Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2005-9367 G/CN
City OfENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering December 30, 2008 Attn: Regents Bank P. O. Box 9137 La Jolla, California 92038 RE: Lemara Holdings, LLC 781 Garden`View APN 257-470-11 Case No. 04-185 Grading Permit 9367-G Final release of security Permit 9367-GI authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Inspector has approved the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, a full release of the security deposited is merited. Letter of Credit 2006-104, in the amount of$ 63,643.00, is hereby released in its entirety. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Debra Geis y L bach Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Lemara Holdings,LLC Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 C4N recycled paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering December 30, 2008 Attn: Lincoln General Insurance Company P.O. Box 3709 York, PA 17402-0136 RE: Lemara Holdings, LLC 781 Garden View APN 257-470-11 Case No. 04-185 Grading Permit 9367-G Final release of security Permit 9367-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, a full release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 661118467, in the amount of$ 253,360.00, is hereby fully exonerated. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Debra Geish ay L bach Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Lemara Holdings, LLC Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760-633-2600 1 FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 ��p� recycled paper N Recording Requested By: WAkl-, FAA L UN l�.,N i2 City Planner r,",L N ,U V i -NA I L,L C JN ly F-L,A1�1,'[ R OH-ICE When Recorded Mail To: T 1 ME 72 Ptl City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 SPACE Abu v r, r ux 3 u 3r COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY FUTURE PAW TRAFFIC, AND FLOOD CONTROL FEES Assessor's Parcel Number: 258-372-07 Project No. TPM 04-186 A. KENNETH MOUZON BLEVINS AND JUDY M. BLEVINS, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JENNIFER J. STANTON AND BRIAN CLAY STANTON, HUSBAND AND WIFE ALL AS JOINT TENANTS, ("OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property commonly known as TPM 04-186 ("PROPERTY"hereinafter) and which is legally described as follows: As Exhibit"A"which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. B. In consideration of Final Map approval for the above referenced project by the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), OWNER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: See Attachment "B"which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that OWNER's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, from the other party. F. Failure of the OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. G. Upon OWNER's satisfaction of OWNER's duties and obligations contained herein, OWNER may request and CITY shall execute a"Satisfaction of Covenant". H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant, the right to enforce this Covenant against OWNER. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: OWNER Dated �y `G� I 0— Kenneth Mouzon BI vins Dated �7Judy4k.Blevins Dated—3 14-3/O 7 to Dated—'S 145 k 7 0 Brian Clay Stanton (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached) ATTACH NOTARY HERE CITY OF ENCINI 01 Dated t) D -7 by (Notarizati n not required) Peter Cota-Robles, City Engineer CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California �� IF G ss. County of Si�tw I� I' On O before me, L � (A +r1*fU IA&IG Date Name and Tit Fe of Officer(e.g.,"Jane 06e,Notary P lic") I� personally appeared fq-"J A x''11 7`r-3/LJ me(s)of Signer(s) I�rsonally known to me �� Ll proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personK' whose name(' is/are— VALERIE J.HUDSON subscribed to the within instrument and OMV Commisslon#1483529 acknowledged to me that he/ �executed Notary Public California the same in his/iterftheir authorized San Diego County capacity(wt), and that by his/Fterftheir Comm.ExpiresMay12,2008 signature(V) on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person( acted, executed the instrument. I I� TIM, my h d`ir n fficial s al. ✓�-� Place Notary Seal Above Sig ature No ary Public - ,, II i OPTIONAL < Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document �I and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attache ocu en�M ' A7L�/� ,Title or Type of ocument:� U i�430��Al pe / Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Name bove: ' Z-v21-9- QI T Z,'01W rn • "5_4,_j 3 Capacity(ies) Cla' ed by Signer ir Signer's Name: - L A � k�dividual • Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: i presenting: 0 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT F( State of CaliforniyJC. O ss. nty of On before me, v� 0 Aj, li o1 D le N7T.Title of r(e.g.,"Jane oe,Notary Public" personally appeared ea ,rt/-j � (; _/Name(s)of Signer(s) -I� personally known to me ,� ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence I to be the person(!§4 whose name(') is/ate vALERIEJ.HUDSON subscribed to the within instrument and Commission# 1493529 F acknowledged to me that fie/she#iey executed ; Notary Public -California the same in +i s/her4te4f authorized ' San Diego County My Comm.Expires May 12 2008 capacity(i"*, and that by #is/herhei_ signature(s) on the instrument the person(*, or the entity upon behalf of which the perso*) acted, executed the instrument. W THE S rrLy and n icial se i I' Place Notary Seal Above Si a ure of otary Public I OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. ;i Description of Attac Document itle or Type of Documerk: 126A f- (L A Pric L (` Docume t Date: Z Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: C LA c Ca acit fes Clai by Si ner Signer's Name: /V!V —t-T-Individual Top of thumb here I ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator �i ❑ Other: Signer Is Represerttirig 0 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nalionalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 ATTACHMENT "A" TO COVENANT 04-186 TPM THE SOUTHERLY 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 20 FEET THEREOF. ATTACHMENT "B" TO COVENANT REGARDING 04-186 TPM OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS A. In accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 23.98 in effect at time of fees being paid,park fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. B. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.94 in effect at time of fees being paid,traffic fees for the development shall be paid prior to Final Occupancy approval. C. In accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 23.96 in effect at time of fees being paid, flood control fees shall be assessed and collected during the building permit processing prior to the construction of any impervious surfaces. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California l ss. County of !`Aw I D }- On before me, L I U�V� a Date Name and tle icer(e.g.'Jane Doe,Notary Public's personally appeared V\ih i Name(s)of Signers) I ❑personally known to me improved to me on the basis of satisfactory (, evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)`iA- re subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in -ttkAaer/their authorized ll sIo GiN� capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their Commissllc # 1530701 signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or Notary Public — Collfornia the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) San Diego County i' MY Car".EPrespec 27�8 acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official al. G Signature of Note blic OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent ( fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: t ❑ Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): i ❑ Partner—❑Limited ❑General i ❑ Attorney-in-Fact j ( ❑ Trustee I ❑ Guardian or Conservator ( ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: ®7999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•w .nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800.876-6!327 Recording Requested by: . :/ o/^..`�^ o�� /"/s .x/c' m' City Engineer c'uu'/wEnTw/mu F zu/, �ue�yoz When Recorded -- — nws 2 Pw City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas. CA 92024 COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY' A8S8GSOr's Parcel ND. 258-372-07 Project NO.: W.{].K]O.: 04-186 TPM A. KENNETH K8OUZON BLEV|NS AND JUDY M. BLEV|NS, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JENNIFER J. STANTON AND BRIAN CLAY STANTON, HUSBAND AND WIFE ALL AS JOINT TENANTS (SUBDIVIDER" hereinafter) is the owner of n83| property which is oonnrnon|y known as ("PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is described as follows: See Exhibit A attached hereto and made o part hereof. B. The tentative subdivision of the PROPERTY was approved with the final approval subject to certain conditions requiring the construction of private improvements by SUB[}|\/|[)ER. SUBDIVIDER has applied for final 8ppn]Ya| of the subdivision but has not constructed the required private improvements. In consideration of the final approval of the subdivision Of the PROPERTY by the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), SUBDIVIDER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of C|TY, to do the following: See Exhibit B which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future ovvnera, enounnbnanmma, auccensons, haira, personal nepne3entabves, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. SUBC)|V|[}EF| agrees that SUBC)|V|OEF{'a duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity 10 p8SpOnd. CITY may odd to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any post due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur coots to enforce the provisions of-this Covenont, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all mosta, including na000nmb|e attorney's foea, from the other party. F. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. G. Upon SUBDIVIDER's satisfactory completion of SUBDIVIDER's duties and obligations contained herein, SUBDIVIDER may request and CITY shall execute a Satisfaction of Covenant. H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant, the right to enforce this Covenant against SUBDIVIDER. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: SUBDIVIDER/OWNER - -0-7 R4 Dated K nn Mouzins Dated Ju uzins 9 ev„ Y,S S/�/vim , (�� Dated nifer n 3/73 /G-7 Dated Brian Stan on (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached.) CITY OF ENCINITAS By &.4A U. wz-, Dated /30 10�- /�/� V PETER COTA-ROBLES l" Director of Engineering Services (Notarization not required) CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT �I i, State of California ss. County of I C) OLosdl� T G� I� On I before me, �I Date Name and Title of Officer(e.g.,"Jane Doe,Notary Public" personally appeared i Name(s)of Signer(s) �I .-impersonally known to me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personts-} whose namefe}- isfar - subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that-he/she/herexecuted VALERIE J.HUDSON Commwlon# 1483529 the same in -#pis/her/tkteir authorized ,. Notary Public-California capacity(ie-5), and that by his/her/thei+r San Diego County - signature(s.) on the instrument the person(ri), or My Comm.Expires May 12 2008 the entity upon behalf of which the person(-Q acted, executed the instrument. I ITN SS my h `d nd fficial s I. �-� Sin t re of Not Public v Sign rY Place Notary Seal Above OPTIONAL �t Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. i Description of Attached Aocument Title or Type of Document: UO /nJ 4,/'�V10 11Qsn.,� �`S ,��,rr�� d►'V Y 0 Srav�1 1 Document Date: 3 2 3 77 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: v ^J ^ apacity(ies) Clai d by�Signer c (' P ner's Name: �I i. Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General [� ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee �I ❑ Guardian or Conservator ,I ❑ Other: I< I ©1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ss. County of I� On r g/23/Q7 , before me, vl�(_6/1 �C4 0sorl-i IQY-A-721 /Pu D to Name and Titl I er(e.g.,"Jane Doe,Notary Public") TZ r,�l personally appeared / � (.. � Names)oT Signer(s) '' personally known to me I ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory (, evidence to be the person( whose nameY is/are-- �` VALERIE J.HUDSON subscribed to the within instrument and -< Commission# 1443529 acknowledged to me that he4s4elifi►ey executed •..�� Notary Public California the same in his/4efA authorized Son Diego County capacity(ies), and that by his/`++ter I MY Comm.Expires May t2,2008 signature(`s).on the instrument the person(•, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s�_ I, acted, executed the instrument. ITI�ES my h nd a icial se Place Notary Seal Above Si atQte'o Notary Public I, ( I OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attacheckpocument Tit r Type of Document: L� /N/Q x>T ^A- /N� - YP ( 2(✓R�'/, —0 J� -: � 75 S vrL'Oii�c'r`' �JViJ Document Date: �� 2 � Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Z A-)�j FE 2 � z o �d v-( Z NS � Capacity(ies) Clai d by Signer Signe's Name: I; ' Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ( ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator I• ❑ Other: m 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 ATTACHMENT A TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY. PROJECT NO. TPM 04-186 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION THE SOUTHERLY 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 20 FEET THEREOF. ATTACHMENT `B' TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY. PROJECT NO. TPM 04-186 SUBDIVIDER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS Name of SUBDIVIDER: Kenneth Blevins, Judy Blevins, Jennifer Stanton and Brian Stanton I Tract or Parcel Map Number:TPM 04-186 Name of subdivision: TPM 04-186 Resolution of Approval Number: PBD 2006-57 Adopted June 13, 2006 Estimated total cost of improvements: $ 1.0 IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED 1.1 SUBDIVIDER agrees at SUBDIVIDER's own cost and expense to furnish all the labor, equipment and materials to perform and complete, in accordance with the plans and specifications and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the private improvements referred to below: Grading plan drawing no. 296-G- sheets 1 through 3 prepared by Coastal Land Solutions, Inc. as approved by the City Engineer together with any subsequent amendments approved in writing by the City Engineer; on file with CITY in City Engineer's office and incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length. 1.2 Further, SUBDIVIDER agrees to perform the following Conditions: All improvements, conditions and work pursuant to Conditions of Approval for TPM 04-186 2.0 PROGRESS OF WORK 2.1 Time is of the essence with this Covenant. SUBDIVIDER shall commence substantial construction of the private improvements required by this Covenant no later than one year form the date of approval by the City Engineer and shall complete the private improvements no later than two years and three months from the date of said approval. In the event good cause exists, as determined by the City Engineer, the time for commencement of construction or completion of the private improvements hereunder may be extended. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER's Surety or Sureties, if any, and shall in no way affect the validity of this Covenant or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given f or the faithful performance of this Covenant. The City Engineer shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. As a condition of such extensions, the City Engineer may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Covenant, as extended, in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for any increase in construction costs as determined by the City Engineer. 2.2 If any of the private improvements are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced prior to SUBDIVIDER demonstrating to CITY that SUBDIVIDER has acquired the appropriate property interests. 2.3 SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER's expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of the private improvements and give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 2.4 SUBDIVIDER shall notify the City Engineer in writing at least 15 days prior to the commencement of work hereunder. No construction work shall begin until authorized by CITY. 2.5 SUBDIVIDER shall not be entitled to obtain occupancy permits for the buildings constructed on any lot created by the subdivision until all required improvements have been provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2.6 SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain safe construction facilities, and provide safe access, for inspection CITY, to all parts of the work and to the shops wherein the work is in preparation. 2.7 SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public to each and every existing danger relating to the construction of the private improvements, and shall protect the public from such dangers. 3.0 INSPECTION/APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS 3.1 The City Engineer or his duly authorized representative, upon request of SUBDIVIDER, shall inspect, at SUBDIVIDER's expense the private improvements herein agreed to be constructed and installed by SUBDIVIDER. If determined to be in accordance with applicable CITY standards and the other terms of this Covenant, the City Engineer shall approve the improvements. 3.2 SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay for each inspection of the improvements required by the City Engineer. 3.3 Approval of the private improvements by CITY, shall not constitute a waiver by CITY of any defects in the improvements. 3.4 Until such time as the private improvements required by this Covenant are fully completed by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the City Engineer. SUBDIVIDER will be responsible for the care, maintenance, repair and replacement of such private improvements. 4.0 HOLD HARMLESS 4.1 SUBDIVIDER agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER or SUBDIVIDER's agents, employees, subcontractors, officials, 'officers or representatives. Upon demand. SUBDIVIDER shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. 4.2 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the private improvements; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to SUBDIVIDER's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by SUBDIVIDER, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. 4.3 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the construction of the private improvements; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the private improvements; alleged injury to persons or property; alleged inverse condemnation of property or a consequence of the design, construction, or maintenance of the work or the private improvements; and any accident, loss or damage to the work or the private improvements prior to the approval of the construction of the private improvements by CITY. 4.4 By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the private improvements, CITY shall not have waived the protections afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of SUBDIVIDER who shall remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless as provided above. 4.5 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, and causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law, or CITY's sole active negligence. 5.0 INSURANCE 5.1 SUBDIVIDER shall obtain and maintain a policy of motor vehicle liability, public liability, general liability and property damage insurance from an insurance company approved by CITY and authorized to do business in the State of California, in an insurable amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for each occurrence. The insurance policy shall provide that the policy shall remain in force during the life of this COVENANT and shall not be cancelled, terminated, or allowed to expire without thirty- (30) days prior written notice to CITY from the insurance company. 5.2 CITY shall be named as an additional insured on SUBDIVIDER's policies. 5.3 SUBDIVIDER shall furnish certificates of said insurance to CITY prior to commencement of work under this AGREEMENT. 6.0 REPAIR MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT As a condition on the approval by CITY of the satisfactory construction of the private improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall prepare, have executed. and record a covenant, in a form satisfactory to CITY, whereby property owners who will be served by the private improvements will be obligated to provide for the repair, maintenance and replacement of the private improvements and to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless. 7.0 NOTICES 7.1 Any notices to be given under this COVENANT, or otherwise, shall be served by certified mail. 7.2 For the purposes hereof, unless otherwise provided in writing by the parties hereto, the address of CITY and the proper person to receive any such notice on its behalf is: City Engineer City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92024 And the address of SUBDIVIDER and the proper person to receive any such notice on Its behalf is: Kenneth Blevins, Judy Blevins, Jennifer Stanton and Brian Stanton 907 Bracero Road Encinitas, CA 92024 8.0 SUBDIVIDER'S CERTIFICATION OF AWARENESS OF IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986 SUBDIVIDER certifies that SUBDIVIDER is aware of the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (8 USC SS 1101-1525) and will comply with these requirements, including but not limited to verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employees, subcontractors and consultants that are included in, satisfy the duties and obligations contained herein. 9.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 9.1 Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER's duties and obligations under this Covenant. 9.2 Sale or other disposition of the PROPERTY will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the duties and obligations set forth herein. 9.3 SUBDIVIDER shall provide the improvements as an independent contractor and in pursuit of SUBDIVIDER's independent calling, and not as an employee of CITY. SUBDIVIDER shall not be under control of CITY except as to the result to be accomplished. SUBDIVIDER may confer with CITY as required to perform this Covenant. 9.4 No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, official, agent or employee of CITY, either before, during or after the execution of this Covenant,•shall effect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California i' County of ss. l 'y �) (, On �=b� L)— Q0 before me, L I Data -. L))^- Name and Officer(e.g.,'Ja ofary Pu�licj ' personally appeared Vl -'sOC( Name(s)of Signer(s) ( ❑personally known to me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory (, evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) 'is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in `big7her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or — �► — the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) LI VAUGHN acted, executed the instrument. f QWCorrmB0wD9c27,2M6r Commission# 1530701 Notary Public -- COIIf0MI0 WIT SS my hartd and official s a San Diego County r Signature of Notary P I i' OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document t Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer i Signer's Name: i ❑ Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner —❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact j ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: 0 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313.2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 v Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1.800.876-6827 ~ Recording B« ) wv - .'e�wuu/om /ou~^ zoo/ \ City Engineer , ruouw!-nTmuVm�H zmn o39593L4 �no' /cm',�/, ���`u*o��sn�/ /cs When FA�C0Fd8d K��i| TO� / z��nm/ Pw ^ �i� Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas, CA 92024 ) SPA COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR DRAINAGE Assessor's Parcel Planning Case: 04-1l�i JJP Work Order: 298-G No. ------ A. KENNETH MC]UZON BLEV|NS AND JUDY M. BLEV|NG, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JENNIFER J. STANTON AND BRIAN CLAY STANTON. HUSBAND AND WIFE ALL AS JOINT TENANTS (^{}VVNEF|" hereinafter) is the owner of real property which is known as ("PFlOPERTY'' hereinafter) and which is described asfollows: EXHIBIT^'A'`ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF;and B. |n consideration o By the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter), (]VVNEFl hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit ofCITY, 10 do the following: SEE ATTACHMENT^B^ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure ho the benefit of the future mvvnerS, onounnbnanoere, succeaaors, heina, personal napnosantaUves, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that OVVNER'a duties and obligations under this Covenant are o lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to p8apond. CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of This Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, from the other party. F. Failure of OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. ACCEPTED AND A REED: OWNER Dated J&K:enne th Mouton Blev- s Dated Judy)A.Blev' Dated �f 7--3/0-7 f 'fer to Dated 3/Z3/O'7 Brian Clay Stanton (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached.) CITY OF ENCINITAS Dated /��3D�� ', by (Notarization not required) Peter Cota-Robles Director of Engineering Services CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT I State of California. ss. County of �� I �3, � �� / fit r On Z U-7 before me, l,�-t � �(� Dat ame and Tille of Office Jane oe,Notary Public' personally appeared n r i� a e(s) Signer(s) personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name(Q islafe-- l VALERIE J.HUDSON Ili subscribed to the within instrument and k?•e,✓�#ay. Commission# 1483529 acknowledged to me that he%s executed <90my Notary Public-California the same in his/I}etf eT authorized San Diego County capacity(, and that by his/I ir_Comm.Expires May 12.2008 signatures on the instrument the person(, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(X) acted, executed the instrument. W TN�SS myFhan an ffi ial seal. 'n , Place Notary Seal Above Signa re of Not ry Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of AttacheA Document _ Title or Ty p of Do en : AJ7- F A-f1�iti-16- - f4ow �rryH/4RbxL� S �A 2Ax�AG� Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above, ��2 FCa Capacity(ies) Clai by Signer S t fI N c`� %Yt/�T�✓J i ner's Name: L 9 it �-individual 7"7 ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): I ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Si ner Is R l 0 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Tall-Free 1-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ( i State of California County of 51+n j ��E 0 ss. I I � On before me, l �S d/`� A/-nv th r°Ct G ,' Elate Name and.Sitle of Officer(e.g., an D e,Notary Public") personally appeared �� E Name(s)of Signer(s personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose nam is/are- subscribed to the within instru ent and VALERIE J.HUDSON acknowledged to me that-tae/sheA4ey executed Comission# 1483529 ry Public California the same in Hslher/their' authorized QyNota San D iego County capacity(iesr and that by hfs/her/thei-Comm.Expires May 12,2008 signature�on the instrument the person(e or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WINES f1�y h nd andl fflcial seal. Place Notary Seal Above Si at a of N tary ublic 1 OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. I: Description of Attach Document 7 T' le or Type of DocumentL v 1,1_019w/1 T*�L Document Dater Number of Pages:0 Signer(s) Other Than Named Above f4 /J r/N=lr- Jv� ZEN + � / w i Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer _ Signer's Name: Pt-Th—dividual • Top of thumb here i L1 Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee I ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Si ner preserrtinn'__..�.--____.�_- I 0 1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 Attachment `A" Legal Description of Real Property APN: 258-372-07 THE SOUTHERLY 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 20 FEET THEREOF. ATTACHMENT B TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR DRAINAGE PROJECT NO. 296-G OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS 1. For claims that are alleged to have arisen, directly or indirectly, from drainage or runoff associated with the PROPERTY or the plans, design, construction or maintenance of OWNER' s improvements, OWNER unconditionally waives all present and future claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents. This waiver does not apply to claims that are alleged to have arisen out of the sole, active negligence or deliberate wrongful act of CITY. 2. It is further understood and agreed that all of OWNER'S rights under §1542 of the Civil Code of, the State of California and any similar law of any state or territory of the United States are hereby expressly waived. 9 1542 reads as follows: 1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release does not extend to claims, which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. 3. OWNER agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of OWNER or OWNER's agents, employees, subcontractors, officials, officers or representatives. Upon demand, OWNER shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. OWNER' s obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the improvements; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to the OWNER's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by OWNER, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. OWNER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the construction of the improvements; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the improvements; alleged injury to persons or property; and any alleged inverse condemnation of property as a consequence of the design, construction, or maintenance of the improvements. By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the improvements, CITY shall not have waived the protections afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of OWNER who shall remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless as provided above. OWNER's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of the CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law, or CITY's sole active negligence. 4. OWNER hereby agrees not to develop in any manner the PROPERTY except as authorized by CITY's ordinances and then only in accordance with issued permits. Among other things, but without limitation, this shall prohibit the alteration of landforms, removal of vegetation and the erection of structures of any type, except as permitted or authorization by CITY. 5. This Covenant does not Preclude OWNER taking emergency, protective measures as approved by CITY. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT l State of California ,n ,,, \ 0 F County of tT y V ) t,0 ss. On before me, L Name and Title o r(e.g.,'Ja Doe,Notary P Wic personally appeared C> Names(of Signer(s) !- ❑personally known to me --9,proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed - LI VAUGHN the same in -tr4kQr/their authorized Commisslon# 1530701 capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their tea' Notary Public -- Callfornfa l signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or San Diego County the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) Nh' +esDec27,21)B acted, executed the instrument. i WITNESS my hand and offic' I seal. Sign r ry P lic OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons reiying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ' ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s): Top of thumb here ❑ Partner—❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee l ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: MEA ®1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www riatlonalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800.876-6827 Recording Requested by: c,r ! Fit - t 1(,t �j ryl L- City Engineer C()HDt 1,'()N .1 IN 2(-0 When Recorded Mail To: l i NA E 2�J� PNI City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue FnC*nitas CA 92024 SPA COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY. Assessor's Parcel No. 258-372-07 Project No.: TPM 04-186 W.O. No.:— 0296-G A. KENNETH MOUZIN BLEVINS AND JUDY M. BLEVINS, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JENNIFER J. STANTON AND BRIAN CLAY STANTON HUSBAND AND WIFE ALL AS JOINT TENANTS, (SUBDIVIDER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property which is commonly known as TPM 04-186 ( "PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is described as follows: See Exhibit A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. B. The tentative subdivision of the PROPERTY was approved with the final approval subject to certain conditions requiring the construction of public improvements by SUBDIVIDER. SUBDIVIDER has applied for final approval of the subdivision but has not constructed the required public improvements. In consideration of the final approval of the subdivision of the PROPERTY by the City of Encinitas ("CITY" hereinafter) , SUBDIVIDER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: See Exhibit B which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrances, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. SUBDIVIDER agrees that SUBDIVIDER's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due f financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorneys fees, from the other party. F. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. G. Upon SUBDIVIDER's satisfactory completion of SUBDIVIDER's duties and obligations contained herein, SUBDIVIDER may request and CITY shall execute a Satisfaction of Covenant. H. By action of the City Council, CITY may assign to a person or persons impacted by the performance of this Covenant, the right to enforce this Covenant against SUBDIVIDER. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: DEVELOPER Dated KENNETH MOUZON LEVINS Dated -°? -O 7 JUDY M. BLEVINS Dated Z?j6ER J. TANTON 01 Dated BRIAN CLAY STANTON (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached.) Mn F CI T�j By: - Peter Cota-Robles Director of Engineering Services Dated: 44dezD IT (Notarization not required) CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ss. County of "1 1�1 � y i J On Z before me F Yet G i; Dat Name and 3of Officer(e.g.,"J6nj Doe,Notary Pu is") personally appeared N L /4` Nr v N Name(s)of Signer(s) eo� erknally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence VALERIE J.HUDSON Commission#t 1483529 to be the person(�s} whose name( i4aFe- I; , Notary Public-California subscribed to the within instrument and San Diego County acknowledged to me that he/�executed My Comm.Expires May 12,2008 the same in his/ Hetr- authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/4e444e4- signature(sj'on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(-&) acted, executed the instrument. .n I THE S my,han an offici sea I. I 1 Place Notary Seal Above Signatur of Notarl,Pubic I OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached current 4�4t 7S itle or Typ of Document: 6A111_.JiNG P12001tril." P I-B f� KFQ 1+S �r.d?ti h� r/yA---L /���t t?t//aL 0 f K�� /�lS[ �� 'I l Document Date: 3 2 3 /D Number of Pages- Signer(s) Other Tha Named Abov : —J e J'f F,i A)_ ;`W a Zvw Fr/in�s 3 m/ n�f _ C,E'di Ai s . Capacity(ies) Clai d by Signer Signer's Name: !� �=} v4 °)4y� �J ✓� `. �er_1f1dIVldUa) Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator i ❑ Other: i Signer Is Repres I I ®1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•w .nationalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of Calif�tJ County of T On before me, i L09A/, P1_T -qf 14 3f#lf Chh'! Date ��. ,b4me and Tit f Officer(e.g.,'JaAelllboe,Notary Pub V(") TI personally appeared C t FE�L- �J - �7� 0 Name(s)of Signer(s) --� personally known to me I ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence I to be the personK"whose name(,a'J" is/arm subscribed to the within instrument and <6,YNVALERIE J.HUDSON acknowledged to me klat-he/sheMk executed o Commission# 1483529 the same in h1s/her/their authorized tary Public-California capacity,(iesj; and that by hisLher/their San Diego County Comm.Expires May 12.2008 signatures}on the instrument the person*, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(W- acted, executed the instrument. Wl)NES mha QnMl ea l Place Notary Seal Above Sig lure of Notary Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached ocument 0,. D � Title or Type of Document: UP �c /ti✓LptNG PAWL I T iC �Df✓u° '�� /*S CoNbmc F/"i� I' Document Date: Number of Pages: d Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Vi NS F Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: "T- N T c- T–Individual Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): I ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator . I ❑ Other: � $ignPx-ls-Represtrting: ©1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•w .nahonalnotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 ATTACHMENT A TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY. PROJECT NO. TPM 04-186 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION THE SOUTHERLY 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 20 FEET THEREOF. ATTACHMENT B TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY. PROJECT NO. TPM 04-186 SUBDIVIDER's DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS Name of SUBDIVIDER: KENNETH MOUZON BLEVINS, JUDY M. BLEVINS, JENNIFER J. STANTON, AND BRIAN CLAY STANTON Tract or Parcel Map Number TPM 04-186 Name of subdivision: 04-186 TPM Resolution of Approval Number: PBD 2006-57 Adopted: June 13, 2006 Estimated total cost of improvements: 1.0 IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED 1.1 SUBDIVIDER agrees at SUBDIVIDER's own cost and expense to furnish all the labor, equipment and materials to perform and complete, in accordance with the plans and specifications and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public improvements referred to below: Improvement plan drawing no. 0296-G sheets 1 through 3 and prepared by Coastal Land Solutions , . , as approved by the City Engineer together with any subsequent amendments approved in writing by the City Engineer on file with CITY in City Engineer's office and incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length. 1.2 Further, SUBDIVIDER agrees to perform the following conditions: Public Improvements pursuant to TPM 04-186 2.0 PROGRESS OF WORK 2.1 Time is of the essence with this Covenant. SUBDIVIDER shall commence substantial construction of the public improvements required by this Covenant no later than one year from the date of approval by the City Engineer and shall complete the public improvements no later than two years and three months from the date of said approval. In the event good cause exists, as determined by the City Engineer, the time for commencement of construction or completion of the public improvements hereunder may be extended. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER's Surety or Sureties, if any, and shall in no way affect the validity of this Covenant or release the Surety or Sureties on any security given f or the faithful performance of this Covenant. The City Engineer shall be the sole and final judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. As a condition of such extensions, the City Engineer may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Covenant, as extended, in an increased amount as necessary to compensate for any increase in construction costs as determined by the City Engineer. 2.2 If any of the public improvements are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced prior to SUBDIVIDER demonstrating to CITY that SUBDIVIDER has acquired the appropriate property interests. 2.3 SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER's expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of the public improvements and give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 2.4 SUBDIVIDER shall notify the City Engineer in writing at least 15 days prior to the commencement of work hereunder. No construction work shall begin until authorized by CITY. 2.5 SUBDIVIDER shall not be entitled to obtain occupancy permits for the buildings constructed on any lot created by the subdivision until all required improvements have been provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2.6 SUBDIVIDER shall at all times maintain safe construction facilities, and provide safe access, for inspection CITY, to all parts of the work and to the shops wherein the work is in preparation. 2.7 SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public to each and every existing danger relating to the construction of the public improvements, and shall protect the public from such dangers. 3.0 INSPECTION/APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS 3.1 The City Engineer or his duly authorized representative, upon request of SUBDIVIDER, shall inspect, at SUBDIVIDER's expense the public improvements herein agreed to be constructed and installed by SUBDIVIDER. If determined to be in accordance with applicable CITY standards and the other terms of this Covenant, the City Engineer shall approve the improvements. 3.2 SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay for each inspection of the improvements required by the City Engineer. 3.3 Approval of the public improvements by CITY, shall not constitute a waiver by CITY of any defects in the improvements. 3.4 Until such time as the public improvements required by this Covenant are fully completed by SUBDIVIDER and approved by the City Engineer. SUBDIVIDER will be responsible for the care, maintenance, repair and replacement of such public improvements. 4.0 HOLD HARMLESS 4.1 SUBDIVIDER agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities. claims, demands. causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER or SUBDIVIDER's agents, employees, subcontractors, officials, officers or representatives. Upon demand, SUBDIVIDER shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. 4.2 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the public improvements; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to SUBDIVIDER's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by SUBDIVIDER, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. 4.3 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the construction of the public improvements; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the public improvements; alleged injury to persons or property; alleged inverse condemnation of property or a consequence of the design, construction, or maintenance of the work or the public improvements; and any accident, loss or damage to the work or the public improvements prior to the approval of the construction of the public improvements by CITY. 4.4 By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the public improvements, CITY shall not have waived the protections afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of SUBDIVIDER who shall remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless as provided above. 4.5 SUBDIVIDER's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action. losses, damages or costs that arise out of CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law. or CITY's sole active negligence. 5.0 INSURANCE 5.1 SUBDIVIDER shall obtain and maintain a policy of motor vehicle liability, public liability, general liability and property damage insurance from an insurance company approved by CITY and authorized to do business in the State of California, in an insurable amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for each occurrence. The insurance policy shall provide that the policy shall remain in force during the life of this COVENANT and shall not be cancelled, terminated, or allowed to expire without thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY from the insurance company. 5.2 CITY shall be named as an additional insured on SUBDIVIDER's policies. 5.3 SUBDIVIDER shall furnish certificates of said insurance to CITY prior to commencement of work under this AGREEMENT. 6.0 REPAIR, MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT As a condition on the approval by CITY of the satisfactory construction of the public improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall prepare, have executed. and record a covenant, in a form satisfactory to CITY, whereby property owners who will be served by the public improvements will be obligated to provide for the repair, maintenance and replacement of the public improvements and to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless. 7.0 NOTICES 7.1 Any notices to be given under this COVENANT, or otherwise, shall be served by certified mail. 7.2 For the purposes hereof, unless otherwise provided in writing by the parties hereto, the address of CITY and the proper person to receive any such notice on its behalf is: City Engineer City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 And the address of SUBDIVIDER and the proper person to receive any such notice on its behalf is: KENNETH BLEVINS, JUDY BLEVINS, JENNIFER STANTON AND BRIAN STANTON 907 BRACERO ROAD ENCINITAS, CA. 92024 8.0 SUBDIVIDER's CERTIFICATION OF AWARENESS OF IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986 SUBDIVIDER certifies that SUBDIVIDER is aware of the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (8 USC SS 1101-1525) and will comply with these requirements, including but not limited to verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employees, subcontractors and consultants that are included in, satisfy the duties and obligations contained herein. 9.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 9.1 Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER's duties and obligations under this Covenant. 9.2 Sale or other disposition of the PROPERTY will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the duties and obligations set forth herein. 9.3 SUBDIVIDER shall provide the improvements as an independent contractor and in pursuit of SUBDIVIDER's independent calling, and not as an employee of CITY. SUBDIVIDER shall not be under control of CITY except as to the result to be accomplished. SUBDIVIDER may confer with CITY as required to perform this Covenant. 9.4 No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, official, agent or employee of CITY, either before, during or after the execution of this Covenant, shall effect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ss. i, On before me, ( Date Name and Tide of (e.g., ' 1 yy� -` ''�- 'Jane Doe,Nola ub personally appeared k e A ok+ 1�/—��/��--�Y/—►u� Ui�� f Name(s)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me '-< proved to me on the basis of satisfactory I evidence ) to be the person(s) whose name(s)`rs/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that'he'slae/they executed Ll VAUGHN the same in his/her/their authorized :..::. . Commission# 1530701 capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their ( "q Notary Public — Californial signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or San ego County - the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) � MY n s27 acted, executed the instrument. I WITNESS my hand and official al. Signature of Notary blic OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: i• Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer � Signer's Name: ❑ Individual El Corporate Officer—Title(s): Top of thumb here ❑ Partner —❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee i ❑ Guardian or Conservator i ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: ®1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.national notary•org Prod.No.5907 Reorder.Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 � DRAINAGE STUDY Quest Medical Buildin Lot 11 , Map No. 10909 781 Garden View Court Encinitas, California r.y I Christensen Engineering & Surveying 7888 Silverton Avenue, Suite J San Diego, CA 92126 858.271 .9901 March 30, 2005 Revised March 06, 2006 Revised May 13, 2006 DRAINAGE STUDY Quest Medical Building Lot 11, Map No. 11909 Introduction The Quest Medical Building is a proposed office development of an existing, vacant lot. The site is located in Encinitas, California and is bounded commercial development on the lots northerly and southerly of the site and residential lots easterly of the site. The lot fronts on Garden View Court on its westerly boundary. The site is to be developed with a professional medical building and will include a parking lot with masonry retaining walls on the easterly portion of the site as well as generous landscaping surrounding the proposed development. Currently the site drains to a curb outlet and then onto Garden View Court and this drainage pattern will persist after development. All runoff will drain over landscaping before draining into the exiting curb outlet or the proposed new curb outlet and then onto Garden View Court. There are no areas tributary to the site as shown on the attached drainage area map. Drainage Area (A) There are no areas tributary to this site as shown on the attached drainage area map. The topography was obtained from a topographic survey by Christensen Engineering & Surveying, dated October 20, 2004 The drainage areas are shown on the attached drainage map as follows: Area of Drainage of Northerly developed area (Area A) 0.226 Acres Area of Drainage of Southerly and Easterly developed area (Area B) 0.522 Acres Time of Concentration (Td From the San Diego County Hydrology Manual: Tc= 1.8 (1.1-C) DU2/S '�ss H= 222-197 = 25 feet D=305 feet S= 8.2% C= 0.82 (G. Comm.) T,= 1.8 (1.1-0.82) (305)12 /(8.2)'/3 T,= 4.36 minutes (Since less then 5 minutes County recommends use 5.0 minutes) Rainfall Intensity (I) From the San Diego County Hydrology Manual: At geographical coordinates 330 03' 12" 1170 16' 0811 l i oo = 7.44 (P6) loo D -.645 D = Tc = 5.0 (P6)100 = 2.6" (P24)100 = 4.5" Since 26) = 2.6/4.5 = 57.8% no need to adjust P6 value. (P24) I 100 = 7.44 (P6) (D) -.641 I 100 = 7.44 (2.6) (5.0) -.645 Iwo = 6.85 inches/hour Quantity of Flow From the San Diego County Hydrology Manual: For the onsite area (Improved area) C= 0.82 Q = CIA Q l OOA = 0.82 x 6.85 x 0.226 = 1.27 cfs (Northerly Area) Q 100E = 0.82 x 6.85 x 0.522 = 2.93 cfs (Southerly and Easterly Area) TEST FOR ADEQUACY OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURES A test for adequacy of the pipes was run using the attached iterative program. A roughness coefficient of 0.10 for PVC pipes. The concrete swales were tested using a roughness coefficient of 0.013. A test for each pipe size was run using the slope shown on the plan using the attached program for a circular conveyance. The 4" PVC pipe was tested and will convey runoff from the planter under the overhanging portion of the propose building and was found to be able to convey 0.24 cfs at a slope of 1%. The 6" PVC drain from the building to the junction box at the driveway was tested and found capable of carrying the required 0.50 cfs flow at a depth of 0.24' and a velocity of 5.0 fps for it 1.8 % slope. The other 6" PVC drain conveying runoff from the northerly portion of the building and from the roof drains found on that side of the building will carry the required 0.77 cfs at a dept of 0.49' at a velocity of 4.4fps for its slope of 1.2%. The 6" PVC pipe from the junction box to the curb outlet will convey the 1.27 cfs flow volume at a slope of 4.7% slope at a depth of 0.40' with a velocity of 9.2 fps. Due to its minimal depth under the driveway this portion of the drain will need to be encased in concrete. The 5' concrete swale was tested using the attached program and was found to be capable of conveying the 3.2 cfs at a slope of 10% which is greater then the quantity it is required to carry. q Using figure 3.6 from the County of San Diego Hydrology Manual the gutter along the southerly portion of the parking lot was tested and found to flow at a depth of 0.32' with a quantity of 2.93 cfs at a slope of 1.0% and at a velocity of 2.4 fps. The bio-swale was tested and was found capable of carrying 2.93 cfs at a depth of less then 1.0 feet. The area surrounding the swale is at least 0.2' higher providing a modest freeboard. The rip-rap energy dissipater at the outfall of the 5' concrete swale was determined using the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications for Public Work Construction for a velocity of 10.3 fps. Light Class stone 2.0' deep with a filter blanket was selected. Antony K. Christensen, RCE C54021 05/13/06 Date SUPPLEMENTAL DRAINAGE STUDY Quest Medical Buildin Lot 11 , Map No. 10909 1 781 Garden View Court Encinitas, California 1 Christensen Engineering Surveying g Y g 7888 S ilverton Avenue, Suite J San Diego, CA 92126 858.271 .9901 1 August 31 , 2005 Revised March 6, 2006 SUPPLEMENT TO DRAINAGE STUDY Quest Medical Building Lot 11, Map No. 11909 Introduction �- The Quest Medical Building is a proposed office development of an existing, vacant lot. The site is located in Encinitas, California and is bounded commercial development on the lots northerly and southerly of the site and residential lots easterly of the site. The lot fronts on Garden View Court on its westerly boundary. i' The site is to be developed with a professional medical building and will include a parking lot with a masonry retaining wall on the easterly portion of the site as well as generous landscaping surrounding the proposed development. Currently the site drains to a curb outlet and then onto Garden View Court and this drainage pattern will persist after development. All runoff will drain over landscaping before draining into the exiting curb outlet or the proposed new curb outlet and then onto Garden View Court. There are no areas tributary to the site as shown on the attached drainage area map. This supplement is intended to address the Flow Based Storm Water discharge factors a_. associated with the proposed grass lined swale that will convey runoff from the southerly portion of the project onto Garden View Court. h i R, Drainage Area (A) �- There are no areas tributary to this site as shown on the attached drainage area map. The topography was obtained from a topographic survey by Christensen Engineering & Surveying, dated October 20, 2004 .The drainage areas are shown on the attached drainage map as follows: Area of Drainage of Northerly developed area .(Area A) 0.226 Acres Area of Drainage of Southerly and Easterly developed area (Area B) 0.522 Acres/ Rainfall Intensity (I) From the City of Encinitas Best Management Practices Manual, Part II, for Flow Based BMPs the Intensity employed is 0.2"/hour Quantity of Flow From the San Diego County Hydrology Manual: For the onsite area (General Commercial) C= 0.82 Q = CIA Qa = 0.82x0.2 x 0.226 = 0.037 cfs' QB = 0.82 x 0.2 x 0.522 = 0.085 cfs t L TEST FOR ADEQUACY OF GRASS LINED SWALE A test for adequacy of the grass lined swale was run using the attached iterative program. A roughness coefficient of 0.18 for the grass lined swale was chosen. The grass swale was modeled using a bottom width of 2.0' and a 2:1 side slope with the maximum depth of the Swale of 1.001. Using these data the velocity in the swale was determined to be 0.254 fps with depth of flow of 0.146', less then the 2" maximum depth required for adequate treatment of the runoff. _ The time of travel for the runoff to reach the street for half of the length of the Swale, 115' (total swale length is 230') at a velocity of 0.236 feet per second results in a travel time of 7.8 minutes greater then the required minimum 5 minute travel time within the swale Therefore the swale is adequate to convey the runoff at a depth less then 2" and for a time longer then the minimum 5 minutes required over a distance of half its length. Antony K. Christensen, RCE C54021 03/06/06 Date �r OF i Type of conveyance is a : 85th Percentile Depth of channel equals 1 Feet Bottom Width Equals 2 Side slope equals 2 Slope of conveyance equals 1 . 5 % Roughness equals . 18 Flow quantity equals 8 . 532737E-02 CFS Area equals . 3346323 Square Feet Velocity equals . 2540101 FPS Depth of flow equals . 1460001 Feet Type of conveyance is a : 100-Year Storm Depth of channel equals 1 . 2 Feet Bottom Width Equals 2 Side slope equals 2 Slope of conveyance equals 1 . 5 % Roughness equals . 18 Flow quantity equals 2 . 930307 CFS Area equals 3 . 987952 Square Feet Velocity equals . 7347129 FPS Depth of flow equals . 9979907 Feet SCREEN 7 COLOR 4 , 3 CLS -- LINE INPUT "Enter the type of Conveyance" ; tg$ PRINT "Type of Conveyance is" ; tg$ 10 INPUT "Enter the flow quantity" ; Q 20 INPUT "Enter the Slope" ; s 25 INPUT "Enter the Bottom Width" ; B 27 INPUT "Enter the Run for one unit of Rise ( Z ) " ; Z 28 INPUT "Enter the Maximum depth of channel " ; D 30 INPUT "Enter the Roughness Coefficient " ; n 35 Y = . 001 40 A = ( B + Z * y ) * Y A 60 Qt = ( 1 . 49 / n ) * A * ( R ± ^ ( 2 /23 ) ) *5s ) 70 IF Qt < Q THEN Y = Y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Q equals Qt ; "Depth Equals y 80 IF y > D THEN PRINT "Channel Too Small " 82 IF y > D THEN END 85 IF Qt < Q GOTO 40 ELSE GOTO 90 90 V = Q / A - 95 PRINT "Velocity equals " ; V 150 INPUT "Do you want a hardcopy of Data? Enter 1 if Yes " ; C 160 IF C: = 1 GOTO 165 ELSE END - 165 LPRINT "Type of conveyance is a : " ; tg$ 170 LPRINT Depth of channel equals" ; D; "Feet " 175 LPRINT "Bottom Width Equals" ; B 178 LPRINT "Side slope equals " ; Z 180 LPRINT "Slope of conveyance equals" ; s * 100 ; 190 LPRINT "Roughness equals" ; n 200 LPRINT "Flow quantity equals " ; Qt ; "CFS" 210 LPRINT "Area equals" ; A; "Square Feet " 220 LPRINT "Velocity equals" ; V; "FPS" 230 LPRINT "Depth of flow equals" ; y ; "Feet " APPENDIX A u 00 2 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o c `O 4 00 •� u ai O �p N V1 00 er � _ 00�•°• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C RI t~Ui 0 m N 00 u oM �. ono n M 3 o � � � � c Q � � Q N r•1 M [f 7 v� `O �° �° O M M r C C C O O O O O O C O O O O O O p 00 ^� C �y E LY U W � O a, H W o a flEu ° $ o o` o` ° ° ° E CU U u c o •c fq '•play H E id id .� OE w •� •� ce a; oG C7 O :a V c _ W. c u a a a a; a � .? R h T E u m �+ 0 u ° ° -� C7 3 0 ` u E- a a u .• ,ro C7 v z y v O Z Ci' C T cn fd ;o v u � �i � � � � � is � � � $ u •v � o o U H N H a' c' ai a F b b b F i� $ 7 ce CJ O Z z ce �'' �+' +' a: Le •O °— = o � � •� g c .� 5 5 S S Uv — x x U U U g � a ` - z Q _ _ LL rL -„ D,a,O" .-'.e5 CC — { I r , f f , 1 I Z I � S�inNIW NI MO-IJ aNV� JA,�O j rn u _ E j z 3 LL o v 1 0 w J I � a� O Ln p - _ tl- C Z — nL 1 C �r' O VII . . n o ri 77 �� I J 'V rr a X � - n ! San Diego County Hydrology Manual Date: June 2003 Section: 3 Page: 12 of 26 Note that the Initial Time of Concentration should be reflective of the general land-use at the upstream end of a drainage basin. A single lot with an area of two or less acres does not have a significant effect where the drainage basin area is 20 to 600 acres. Table 3-2 provides limits of the length (Maximum Length (LM)) of sheet flow to be used in hydrology studies. Initial T; values based on average C values for the Land Use Element are also included. These values can be used in planning and design applications as described below. Exceptions may be approved by the "Regulating Agency" when submitted with a detailed study. Table 3-2 MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH (LM) & INITIAL TIME OF CONCENTRATION T; Element* DU/ .5% 1% 2% 3% 10%/0 o o 1 5 Acre LM T; LM Ti LM T' LM T, I-M Ti Lm T Natural 50 13.2 70 12.5 85 10.9 100 10.3 100 8.7 100 6.9 i LDR 1 50 12.2 70 11.5 85 10.0 100 9.5 100 8.0 100 6.4 LDR 2 50 11.3 70 10.5 85 9.2 100 8.8 100 7.4 100 5.8 LDR 2.9 50 10.7 70 10.0 85 8.8 95 8.1 100 7.0 100 5.6 MDR 4.3 50 10.2 70 9.6 80 8.1 95 7.8 100 6.7 100 5.3 MDR 7.3 50 9.2 65 8.4 80 7.4 95 7.0 100 6.0 100 4.8 MDR 10.9 50 8.7 65 7.9 80 6.9 90 6.4 100 5.7 100 4.5 MDR 14.5 50 8.2 65 7.4 80 6.5 90 6.0 100 5.4 100 4.3 HDR 24 50 6.7 65 6.1 75 5.1 90 4.9 95 4.3 100 3.5 HDR 43 50 5.3 65 4.7 75 4.0 85 18 95 3.4 ! N. Com 100 2.7 � 50 5.3 60 4.5 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.4 ]00 2.7 I G. Com 50 4.7 60 4.1 75 3.6 85 3.4 90 2.9 0.P./Com 100 2.4 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 100 2.2 -- Limited I. 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 100 2.2 General 1. 50 3.7 60 3.2 70 2 7 *See Table 3-1 for more detailed description 80 2.6 90 2.3 100 1.9 i 3-12 E EQUATION Feet Tc : 11.91.3 0.2186 AE ) 5000 Tc = Time of concentration(hours) L a Watercourse Distance(miles) 4000 DE a Change In elevation along 3000 effective slope line(See Figure 3-5)(feet) _ Tc Hours Minutes 2000 4 240 3--i80 1000 900 800 2 . 120 X00 \ 100 500 110 � eo 400 70 300 oiP 1 s0 s0 200 40 Mlles Feet 30 100 `1 4000 20 30 0.5-1 � 18 � 14 40 2000 12 1800 30 1800 10 1400 9 1200 8 20 1000 7 400 800 i 700 600 5 10 500 4 400 300 3 5 0 E 1200 L Tc SOURCE:California Division of Highways(1941)and Kirpich(1940) F I Nomograph for Determination of G U R E __ Time of Concentration (Tc)or Travel Time(Tt) for Natural Wbtersheds ��� 0 con I g Imperial County o L4 p. I .......... R, Q,L .......... . ................ . ..... .......... ...... IQ 0A, 0 95 It J J >1 >) al C.�rPV r' Imperial County N C d y . b. "'• 0 7 S. ' O _ 4� l 4om ° o`° Ocean F O N a If-1.5'-01 —n=.015—> 2% I n= .0175 2% Concrete Depth Paved Gutler 0 13 RESIDENTIAL STREET ONE SIDE ONLY 20 i 70` 14 12 _._ 10 B j 8 � 440 rV 6 O' ` Q ti 6f O d V. a: S. n n0 3 CY _ c 2 �P 1. 0 18 1 4 d'r $ 2 p•S O�Q (0 2 O e 09 o 0 8 yQ 0 I 07 7,5 As 4 j 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 5C Discharge (C.F.S.) Q=2.93 EXAMPLE: S=1 .0% Given:0.10 S=2.5% j Chart gives:Depth.0.4,Velocity-4.4 f.p.s. V=2.4fpS D=.32feet SOURCE San Diego County Department of Special District Services Design Manual F 1 G L R E Gutter and Roadway Discharge • Velocity Chart 3-6 Type of conveyance is a : 4" PVC from Easterly Planter Area Diameter of conveyance equals . 33333 Feet Slope of conveyance equals 1 % Roughness equals . 01 Flow quantity equals . 240007 CFS Area equals . 0797035 Square Feet _. Velocity equals 3 . 01116 FPS Depth of flow equals . 3276642 Feet Type of conveyance is a : 6" PVC Drain at Driveway Diameter of conveyance equals . 5 Feet Slope of conveyance equals 1 . 8 % Roughness equals . 01 Flow quantity equals . 5000955 CFS Area equals . 099311 Square Feet Velocity equals 5 . 034689 FPS Depth of flow equals . 2549999 Feet Type of conveyance is a : 6" PVC at Northerly Building Diameter of conveyance equals . 5 Feet Slope of conveyance equals 1 . 2 % Roughness equals . 01 Flow quantity equals . 7700408 CFS Area equals . 1766179 Square Feet Velocity equals 4 . 359694 FPS Depth of flow equals . 4879969 Feet Type of conveyance is a : 6'' PVC Drain to Curb Outlet Diameter of conveyance equals . 5 Feet Slope of conveyance equals 4 . 7 % Roughness equals . 01 Flow quantity equals 1 . 270287 CFS Area equals . 138027 Square Feet Velocity equals 9 . 201101 FPS Depth of flow equals . 3989981 Feet Type of conveyance is a : 5 ' Swale Depth of channel equals . 33 Feet Bottom Width Equals 0 Side slope equals 3 Slope of conveyance equals 10 % Roughness equals . 013 Flow quantity equals 3 . 221354 CFS Area equals . 3110508 Square Feet Velocity equals 10 . 28771 FPS Depth of flow equals . 3219994 Feet SCREEN 7 COLOR 4 , 3 CLS LINE INPUT "Enter the type of Conveyance" ; tg$ PRINT "Type of Conveyance is" ; tg$ 10 INPUT "Enter the flow quantity" ; Q 20 INPUT "Enter the Slope" ; s 25 INPUT "Enter the Bottom Width" ; B 27 INPUT "Enter the Run for one unit of Rise ( Z ) " ; Z 28 INPUT "Enter the Maximum depth of channel " ; D 30 INPUT "Enter the Roughness Coefficient" ; n 35 y = . 001 40 A = ( B + Z * y ) * y 50 R = A / (B + ( 2 * y * ( 1 + Z ^ 2 ) " . 5 ) ) 60 Qt = ( 1 . 49 / n ) * A * ( R " ( 2 / 3 ) ) * s " ( 1 / 2.) 70 IF Qt < Q THEN y = y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Q equals" ; Qt ; "Depth Equals" ; y 80 IF y > D THEN PRINT "Channel Too Small " 82 IF y > D THEN END 85 IF Qt < Q GOTO 40 ELSE GOTO 90 90 V = Q / A 95 PRINT "Velocity equals" ; V 150 INPUT "Do you want a hardcopy of Data? Enter 1 if Yes" ; C 160 IF C = 1 GOTO 165 ELSE END 165 LPRINT "Type of conveyance is a : " ; tg$ 170 LPRINT "Depth of channel equals" ; D; "Feet " 175 LPRINT "Bottom Width Equals" ; B ~ 178 LPRINT "Side slope equals" ; Z 180 LPRINT "Slope of conveyance equals" ; s * 100 ; "%" 190 LPRINT "Roughness equals" ; n 200 LPRINT "Flow quantity equals" ; Qt ; "CFS" 210 LPRINT "Area equals" ; A; "Square Feet" 220 LPRINT "Velocity equals" ; V; "FPS" 230 LPRINT "Depth of flow equals" ; y; "Feet " SCREEN 7 COLOR 4 , 3 CL LINE INPUT "Enter the type of Conveyance" ; tg$ PRINT "Type of Conveyance is" ; tg$ 10 INPUT "Enter the flow quantity" ; Q 20 INPUT "Enter the Slope" ; s 25 INPUT "Enter the Diameter" ; D 30 INPUT "Enter the Roughness Coefficient " ; n 35 theta = 001 40 A = ( 1 / 8 ) * ( theta - sine ( theta) ) * D ^ 2 50 R = ( 1 / 4 ) * ( 1 - ( ( SIN ( theta) ) / theta ) ) * D 60 Qt = ( 1 . 49 / n ) * A * ( R ^ ( 2 / 3 ) ) * s ^ ( 1 / 2 ) 70 IF Qt < Q THEN theta = theta + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Q equals" ; Qt ; " theta equals" theta 80 IF theta > 6 . 28318 THEN PRINT "Pipe Diameter Too Small " 82 IF theta > 6 . 28318 THEN END 85 IF Qt < Q GOTO 40 ELSE GOTO 90 90 V = Q / A 95 PRINT "Velocity equals" ; V 100 IF theta < 3 . 14159 THEN Y = . 001 ELSE GOTO 141 1 10 X = Y * ( D - Y ) 120 Z = ( ( SIN ( . 5 * theta ) ) * D / 2 ) ^ 2 130 IF Z > X THEN Y = Y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Depth Equals" ; Y 140 IF Z > X GOTO 110 ELSE 150 141 Y = D / 2 142 X = Y * (D - Y ) 143 Z = ( ( SIN ( . 5 * theta ) ) * D / 2 ) " 2 144 IF Z < X THEN Y = Y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Depth Equals" ; Y 145 IF Z < X GOTO 142 ELSE 150 150 INPUT "Do you want a hardcopy of Data? Enter 1 if Yes" ; C 160 IF C = 1 GOTO 165 ELSE END 165 LPRINT "Type of conveyance is a; " ; tg$ 170 LPRINT "Diameter of conveyance equals" ; D; "Feet " 180 LPRINT "Slope of conveyance equals" ; s * 100 ; "%" 190 LPRINT "Roughness equals" ; n 200 LPRINT "Flow quantity equals" ; Qt ; "CFS" 210 LPRINT "Area equals" ; A ; "Square Feet " 220 LPRINT "Velocity equals" ; V ; "FPS" 230 LPRINT "Depth of flow equals" ; Y ; "Feet " �- i;BM'Ei ! i 557 Niagnatrcn Slid,Suite H - 37,1-6: 7,_ Scr: Diecc,CA 92'11 E'^Cil nfc l ne PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR THE PROPOSED QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED AT 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 i } � r NUv L PREPARED FOR: QUEST CONSTRUCTION Attn: Mr. Gary Schotz 6496 Weathers Place, Ste. 100 San Diego, CA 92121 September 7,2004 Project Ref.: 042608-1 - www.accutechengineering.com TARTS OF CONTENTS P� INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 General .................................................................................................................................... I ProposedSite Development.................................................................................................... 1 SITEEVALUATION.......................................................................................................................... 2 General .................................................................................................................................... 2 Area and Site Reconnaissance................................................................................................ 2 ExistingSite Development..................................................................................................... 3 SiteDrainage........................................................................................................................... 3 GeologicMap Review............................................................................................................ 3 Subsurface Evaluation................................................:....................:.. LABORATORY TESTING 4 ............................................................. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION.......................................... CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 6 General ........................................................................................... 6 ................................... Seismicity................................................................................................................................ 7 Earthwork.......................................................... Foundations 8 Concrete Slabs-on Grade ........................................................................................................ 11 SurfaceDrainage.................................................................................................................... 11 RetainingWalls............................................................... ......... 12 .............................................. ConstructionObservation...................................................................................................... 13 MISCELLANEOUS........................................................................................................................... 14 General ................................................................................................................................... 14 Maintenance Guidelines for Property Owners Limitations.....:.................... 15 ................................................................................................... 15 ATTACHMRNTS SiteVicinity Map................................................................................................................Figure 1 SiteLocation Map...............................................................................................................Figure 2 Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations.................................................................Figure 3 References.............................................................................. ........................................Appendix A SubsurfaceExploration......................................................................................................Appendix B LaboratoryTesting..............................................................................................................Appendix C GradingSpecifications .......................................................................................................Appendix D Project Ref.: 042608-1 Table of Contents TNTUOD TT 7'TON General This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical evaluation for a proposed medical office building to be located at 781 Garden View Court,in the City of Encinitas, San Diego County, California (see Figure 1, "Site Vicinity Map", and Figure 2, "Site Location Map"). The scope of our work, conducted to date, includes the following: • Conversations with the project Owner; review of a site plan for the proposed construction; review of published in-house data related to the site; review of additional provided reports for the original geotechnical evaluation of the property and the rough grading of the site (see Appendix A, "References") • Site Evaluation(see Appendix B, "Subsurface Exploration") • Laboratory Testing (see Appendix C, "Laboratory Testing") • Analysis and Discussion • Conclusions and Recommendations • Miscellaneous Information • Preparation of this report, presenting our observations, findings, conclusions, and recommendations Proposed Site Development Based on our review of project data and conversations with the project Developer, we understand that the proposed construction will consist of a two-story, wood-framed medical office building with associated improvements. The site has been rough-graded to form a relatively level building pad. It is anticipated that site grading will consist of scarification and recompaction of the near- surface soils to mitigate the effects of weathering since the site was rough-graded, and to develop a firm pad, suitable for support of the proposed building floor slabs and outlying parking areas, and excavations for foundations and utility trenches to the building. A retaining wall will be constructed to support a cut of approximately eighteen feet (18') into the hillside to the east of the structure, in order to expand the level area for parking spaces. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 1 The proposed structure will be reconstructed using a concrete slab-on-grade floor, with thickened slab for continuous strip footings or individual pads. Please see Figure 3, "Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations"for depiction of proposed site development footprint. STIE FVAT.TTATTO General Our site evaluation of the property, conducted on Thursday, August 5, 2004, consisted of the following: • Area and Site Reconnaissance • Existing Site Development • Site Drainage • Geologic Map Review • Subsurface Evaluation Area and Site R onnai�can X The site is a somewhat trapezoidal-shaped parcel of land located at 781 Garden View Court in the City of Encinitas, San Diego County, California. The site is on the eastern side of the cul-de-sac at the northern end of Garden View Court, north of Garden View Road. The site is bordered by an office building to the south, single-family residential sites to the east, a parking lot for a health club to the north, and'a health club across Garden View Court to the west. The overall natural topography of the area consists of rolling hills. The topography of the immediate area surrounding the site, similar to the overall area, consists of a gradually sloping mesa fringe with a general trend of slope to the west. The site itself consists of a relatively level building pad. A cut slope ascends from the relatively level portion of the property for a height ranging from twelve to sixteen feet (12'-16'), increasing from south to north, with an inclination of approximately 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The approximate elevation difference across the flat portion of the property is approximately eight feet (8'), from the high point in the northeastern corner of the property, to the low point at the southwestern comer of the property. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 2 Existing-Site Development The site, like the surrounding sites, has been developed, by the construction of cuts and fills, to create a relatively flat building pad during mass grading of the property. Other than grading, the site is currently unimproved. Site DrainaaP The site is currently sloped to drain runoff in sheet flow from the northeast to the southwest into the curbs and gutters of the Garden View Court cul-de-sac. Geologic Man Review A review of available pertinent, published, geologic maps suggests that no geologic hazards, such as faults, suspected landslides or areas of potential soil liquefaction exist at or within the immediate vicinity (within two hundred fifty feet [250] of the site), and none were observed during our field evaluation. The nearest known local active faults are part of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, which lies approximately four (4) miles to the southwest. Other major active faults in the Southern California region that may affect the site are the Coronado Banks, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Fault Zones, which lie approximately sixteen (16) miles to the southwest, and twenty six (26) miles to the northeast, forty nine (49) miles to the northeast, and sixty nine (69) miles to the northeast from the site, respectively. Suhsurfa Fval cation Six (6) exploratory test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of five feet (5') during our subsurface evaluation (see Figure 3, "Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations"). The test pits were excavated with a rubber-tired backhoe. Subsurface soils were reviewed and logged during the excavation, and disturbed samples were obtainedfor laboratory testing. As encountered within our subsurface explorations, the site was found to be underlain by fills and weathered formational deposits. Soils encountered within the explorations are described as follows: Fill Soils: Fill soils, encountered to depths ranging from zero to four and one-half feet (0'-4 %') appear to be generated from the original slopewash and formational soils on or immediately surrounding the site, as described in the referenced report of rough grading. Generally, these Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 3 't soils consist of tan, fine to medium grained, dense, moist, sand with silt, with scattered sandstone fragments. Fill soils classify as SP-SM (fine to medium grained sand with silt) according to the Unified Roils Classification e#.ter and, based on laboratory testing of similar soils, have a very low to low potential for expansion. Weathered Formational Materials: Weathered formational materials were encountered beneath the fill soils and at the surface in two (2) of the test pits. They consisted of moist, dense, slightly cemented to moderately indurated, sandstone. Weathered formational materials classify as SP-SM (fine to medium grained sand with silt) according to the IWhed mils Classification System and, based on our experience with these materials,have a low potential for expansion. The formational soils were encountered as exposed on the cut slope ascending from the eastern side of the level portion of the property, and were encountered within four (4) of the test pits at depths ranging from zero to approximately two feet(0'-2') beneath the surface. I,AR IRATQRV TFCTTNG Laboratory tests were performed on the disturbed and undisturbed soil samples to determine their physical and mechanical properties, and their ability to perform appropriately under the demands of the project. The following tests were conducted on the sampled soils: • Classification(ASTM D2487) • Moisture Density(ASTM D2216) • Grain Size Distribution(ASTM D422) • Expansion Index (UBC Standard 29-2) A thorough review of laboratory testing, including a description of the purpose and methodology of the tests, is provided, along with the quantitative and graphical (where applicable) test results (see Appendix C, "Laboratory Testing"). Use of the quantitative results of laboratory test data, a thorough visual inspection of the primary soil types on the property, and previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils have aided in developing the "CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS"section contained within this report. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 4 ANAT,VCTC ANT) 111C('TTC4i()1`T In deriving recommendations for this project, the subsurface conditions,proposed construction, and conditions of the existing structure and associated improvements were evaluated. Considerations were given to the potential for failure of the foundation soils, or the build up of detrimental supplemental stress in the structural elements due to differential, vertical, or lateral movement of the foundation soils. Generally, it is advisable to support an entire structure on similar foundation materials. When competent formational or bedrock material is present at economic depths throughout the area of a proposed structure, it is best to support the structure on this material to minimize foundation movement. In fact, a deep foundation is sometimes used in place of a shallow foundation to achieve this optimal bearing condition, especially if heavy foundation loads are anticipated or strict tolerances are required for the structure to function properly. On the other hand, when formational or bedrock material is not present at economic depths, the quality of the soils above must be carefully evaluated to determine their suitability for use with a shallow foundation. These soils may consist of topsoils, fill soils, slopewash, alluvium, residual soils, or other soil types, depending on the site. Such soils can be susceptible to settlement, consolidation, expansion, or failure. In the case of previously placed fill soils, settlement of the foundation can occur over time,resulting in the potential for distress symptoms within the structure. Unconsolidated natural soils, such as alluvium, can create similar problems. The magnitude, rate, and varying degree of settlement will depend on the soil composition, how and when the fills were placed, and variations in fill depth, and will vary from site to site. If an unacceptable degree of settlement is anticipated, a deep foundation (or combination of shallow and deep foundations) can be used to support the entire structure on competent material beneath the fills. If a structure cannot be cost-effectively founded on competent.formational or bedrock material,full or partial removal and recompaction of the fills can be performed to minimize the likelihood of distress. In some cases, a shallow foundation on previously placed fills (without removal and recompaction) is acceptable if they have existed for sometime, or are relatively shallow or uniform in depth. The use of lower bearing values, or additional steel in the foundation and slab (which may be post-tensioned), are sometimes recommended. In other cases, when deep settlement/consolidation-prone fills or alluvium do not exist, formational or bedrock material may be present at economic depths; however, expansive soils or variable near- surface soil conditions may exist, requiring that a structure be founded on removed and recompacted fill materials or imported non-expansive fill materials, depending on the soils present. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 5 In such cases, differential foundation movement can be minimized by providing a non-expansive, uniform, compacted fill to support the foundation and slab. Other options are available, including the use of specific drainage features, more steel reinforcement, or a crawlspace instead of a slab, to mitigate marginal soil conditions near the surface. Variable soil conditions within the proposed footing/slab depths may cause local consolidation/settlement beneath -heavily-loaded footings. Therefore, removal, mixing, and recompacting (or removal and replacement with compacted suitable import material) is recommended at this site; however, since competent formational material is present at relatively shallow depths, a second option would be to construct the foundation in these materials in conjunction with a crawlspace floor system (instead of slab-on-grade). CONCLUSIONS AND In general, it is our opinion that the proposed improvements, as described, are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, within the limitations expressed herein, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are adhered to. It is also our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults mentioned previously, or other faults in the Southern California region; however, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. We believe that the proposed development will have no more negative geologic consequence than the existing or surrounding development, if the guidelines in this report are followed and other customary development techniques are used. Recommendations are provided for each of the following areas of concern: • Seismicity • Earthwork • Foundations • Concrete Slabs-on-Grade • Surface Drainage Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 6 • Retaining Walls • Construction Observation Seismicity The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking, resulting from an earthquake on one of the major active regional faults. A maximum credible event (Richter Magnitude 6.9) or maximum probable event (Richter Magnitude 5.7) on the Rose Canyon Fault, considered the design earthquake for this site, could produce estimated peak horizontal bedrock accelerations of.57g and .37g at this site, respectively. The adverse effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by using acceleration values provided herein, other code requirements given in the most recent edition of the IIniform R„ilding Code (UBC), and design recommendations of the Structural Engineers Association of California. The following seismic parameters (per UBC,Volume 2, 1997) should be used to determine the seismic coefficients Ca and C,to be used in the structural design: Soil Profile Type = SD;Near-Source Factor Na= 1.0;Nv Farthwork Earthwork should be performed in accordance with pertinent city standards, Appendix D, "Grading Specifications", and the following recommendations: Site Preparation Prior to grading, areas of proposed improvement should be cleared of surface and subsurface debris, and stripped of vegetation. Removed vegetation and debris should be properly disposed of off:site, prior,to the.commencement of any fill operations.: Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing foundations, of other underground improvements, which exist within or below the proposed foundation depths or below the undercut depths noted in the "Removals" section, should be filled and properly compacted using on-site material or a non- expansive import material. Removals In order to provide uniform support for slabs and footings, the existing soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill to a depth of five feet (5') below finish subgrade. Where a minimum thickness of five feet (5') of existing fill is in place, the thickness of removed and replaced soil may be reduced to three feet (3'). This should be Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 7 performed to a distance of five feet (5') beyond the proposed building footprint. Soils with an Expansion Index of fifty(50) or higher should not be used for fill. Where parking areas are to be constructed, the existing soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill to a depth of one foot(1')below finish subgrade. Cut slopes should remain stable for a short period of time, if limited to twenty feet (20') in height and slopes not exceeding 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in fill soils and 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in formational material. Care should be exercised when making removals adjacent to, or near, existing foundations on adjacent properties. No equipment, material, soil stockpile, other loads, or surcharge should be placed at the top of slopes within a horizontal distance from the top of the slope equal to one-half(1/2) the height of the excavation. Our office should be contacted to observe all temporary slopes during construction to determine if any adverse geologic conditions are exposed which would affect the stability of the slope. Fills Areas to receive fill and/or structural improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of eight inches (8"), brought to near optimum moisture content, and properly recompacted to at least ninety percent (90%) relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557). All fill slopes should be properly compacted to ninety percent (90%) relative compaction in order to avoid erosion and sloughage. A minimum overall slope of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) should be maintained. When fills are required to support any area of a slab, then the entire slab should be supported by a minimum of thirty six inches (36")of fill to avoid differential settlement. Fills should generally be placed .in lifts not a exceeding eight inches (8") .in thickness. If importing soil is.planned, soils should be non-expansive and free:of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled, and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. Foundations The project and site are well suited for the use of continuous strip footings, isolated spread footings, piers and grade beams, or appropriate combinations of these systems, provided special care as described herein is exercised. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 8 Since adequate bearing materials are anticipated to be developed from the recommended grading, a standard spread footing foundation system may be used. A suitable foundation system with tolerable movement, three-quarters inch (3/4") total differential and one-half inch(1/2")differential over a horizontal distance of fifteen feet (15'), may be constructed if the following design and construction precautions are observed: Continuous Strip/Isolated Spread Footings 1. All footings for the building should be founded on uniformly and properly recompacted fill. Footings for the retaining wall along the eastern side of the property should be founded on competent formational material. 2. Footings bearing a minimum of twelve inches (12') into competent formational materials or properly recompacted fills may be designed based on a maximum allowable soils pressure of two thousand (2,000) psf. Bearing values may be increased by twenty percent (20%) for each additional foot of width or depth, up to a maximum of three hundred percent (300%) of the designated values. Bearing values may be increased by thirty-three percent (33%) when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 3. To resist lateral forces, a lateral soil bearing pressure of two hundred fifty (250) pcf may be used, along with a coefficient of friction of thirty-five-hundredths (0.35) between the soil and concrete footings. 4. The following parameters should be used as a minimum for designing footing width and depth below lowest adjacent grade: Embedment Below Lowest Adjacent Fln'nrs Supported Width Fina_ 1 Grailg 1 12 inches 12 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches 24 inches 5. For footings constructed within or adjacent to sloping terrain, a minimum of seven feet (7') horizontal setback, as measured horizontally from the bottom of the footing to daylight within formational soils or properly recompacted fill, should be maintained. For retaining walls in similar conditions, the setback should be seven feet (7') as measured horizontally from the bottom of the footing to daylight within formational soils. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 9 6. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) #4 bars at the top and two (2) #4 bars at the bottom (three inches [3"] above the ground). For footings over thirty inches (30") in depth, additional reinforcement should consist of at least one (1) vertical #4 bar and one (1) longitudinal #4 bar, located at eighteen inches (18") o.c. in each direction. Retaining wall design may also be warranted to resist lateral loads. This detail should be provided on a case-by-case basis by an engineer experienced in foundation design. 7. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and reinforced with #4 bars at twelve inches (12") o.c. in each direction (three inches [3"] above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of twenty four inches (24"). 8. If fills are required to establish the desired grades for footings, the fills should be properly compacted to at least ninety percent (90%) Modified Proctor Density. If any of the footings are located on fills, then all of the foundations for the structure should be located on a minimum of twenty four inches (24") of fill. Foundations bearing on both the natural soils and fills are strongly discouraged at this site. To avoid this, special care and attention should be given to the transition lot fill guidelines given in Appendix D, "Grading Specifications". 9. All loose soil found at the base of footings, when the excavation is opened, should be removed and extended to dense, undisturbed soils. 10. Additional reinforcement of one (1) #4 bar at the top and one (1) #4 bar at the bottom (three inches [3"] above the ground), should extend across all cut/fill transitions for a distance of ten feet (10') in each direction from the transition line. 11. Our estimates of tolerable limits of settlement should be confirmed by an engineer experienced in structural design or by the designer of the residence. The preceding foundation recommendations are based on foundations bearing on suitable weathered formational materials or uniformly and properly compacted fill, and grading of the site performed in accordance with the recommendations in the "Earthwork" section of this report. None of the above is to preclude engineering requirements by the structural designer of the project, where calculations require more stringent measures. The above embedment and reinforcement considerations are minimum guidelines, which may be increased at the discretion of the engineer or designer responsible for structural considerations for the project. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 10 Concrete Slabs on C;rarl„r Concrete slabs-on-grade will be suitable, if the earthwork/grading recommendations of this report are closely adhered to. The following recommendations are based on the assumption that slabs are placed on uniform soils. Slabs will be suitable if the following guidelines are closely adhered to: 1. Concrete slabs-on-grade should have a nominal thickness of four inches (4") and should be reinforced with #4 bars placed at mid-depth in the slab at eighteen inches (18") on center in each direction. 2. Reworked structural compacted fill or formational materials are suitable for the support of slabs. I A uniform layer of four inches (4") of clean sand is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a plastic moisture barrier layer (6 mil) should be placed mid- height in the sand bed to act as a vapor barrier. 4. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. The aforementioned precautions will not prevent slab movement if the underlying soils become moistened; however, they will minimize the damage if such movement occurs. ���P >nrainauP Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative, especially since expansive soils were encountered. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to footings, foundation walls, or retaining walls. The ground surface surrounding the building should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the building in all directions, with a minimum slope of five percent (5%) for a horizontal distance of ten feet (10'). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Roof gutters and downspouts with tightline drains should be installed on the proposed structure, and discharged to flow to suitable outlets a minimum of ten feet (10') away from the foundation. Surface and area drains should not be connected to any wall drainage or underdra system. in Drainage should be diverted away from the top of slopes to avoid erosion and "creep". Surfaces Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 11 should be adequately vegetated or otherwise covered with hardscape surfaces and provided with appropriate energy dissipaters, where applicable, to avoid pending erosion. Retaininb Walls A retaining wall will be required along the eastern side of the building pad area to expand the parking lot. Because of limitations of space between the wall and property line, we expect that a conventional cantilever wall will be used, and a segmented or mechanically stabilized wall, such as a Keystone wall at the back wall, will not be used. However, parameters for design are provided. The wall should be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations: 1. Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations"section of this report. 2. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of thirty five (35)pcf. This assumes that for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level MTh The oils are suitable l or used For sloping backfill,the following s' g parameters may be utilized: Condition ai—Slape 2'1 Active 45 55 Any other surcharge loadings should be analyzed in addition to the above values. 3. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed using an additional uniform soil pressure of 7 x H psf, where H is the height of the wall in feet, or an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure of sixty(60)pcf, whichever is more conservative. 4. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of three hundred (300) pcf, for level formational materials. This value assumes that the formational material being utilized to resist passive pressures extends horizontally two and one-half(2 %z) times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than two and one-half(2 %Z horizontal length. ) times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available 5. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive soil pressures above. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 12 6. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction of backfill. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. 7. All walls should be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure in accordance with Appendix D,Figure G-6, "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail". All exterior site retaining walls constructed of concrete masonry should, at a minimum, have the strike mortar omitted in the lowest course to allow for drainage. 8. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section and Appendix D, "Grading Specifications". Where there is a conflict, the more stringent recommendations shall be used unless otherwise specified by the engineer. 9. If segmented walls, such as reinforced earthwalls or Keystone walls, are to be used, they should be designed using an angle of internal friction for the backfill, derived from on-site sources, of�=34 degrees, c=0, and with a wet density of one hundred ten(I 10)pcf. Construction Observation The following services should be conducted under the direction and supervision of a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to or during construction of the proposed improvements (if applicable): 1. Grading and foundation plan review,prior to grading. 2. Observation of any conditions that vary from the conditions as described within this report. 3. Observation of all foundation excavations. 4. Observation of all subgrade preparation,after removals and replacement and recompaction of fill or concrete placement. 5. Observation and testing of any fill placement and preparation of compaction report (see Appendix D,Figure G-7, "DPL-73 Form"). It is probable that jurisdictional agencies may require additional services for documentation during construction, where applicable. These requirements may include the review or observation of one (1) or more of the following: • Exposed undercuts Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 13 • Reinforcing placement in slabs • Finish rough grade of slopes • Waterproofing • Subdrain installation • Area drain installation • Reinforcing placement in footings • Finish grade of landscaping The owner/builder should consult the governing agencies to determine the extent of their requirements prior to commencing work, to avoid costly delays during construction, and to have the required services included in the construction budget for the project. We are available to assist you in these services, should they be required. MTSCE T A N WILS r n r�l Some governing agencies require hillside property developers to utilize specific methods of engineering and construction to protect those investing in improved lots or constructed homes. For example, the developer may be-required to grade the property in such a manner.that rainwater will be drained away from the lot and to plant slopes so that erosion will be minimized. may also be required to install permanent drains. The developer However, once the lot is purchased, it is the buyer's responsibility to maintain these safety features by observing a prudent program of lot care and maintenance. Failure to make regular inspection and maintenance of drainage devices and sloping areas may cause severe financial loss. In addition to his/her own property damage, he/she may also be subject to civil liability for dama a occ to neighboring properties as a result of his/her negligence. g umng Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 14 L��iin Qnanse C;tliclQlin c for Prnner13 (lwn� The following maintenance guidelines are provided for the protection of the property owner's investment: • Surface drainage must be directed away from structural foundations to prevent ponding of storm waters or irrigation adjacent to footings. • Care should be taken that slopes, terraces, berms (ridges at crown of slopes) and proper lot drainage is not disturbed. Surface drainage should be conducted from the rear yard to the street through the side yard, or to natural drainage ways within the property boundary. • In general, roof and parking area runoff should be conducted to either the street or storm drain by non-erosive devices such as sidewalks, drainage pipes, ground gutters and driveways. Drainage systems should not be altered without expert consultation. Limits inns It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activi l addition containing cement also shrink during natural curing. All of the above can induce stresses frequently result in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. This is especially true when considering an addition or modification to an existing building or repair of an existing condition. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the subsurface excavations. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed improvements; however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soil profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed; therefore, no warranties of the accuracy t these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the evaluation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 15 Man-made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state-of-the-art knowledge and/or legislation are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due_ to these changes; therefore, this report for the specific site is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one (1) year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. This report is not meant to imply nor does it offer any warranty whatsoever as to the future performance or value of the property. Use of this report is for the sole purpose of the client. It is understood that Accutech Engineering Systems, Inc. will be compensated in full for any costs of litigation that may arise from the use of this report, including, but not limited to, fees for staff, attorneys, and/or expert witness testimony. It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to insure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and/or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Very truly yours, ACCUTECH ENGINEERIN C. HIV .4 Robert J. Randall, Pre t No. GE000707 M RGE#000707 * Exp. 3/31/07 RJR/SJC:dIiCKN���� Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 16 °WURR?ETA �p O WKHO C&FORW TEMECULA 79 o AGLWrA 13 1 \O\ \0 PALA o ps.0" 5 76 PAM vAt1FY 79 TO SA(ToN SFA � BONSNL RMCpI '�Y6lEJt SPIblfS 76 E OCEANSIDE ' VISTA SIT Wmm �FE1pE CARLSBAD SCONDIDO 79 S2 TO 5 SHWA YSM 7w NVUIM SAN PASg1AL ENCINRAS 67 76 ON" JULIAN CAR SO=FE RAMONA SOL" BEACH 67 DEL MAR S SAN DIEGO COUNTY WA 56 34 POWAY 13 67 79 LA JOL4 3 32 S Fu« 6 PACIFIC BEACH smmo3 ALPINE MISSION BEACH 7 .r� 6 � EL CAION OCEAN BEACH•o SAN MESA �—..1 94 o3mm Ro DIEGO C 34 6 7b E 94 6aanawo WORK' 3 ow mm" UNITED STATES sAN YSIORO TEGTE MEXICO TIJUANA ITo RosARrro NORTH 0 0 5 10 MILES APPROX. GRAPHIC SCALE 0 SITE VICINITY MAP m QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS, CA 92024 a s DATE: FIG���P�ROJECT 9 NO.: a 09-07-04 2608-1 t Yt• r�' b � .i° r _.�' '; •��'t Y� tg_ 4 "µ•"" k .�.1� �9 ., + n�a izY .,kT 1 W', a"All t Y�^`L� � � � r Ks" '`Y•', '1' .sn r s+�' i� 7- t a 4•� � 4t-r- "3. 'r '�# 3 S =L r a ?:"'` �.t'�'�'i,�6wA j r z S�'b r�a�'r �`•,' m r �e� �S t',.,J .i,.Y u�,' •7•�• A t � A' ':\t 7 y a,.e.x. � rc 1,-!21iM 1�-.� 6.J"� f `, E- F'_ryvR� f�. .•'`1.. $ _ � b ws '✓�—}.yt•`' �i ��•�y��'_ ,'-� .z i r '•�: Y i f k � i :'.N 'ja z br ,��f a � '�y, �.:, .. .. J`'� y �• + ..+'�` � .� _� vim,. L d 5 -t & 44 L ��!"��.,��� �.*�� -sa �+'�u��tk 2 vas ':t r ��? - �3' ,��.rj XS.t,•y x4d��-""_'T-^�r.�T=-` "9?(� �• pb2' ;3 �lY 'S ✓ 9P y4y i._ i J .. t.• it rY z'.°'dam. f ^ '!E y'" 1 C . �.,rsai•orC w�� � � 4� •A J„ f^2'"s. :�"rt; S3 '' t - s1+►Ji1L.tiJ NORTH c ( J QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT , • � CCUTECH ,1 s J G ]�N FED sl N C •r FIGURE • . r�° j • 042608-1 APPENDIX A REFERENCES REFERENCES 1. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Garden View Plaza, Unit#3, County of San Diego (Tentative Map) Tract 4255, Lots 8-19, El Camino Real and Garden View Road, Encinitas, California"by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. (GEI),dated March 27, 1987. 2. "Final Report of Rough Grading Observation and Field Density Testing, Utility, Drainage, and Street Improvement Testing, Garden View Plaza, County Tract No. 4255, Northeast and Southeast of the Intersection between El Camino Real and Garden View Court, Encinitas, California"by Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. (GEI), dated January 18, 1990. 3. Greensfelder, R. W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California. 4. Kennedy, M.P., and Peterson, G.L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, California Division of Mines and Geology,Bulletin 200. 5. City of San Diego, 1995,San Diego Seismic Safety Study. 6. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997 Uniform Building Code, Volume 2. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page R1 APPENDIX B SuBsuRFACEEAPLORATION SUB-SURFACE EXPLORATION TERMS ...vv:::::::.:::.::.w:::.-.w:}}::w. vv.ry .•...• '\+::'ii:}?.......... .:{::::.v:::::n�:u•:•:}}i:u:v: ..:.:..:....:':..:.....:.........l....r:.{i•}}:{•i::{�:v-'FMS:?':v:{:}:{{ny::�<::::•:::,:vii�:•,:{:�:}}�:w;':}:Yiti::.{•}:.i.�•�:.•{:3:ti'. <-. :;::.}};::::!::.:::::{.:{.::.:{:...:. }::. ::.:.::..::::..::..:.:::::::. ..:;::.:S.C. Oltlt�flL•.{{.. [Y�S011.:::::::::.:::!.:::,,}:.,,:.:,.,:.:•::.:'::.::. .. :::<:<;:..<•'::.}}>::::< <::<::<: .: : mr7L.. :»�!><.vest lons::::<:<:}r::::::::}a<:::::><::::::{:}:<: Gravels, more Clean p d GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. than half of coarse with <5% D Q fraction is larger Rues p than #4 sieve � GI' Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no lines. Gravels with GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, uon-plastic fivas. in >5% Fines o „ > in GC Clayey gravels, gravel-.sand-clay mixtures, Plastic Guts. 0 0 c 1r 0 x � Sands, more than Clean Sands ,�•� ' SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no Gncs. C half of coarse with <5% • . �. fraction is smaller Fines ' V than#4 sieve. , SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. V I.r Sands with •�;�, SM Silty sands, laud-silt mixtures, uou-Plastic Guns. >5% Fine SC Clayey lauds, laud-clay mixtures, pla. GlleS. Silts and Clays \ \` ML Inorganic silts and very Guc sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. liquid Limit is Y Less T'hau 50% CL Inorganic clays of low to medium Plasticity,gravelly clays, sandy b o KK clays, lean clays. -o in v0 00 OL Organic silts and organic silly clays of low plasticity. a 'a �° Silts and Clays \�;�; MIi Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty Y � v ♦ soils, clastic silts. k+ ' liquid Unit is El CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. ,Z More than 50% . OII Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. MgWy Organic Soils v PT Pcat and other highly organic soils. '.%4}N'Si:3}:t? .' .:•y:.yS '.SS\•.;:.5::.•}'J ,n .+:.:. :v•: n...::•. .J::J::•i:;•}}ii:3< ... .�.. �}, f.. .4 r Sands Gravels Silts & Clays Cobbles Boulders Fine Medium Coarse Pine Coarse 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12" IL IU.S. Standard Size Sieve I Clear Square Sieve Opening-c LEGEND '•V#k:":i :ln r•``v i$}:iti?^•:':`�+::::C'.tiiiiir,:-::::i`:::i:::i:1:'i:nv •:}i:?iiiii::{�ii'iiiii:i.:i'.?.v.•:viii:::} :r:;. ....::::•.i:::::::::::. .................... ...... ........................:::v:.�::is vx:::::::•::•.....:...}:...................... .::??::::...::::::::•......... n.......f.C:.. x. ...:..:......{..n... ::....:.. :•...:..........•.••:•}:. '}:.•.}•}.:v...v.}rye:•:::}}..:ih::::r.Y.:.....k�..�•:::•:iiYryi-i i'ti4r: �.�:.:::::?�::}.�:::::::•::.::.:..::.:::::.�::v:r:::.�.:.................r......................:...........:.v:f.•.S:r::::::...............Y.•�..vw:.vv.....n.....v...Y.:...+................ .....?..........r..........v..r..:..r..:}:•}:! Groundwater level or groundwater seepage at the time of drilling could vary seismically. Location of sample taken using a standard split tube sampler, 2 inch O.D. 1 3/8 inch I.D. driven using a hydraulically engaged and released free falling "mobile safety hammer. See Blow Count. Location of bulk sample taken from auger cuttings in borings or shovel in test pits. Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 2 3/8- inch I.D. modified California ® Split Tube Sampler liner rings, driven usinga 140 pound hydraulically engaged and released free falling mobile safety hammer." See Blow Count. Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 2 3/8 inch I.D. "California" liner ring and hand drive adapter. Location of carved chuck or block sample. FT Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 3 inch O.D. thin-walled tube sampler (Shelby Tube) hydraulically pushed. Sample disturbed during sampling such that accurate natural densities or strength D properties may not be reliably obtained in the laboratory. Sample relatively undisturbed during sampling so that natural densities or other U strength properties may be obtained in the laboratory. Blow Count Number of blows required to drive sampling device at 6-inch increments, unless noted otherwise. For example: 8-12-14 = 8, 12, and 14 blows to the sampling device were required to drive the sample for each successive 6-inch increment. 50/4 = 50 blows to the sampling device were required to drive the sample 4 inches. (5-8-9) = Blow count converted to SPT when other samplers are used. See attached 'Blow Count Conversion". DEFINITION OF TIC RIMS ...: ::. tA ri}::y:S.i}:•Y.}:•:;SF::}:5:.}}??:f•:i{:i>}:.+:}>::},}•:X;i}i:•i}:{.:::}n• `:T:<i. ,.::::..F:i}i.,'viS•i }. L. ..:,O::ir•;!{.}:.:..,::.:.::+:::.-::...:.v.::::::...:..t:.+,,?'i?::P,.•!t,-nnS�'v�i +F::.:} ....,v::::v.n.:::::..v...................... ...Lw:::::;•..:.. ...vv v}..n.f.,+ ..... .S.F•. ..1 ..n 1 ••;{�..•..M..;+; v}:}::.}Q.'t:::i?:t::F::�':}}f?v:••{\�\.,:FF;•x+t.<n},}:..) t}�•}•{:u.}.v}' ::..v:::}::•:: :.:i::wn�:::}:F}:C:{•}:{;;F}:<F}??:•}}?:ii}iii:}:i:iii:::}:4..... ..v::4 ::::Y.a1.:+::•... 5::...v. ::. v:.:}•: v•.::.................................,. .ttt•:?. :niii•'O}+': ::n;:FSw} .4•tL.F\+M1:M:i F::tiS:•.}'•�tiF::v}}:SJ v.i ..\•v.•n•.+• L S•;S•}:•}:F: .:.........}x' •k':: :S:{^:F};•?}}:F}}:•:F:{{G?:;S•}? `:}i?}n}:;:;••F:.::i't;:;\:F}.:v 2ii}ice{i'.i •}vi`. .' ..:vi••... •.Fi$v+..t :.4v :n:...........v:: ...%...•v:.:.:•:•.:::•::::}.}:.4?::r... :::.F:::}:?.iv ::...:v•.O.r,v}.vw.vt.{...:::?:.v,t-:::U}' c¢ Angle of internal friction (degrees) T -200 Material passing the #200 sieve (%) App Dnsty Apparent Density is the estimated density of the soil, at the depth noted, during field observation and classification (pounds per cubic foot). App Moist Apparent Moisture is the estimated moisture content, at the depth noted, during field observation and classification (%). DD Dry Density of soil (pounds per cubic foot) EI Expansion Index HP Unconfined compressive strength (hand pentrometer, tsf) ID Inside Diameter ksf Kips per square foot LL Liquid Limit (%) M Moisture Content, estimated or determined in laboratory as a percent of dry weight MSL Mean sea level NP Non-Plastic OD Outside Diameter PI Plastic Index (%) PL Plastic Limit (%) SPT Standard Penetration Test tsf Tons per square foot UC Unconfined compressive strength (cohesion intercept, ksf) USCS United Soil Classification System WD Wet Density of soil (pounds per cubic foot) BLOW COUNT CONVERSION (N-VALUE) The blow count representation of the penetration resistance of a soil (N-Value) is achieved by driving a standard 2 inch O.D. split-barrel sampler utilizing a drive weight of 140 pounds impacting the sampler from a fall of 30 inches. This method is known as the Standard Penetration Test(SPT) and is also used to obtain disturbed samples. Frequently,a larger sampler with brass rings is used to obtain undisturbed samples. _A correlation between_SPT_blow count and blow count from a larger diameter ring lined sampler used may be obtained by considering drive energy created by the fall of the 140 pound weight over the effective cross sectional area of the samplers. The drive energy of a larger 3 inch diameter sampler (133 ft-lb/in2) divided by the drive energy of the standard 2 inch diameter sampler (211 fl-lb/in2) results in a conversion factor of 0.630. The blow count of the 3 inch diameter sampler may be multiplied by this conversion factor to equate it to SPT blow count. Correlation of blow count between SPT and ring lined split-barrel drive sampler: Given: Standard drop hammer weight of 140 pound drop of 30 inches O.D. SPT 2 in. O.D. Split-barrel 3 in. I.D. SPT 1.375 in. I.D. Split-barrel 2.375 in. Effective Area of SPT: A = nd2/4 A = n(2 in)2/4 - n(l.375 in)2/4 Effective Area = 1.657 in2 Drive Energy SPT: (140 lb)(2.5 ft)/1.657 in2 211 ft-lb/in2 Effective Area of Ring Lined Split-Barrel Sampler: A = nd2/4 A = n(3 in)2/4 - n(2.375 in)2/4 Effective Area = 2.638 in2 Drive Energy Ring Lined Split-Barrel Sampler: (140 lb)(2.5 8)12.368 in2 133b/ .. Conversion (C): C = 133 ft-lb/in2 _ 211 ft-lb/in2 C = 0.630 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-1 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wxl2 ' Lx5 . 0' D _,Dle Elevation: 214 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:On slope (see plan) Field Laboratory e y p m S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) M (pcf) (%) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan, fine Large bag - SM to medium-grained, @ 0' -4' - moist, very dense, - friable to weakly - cemented 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - TORREY SANDSTONE 5 - - Test pit terminated @ 5 . 0*' (no caving) 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-1 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-2 B,uipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 ' Wx10 ' Lx3 . 2 ' D hole Elevation: 206 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Northeastern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (pcf) (�) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; fine to Small bag - SM medium-grained, orange- @ 0' -0 . 7' - brown, moist, dense - FILL - SP SAND with SILT; fine to 1 - SM medium-grained, tan, - moist , very dense, - friable to weakly - cemented Large bag 2 _ @ 11 -3 .2' 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE - Test pit terminated @ - 3 . 2 ' 4 - 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-2 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-3 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx3 . 6' D .pole Elevation: 204' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Southeastern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o S Field Description p (pcf) (pcf) M (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; light Small bag - SM brown to tan, fine to @ 0' -1' - medium-grained, moist, - dense - FILL 1 - - SP SAND with SILT; tan with SM mottled oxidized zones, - fine to medium-grained, - moist, very dense, - friable to weakly 2 - cemented - Large bag @ 1' -3 ' 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE Test pit terminated @ 3 . 6' 4 - 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-3 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-4 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhce Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx4 . 0 ' D _ole Elevation: 214 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:On slope (see plan) Field Laboratory e y Surface is brush and shrubs P m S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (a) (pcf) M (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan with Large bag - SM occasional mottled @ 0' -4' - oxidized zones, fine to - medium-grained, very - dense, friable to weakly - cemented 1 - 2 - 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE 4 - - Test pit terminated @ 4 . 0' 5 - 6 - project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-4 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-5 :quipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 21Wx81Lx4 . 5 ' D .pole Elevation: 203 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Southwestern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (%-) (pcf) W (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; fine to Field SM medium-grained, moist, density - dense, sandstone chunks test : 94% _ compact'n Q 1 . 2' 1 - 2 - 3 - _ Large bag Q 2 ' -4 .5' 4 - FILL Test pit terminated 4 . 5 ' 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-5 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-6 :tcruipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged : 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx3 . 2 'D .iole Elevation: 204 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Northwestern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (pcf) W (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan, fine Large bag SM to medium-grained, @ 0' -1 . 8' moist, dense, with - sandstone chunks, trace fine grass roots to 1 . 5' 1 - FILL 2 - SP SAND with SILT; tan with Large bag - SM mottled oxidized zones, @ 2 ' -3 .2' - fine to medium-grained, - moist, very dense, - friable 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE - Test pit terminated @ - 3 . 2' 4 - 5 - 6 Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-6 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING LABORATORY TFSTTNC; Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the accepted practice of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the Uniform Building Code (IJBC), and other suggested methods. A brief description of the tests performed is as follows: • CLASSIFICATION - Field classifications are prepared in the field and are verified in the laboratory by a visual examination per (ASTM D2487). Further classification is provided with the aid of supplemental laboratory testing of selected samples obtained in the field. Samples are classified, as coarse or fine grained, well or poorly graded, high or low plasticity, per the I Inified Classification System. • MOISTURE DFNSTTY - Moisture contents and dry densities are determined for representative soil samples in accordance with ASTM D2216. This information is an aid to classification and assists in recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-situ moisture content is determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. The results are summarized in the excavation and/or boring logs and the summary of laboratory testing within this section of the report. • GRAIN SIZE DTSTRTRTTTIO - The grain size distribution is determined for representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. Samples are washed through a #200 sieve (opening size of 0.7mm) and then mechanically vibrated through a series of sieves of various size openings. The results are presented on the gradation test results sheets, within this section of the report. EXPANSION INDEX - Expansion.Index tests on .remolded samples are performed on representative samples of soils per UBC Standard 29-2. The test is performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The sample and is then compacted in a 4-inch- diameter mold at a saturation of approximately 50 percent. The specimen is placed in a consolidometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, subjected to a total normal load of 12.63 pounds (144.7 psf), and the sample is allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample is submerged in water and the change in vertical movement is measured and recorded until the rate of expansion becomes nominal. The expansion index is reported as the total vertical displacement in inches times 1000. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page Ll 1 2 3 4 5 Passing Maximum Natural #200 Density & Atterburg Moisture& Sieve Sample Moisture Limits (%) Density Direct Shear (-200) Sample Depth Field pcf @ (LL) (PL) (PI) M DD C 0 % Loc. Bulk Drive (feet) Class % % % % % pcf ksf (0) Remarks T P-1 X 0-4 7.2 TP-2 X 0-0.7 6.1 X 1-3.2 11.5 TP-3 X 0-1 8.2 X 1-3 10.8 7.8 T P-4 X 0-4 7.1 TP-5 X 2-4.5 8.5 E1<20 TP-6 X 0-1.8 4.5 X 2-3.2 6.8 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SUMMARY SHEET Ll QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Q781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS, CA 92024 September 2004 L-1 042608-1 DATE: FIGURE#: PROJ.REF.# APPENDix .D GRADING SPECIFICA TIONS Suggested Specifications For Placement of Compacted Earth Fill and/or Backfill GRADING SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL It is advisable that a soils engineer be on-site as the owner's representative to observe the placement of all compacted fill and/or backfill on the project. The soils engineer shall inspect all earth materials prior to their use, in addition to the methods of placement, and the degree of compaction obtained. MATFRTALS Soils used for compacted fill and backfill shall be approved by the soils engineer prior to their use. No material, including rock, having a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (6") shall be placed in any structural fill. Any fill containing rock should be carefully mixed to avoid nesting and creation of voids. In no case shall organic material be used as fill and/or backfill material. PREPARATION OF SITRGRADF All topsoil, vegetation (including trees and brush), timber, debris, rubbish, and other unsuitable material shall be removed to a depth satisfactory to the soils engineer and disposed of off-site before beginning preparation of the subgrade. Removals shall extend a minimum of five feet (5') beyond the building footprint of all proposed structures. The surface of the area to be filled shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 8 inches (8"), moistened or dried as necessary, and adequately compacted in a manner specified below. PI,AC'ING FILL No organic or other unsuitable material shall be placed in the fill. No fill shall be placed during unfavorable weather conditions that would be adverse to the fill placement. All clods shall be broken into small pieces, and distribution of material in the fill shall be such as to preclude the formation of layers of material differing from the surrounding material. The materials shall be . delivered to the fill area and placed in a manner which will result in a uniformly compacted fill. Each layer shall be thoroughly mixed during placement to insure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. Prior to compacting, each layer shall have a maximum thickness of 6 to 10 inches (6"-10"), and its upper surface shall be approximately horizontal. Each successive 6 to 10 inch (6"-10") lift of fill placed on slopes or hillsides should be benched into the existing hillside, providing good bond between the fill and existing ground. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page G1 MOTSTT?RR CONTROL During compaction, the fill material in each layer shall be conditioned to a moisture content near or slightly above optimum with the moisture uniform throughout the fill. If, in the opinion of the soils engineer, the material placed as fill is too wet or dry to permit adequate compaction, it shall be removed and adequately dried or moisture conditioned prior to replacement and compaction. COMPACTION When an acceptable, uniform moisture content is obtained, each layer shall be compacted to applicable standards by a method acceptable to the soils engineer and as specified in the foregoing report. Compaction shall be performed by multiple passes with approved equipment suited to the soils being compacted. If a "sheep's foot" roller is used, it shall be provided with cleaner bars attached in a manner that will prevent the accumulation of material between the tamper feet. The tamper feet should be able to provide an increase in effective weight. MC)TSTTIRF-DFNSTTY DFTFRMTNATTON Representative samples of fill materials to be placed shall be furnished to the soils engineer by the contractor for determination of maximum density and optimum moisture content for these materials. Tests for this determination will be made using methods conforming to requirements of ASTM D 698 or ASTM D 1557. The results of these tests shall be the basis of control for all compaction effort. DF,NSTTY TESTS The density and moisture content of each layer of compacted fill will be determined by the soils engineer in accordance with ASTM D 1556 or ASTM D 2922. Any material found not to comply with the minimum specified:density shall be recompacted until the required density is obtained. Sufficient density tests shall be made and the results submitted to support the soils engineer's recommendations. The results of density tests will also be furnished to the owner, the project engineer, and the contractor by the soils engineer. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page G2 RELATIVELY IMPERVIOUS SOIL BACKFILL, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 90% MAXIMUM DENSITY (ASTM D1557) 57. MIN. � FINISH GRADE RETAINING WALL 18" MIN. WALL WATERPROOF'G 6 IN. PER ARCHITECT'S _ SPECIFICATIONS OVERLAP WEEP HOLES 4'-0" 12" MIN. 3/4" TO 1 1/2" CLEAN GRAVEL; O.C. HORIZ. AND WRAP IN FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE VERT. FOR EXTERIOR (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED WALLS, TYP. EQUIVALENT)* 4" MIN. 0 PERFORATED FINISH GRADE PVC PIPE (SCHED. 40 MIN.) WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN AS DEPICTED, MINIMUM 1% GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET COMPACTED FILL I I 4" MIN. BEDDING I — WALL FOOTING IN COMPETENT FORMATIONAL OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS AS DETERMINED BY THE CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE % PASSING 1" 100 3/4" 90-100 * IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL g 3/8" 40-100 (SEE GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE No. 4 25-40 OF 3/4" TO 1 1/2" GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC IS No. 8 18-33. NOT REQUIRED.. 'CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE No. 30 5-15 MATERIAL MUST BE COMPACTED TO AT LEAST No. 50 0-7 909 MAXIMUM DENSITY (ASTM D1557) No. 200 0-3 SAND EQUIVALENT >75 NOT TO SCALE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL m QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS, CA 92024 DATE: FIGURE NO.: PROJECT NO.: s09-07-04 G-1 042608-1 a COUNTY OF S IN DIEGO DEPARTIMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE San Diego Office CODES DIVISION North County,Office RETURN TO: 5201 Ruffin Road,Suite B3 334 Via Yen Crux San Diego,CA 92113 San Marcos,CA 92069 Project Location Name of Permittee Grading Permit No. This report form for a"minor"grading project is to be completed and signed by the Registered Civil Engineer(or Architect)who has been designated on the Grading Plan and Permit as the Engineer who will furnish the compaction report for work authorized by a grading permit Issued by the Department of Planning and Land Use. The intent of the format is to provide information to the Department of Planning and Land Use as to grading compliance with the approved Grading Plan and Permit. Where the questions below refer to location,configuration of quantity of cut andlor(111 areas,it is understood that your response will not normally be based on an actual land survey or detailed earthwork quantity calculations. it should be noted, however, that the Department is particularly concerned where there are possible infractions with respect to over-steeped slopes, encroachments of required setbacks,uncompacted fills placed,or where(lie quantity of fill placed differs substantially from that authorized. The Department of Planning and Land Use requires that all fills authorized by a Grading Permit be compacted to a minimum of 90% maximum density with the exception that not more than 12"of uncompacted and untested fills may be dispersed over the land parcel. The need to compact all fills that are beyond the present limits of the present proposed construction is to insure that future proposed construction of room additions or swimming pools or similar structures will not require that uncompacted fills be removed or recompacted, or that extensive foundation work be installed. Compaction reports will not be accepted unless this form is completed and signed by the registered person. A. COMPATiBILITY WiTH GRADING PLAN AND PERMIT I. Was the compacted fill placed only in the approximate locations designated on the grading plan areas to be filled? Yes_ No 2. Did the quantity of fill material placed approximately conform to the grading plan? Yes No 3. Did the toe of fill or the top of cut appear to meet the prescribed property line setback Yes_ No (1S' for fill;3.0' for cuts)? 4. Were the finished fill slopes equal to or less than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical? Yes No S. If the flit material was obtained by cuts on the site,were the cuts made in the proper location and to the proper slope approximately as shown on the grading plan? ' Yes_ No_ 6. Were the brow ditches constructed approximately as shown on the grading plan? Yes_ No B. LOCATION AND AMOUNT OF COMPACTION TESTS 1. Have you attached a sketch and data showing the location and relative elevation for all compacted materials? Yes 2. Was a compaction test made so that there is at least one test in each 2' thick lens of compacted material? Yes_ No 3. As indicated by inspections,observations and compaction test results,was the fill,excluding the top 1.0', compacted to at least 90%of maximum dry density? Yes No_ C. QUALITY OF FiLL COMPACTION OPERATION I. Was the area to receive fill properly prepared in terms of brush removal,benching,wetting, removal of noncompacted fill or debris and related items? Yes No_ Z Were all detrimentally expansive sails placed in the rill at 3' or more below finish grade.? Yes_ No DPL 1173 Rev.3-7-79 Figure G-.2,.� _ 3. Have you attached a copy of your curve slowing the relationship between optimum moisture content and maximum density? Yes— No- m. Was 211 material used as rill (earth, rocks, gravel)smaller than 12"in size? Yes No S- Are all areas of the(III suitable for support of structures? Yes No 6. Were all existing fills on the site recompaded in accordance with the provisions of the grading ordivaace? yes No D- STATISTICAL DATA 1- Dates the grading work was performed: 2. Dates your representative was on site and number of hours on site for eacb date,and name of representative: & AS-BUILT DATA L If the fill placement was not in accordance with the approved grading plan,did you notify the permittee to obtain approval for deviation from the plan before proceeding with additional fill placement? Yes L If the approved grading plan does not reflect the actual location,depth and type of fill, have you submitted for review and approval an as-built plan? Yes No REMARKS: — CERTIFICATION I hereby certify,under penalty of perjury,that the information provided in this certification is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature Date (To be signed and dated by a Registered Engineer or Architect) Registratloa or CMNQcatdos Number Address Telephone Number DPL #77 Rev.3-7-79 Figure GZ �r• — -M Accutech Engineering Systems,Inc. Phone: (858) 874-6768 Ext 1 1 1 "ATECH . , � 4 } , 5575 Magnetron Blvd,Suite H Fax: (858) 874-6912 � r�; ;' San Diego,CA 92111 Email: info @accutechengineering.c< DATE: May 25,2006 TO: QUEST CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING & Ct � Attn: Mr. Tim Travers 1� ,� 6496 Weathers Place, Ste. 100 JUL 19 206 jam' San Diego, CA 92121 f ! L-E>rGi��E .r s n:�i�ES RE: Quest Medical Office Building, 781 Garden View Lt.,EncihhTt� SUBJECT: Update Letter REF: "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for the Proposed Quest Medical Office Building to be Located at 781 Garden View Court, Encinitas, California 92024" by Accutech Engineering Systems,Inc., dated September 7,2004 Dear Mr. Travers: As requested, this letter provides the results of our review of current site conditions in view of the referenced geotechnical report prepared for the development of the referenced project. As part of this review, we performed a brief site reconnaissance on May 25, 2006 to view site conditions. The purpose of our site visit was to evaluate whether site conditions have changed significantly since the referenced report was prepared. Based on our site reconnaissance and review of the referenced report, in our opinion, site conditions have not changed significantly since the referenced report was prepared, and the conclusions and recommendations presented in the referenced report remain in force and valid. We trust this information meets your needs. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance to you,please do not hesitate to call our office. Very truly �; E ACCUT GINEE TEMS, INC. Robert Presid�et' RGE#000SyC � RJR/SJC:dh Cc: Quest Construction Engineering & Mgmt., Inc., Attn: Mr. Gary Schotz, 6496 Weathers Place, Ste. 100, San Diego, CA 92121 Project Ref.: 042608-1A Pagel �! Jnicauuu )y�it�ins,inc;. r ur,e IC13CI -XT I I -1 — — '° 4 ° ' 5575 Magnetron Blvd,Suite H ax: ;8581 874-6912 iiiWw San Diego, 921 1 1 maii: nfe¢accutechengineering.c ma a;'.m °f. apt L t. f l} •�:. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR THE PROPOSED QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED AT 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 PREPARED FOR: QUEST CONSTRUCTION Attn: Mr. Gary Schotz 6496 Weathers Place, Ste. 100 San Diego, CA 92121 September 7,2004 Project Ref.: 042608-1 www.accutechengineering.com TABLE OF CONTFNTS Ea r, INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 General .................................................................................................................................... 1 ProposedSite Development.................................................................................................... 1 SITEEVALUATION.......................................................................................................................... 2 General .................................................................................................................................... 2 Area and Site Reconnaissance................................................................................................ 2 ExistingSite Development..................................................................................................... 3 SiteDrainage........................................................................................................................... 3 GeologicMap Review............................................................................................................ 3 SubsurfaceEvaluation............................................................................................................. 3 LABORATORYTESTING................................................................................................................ 4 ANALYSISAND DISCUSSION....................................................................................................... 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 6 General .................................................................................................................................... 6 Seismicity................................................................................................................................ 7 Earthwork................................................................................................................................ 7 Foundations............................................................................................................................. 8 ConcreteSlabs-on Grade ....................................................................................................... 11 SurfaceDrainage.................................................................................................................... 11 RetainingWalls...................................................................................................................... 12 Construction Observation...................................................................................................... 13 MISCELLANEOUS........................................................................................................................... 14 General ................................................................................................................................... 14 Maintenance Guidelines for Property Owners .. 1 . Limitations.............................................................................................................................. 15 ATTACHMENTS SiteVicinity Map................................................................................................................Figure 1 SiteLocation Map...............................................................................................................Figure 2 Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations.................................................................Figure 3 References...........................................................................................................................Appendix A Subsurface Exploration......................................................................................................Appendix B LaboratoryTesting..............................................................................................................Appendix C Grading Specifications .......................................................................................................Appendix D Project Ref.: 042608-1 Table of Contents INTRO D 1C'TION General This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical evaluation for a proposed medical office building to be located at 781 Garden View Court, in the City of Encinitas, San Diego County, California (see Figure 1, "Site Vicinity Map", and Figure 2, "Site Location Map"). The scope of our work, conducted to date, includes the following: • Conversations with the project Owner; review of a site plan for the proposed construction; review of published in-house data related to the site; review of additional provided reports for the original geotechnical evaluation of the property and the rough grading of the site (see Appendix A, "References") • Site Evaluation(see Appendix B,"Subsurface Exploration") • Laboratory Testing (see Appendix C, "Laboratory Testing") • Analysis and Discussion • Conclusions and Recommendations • Miscellaneous Information • Preparation of this report, presenting our observations, findings, conclusions, and recommendations Proposed Site Development Based on our review of project data and conversations with the project Developer, we understand that the proposed construction will consist of a two-story, wood-framed medical office building with associated improvements. The site has been rough-graded to form a relatively level building - pad. It is anticipated that site grading will consist of scarification and recompaction of the near- surface soils to mitigate the effects of weathering since the site was rough-graded, and to develop a firm pad, suitable for support of the proposed building floor slabs and outlying parking areas, and excavations for foundations and utility trenches to the building. A retaining wall will be constricted to support a cut of approximately eighteen feet (18') into the hillside to the east of the structure, in order to expand the level area for parking spaces. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 1 The proposed structure will be reconstructed using a concrete slab-on-grade floor, with thickened slab for continuous strip footings or individual pads. Please see Figure 3, "Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations"for depiction of proposed site development footprint. STTF FVAT'ITATTON General Our site evaluation of the property, conducted on Thursday, August 5, 2004, consisted of the following: • Area and Site Reconnaissance • Existing Site Development • Site Drainage • Geologic Map Review • Subsurface Evaluation Area and Site Reconnaissance The site is a somewhat trapezoidal-shaped parcel of land located at 781 Garden View Court in the City of Encinitas, San Diego County, California. The site is on the eastern side of the cul-de-sac at the northern end of Garden View Court, north of Garden View Road. The site is bordered by an office building to the south, single-family residential sites to the east, a parking lot for a health club to the north, and a health club across Garden View Court to the west. The overall natural topography of the area consists of rolling hills. The topography of the immediate area surrounding the site, similar to the overall area, consists of a gradually sloping mesa fringe with a general trend of slope to the west. The site itself consists of a relatively level building pad. A cut slope ascends from the relatively level portion of the property for a height ranging from twelve to sixteen feet (12'-16'), increasing from south to north, with an inclination of approximately 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The approximate elevation difference across the flat portion of the property is approximately eight feet (8'), from the high point in the northeastern corner of the property, to the low point at the southwestern corner of the property. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 2 Fxis ing Site .lopment The site, like the surrounding sites, has been developed, by the construction of cuts and fills, to create a relatively flat building pad during mass grading of the property. Other than grading, the site is currently unimproved. ,Site Drainage The site is currently sloped to drain runoff in sheet flow from the northeast to the southwest into the curbs and gutters of the Garden View Court cul-de-sac. Geologic Man Review A review of available pertinent, published, geologic maps suggests that no geologic hazards, such as faults, suspected landslides or areas of potential soil liquefaction exist at or within the immediate vicinity (within two hundred fifty feet [250] of the site), and none were observed during our field evaluation. The nearest known local active faults are part of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, which lies approximately four (4) miles to the southwest. Other major active faults in the Southern California region that may affect the site are the Coronado Banks, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Fault Zones, which lie approximately sixteen (16) miles to the southwest, and twenty six (26) miles to the northeast, forty nine (49) miles to the northeast, and sixty nine (69) miles to the northeast from the site, respectively. Subsurface Evaluation Six (6) exploratory test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of five feet (5') during our subsurface evaluation (see Figure 3, "Site Plan/Location of Exploratory Excavations"). The test pits were excavated with a rubber-tired backhoe. Subsurface soils were reviewed and logged during the excavation, and disturbed samples were obtained for laboratory testing. As encountered within our subsurface explorations, the site was found to be underlain by fills and weathered formational deposits. Soils encountered within the explorations are described as follows: Fill Soils: Fill soils, encountered to depths ranging from zero to four and one-half feet (0'-4 %Z') appear to be generated from the original slopewash and formational soils on or immediately surrounding the site, as described in the referenced report of rough grading. Generally, these Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 3 soils consist of tan, fine to medium grained, dense, moist, sand with silt, with scattered sandstone fragments. Fill soils classify as SP-SM (fine to medium grained sand with silt) according to the Unified Soils 0a sifi a ion Systern and, based on laboratory testing of similar soils,have a very low to low potential for expansion. Weathered Formational Materials: Weathered formational materials were encountered beneath the fill soils and at the surface in two (2) of the test pits. They consisted of moist, dense, slightly cemented to moderately indurated, sandstone. Weathered formational materials classify as SP-SM (fine to medium grained sand with silt) according to the Llified Sails ('lass;fi at;nn S st m and, based on our experience with these materials, have a low potential for expansion. The formational soils were encountered as exposed on the cut slope ascending from the eastern side of the level portion of the property, and were encountered within four (4) of the test pits at depths ranging from zero to approximately two feet(0'-2') beneath the surface. I,AR(1RA -OK) I-ESTIvr Laboratory tests were performed on the disturbed and undisturbed soil samples to determine their physical and mechanical properties, and their ability to perform appropriately under the demands of the project. The following tests were conducted on the sampled soils: • Classification(ASTM D2487) • Moisture Density(ASTM D2216) • Grain Size Distribution(ASTM D422) • Expansion Index (UBC Standard 29-2) A thorough review of laboratory testing, including a description of the purpose and methodology of the tests, is provided, along with the quantitative and graphical (where applicable) test results (see Appendix C, "Laboratory Testing"). Use of the quantitative results of laboratory test data, a thorough visual inspection of the primary soil types on the property, and previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils have aided in developing the "CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS" section contained within this report. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 4 ANAT.VCTR ANTI DTCC'TT.CRT() In deriving recommendations for this project, the subsurface conditions, proposed construction, and conditions of the existing structure and associated improvements were evaluated. Considerations were given to the potential for failure of the foundation soils, or the build up of detrimental supplemental stress in the structural elements due to differential, vertical, or lateral movement of the foundation soils. Generally, it is advisable to support an entire structure on similar foundation materials. When competent formational or bedrock material is present at economic depths throughout the area of a proposed structure, it is best to support the structure on this material to minimize foundation movement. In fact, a deep foundation is sometimes used in place of a shallow foundation to achieve this optimal bearing condition, especially if heavy foundation loads are anticipated or strict tolerances are required for the structure to function properly. On the other hand, when formational or bedrock material is not present at economic depths, the quality of the soils above must be carefully evaluated to determine their suitability for use with a shallow foundation. These soils may consist of topsoils, fill soils, slopewash, alluvium, residual soils, or other soil types, depending on the site. Such soils can be susceptible to settlement, consolidation, expansion, or failure. In the case of previously placed fill soils, settlement of the foundation can occur over time, resulting in the potential for distress symptoms within the structure. Unconsolidated natural soils, such as alluvium, can create similar problems. The magnitude, rate, and varying degree of settlement will depend on the soil composition, how and when the fills were placed, and variations in fill depth, and will vary from site to site. If an unacceptable degree of settlement is anticipated, a deep foundation (or combination of shallow and deep foundations) can be used to support the entire structure on competent material beneath the fills. If a structure cannot be cost-effectively founded on competent.formational or bedrock material, full or partial removal and recompaction of the fills can be performed to minimize the likelihood of distress. In some cases, a shallow foundation on previously placed fills (without removal and recompaction) is acceptable if they have existed for some time, or are relatively shallow or uniform in depth. The use of lower bearing values, or additional steel in the foundation and slab (which may be post-tensioned), are sometimes recommended. In other cases, when deep settlement/consolidation-prone fills or alluvium do not exist, formational or bedrock material may be present at economic depths; however, expansive soils or variable near- surface soil conditions may exist, requiring that a structure be founded on removed and recompacted fill materials or imported non-expansive fill materials, depending on the soils present. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 5 In such cases, differential foundation movement can be minimized by providing a non-expansive, uniform, compacted fill to support the foundation and slab. Other options are available, including the use of specific drainage features, more steel reinforcement, or a crawlspace instead of a slab, to mitigate marginal soil conditions near the surface. Variable soil conditions within the proposed footing/slab depths may cause local consolidation/settlement beneath heavily-loaded footings. Therefore, removal, mixing, and recompacting (or removal and replacement with compacted suitable import material) is recommended at this site; however, since competent formational material is present at relatively shallow depths, a second option would be to construct the foundation in these materials in conjunction with a crawlspace floor system (instead of slab-on-grade). CON C'T,T SION.S AND R F!-"0 MEND LTIO m General In general, it is our opinion that the proposed improvements, as described, are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, within the limitations expressed herein, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are adhered to. It is also our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults mentioned previously, or other faults in the Southern California region; however, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. We believe that the proposed development will have no more negative geologic consequence than the existing or surrounding development, if the guidelines in this report are followed and other customary development techniques are used. Recommendations are provided for each of the following areas of concern: • Seismicity • Earthwork Foundations • Concrete Slabs-on-Grade • Surface Drainage Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 6 • Retaining Walls • Construction Observation Seism. The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking, resulting from an earthquake on one of the major active regional faults. A maximum credible event (Richter Magnitude 6.9) or maximum probable event (Richter Magnitude 5.7) on the Rose Canyon Fault, considered the design earthquake for this site, could produce estimated peak horizontal bedrock accelerations of.57g and .37g at this site, respectively. The adverse effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by using acceleration values provided herein, other code requirements given in the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and design recommendations of the Structural Engineers Association of California. The following seismic parameters (per UBC, Volume 2, 1997) should be used to determine the seismic coefficients Ca and C,,,to be used in the structural design: Soil Profile Type=SD;Near-Source Factor Na= 1.0;N, Earthwork Earthwork should be performed in accordance with pertinent city standards, Appendix D, "Grading Specifications", and the following recommendations: Site Preparation Prior to grading, areas of proposed improvement should be cleared of surface and subsurface debris, and stripped of vegetation. Removed vegetation and debris should be properly disposed of off:site, prior,to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing foundations, or other underground improvements, which exist within or below the proposed foundation depths or below the undercut depths noted in the "Removals" section, should be filled and properly compacted using on-site material or a non- expansive import material. Removals In order to provide uniform support for slabs and footings, the existing soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill to a depth of five feet (5') below finish subgrade. Where a minimum thickness of five feet (5') of existing fill is in place, the thickness of removed and replaced soil may be reduced to three feet (3'). This should be Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 7 Z J �/ / m 1 1 7 Z - L� _ C) Q LY1 ' W 0 I [, <J Li W V— W O t O r l U W i Q < O �-- v7 00 l_) a_ :D X O, W W I - [a iv O .._.I _. _........... ® _... .. .. _..... ...... ... w ' i ... .... %.,..� o _ a J � i I 1 I r I % i� 1 I 1 1 I s i I i 1 I i I I i ;; r I I ii I , I I . I - tt t f II.... i.. 1 ' � � � j ( 11 �• j l 1 I I 1 � I I , I r i fl 1 I i \` performed to a distance of five feet (5') beyond the proposed building footprint. Soils with an Expansion Index of fifty(50) or higher should not be used for fill. Where parking areas are to be constructed, the existing soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill to a depth of one foot(1')below finish subgrade. Cut slopes should remain stable for a short period of time, if limited to twenty feet (20') in height and slopes not exceeding 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in fill soils and 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in formational material. Care should be exercised when making removals adjacent to, or near, existing foundations on adjacent properties. No equipment, material, soil stockpile, other loads, or surcharge should be placed at the top of slopes within a horizontal distance from the top of the slope equal to one-half(1/2) the height of the excavation. Our office should be contacted to observe all temporary slopes during construction to determine if any adverse geologic conditions are exposed which would affect the stability of the slope. Fills Areas to receive fill and/or structural improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of eight inches (8"), brought to near optimum moisture content, and properly recompacted to at least ninety percent (90%) relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557). All fill slopes should be properly compacted to ninety percent (90%) relative compaction in order to avoid erosion and sloughage. A minimum overall slope of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) should be maintained. When fills are required to support any area of a slab, then the entire slab should be supported by a minimum of thirty six inches (36") of fill to avoid differential settlement. Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding eight inches (8") in thickness. If importing soil is.planned, soils should be non-expansive and free of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled, and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. Foundations The project and site are well suited for the use of continuous strip footings, isolated spread footings, piers and grade beams, or appropriate combinations of these systems, provided special care as described herein is exercised. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 8 Since adequate bearing materials are anticipated to be developed from the recommended grading, a standard spread footing foundation system may be used. A suitable foundation system with tolerable movement, three-quarters inch (3/4") total differential and one-half inch(1/2") differential over a horizontal distance of fifteen feet (15'), may be constructed if the following design and construction precautions are observed: Continuous Strip/Isolated Spread Footings 1. All footings for the building should be founded on uniformly and properly recompacted fill. Footings for the retaining wall along the eastern side of the property should be founded on competent formational material. 2. Footings bearing a minimum of twelve inches (12") into competent formational materials or properly recompacted fills may be designed based on a maximum allowable soils pressure of two thousand (2,000) ps£ Bearing values may be increased by twenty percent (20%) for each additional foot of width or depth, up to a maximum of three hundred percent (300%) of the designated values. Bearing values may be increased by thirty-three percent (33%) when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 3. To resist lateral forces, a lateral soil bearing pressure of two hundred fifty (250) pcf may be used, along with a coefficient of friction of thirty-five-hundredths (0.35) between the soil and concrete footings. 4. The following parameters should be used as a minimum for designing footing width and depth below lowest adjacent grade: Embedment Below Lowest Adjacent Floors Sup=ported Width Final Grade 1 12 inches 12 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches 24 inches 5. For footings constructed within or adjacent to sloping terrain, a minimum of seven feet (7') horizontal setback, as measured horizontally from the bottom of the footing to daylight within formational soils or properly recompacted fill, should be maintained. For retaining walls in similar conditions, the setback should be seven feet (7') as measured horizontally from the bottom of the footing to daylight within formational soils. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 9 6. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) #4 bars at the top and two (2) #4 bars at the bottom (three inches [3"] above the ground). For footings over thirty inches (30") in depth, additional reinforcement should consist of at least one (1) vertical #4 bar and one (1) longitudinal #4 bar, located at eighteen inches (18") o.c. in each direction. Retaining wall design may also be warranted to resist lateral loads. This detail should be provided on a case-by-case basis by an engineer experienced in foundation design. 7. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and reinforced with #4 bars at twelve inches (12") o.c. in each direction (three inches [3"] above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of twenty four inches (24"). 8. If fills are required to establish the desired grades for footings, the fills should be properly compacted to at least ninety percent (90%) Modified Proctor Density. If any of the footings are located on fills, then all of the foundations for the structure should be located on a minimum of twenty four inches (24") of fill. Foundations bearing on both the natural soils and fills are strongly discouraged at this site. To avoid this, special care and attention should be given to the transition lot fill guidelines given in Appendix D, "Grading Specifications". 9. All loose soil found at the base of footings, when the excavation is opened, should be removed and extended to dense, undisturbed soils. 10. Additional reinforcement of one (1) 94 bar at the top and one (IA #4 bar at the bottom (three inches [3"] above the ground), should extend across all cut/fill transitions for a distance of ten feet (10') in each direction from the transition line. . 11. Our estimates of tolerable limits of settlement should be confirmed by an engineer experienced in structural design or by the designer of the residence. The preceding foundation recommendations are based on foundations bearing on suitable weathered formational materials or uniformly and properly compacted fill, and grading of the site performed in accordance with the recommendations in the "Earthwork" section of this report. None of the above is to preclude engineering requirements by the structural designer of the project, where calculations require more stringent measures. The above embedment and reinforcement considerations are minimum guidelines, which may be increased at the discretion of the engineer or designer responsible for structural considerations for the project. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 10 Concrete Slabs-on-(trade Concrete slabs-on-grade will be suitable, if the earthwork/grading recommendations of this report are closely adhered to. The following recommendations are based on the assumption that slabs are placed on uniform soils. Slabs will be suitable if the following guidelines are closely adhered to: 1. Concrete slabs-on-grade should have a nominal thickness of four inches (4") and should be reinforced with #4 bars placed at mid-depth in the slab at eighteen inches (18") on center in ZD each direction. 2. Reworked structural compacted fill or formational materials are suitable for the support of slabs. 3. A uniform layer of four inches (4") of clean sand is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a plastic moisture barrier layer (6 mil) should be placed mid- height in the sand bed to act as a vapor barrier. 4. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. The aforementioned precautions will not prevent slab movement if the underlying soils become moistened; however, they will minimize the damage if such movement occurs. Surface nraina e Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative, especially since expansive soils were encountered. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to footings, foundation walls, or retaining walls. The ground surface surrounding the building should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the building in all directions, with a minimum slope of five percent (5%) for a horizontal distance of ten feet (10'). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Roof gutters and downspouts with tightline drains should be installed on the proposed structure, and discharged to flow to suitable outlets a minimum of ten feet (10') away from the foundation. Surface and area drains should not be connected to any wall drainage or underdrain system. Drainage should be diverted away from the top of slopes to avoid erosion and "creep". Surfaces Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 11 should be adequately vegetated or otherwise covered with hardscape surfaces and provided with appropriate energy dissipaters, where applicable,to avoid pending erosion. Retaining Walls A retaining wall will be required along the eastern side of the building pad area to expand the parking lot. Because of limitations of space between the wall and property line, we expect that a conventional cantilever wall will be used, and a segmented or mechanically stabilized wall, such as a Keystone wall at the back wall, will not be used. However, parameters for design are provided. The wall should be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations: 1. Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report. 2. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of thirty five (35)pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. The on-site soils are suitable for this. For sloping backfill,the following parameters may be utilized: C'onditiun 3)-J Slope ?,-I ape Active 45 55 Any other surcharge loadings should be analyzed in addition to the above values. 3. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed using an additional uniform soil pressure of 7 x H psf, where H is the height of the wall in feet, or an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure of sixty(60) pcf, whichever is more conservative. 4. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of three hundred (300) pcf, for level formational materials. This value assumes that the formational material being utilized to resist passive pressures extends horizontally,two and one-half(2 %) times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than two and one-half(2 ''/z) times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available horizontal length. 5. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive soil pressures above. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 12 6. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction of backfill. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. 7. All walls should be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure in accordance with Appendix D, Figure G-6, "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail". All exterior site retaining walls constructed of concrete masonry should, at a minimum, have the strike mortar omitted in the lowest course to allow for drainage. 8. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section and Appendix D, "Grading Specifications". Where there is a conflict, the more stringent recommendations shall be used unless otherwise specified by the engineer. 9. If segmented walls, such as reinforced earthwalls or Keystone walls, are to be used, they should be designed using an angle of internal friction for the backfill, derived from on-site sources, of�=34 degrees, c =0, and with a wet density of one hundred ten(110)pcf. Construction Observation The following services should be conducted under the direction and supervision of a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to or during construction of the proposed improvements (if applicable): 1. Grading and foundation plan review,prior to grading. 2. Observation of any conditions that vary from the conditions as described within this report. 3. Observation of all foundation excavations. 4. Observation of all subgrade preparation, after removals and replacement and recompaction of fill or concrete placement. 5. Observation and testing of any fill placement and preparation of compaction report (see Appendix D, Figure G-7, "DPL-73 Form"). It is probable that jurisdictional agencies may require additional services for documentation during construction, where applicable. These requirements may include the review or observation of one (1) or more of the following: • Exposed undercuts Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 13 • Reinforcing placement in slabs • Finish rough grade of slopes • Waterproofing • Subdrain installation • Area drain installation • Reinforcing placement in footings • Finish grade of landscaping The owneribuilder should consult the governing agencies to determine the extent of their requirements prior to commencing work, to avoid costly delays during construction, and to have the required services included in the construction budget for the project. We are available to assist you in these services, should they be required. MLS!C.E.T T A1�LC)TTC General Some governing agencies require hillside property developers to utilize specific methods of engineering and construction to protect those investing in improved lots or constructed homes. For example, the developer may be.required to grade the property in such a manner that rainwater will be drained away from the lot and to plant slopes so that erosion will be minimized. The developer may also be required to install permanent drains. However, once the lot is purchased, it is the buyer's responsibility to maintain these safety features by observing a prudent program of lot care and maintenance. Failure to make regular inspection . and maintenance of drainage devices and sloping areas may cause severe financial loss. In addition to his/her own property damage, he/she may also be subject to civil liability for damage occurring to neighboring properties as a result of his/her negligence. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 14 Maintenance Guidelines for Pronerty Owners The following maintenance guidelines are provided for the protection of the property owner's investment: Surface drainage must be directed away from structural foundations to prevent ponding of storm waters or irrigation adjacent to footings. • Care should be taken that slopes, terraces, berms (ridges at crown of slopes) and proper lot drainage is not disturbed. Surface drainage should be conducted from the rear yard to the street through the side yard, or to natural drainage ways within the property boundary. • In general, roof and parking area runoff should be conducted to either the street or storm drain by non-erosive devices such as sidewalks, drainage pipes, ground gutters and driveways. Drainage systems should not be altered without expert consultation. Limitations It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. In addition, products containing cement also shrink during natural curing. All of the above can induce stresses that frequently result in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. This is especially true when considering an addition or modification to an existing building or repair of an existing condition. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the subsurface excavations. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed improvements; however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soil profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed; therefore, no warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the evaluation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed,the results would also most likely change. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 15 Man-made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state-of-the-art knowledge and/or legislation are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes; therefore, this report for the specific site is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one (1) year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. This report is not meant to imply nor does it offer any warranty whatsoever as to the future performance or value of the property. Use of this report is for the sole purpose of the client. It is understood that Accutech Engineering Systems, Inc. will be compensated in full for any costs of litigation that may arise from the use of this report, including,but not limited to, fees for staff, attorneys, and/or expert witness testimony. It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to insure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and/or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Very truly yours, ACCUTECH ENGINEERIN C. JOHN q ! Robert J. Randall, Pre t No. GE000707 �j RGE#000707 Exp. 3/31/07 ; RJR/SJC:dfi � Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page 16 O MURMEIA 0 Y� PO o RANCHO GLJFORNA TEMECULA 79 371 o 1 15 ALLBROOK O l0 76 O PAU c a PALOMAR TO SAtTO)V ,.... PA11141 VALLEY r. 76 IINUJFR SPR►KS \. BOlSALL F*CCN l 76 \S LAKE HE16iTA1Y OCEANSIDE'; �A � �5 SAN� S3 70 ocon ` SITE Ss 78 7s THE NAARON CARLSB D'- g SCONDID0 SAWA YSABEL 5 76 SAN PASg1AL 67 73 ENCINITAS' 1 RAw�u JULIAN SANFA FE o :V RAMONA CARDIFFI, 57 SOLANA BEACHi "= SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEL MAR; S4 POWAY 56 15 67 BESCAN o g SANTaBKE o e LA JOLLA' S2 R" sP16NCS ALPINE PACIFIC BEACH yg MISSION BEACH' ' 6 v EL CAJON SPRNGS MESA OCEAN BEACH�o 163 SAN 94 oSPRm 94 � coRO DIEGO .; JNA1L � B ro �NAflQ` Y, ~) C 54 94 BOULEVARD I EA t E DuzuRA CHULA QTatur. PDIRERO CAAPO 94 STA IEGTE 1 OTAY 1� STATES IMPERIAL j UNITED TECATE BEACH, 5 SAN YSIDRO MEXICO TIJUANA TO ROSARITO NORTH s d 0 5 10 MILES APPROX. GRAPHIC SCALE LL SITE VICINITY MAP 0 QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS, CA 92024 DATE: FIGURE NO.: PROJECT NO.: s 09-07-04 1 042608-1 0 y'. ., ¢'. Ayiki.6X ?, �'€P� giv DI U. tiff ik j 2d f �� �•s,' g� +8a°�..v' :?: xN -tsE l �4k P .. s'z , w - z.z. �, > _11 L6i. F �aL7 5-Zi ��'•' ry'`"�". ° ' fi �$6�� - '. }. �M F R�. Wt-.oa f. � � � � � fi� ,� Yb f6 �� •`�' sad tx�s� 4�°� C-SI�G .z.," a �` nPR t F - 1„• u`^t '� `_ az� �c... M' .'s` 4' v 9 {� Yom. �• r -.r. v, ,. ?RE ...: ..,,.. „az.e - t yx 1Y a ,➢ 2'i i 5Y.a:SS. s t� r m ho mas m200t T mas Bros Ma NORTH 3 0 $ry d LL SITE LOCATION MAP ol E QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT :.: ENCINITAS, CA 92024 DATE: FIGURE NO_: PROJECT NO.: 09-07-04 2 042608-1 0 � N � Z 3 Q m :D , L Q O U U w ® W O w a J J U w a O o ° LLJ I Q Q O ~ LL I J w °0 `` 0- Z X O r17 LL- w L= O I� O r OZ ooz Cl— w • j J i i I I 1 APPENDLxA REFERENCES REFERENCES 1. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Garden View Plaza, Unit #3, County of San Diego (Tentative Map) Tract 4255, Lots 8-19, El Camino Real and Garden View Road, Encinitas, California"by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. (GEI),dated March 27, 1987. 2. "Final Report of Rough Grading Observation and Field Density Testing, Utility, Drainage, and Street Improvement Testing, Garden View Plaza, County Tract No. 4255, Northeast and Southeast of the Intersection between El Camino Real and Garden View Court, Encinitas, California"by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. (GEI), dated January 18, 1990. 3. Greensfelder, R. W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California. 4. Kennedy, M.P., and Peterson, G.L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, California Division of Mines and Geology,Bulletin 200. 5. City of San Diego, 1995,San Diego Seismic Safety Study. 6. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997 Uniform Building Code, Volume 2. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page R1 APPENDIX B SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION SUB-SURFACE EXPLORATION TERMS syl :.::5::::;:.:::.:::•'•:]`"s.::::ii:%::::.�:.. � i � �7�: �: � .::: ;:��.: :::+ :. - �. 2::' ��:; -.: .: :i:::ii��i::; - 1>-. :: _l: :�:. >:> S:i. ... ... �Y.�f.S1iJC..:�..�.....R;1.:::::::.:..:...... :J;::::.:;;;::.;:.:.;:.>]]::;•J:tJ; :-. . : ,. : . :: . : .:'. .:. .: : '��0.:.::...::?::.>4ll�1!�.I'X�`ICA'..Y..t4�Nt<.A►. �:.,�.:::;..::..�:::::::::.;::.;:< .:.:::<:::.:_::,:.:::.:..: ..... .. ............................................ ...... Gravels, more Clew Gravels p� d GW Well b nded gravels, b rzvcl-sand wixtureS, little or no Guc� than Ralf of coarse with <5% O Q fraction is larger Flues Q � GI' Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no 1 than#4 sieve u Gravels with GM Silty gravels, gravel-saud mixtures, uou-Plastic Guts. H in >5% Fiucs VSv V r GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixture , plastic Lines. b �_ in o 0 Vx Sands, more than Clean Sands SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no Cnucs. half of coarse with <5% e fraction is smaller Fines U y ba than#4 sieve. SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly scads, little or no Lines. o a Sands with, .\ �, SM Silty sands, saud-silt mixtures, uou-plastic Lines. >5% Fine ���• SC Clayey sands, swd-clay mixtures, Plastic Lines. Silts and Clays \ \� ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or c fine sands or clayey silts with slight Plasticity. u .� liquid Limit is CL hnorgauic clays of low to medium Plasticity, gravelly clays, 'o A u Less Titan 50% clays, lean clays. o OL 0 Organic sills wd organic silty clays of low plasticity. u V Silts and Clays �� ��� MII Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or d p ��� soils, clastic silts. u liquid limit is rn. More than 50% CIl Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OIl Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. HigWy Organic Soils .00 PT 1'cat and other highly organic soils. P_ v .......... ............ ... . .... ...... ........:::...,................... .... .... .kn ..... ....... , , J. n5.. J.... ....r,..r :{..... .:,...,.....v..]...... ,v........m...n.n ...\. b nx'] ♦.....-.r::: .... ♦.:..,. ........................................ ,:.::::...t t::•,.rn.:err<,, .. :... y,, r. .h..f...,:...:....r:..r............:r...:.n..::..::.>.vw::v.:.. .. ...:..... .. r../. h....r......... ..... :t::.�..: ,... ........................ .........., .....:..................:. Gran S. :. Hc.r .'-qti..#yf.].�i"+s...,esr,Y•'T�f'+.:]�<.?R...:r....n.-Y,.;.n Sands Gravcls Silts 3c Clays Cobbles Boulc Fine Medium Coarse Pine Coarse 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3° 12" IU.S. Standard Size Sieve l Clear Square Sieve Operrinkr.s LEGEND ,::<. >: ................ :..:..-.......:.:............::.. Groundwater level or groundwater seepage at the time of drilling could var. seismically. Location of sample taken using a standard split tube sampler, 2 inch O.D. 1 3/8 incl I.D. driven using a hydraulically engaged and released free falling "mobile safet, hammer. See Blow Count. Location of bulk sample taken from auger cuttings in borings or shovel in test pits. Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 2 3/8 inch I.D. modified Californi, ® Split Tube Sampler liner rings, driven using a 140 pound hydraulically engaged an( released free falling "mobile safety hammer." See Blow Count. Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 2 3/8 inch I.D. "California" liner rinj ® and hand drive adapter. Location of carved chuck or block sample. m Location of undisturbed sample taken using a 3 inch O.D. thin-walled tube sample: (Shelby Tube) hydraulically pushed. Sample disturbed during sampling such that accurate natural densities or strengtl D properties may not be reliably obtained in the laboratory. Sample relatively undisturbed during sampling so that natural densities or othe, U strength properties may be obtained in the laboratory. Blow Count Number of blows required to drive sampling device at 6-inch increments, unless noted otherwise. For example: 8-12-14 = 8, 12, and 14 blows to the sampling device were required to drive the sample for each successive 6-inch increment. 50/4 = 50 blows to the sampling device were required to drive the sample 4 inches. (5-8-9) = Blow count converted to SPT when other samplers i are used. See attached "Blow Count Conversion". DEFINITION OF TERMS Angle of internal friction (degrees) T -200 Material passing the 9200 sieve (%) App Dnsty Apparent Density is the estimated density of the soil, at the depth noted, during field observation and classification (pounds per cubic foot). App Moist Apparent Moisture is the estimated moisture content, at the depth noted, during field observation and classification (%). DD Dry Density of soil (pounds per cubic foot) EI Expansion Index HP Unconfined compressive strength (hand pentrometer, tsf) ID Inside Diameter ksf Kips per square foot LL Liquid Limit (%) M Moisture Content, estimated or determined in laboratory as a percent of dry weight MSL Mean sea level NP Non-Plastic OD Outside Diameter PI Plastic Index (%) PL Plastic Limit (%) SPT Standard Penetration Test tsf Tons per square foot UC Unconfined compressive strength (cohesion intercept, ksf) USCS United Soil Classification System WD Wet Density of soil (pounds per cubic foot) BLOW COUNT CONVERSION (N-VALUE) The blow count representation of the penetration resistance of a soil (N-Value) is achieved by driving a standard 2 inch O.D. split-barrel samplcr utilizing a drive weight of 140 pounds impacting the sampler from a fall of 30 inches. This method is known as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and is also used to obtain disturbed samples. Frequently, a larger sampler with brass rings is used to obtain undisturbed samples. A correlation between SPT blow count and blow count from a larger diameter ring lined sampler used may be obtained by considering drive energy created by the fall of the 140 pound weight over the effective cross sectional area of the samplers. The drive energy of a larger 3 inch diameter sampler (133 ft-lb/in2) divided by the drive energy of the standard 2 inch diameter sampler (211 ft-lb/in ) results in a conversion factor of 0.630. The blow count of the 3 inch diameter sampler may be multiplied by this conversion factor to equate it to SPT blow count. Correlation of blow count between SPT and ring lined split-barrel drive sampler: Given: Standard drop hammer weight of 140 pound drop of 30 inches O.D. SPT 2 in. O.D. Split-barrel 3 in. I.D. SPT 1.375 in. I.D. Split-barrel 2.375 in. Effective Area of SPT: A = nd2/4 A = n(2 in)'/4 - 7c(1.375 in)2A Effective Area = 1.657 in' Drive Energy SPT: (140 lb)(2.5 (1)/1.657 in2 211.x.f.-lam= Effective Area of Ring Lined Split-Barrel Sampler: A = nd2/4 A = n(3 in)2/4 - n(2.375 in)2/4 Effective Area = 2.638 in2 Drive Energy Ring Lined Split-Barrel Sampler: (140 lb)(2.5 R)/2.368 in2 133 ft-lb/in2 .. Conversion (C): C = 133 ft-lb/in2 =- 211 ft-lb/in2 C = 0.630 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-1 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wxl2 'Lx5 . 0 'D _,Dle Elevation: 214' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:On slope (see plan) Field Laboratory e y p m S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (o) (pcf) (%) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan, fine Large b - SM to medium-grained, @ 0' -4' moist, very dense, friable to weakly cemented 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - TORREY SANDSTONE 5 - Test pit terminated @ 5 . 01 (no caving) 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref . : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-1 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-2 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx10' Lx3 . 2 'D .nole Elevation: 206' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Northeastern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (o) (pcf) (0-.) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; fine to Small b - SM medium-grained, orange- @ 0 ' -0 . - brown, moist, dense - FILL - SP SAND with SILT; fine to 1 - SM medium-grained, tan, - moist, very dense, - friable to weakly - cemented Large b 2 - @ 1' -3 . 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE - Test pit terminated @ - 3 . 2 ' 4 - 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref . : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No . : SE-2 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-3 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx3 . 6'D .�.ole Elevation: 204 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location: Southeastern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (%) (pcf) M (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; light Small b - SM brown to tan, fine to @ 0' -1' - medium-grained, moist, - dense FILL 1 SP SAND with SILT; tan with SM mottled oxidized zones, fine to medium-grained, moist, very dense, friable to weakly 2 - cemented _ Large b @ 1' -3 ' 3 - TORREY SANDSTONE Test pit terminated @ 3 . 6' 4 - 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref. : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-3 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-4 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx4 . 0'D ._ole Elevation: 214 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:On slope (see plan) Field Laboratory e y Surface is brush and shrubs p m S App App Ntrl Ntrl Other t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (%) (pcf) (%) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan with Large b - SM occasional mottled @ 0' -4' oxidized zones, fine to medium-grained, very dense, friable to weakly cemented 1 - 2 - 3 - - TORREY SANDSTONE 4 - Test pit terminated @ 4 . 0 ' 5 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref . : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-4 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-5 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2'Wx8 ' Lx4 . 5' D .zole Elevation: 203 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location: Southwestern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Othei t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o TUSField Description p (pcf) M (pcf) (o) (ft) 1 and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; fine to Field - SM medium-grained, moist, et '; tesst :: - dense, sandstone chunks t compact @ 1 . 2 ' 1 - 2 - 3 _ Large '. @ 21 -4 4 - FILL Test pit terminated @ 4 . 5 ' 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref . : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-5 EXCAVATION LOG NO. TP-6 Equipment : CAT430D Type : Date Logged: 8/5/04 Rubber-tired backhoe Dimen: 2 'Wx8 ' Lx3 . 2 'D dole Elevation: 204 ' Groundwater Depth: None Logged By: SJC Datum: MSL D S Location:Northwestern corner Field Laboratory e y of building surface (bare p m dirt) S App App Ntrl Ntrl Othez t b m Dnsty Moist Dnsty Moist h o US Field Description p (pcf) (%) (pcf) (%) (ft) 1 CS and Classification 1 0 - SP SAND with SILT; tan, fine Large r - SM to medium-grained, @ 0' -1 . - moist, dense, with - sandstone chunks, trace - fine grass roots to 1 . 5' 1 - FILL 2 - SP SAND with SILT; tan with Large k - SM mottled oxidized zones, @ 2' -3 . - fine to medium-grained, - moist, very dense, - friable 3 _ TORREY SANDSTONE - Test pit terminated @ - 3 . 2 ' 4 - 5 - 6 - Project Name : Quest Medical Office Building Project Ref . : 042608-1 Project Location: 781 Garden View Ct . , Encinitas, CA 92024 Figure No. : SE-6 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING I ARORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the accepted practice of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM),the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and other suggested methods. A brief description of the tests performed is as follows: C'I,ASSIFICATION - Field classifications are prepared in the field and are verified in the laboratory by a visual examination per (ASTM D2487). Further classification is provided with the aid of supplemental laboratory testing of selected samples obtained in the field. Samples are classified, as coarse or fine grained, well or poorly graded, high or low plasticity, per the I Inified Classification System. MoISTIJRF, DENSITY - Moisture contents and dry densities are determined for representative soil samples in accordance with ASTM D2216. This information is an aid to classification and assists in recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-situ moisture content is determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. The results are summarized in the excavation and/or boring logs and the summary of laboratory testing within this section of the report. GRAIN ST .E DISTRIBUTION -The grain size distribution is determined for representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. Samples are washed through a #200 sieve (opening size of 0.7mm) and then mechanically vibrated through a series of sieves of various size openings. The results are presented on the gradation test results sheets, within this section of the report. EXPANSION INDEX - Expansion Index tests on remolded samples are performed on representative samples of soils per UBC Standard 29-2. The test is performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The sample and is then compacted in a 4-inch- diameter mold at a saturation of approximately 50 percent. The specimen is placed in a consolidometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, subjected to a total normal load of 12.63 pounds (144.7 psf), and the sample is allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample is submerged in water and the change in vertical movement is measured and recorded until the rate of expansion becomes nominal. The expansion index is reported as the total vertical displacement in inches times 1000. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page L1 1 2 3 4 5 Passing Maximum Natural #200 Density & Atterburg Moisture & Sieve Sample Moisture Limits (%) Density Direct Shear (-200) Sample Depth Field pcf @ (LL) (PL) (PI) M DD C 0 Loc. Bulk Drive (feet) Class % % % % % pcf ksf (0) Remark T P-1 X 0-4 7.2 TP-2 X 0-0.7 6.1 X 1-3.2 11.5 TP 3 X 0-1 8.2 1-3 10.8 7.8 X T P-4 X 0-4 7.1 TP-5 X 2-4.5 8.5 El<20 TP-6 X 0-1.8 4.5 X 2-3.2 6.8 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SUMMARY SHEET Lf QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Q781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENGINEERI M 59C.1 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 I September 2004 L-1 042608- DATE: FIGURE#: PROJ.REF.# APPENDLxD GRADING ,SPECIFICATIONS Suggested Specifications For Placement of Compacted Earth Fill and/or Backfill GRADING SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL It is advisable that a soils engineer be on-site as the owner's representative to observe the placement of all compacted fill and/or backfill on the project. The soils engineer shall inspect all earth materials prior to their use, in addition to the methods of placement, and the degree of compaction obtained. MATERIALS Soils used for compacted fill and backfill shall be approved by the soils engineer prior to their use. No material, including rock, having a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (6") shall be placed in any structural fill. Any fill containing rock should be carefully mixed to avoid nesting and creation of voids. In no case shall organic material be used as fill and/or backfill material. PREPARATION OF SITBGRADF, All topsoil, vegetation (including trees and brush), timber, debris, rubbish, and other unsuitable material shall be removed to a depth satisfactory to the soils engineer and disposed of off-site before beginning preparation of the subgrade. Removals shall extend a minimum of five feet (5') beyond the building footprint of all proposed structures. The surface of the area to be filled shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 8 inches (8"), moistened or dried as necessary, and adequately compacted in a manner specified below. PLACING FILL No organic or other unsuitable material shall be placed in the fill. No fill shall be placed during unfavorable weather conditions that would be adverse to the fill placement. All clods shall be broken into small pieces, and distribution of material in the fill shall be such as to preclude the formation of layers of material differing from the surrounding material. The materials shall be . delivered to the fill area and placed in a manner which will result in a uniformly compacted fill. Each layer shall be thoroughly mixed during placement to insure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. Prior to compacting, each layer shall have a maximum thickness of 6 to 10 inches (6"-10"), and its upper surface shall be approximately horizontal. Each successive 6 to 10 inch (6"-10") lift of fill placed on slopes or hillsides should be benched into the existing hillside, providing good bond between the fill and existing ground. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page GI MOISTURE-CONTROL During compaction, the fill material in each layer shall be conditioned to a moisture content near or slightly above optimum with the moisture uniform throughout the fill. If, in the opinion of the soils engineer, the material placed as fill is too wet or dry to permit adequate compaction, it shall be removed and adequately dried or moisture conditioned prior to replacement and compaction. COMPACTION When an acceptable, uniform moisture content is obtained, each layer shall be compacted to applicable standards by a method acceptable to the soils engineer and as specified in the foregoing report. Compaction shall be performed by multiple passes with approved equipment suited to the soils being compacted. If a "sheep's foot" roller is used, it shall be provided with cleaner bars attached in a manner that will prevent the accumulation of material between the tamper feet. The tamper feet should be able to provide an increase in effective weight. MOISTURF-DENSITY DETERMINATTON Representative samples of fill materials to be placed shall be furnished to the soils engineer by the contractor for determination of maximum density and optimum moisture content for these materials. Tests for this determination will be made using methods conforming to requirements of ASTM D 698 or ASTM D 1557. The results of these tests shall be the basis of control for all compaction effort. DENSITY TESTS The density and moisture content of each layer of compacted fill will be determined by the soils engineer in accordance with ASTM D 1556 or ASTM D 2922. Any material found not to comply with the minimum specified density shall be recompacted until the required density is obtained. Sufficient density tests shall be made and the results submitted to support the soils engineer's recommendations. The results of density tests will also be furnished to the owner, the project engineer, and the contractor by the soils engineer. Project Ref.: 042608-1 Page G2 RELATIVELY IMPERVIOUS SOIL BACKFILL, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 90% MAXIMUM DENSITY (ASTM D1557) 57. MIN. FINISH GRADE RETAINING WALL 18 MIN. WALL WATERPROOF'G 6, IN. PER ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS _ OVERLAP WEEP HOLES 4'-0" 12" MIN. 3/4" TO 1 1/2" CLEAN GRAVEL; O.C. HORIZ. AND WRAP IN FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE VERT. FOR EXTERIOR (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED WALLS, TYP. EQUIVALENT)* 4" MIN. 0 PERFORATED --- � j PVC PIPE (SCHED. 40 MIN.) FINISH GRADE _ WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN AS DEPICTED, MINIMUM 1% GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET COMPACTED FILL 4" MIN. BEDDING '- WALL FOOTING IN — COMPETENT FORMATIONAL OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS AS DETERMINED THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGG THE CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE % PASSING 1" 100 3/4" 90-100 * IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL 3/8,. 40-100 (SEE GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE No. 4 . 25-40 OF 3/4" TO 1 1/2" GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC IS No. 8 18-33 NOT REQUIRED. CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE No. 30 5-15 MATERIAL MUST BE COMPACTED TO AT LEAST No. 50 0-7 90% MAXIMUM DENSITY (ASTM D1557) No. 200 0-3 3 o - SAND EQUIVALENT >75 NOT TO SCALE 0 3 z RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL E QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BLDG. 4 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ig ® DATE: FIGURE NO.: PROJECT NO.: s 042608- 09-07-04 G-1 0 COUNTY OF SAIN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE San Diego Office CODES DIVISION North County Office RETURN TO: 5201 Ruffin Road,Suite 113 334 Via Vera Cruz San Diego,CA 92123 San Marcos,CA 92069 Project Location Name of Permittee Grading Permit No. This report form for a"minor"grading project is to be completed and signed by the Registered Civil Engineer(or Architect)who has designated on the Grading P1211 2nd Permit as the Engineer who will furnish the compaction report for work authorized b a din g permit Issued by the Department of Planning and Land Use. The intent of the format is to provide information to the Department of Planning and Land Use as to grading compliance with the approved Grading Plan and Permit. Where the questions below refer to location,configuration of quantity of cut andlor fill areas,it is understood that your response will not normally be based on an actual land survey or detailed earthwork quantity calculations. It should be noted, however, that the Department is particularly concerned where there are possible infractions with respect to over-steeped slopes, encroachments of required setbacks,uncompacted flits Placed,or where the quantity of rill placed differs substantially from that authorized. The Department of Planning and Land Use requires that all fills authorized by a Grading Permit be compacted to a minimum of 90% maximum density with the exception that not more than 12"of uncompacted and untested tilts may be dispersed over the land parcel. The need to compact all tilts that are beyond the present limits of the present proposed construction is to insure that future proposed construction of room additions or swimming pools or similar structures will not require that uncompacted rills be removed or recompacted, or that extensive foundation work be installed. Compaction reports will not be accepted unless this form is completed and signed by the registered person. A. COMPATIBILITY WITH GRADING PLAN AND PFRNIIT 1. Was the compacted fill placed only in the approximate locations designated on the grading plan areas to Yes_ No_ be filled? 2. Did the quantity of fill material placed approximately conform to the grading plan? Yes_ No_ 3. Did the toe of fill or the top of cut appear to meet the prescribed property line setback Yes_ No_ (IS' for fill;3.0' for cuts)? 4. Were the finished fill slopes equal to or less than 2 horizontal to t vertical? Yes_ No_ 5. If the fill material was obtained by cuts on the site.were the cuts made in the proper location and Yes No_ to the proper slope approximately as shown on the grading plan? __ 6. Were the brow ditches constructed approximately as shown on the grading plan? Yes No_ B. LOCATION AND AMOUNT OF COMPACTION TESTS I. Have you attached a sketch and data showing the location and relative elevation for all compacted materials? YeS_ No_ 1 Was a compaction test made so that there is at(east one test in each 2' thick Ions of compacted material? Yes_ No_, 3. As Indicated by Inspections,observations and compaction test results, was the fill, excluding the top 1.01, Yes_ No_ compacted to at least 90%of maximum dry density? C. QUALITY OF FILL COMPACTION OPERATION 1. Was the area to receive fill properly prepared in terms of brush removal,benching,wetting, removal of Yes No_ noncompacted fill or debris and related items? Z. Were all detrimentally expansive soils placed in the fill at 3'or more below finish grade' Yes_ No_ DPL#73 Figure GZ. Rev.3-7-79 3. Have you attached a copy of your Curve Shuwing the relationship between optimum moisture content and maximum density? Yes_ No 4. Was all material used as fill(earth, rocks,gravel)smaller than 12'in size? Yes No_ & Are all areas of the fill suitable for support of structures? Yes No_ 6. Were all existing fills on the site recompacted in accordance with the provisions of the grading ordinance. Yes No D. STATISTICAL DATA 1. Dates the grading work was performed: 2 Dates your representative was on site and number of hours on site for each date,and name of representative: L AS-BUILT DATA 1. If the fill placement was not in accordance with the approved grading plan,did you notify the permittee to obtain approval for deviation from the plan before proceeding with additional rill placement? Yes_ No_ L If the approved grading plan does not reflect the actual location,depth and type of fill,have you submitted for review and approval an as-built plan? Yes No REMARKS: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify,under penalty of perjury,that the inforniation provided in this certification is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature Date (To be signed and dated by a Registered Engineer or Ambitect) Registration or Certification Number Address Telephone Number DPL #7? Rer 3-7-79 Figure GZ October 25, 2006 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Engineer's Pad Certification for Quest Medical Office Building 781 Gardenview Court Grading Permit No. 9367GI Plan No. 9367G Case No. 04185 Parcel No. 257-470-1100 Dear Sir/Madam: Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a finish pad grade certification letter for Lot 257-470-1100,the above referenced subject project. As the Engineer of Record for the subject project, I hereby state that the finished pad grading for Lot 257-470-1100 has been completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards. LOT PAD ELEVATION PER PLAN PAD ELEVATION SURVEYED 257-470-1100 204.00 204.05 23.24.3 10(B)6. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with ading plan. Very truly ours, No•030966 C G ' �`chotz,P ./L.S. .•....... C ifornia Lic se# C 56,Expires March 31, 2008 Flevatio. Note Point NQrthing =_ Basting Point PAD° FI$ ,D SLOT 5022 .926000 10170 .378700 204 .020 PAD FIELD SHOT 163 10173 .264300 204.000 PAD FIELD SHOT 164 4995 .827600 60920'0 FIE 4970 .074500 10169 . 203 ,960 PAD SHOT 165 10129 .211100 203 .900 PAD FIELD SHOT 166 4976 . 032300 FIELD SHOT 167 4998 .518200 10130 .172900 203.940 PAD 10116 .899200 2Q4.030 PAD FIELD SHOT 168 5022 .733800 10082 .464600 FIELD SHOT 169 10089 .390000 5012 .932300 203 .960- PAD 170 4 203 .910 PAD FIELD SHOT 9.90 .638500 10098 .431500 171 4968 .729200 �. oyr8 CE7888 SILVERTON AVENUE,SUITE J CHRISTENSEN SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92126 &S ENGINEERING & SURVEYING (858)271-9901 PHONE (858)271-8912 FAX March 3, 2009 , �` AR City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Engineer's Final Grading Certification for Project No. 99-001 TM and Grading Permit Number 9367-G The grading under permit number 9367-G has been performed in Substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shoe n on the attached "As Graded" plan. Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms with the approved grading plan and that swales drain at a minimum of 1% to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Development, Source Control and Treatment Control Best Management Practices as shown on the drawing and required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part II were constructed and are operation 1, together with the required maintenance covenant(s). OFESS 10 Nq� Engineer of Record__ __ _ �4o �4 lap, s2c2 Dated �3� ------ ' N0• P srq�oG �Fo Verification by the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility: Engineering Inspector Dated 3 CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING•LAND PLANNING•FORENSIC ENGINEERING -- MRVINIE ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. August 7, 2006 Project No. 606-433 Mr.Tim Travers Quest Construction Engineering&MGMT.,Inc. 6496 Weathers Place,Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92121 Subject: COMPACTION TESTING REPORT PROPOSED QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS,CALIFORNIA Dear Mr.Travers: At your request and authorization, IRVINE Engineering Group, Inc. (IRVINE), has prepared this Compaction Testing Report for the building pad at the above-referenced site. A representative of IRVINE Engineering Group, Inc. conducted compaction testing for the subject project during the period between July 26, 2006 and August 3,2006. A total of 47 in-place density tests were conducted. The individual test data are summarized in the attached Table. The depth and frequency of testing was directed at providing a preliminary evaluation of the backfill compaction. The in-place density and moisture tests were performed using a nuclear gauge in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017. The locations were determined by pacing and steel tape and should be considered accurate to within 0.5 and 5 feet in vertical and lateral dimension,respectively. Based on the result of the in-place density tests,it is concluded that the soil within the building pad area has been placed in accordance with accepted engineering practice and has been compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM D1557 Test Method. Should you have questions regarding this report or need additional information, please contact the undersigned at (800) 372-8020. /pS E5S6A, Respectfully submitted, R IRVINE Engineering Group,Inc. c.� N A9 R. Sammy S lem,MS, E,GE,REA Principal Engineer RCE No.52762/RGE No.2549 IRVINE ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 3183 F. Airway Ave., #127, costa Mesa 92626 -www.irvineengineeringgroup.com Tel: 1.800.372.8020 - Fax: 949.387.7891 MRVINE ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. CERTIFICATE ENGINEERED GRADING INSPECTION PROPOSED QUEST MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 781 GARDEN VIEW COURT ENCINITAS,CALIFORNIA IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 33 OF THE 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT IRVINE ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. HAS PERFORMED COMPACTION TESTING AT THE ABOVE-REFERENCED PROJECT. THE COMPACTION TESTING/INSPECTION WAS LIMITED TO THE BUILDING PAD BASED UPON OUR OBSERVATION AND WRITTEN REPORTS OF THIS WORK, IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THE SITE PREPERATION/OVER-EXCAVATION AND COMPACTION TESTING / INSPECTION WORK WAS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.BASED ON THE RESULT OF THE IN-PLACE DENSITY TESTS,AS WELL AS OUR OBSERVATIONS, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE SITE WAS OVER-EXCAVATED AND FILL HAS BEEN PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICE AND HAS BEEN COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90 PERCENT OF MAXIMUM DENSITY BASED ON ASTM D1557 TEST METHOD. Respectfully submitted IRVINE Engineering Group, Inc. �;. �f `•E, R. Sam Salem,M ,PE,GE,REA Principal Engineer \•?.,,. _-- - `\ 'f C RCE No .52762/RGE No.2549 �- IRVINE ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 3183 F. Airway Ave., #127, Costa Mesa 92626 - www.irvineengineeringgroup.com Tel: 1.800.372.8020 - Fax: 949.387.7891 � �o �o .o �o �o �o �o �o � �o �o �o � �o � �o � �o �o �o � `o •D o 0 0 0 co N N fu o nz� a 5 Q P. P. P. P �. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. P. obbZ boo boo bCO b�A boo bCD b�A bGA ODD b�A boo boo boo bGA b�A OVA boo bGA 0�o boo b�D boo boo bo 0 p 3 s o v N y fA to to w N !A m fA y H ftl fn y y V) y y y Vi y fA +p , q1 fA O] VI y fA to y fA fA H y VJ Vf y V1 y !A !A Vi N fA y V1 to y !n 'a ' Aj fb <y N"t f0 ftl ttl tC flt !E ttl RS fd b tf! etl fd rt m fC m ft «! e{7 N ttt ttl t0 fE b cC •; , '' +: a, a. c� wawa, awa. ac, a, c, a. a, aaawP, aa, waaaw o W v Ks lz, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H •• U i€ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � w bo ,yp'+,`�nf, rn Ch ?� O� O� m T Q� T Q� T ON O, 6� O, T T Q� O a w u U a 3 "N� -. M l� N ti 1n N h N M N N f--1 d� N N h N N tM to N M 'r O N N U d �:. ,�.:,. Q� T Q� O� Q� O� G� T Q, O, O1 T C, T C� Q� 6� T T M G� 0� fT fT a, C) Pw um p cu Q 7= G ~ . n a, v Q N v'� t.n to to v'� v� � Lrn Ln �n to to '7 ,�''. .O o0 o6 o6 o6 o6 w oo oD a0 a0 a0 oD oo cc co oo oo c0 00 c0 c0 00 n0 0o f:0 00 Zi Q aQ Q` �-. O O f.["l O O� t\ O d+ cn t\ O O N t\ M fn �-. M m O N oo L\ m O o d o 0o ri o v co 0 a o 0o ni o o �r o a . F y.' N b" d Cl oo N L' L� h d! Lq d! '. N M — O M d N N D <Y d M N O p� 6� T O N M O fY i N N N '-+ O r. N m N [h r+ .•-i O Q pp�yy H.ip N N N N N �-•+ �--� .-. r. �-. �"' Cj �..� C.� U� �..� �-. �-•i r. r. .-+ N N N cV Q'- A p bD z m a1 .m-. f�-+ ��•+ .N. 00 O N N N N N N N H � � :a g q q q q •o D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri c*i c*i m Cc) c+i m ri ri M ri ri m 00 00 00 00 co 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0o ao 00 p ao 0o p 00 rn a H a o o v o o o cs cs c c G c It m a m cz ° m m m a n m m b bo bO bo bo M bo bo bo bA bo bo bo bo bD bo bD bo DQ bo G co cm cowwwcomwwwaa 4 A O a Q" .r to to W y to to m to Vo to to m W to to m 0 to to fo W to W W fo to fD y y to to Vi to m to H m to It f{1 b R !d A R4 fil t1S Rf b fE b 1a f0 fC R1 fE RZ fE a -: � �Lwwa. a. wwc.. aaa, aa. wc, a. aa.� a+ aa .. m cn o Au v fa m x'S o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H U .} b0 'FCj+'. �,'. 01 91 rn Q, a, a, ON Q� rn rn 01 rn T Q+ Q1 W U b > U u' s a0 M N N O H d! C r- [J N N O 0 N M N m eti H p'. 00 a � � gr � � � � Lq Lq � � � Uq LQ � � � LqLo Lq � Lq � � a ,oC „ a6 oco Do 00 o6 o6 00 000000 � � � � � � a n A N 1 oo m m v o 1 a N a rn o a 00 Cl) °�° 'a `- 0 0 o O N o o o O o O N o O o 0 0 c e. 6ix N m r+ N O O O O ~ O <--� O a0 O O N N e�-i CN C' p O? - (V O O O O m n n m 0 0 0 0 N N (V CV N N N N cV iV N m m 1 bD a aN AVID O N LO n 00 T O N M N M m m Cl) Cl) m C' dt d� V� Laboratory Compaction Curve ASTM - D16675 D698 Project Number : 206-433 Project Name : 781 Garden View Ct., Encintas : 07/26/06 Date ; 781 Garden View Ct., Encintas Sample location ; S-1 Sample/Curve Number ; Silty Sand, medium to fine grained, trace of Soil Classification ; yellow brown &non-cohesive. Test Method : 1557 A 1 2 3 .0 4159.4 Wei ht of Moist S ecimen &Mold, m 2258 9 4118.6 42223232 9 2258.9 Wei ht of Com action Mold, m 1859.7 1973.1 1900.5 Wei ht of Moist S ecimen, m 0.0333 0.0333 0.0333 Volume of mold, cu. ft. 123.0 130.5 125.8 Wet Densit , Ibslcu.ft. 134.2 134.2 135.0 Wei ht of Wet Moisture I Sample, m 1251 121.8 119.1 Wei ht of D (Moisture) Sam ie, m 7.3% 10.2% 13.4% Moisture Content, % 114.7 118.5 111.0 JDry Densit , Ibs/cu.ft. 150 Densi 118.5 IbSICU.ft Maximum Dry ty: 10.2 % Optimum Moisture Content: 145 lr __ 140 135 - - 130 125 __ _T r 1�.-� — T — m120 -� - — - � 115 -- 110 — -- r- — _ 41. 105 �- _ —j-- — _ - — -- — = 100 95 0 10% 15% 0% 5% Moisture Content,%of Dry Weight SALEM Engineering Group, In LOT 207.4 1 TRACT NOO. 42:5 207.6 i 207.3 ° o 11 x x T. x "Pill 2 x \ 208.1 x \ ASP61 11 287.9 207.3 J 237.2 .9 207. 207.1 227.1 � � 207.6 207.7 � 203.3 III 208.2 x x I �, x x x x x x x x I x 1 I I OT 10 ASP- 11 � I 2 07.6 �7.® I 207.2 237.2 I I .4 237,3 207.8 207.3 W.8 = x x x x 1 1 x x \ 207.0 237.3 297.7 237.3 298.2 \ 2909. 230,6 x 207,2 �xF x x x x 2072 LOT 9 207.9 x x .3 I x MM 297.4 237.7 r, 2106.9 2082 . \ x x " x � ` AsPb 207.5 2207,7 207.8 207.8 \ \ .2 ��✓Gi ) _ _ n " - - g 2„76 908.4 x .9 x ;_ , -:�- I I I I I I 23$.0 I ( I { 224.7 M4 I I I I I 224.5 x I I I I I I I I l i l l 11 I I I 11 I 240.E i t I 1 1 1 III I I ®III I ® I I 242.7 I I I I I I 22.9.0 IIII I I I 224.4 III I I I I a I I t I I 224.3 6- NCE I ` SEE BUILDING PLAN I I i l 11 I 1 x I 2228 239.3 I 240.8 +267/3; I71 { ' I I 246.6 I r� 2M 239.4 11 1 I I I omc 1 I 222.9 ` I \ 292.8 x 290.0 x36.0 226.2 227.9 PLANNING CASE \ \ I 3 0 ffiEn 999.4 199 x 999.4 2 3 2 .7 2 .9 2 2.2 DES SE x x 99J.0 x x x x x' x x x x 294.2 LOT 7 + f 231.7 EXISITNG SEWS L DRAINAGE AREA " B" I X37.3 93.3 9�.7 91.3 6 4 I 290.9 9 6. I 264.4 x m ox x AREAx= 0.522 ACRE x S I I I I 294.3 x D 223.3 987.6 C,"'.t' r - �3 x U927.2 9 . I I 1 x 2'23.8 I x14.3 W �/ - -- 6 ' MASONRY -F - r - W 0 - _ -'- - - x \ \ I I j{ GEE ili G PLAN i 630' RA HT - I \ 998.3 938.0 %233.8 \.� _ 1952 1s6 I� - 930.3 I I � 325.8 W � 0 U7 9i.3�e �++ 9 84.7 194.6 9 .5 95 x Z x x T z .� x x x x x x x x 195.0 195.3 995.5 9 .0 x 105.0 - / 2 a •- Tc_' - n ^/J , 995.2 ASPH ,. 995.3 ©T� I 995.2 I I II x pW„ ASFH 994.7 L'� LS 986.8 i I d 228.8 ^93.3 V W In � ts'a LL 98'. €_ - ; `-- --- - _. _ _ _ _ 198.3 194.4 999.3 984.8 99' =d.3 994.3 x 9�.4 I I 333.9 1 O O O x i xx _ _ _ x x � x x x x x I I 3219.7 993.9 983.0 I \ ASP61 J" \ aD d LL I �L / / 1 ".a 6�ik 9 s.8 9 995.0 I I II O� / .8 I I I �� 293.2 299.4 W� O\ / I x986.4 \ I I I �L-- © -_- _ I x W 0: x \ I 292.9 S 0 \ 994.5 994.9 \ I I I I 208.31 225.5 2 2 x I \ o0-a3 \ �1 292.0 W CL to LL PppESS! Ch,``� ��Q�a o SCALE 1" = 20' T Z U y N d 7' w � No.54021 = m � 3 Exp. 12 -a1 -05 slgr � /VIt• �P OF CAL \ 0' 20' 40' 60' 60' REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES BENCHMARK SCALE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING N ®, STANDARD CENTERLINE WELL MONUMENT PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF RECOMMENDED APPROVED DRAINAGE AREA MAP AT THE INTERSECTION OF ENCINITAS BOULEVARD AND EL C REAL NORTH. ELEVATION N = = 2 220.70 M.S.L. HORIZONTAL 1 "= 20' BY. (�' QUEST M E ®I CAL B U I L ®I G 'G VERTICAL N/A BY DATE ANTONY K. CHRISTENSEN DATE DATE: DATE: 1 Y R.C.E. 54021 EXPIRES 12 -31 -05 7$1 GARDEN VIEW COURT SHEET 1 OF 1 PLANNING CASE