1996-4560 GC I T Y O F E N C I N I T A S
ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
505 S. VULCAN AVE.
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
GRADING PERMIT
PERMIT NO.: 5164GI
................................................ ...............................
PARCEL NO. : 260- 620 - 2000,21 PLAN NO.: 5164 -G
JOB SITE ADDRESS: 1409 -15 SAN ELIJO AVE.
APPLICANT NAME OCEAN VIEWS LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 333 COAST BLVD. #2 PHONE NO.: 619- 456 -7000
CITY: LA JOLLA STATE: CA ZIP: 92037-
CONTRACTOR : DEWHURST & ASSOCIATES
LICENSE NO.: 381927
ENGINEER : RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP.
PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 7/30/98
PERMIT EXP. DATE: 7/30/99 PERMIT ISSUED BY:
INSPECTOR: TODD BAUMBACH
PHONE NO.: 619- 456 -5345
LICENSE TYPE: B
HOi NO 7 - 942 -1106
------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS ----------------------------
1. PLAN CHECK FEE 4,200.00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00
2. INSPECTION FEE 5,149.00 5. SECURITY DEPOSIT 102,979.00
3. PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00
------------------- - - - - -- DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------ ----- -- - - - - --
EARTHWORK /SITE RETAINING WALLS /EROSION CONTROL TO ENABLE CONSTRUCTION OF
4EA SINGLE FAMILY.DWELLING ON INDIVIDUAL LOT WITHIN MINOR SUBDIVISION,
TPM 95 -118. EARTHWORK: 5,950CY EXPORT. WALL: 3,225SF CMU. LETTER DATED
MAY 13 1998 APPLIES.
-- -- INSPECTION ---------- - - - - -- DATE -- - - - - -- INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - --
INITIAL INSPECTION
COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED
ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION
FINAL INSPECTION
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE
INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE
LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF
ANY *RMIT I SOED PURSUANT TO THIS APPLICATION.
SIGN TURE I
P I T NAM
CIRCLE ONE
vie. T :5011 U
DA E SI NED
1YL
TELEPHONE NUMBER
1. OWNER 2. AGENT 3. OTHER
C I T Y O F E N C I N I T A S
Em INEERING SERVICES DEPARTMr 'T
505 S. VULCAN AVE.
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
GRADING PERMIT
PERMIT NO.: 4560GI
......................... =.......... i.a...a: s..v ...............................
PARCEL NO. : 260- 620 - 2000,21
JOB SITE ADDRESS: 1409 -15 SAN ELIJO AVE.
APPLICANT NAME OCEAN VIEWS LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 333 COAST BLVD. #2
CITY: LA JOLLA STATE: CA 21P
CONTRACTOR :
LICENSE NO.:
ENGINEER
PERMIT ISSUE
PERMIT EXP.
INSPECTOR: Ti
DEWHURST & ASSOCIATES
381927
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DATE: 7/30/98
DATE: 7/30/99 PERMIT ISSUED BY
)DD BAUMBACH
------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS
PLAN NO.: 4560 -G
PHONE NO.: 619 - 456 -7000
92037-
PHONE NO.: 619 - 456 -5345
LICENSE TYPE: B
PHO NO.: 760 - 942 -1106
ffig-FF� VIA
t if
1. PLAN CHECK FEE 2,100.00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00
2. INSPECTION FEE 1,473.00 5. SECURITY DEPOSIT 29,458.00
3. PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00
------ ------------- - - - - -- DESCRIPTION OF WORK -------------------------------
EARTHWORK /DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS /EROSION CONTROL TO ENABLE CONSTRUCTION
OF PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD FOR 4EA RESIDENTIAL LOT IN MINOR SUBDIVISION, TPM
95 -118. EARTHWORK: 1,200CY EXPORT. DRAIN: 145LF PIPE /1001F DITCH /65LF
GUTTER /15LF ENCASEMENT /2EA CATCH BASIN /IEA OUTLET. LETTER DATED MAY 13
1998 APPLIES. SEPARATE PERMITS REQ'D FOR SANITARY SEWER & RIGHT -OF -WAY.
- - -- INSPECTION ---------- - - - - -- DATE -- - - - - --
INITIAL INSPECTION
COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED
ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION
FINAL INSPECTION
I HEREBY AC)
INFORMATION'
LAWS REGULAT
ANY ERMIT I
M
SIGNATURE
PRINT NA E' ,T
CIRCLE ONE:
NOWLEDGE THAT I
S CORRECT AND
NG EXCAVATING
S D PURSUANT
0/
1. OWNER
INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - --
HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE
AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE
AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF
TO THIS APPLICATION.
2. AGENT 3. OTHE
DATE SIGNED
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Recording requested by:
City of Encinitas
When Recorded, Mail To:
City Clerk )
City of Encinitas )
505 South Vulcan Avenue )
Encinitas. CA 92024 )
Assessor's Parcel
No. 260- 620 -73
David P. S
the
-,E ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT
WAS RECORDED ON 25- JUN -1996,
DOCUMENT NUMBER 1996- 0319321.
GREGORY SMITH, COUNTY RECORDER
SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY
DRAINAGE EASEMENT
Project:
W.O. No.:
TPM 95 -1 \L'�
Q7 Eo �M
and Suzanne L. Shaw, Trustees of
hereinafter designated Grantor(s) do(es) hereby grant, bargain,
convey and release unto the City of Encinitas herein designated
Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement and
right -of -way upon, through, under, over and across the hereinafter
described real property for the installation, construction,
maintenance, repair, replacement, reconstruction and inspection of
an enclosed or unenclosed flood DRAINAGE channel and all structures
incidental thereto, and for the flowage of any waters in, over,
upon or through said channel, together with the perpetual right to
remove buildings, structures, trees, bushes, undergrowth, and any
other obstruction interfering with the use of said easement and
right -of -way by the Grantee, its successors or assigns. To have
and to hold said easement and right -of -way unto itself and unto its
successors and assigns forever together with the right to convey
said easement, or any portion of said easement, to other public
agencies.
The real property referred to hereinabove and made subject to said
easement and right -of -way by this grant is situated in the City of
Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, and is
particularly described as follows:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this
reference.
TF /03/MS7- 872wp5 1(01- 03 -95 -7)
The Grantee shalom nave the right to fence all or any portion of
said easement herein conveyed within which there is installed or
constructed an unenclosed flood drainage channel. The Grantee, its
successors and assigns, shall be responsible for operating,
maintaining, and keeping in good repair the above described works
of improvement.
The Grantor, his successors and assigns, reserves the right to
enclose in a manner approve by the Grantee, its successors and
assigns, any portion of an unenclosed flood drainage channel
provided such enclosure is constructed or installed by a licensed
contractor in accordance with plans and specifications approved by
and to the satisfaction of the Grantee its successors and assigns.
In granting its approval the Grantee, its successors and assigns,
may impose reasonable conditions including, but not limited to, the
filing by the contractor or Grantor of an adequate form of
security, as approved by the City Engineer, to guarantee completion
of the work.
There is reserved to the Grantor, his successors and assigns, the
right and privilege to use the above described land of the Grantor
at any time, in any manner and for any purpose not inconsistent
with the full use and enjoyment by the Grantee, its successors and
assigns, of the rights and privileges herein granted.
Dated this —;2& day of lii'i /L , 19S(,
(Signature of GRANTOR must be notarized. Attach
the appropriate acknowledgement.]
I certify on behalf of the City Council of the City of Encinitas,
pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution of said Council
adopted on November 9, 1994 that the City of Encinitas consents to
the making of the foregoing Irrevocable Offer, Deed, Grant, or
ubordination .grcc:nent, and cc r. c z.c _ _:ordation thereof by its
duly authorized officer.
Date: J -�� By: lNli IOW ' (/1 JwYP"
Alan D. Archibald
Director of Engineering Services
TF /03/MS7- 872wp5 2(01- 03 -95 -7)
1
1
1
c
ti
CALIFORNIA ALL- PUP.POSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
No 5907
State of l a I (tor ni w
County of San ni e.no
On Apr-;I alo, l 9 9 fo before me, �Uryaen G. kfnniclC I\%a+ctry Nwa
DATE NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER E.G -JANE DOE. NOTAR PUBLIC'
personally appeared Suzann P. _'hctw
NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S)
❑ personally known to me - OR - Z proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(a) whose name(&) is /aFe
subscribed to the within instrument and ac-
knowledged to me that #le/she /they executed
the same in 4isdher /4 r authorized
MARYANNG. LENNICK capacity(iee), and that by his /her /tUQ4r
COMM. #1030783 n signature(s}- n the instrument the person(&},
NOTARY PUBLIGCALIFORNA to
SAN DIEGO COUNTY 17
My Commission Expires or the entity upon behalf of which the
c•.;,, SEPTEMEER3,1998 person
(&) (s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITN SS my hand and official se .
a2�� �2q I
SIG144TURE OF RMANY
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
❑ INDIVIDUAL
❑ CORPORATE OFFICER
❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED
❑ GENERAL
❑ ATTORNEY -IN -FACT
❑ TRUSTEE(S)
❑ GUARDIAW�ONSERVATOR
® OTHER: QgWTUet,
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSONS) OR ENTITYIIES)
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
Di•0.1n a 11., LAS MPA
TITLEItR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
NUMBER OF PAGES
DATE OF DOCUMENT
DQVid Shqw
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
01993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION • 8236 Remmet Ave.. P.O. Box 7184 • Canoga Park. CA 91 309 -71 84
CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT No 59m
State of C G I fC211Ilk c
County of SAN DTEG C
On �orl_�/ ff( before me, Z V 4A, rd (r ilemI � No %z„ �x� ac
GATE II NAME. TITLE OF OFFICER E.G.,'JANE DOE. NOTARY P BLIC-
personally appeared DA \I i d <She? t, r ,
NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S)
❑ personally known to me - OR - proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(st whose names) is /afe
subscribed to the within instrument and ac-
knowledged to me that he /s� executed
the same in his /4o*4herk authorized
capacity(is& -, and that by his /;etMt,erir
signature(s�on the instrument the person(4
y FAr?YANN G. LF'.'NICK or the entity upon behalf of which the
tT •� Y: �Y�MMyCA�FOgNU y person(.. acted, executed the instrument.
Yr )'KU AN DIE00 COUNTY
" '. My r.ommission Expwec �
SEPTEAIBER3, 1948 WITNESS my hand ndoff Ic I seal.
SIGNATURE OF NOTARY
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
❑ INDIVIDUAL
❑ CORPORATE OFFICER
TITLEIS)
❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED
❑ GENERAL
❑ ATTORNEY -IN -FACT
❑ TRUSTEE(S)
❑ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
® OTHER: P2Amrert.
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTRY(IES)
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
Drg;Y14ae- E4se men i"
TITL OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
NUMBER OF PAGES
DATE OF DOCUMENT
S07-4 nee- L • S 6 a V✓
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
01993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION • 8238 Remmel Ave.. P.O. Box 7184 • Canoga Park. CA 91309 -7184
SUBORDINATION AGREEML_
Whereas, those parties concerned, desire to have the Deed of Trust
recorded 1 -15 -93 as File /Page No. 1993-0026383 subordinated to
the Drainage Easement ( "DOCUMENT" hereinafter) described above as
Required as a Condition of Approval of Tl (m 9S - 1lE)
Now, therefore, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, the undersigned BENEFICIARY or TRUSTEE hereby
waives the priority of said Deed of Trust in favor of said DOCUMENT
to the same extent as if said DOCUMENT had been executed prior to
said Deed of Trust.
APRIL 16, 1996
DATED
DATED
US COM44IUNITY SAVRVS :TANK, F.S.B.,
A (AiIFORNIA CORPORATION
BENEFICIARY OR TRUSTEE
By: TH(1tAS R
Title:
SENIOR VICE PRESID114T
BENEFICIARY OR TRUSTEE
By:
Title:
(Signature of BENEFICIARY OR TRUSTEE must be notarized. Attach the
appropriate acknowledgement.]
I certify on behalf of the City Council of the City of Encinitas,
pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution of said Council
adopted on November 9, 1994 that the City of Encinitas consents to
the making of the foregoing Subordination Agreement, and consents
to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. n
r
Date - L5 q By Alan D. Archibald
Director of Engineering Services
City of Encinitas
TF /03/MS7- 872wp5 3(01- 03 -95 -7)
CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOi_ ACKNOWLEDGMENT
1
State of C -N-yr FvK,✓ih-
On ( lb `r(v before me, _54,flci LL 4'l`/�.s. m. J
Data Name and Tile of Curter (a j_ -Jane Doe, Notary P IM I
personally appeared ?2afaurro -5 �C. tilytciaal
Name(sl of Sgnerfs,
9..personally known to me - OR - ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)
whose name(s� subscribed to the within instrument
and acknowledged to me that�hagh&y executed the
same in6iPher4heir authorized capacity(ies}, and that by
J�erttheir signature(s}on the instrument the person(*,
SAMUEL R. JA= or the entity upon behalf of which the person(n,}acted,
t COMM./ 1062C188 i executed the instrument.
Notary Public —C2
s
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
My Comm. Exprea FEB 24. 1099 WITNESS my hand and official seal.
r� 9gnet.e Notary Public
OPTIONAL
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document:
Document Date: /,-" is -4 te. Number of Pages: �
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name:T�14-�r Q P
❑ Individual
Corporate Officer
Title(s): ✓`�rcle ✓.�tr�nrfrd.ri
❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General
❑ Attorney -in -Fact
❑ Trustee
❑ Guardian or Conservator 7
❑ Other:
Signer Is Representing:
"s rOw.ti ✓.✓ nw �AtlrA.LF
Signer's Name:
❑ Individual
❑ Corporate
Title(s):
❑ Partner —
El
El
Officer
Limited - General
Attorney -in -Fact
Trustee
Guardian or Conservator
Other:
Signer Is Representing:
RIGHT THUMBPRINT
OF SIGNER
0 1996 National Notary Assoc,atan • 8236 Remmel Ave . PO. Box 71 96 • Car Park. CA 9190941M Prod. No 5907 Reorder. Cell Toll Frea 1- BOD816 -6829
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
Public Drainage Easement
The NorthEasterly 2.50 feet of the NorthWesterly 95.00 feet of Parcel 2 of
Parcel Map No. 13635, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State
of California, recorded January 14, 1985.
BRIAN
FNi?
"
DONALD
4 Nn. 2G 175
* = + i
N � i,IViL —
t J '. Pryfessional
1= x H , {3 1 T' A
ReSOUrce
Development ;
Corporation.::._
CML AN�ItTEEStlNGl��611kV�Y (NG- %PIIANNING-
i
JN95 -009G
February 20, 1996
Page 1 of 17
HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS AND DRAINAGE DESIGN
SHAW PARCEL MAP " TPM 95 -118
SAN ELIJO AVENUE, CARDIFF
FEB 2 2 1996 `-
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CITY OF ENCINITAS
Hydrology Calculations and Drainage Design By:
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
BRIAN
r : DONALD -, p
No.
# c 16175
CIVIL #
`�� �• Professional Q
9
Brian Donald, RICE 26175
%F 0f
License Expires 3131198
..
531 ENCINITA5 BOULEVARD, SUITE 201 ENCINITA5. CALIFORNIA 92024 • TEL (619) 942 -1106 • FAX (619) 942 -2514
RESOURCE DEVELOPME CORP.
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. 0204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
RIIFFI ND _ 7" ._.. -_ ______ Or_____ ___. __.
CAI CUI AfFDRY_ -f5` _ DAfF ... ;hi lyd-
CI IFCKFD RY
Ilydrology & Drainage Design Notes
DA 1 F .— _
The hydrology and drainage design calculations prepared for this project were done
to calculate 100 year runoff quantities and to determine the minimum size of pipe culverts
required to carry storm runoff through the site from East to West through the project site.
Temporary construction of a County Standard D -75 PCC ditch will be used through the
adjacent property to the east of the project site and across common boundary of Parcels
3 and 4 on the project site. The temporary surface ditches could be replaced at some time
in the future with 12" PVC underground pipes to allow for construction of residential
buildings and finish landscape and hardscape details.
The runoff area shown on Sheet 3 includes 3.48 acres flowing onto Summit Avenue
and then into a grate inlet at a low point in Summit Avenue. At the present time, an 8"
plastic drain pipe connected to the public drain inlet carries the street runoff westerly and
northwesterly across private property to an outlet point northerly of the project site. Some
erosion has occurred at the outlet of the pipe. The City of Encinitas, in considering the
approval of this project, has required that this project construct a drainage system capable
of carrying the public street storm runoff through the site to outlet on San Elijo Avenue.
The drainage system proposed at this time is to construct a PCC drainage ditch
easterly from the project boundary to a point where the existing 8" plastic pipe can be
terminated and runoff at that point directed into the new ditch. Runoff would then flow in
the ditch onto the project site, across the easterly 90 feet of the site to an inlet structure at
the easterly terminus of the private road to be constructed for this project. Storm runoff
would then be carried in the pipe to a small headwall outlet on the easterly side of San Elijo
Avenue. This system would prevent erosion from occurring on private property and provide
the City with some of the elements of a public storm drain to adequately carry Summit
Avenue storm runoff. A public storm drain easement is proposed over the project site to
be granted to the City on the Parcel Map.
� .ww.- .,s.....rni»e!.++•a.••nn �.nr.nrf w�w�m�..�a
,r 1
l `
i. ,:5i
Vim ho
IRP1 r , S �•I' ,,I II , �• • . 1
'r.' ► �� � �. '�;� •�''' i . soy �. '
Nb
III I
f
ow
` 1
It. .
it
RESOURCE DEVELOPA T CORP.
523 ENCINITAS Blvo. 04
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 carvnnlFnav __ _ —_`- perF— 1�aftj
(619) 942.1106 WAIF --
WALE
C� C7 V ` 107 !f r—
Jr-
zv
V O J,`--, .. %'�`t'-•t'"'_._�f::s1tlr�`,,t %�•},G�7.`�; i1;�,—
:.�.. O �'• P3 -r-S'
ej
C77 r
LLJ
F..i Iif I •l,'1• � •� 1�,�/ 1.: r . C� - l 1 \1 -` -_ /i � 1``//1 �'. %t
1 1
1'1 F<
,,, ■ 111 ;
d a,.
n IC I I I I j n i i
•[!?o
LL} z �i o u• 1 4J i n a
,l fl J
I
ii of �i ' as
e
s
u
11 1 1i
. ,�nw .. .•iM•� /. MIA /.w MrM n,•I,IVI MM1xif•AFIgI11bIM ^vWl
RESOURCE DEVELOPW CORP. q1 IFF I
523 ENCINITAS Blvd.
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 r.AjCULATFD9Y PAIF
(619) 942-1106
SCALE
1Z
L
r
VM 'MP
\ A_7 • I-
- 01
ep
Q
-cc V,
cat .3
C=
C-3
cf,
C-!o
!r rp a
r t-1
u
1A
2: ws < m
a
V
L! 0
m
0. 1; Ec
ut
[I-A-7
i I
LL LL
i C G C
I ,
i I I
i
i I I
x
LL<
v. C
c�i <
IL
< IN
f�N
Ch
< ep
dm00..
�<ZV
>�<a
LLI L)
WWi-
Wen..
Z
sn
W
C
trTERIS - WW,TIOfi D ".Sja.. CHAP.;
` __ IIII : LQU2 :1C: •. I.a4 P D .6.45• ., ...nu.
;�'�`II 1 6
'' nin. - Intens:7• (Ia./ti:.)
a•
'Il jll;l L� P6 • 6 H. P:atipitatior [Jr..
.
Duration. (Mir.. )
4 I � I j. lil I III!
Jill I
��•.
I jit[ :f ;I'1j1: II��u 'IIi r
�.)IIIIIII M
a--
.. ,
mss... 11
�„I l�� ElI►i�
�alilll 11''11I1 (III
11 li 1 1111111 li!1�1IIIIIIIIjI
e 1
APP°_nDD: Xi
It -A -la
kev_sK i tes
(Directions for Applics:ion: �I
I1)
From Precipitation maps determine 6 hr. end
II
24 hr. amounts for the selected frenuen.-y.
These maps are printed in the County Hyarolony
FUnuai 0 0, 5!) and 100 yr. maps Intiused it the
Design and Procedure Manual).
2)
Aditis: 6 hr. precipitatior (if necesserv` so
that 1. is within the range o` 45. to 65: of
'
the 24 hr. precipitation. (Rot arnlimle
tc Desert)
al
3)
Plzt 6 hr. precipitation on the right sioe
of the chart.
z
i4)
Dram a line through the point paralie'. tc the '
M.
Pio:.ed lines.
15)
This line is the intensity- duratior. curve for
the ioca:ion peinc analyzec.
Apol
i.a :i 0r. Forr..:
.0 ,i
0 V j0)
f
Seie:tet Freouen:y 1t.O rr.
.5
j 1)
P6 ` 2.5 ir.. , P24'
i
T
.G
24
5
3)
:c • to min.. �nln,
+ r
4)
4 Z in /nr.
.0
•Not Applicable tc Desert kegior
APP°_nDD: Xi
It -A -la
kev_sK i tes
RESOURCE DEVELOPM -CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. 4
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942.1106
• 'rrl A. Zy R,- it 7M
•� I
1r \t1
r•ni rrx Alrn nv x.71 /. .- _._...__ nnlF _I -7
rl rrrxF I, RY _ _ _.. .. —_. f,MF
1
i
2 !IR
r.r;
v
rYn
n
1k�i
.\ r
. .
fL• %,n J,r•r Al P.1Alrn q��rr.lrmrglrl I' "' ° "" irr•is'rv.
N
I'unl..rnfinll Alfrrrr i, -:
Ilir,! n 1'nnulY'1'lanuinl ; lh'lunlnu • nl
ti:m I lirl•rr f'rundY 1'�.ugnr•In•rni.v 1'I:uming I hp:vritnlinn
In rYPbs
I ti Ibpl of _{el pull nlr� 4rrrr ^:I Nrr cin.
11S h�yd of llu•lulrrirn I:nuYm nl huli:m dOnilu
hr.ld oI 1La Nne1. 11R �I:u ilu•f'm pn
SIII:I-:V fill. x?
..�.,n.nn..YSe....... ��.ren ,Mmr /., rw.,m. +n:. i -e«nryw rw ......... n
RESOURCE DEVELOPM CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd _J4
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
R7n g5---
SO 1FFt NO_S.._^^ ___ (W --------
CALr.IRAfFnnv_�" — "'
-- nnlF —���� �
r.IIFCMEIInv_ —_ nArF_�_._._, _iii-- ° - -,,,
V:AI F
IAnll It IIIIIN'n11A11U11•: Inn IM111 rINJACIIIIP1l 1'nnr lnnrrl
Ilan kren rnm•r
Inns •nn.l) loon, ? rn ire nrrrrt alopr.- - - - - -- -------------
IkA 1^rcn seedy , yllnc, n for 7 pr rcrut shpes ----------
11IrA7 kren tint sandy In:r., n In 7 prrrrnt ,Iry1nA, ";,Jll -_ -,_
1hC kln.rq•hlr rock ..... .......... . .........
IhA bttarlllr Iwna)• rnnrnr !aver, 0 In 1 pr reerlt . lop es ------
Ihh Y•f 1.r 111E Ir:rwy rnnr.r <onrl, ? In n pr rrnnt •lope+----- -
thn Ftf ar'I lit Ire.)' ronr,r .nod. n 1- 15 prrernt sl(opr ......
II,A MI!rllle l.n.v rnar.e rend, vrt, 11 In ? ).wrrtnt
.Inpr•
'tor 111rrnhnln cnl•hly Inn., 7 to p pr1'rrnt .Irpra ...........
In" 111re W.M., "14.1, Inmv, r In V prrc,-nf ,Irpr.----- - -. -..
Clrr Jllvenh. +ln erhl•h' Inner, 'n In no prrernt altpr s---- -._ -_-
M'C
of 11 nln Iry lmn Imul rr.plrv, 7 In n prrrrnt .lerpes:
Irl l ernlm l rn
nrhan Imrd ___ ________ ______ _ ______
hl l° 111 renhaln- Irrt•an Imr.l r.l.plrn, of rr tp prrcent .Ilrpr.:
11rh.1 1nn4. - -. ............... .
rrA '1.,totls randy Ire., n In 7 prrrrnt elnpe______
rrr; Inrrotln ",.IV Ion., 1 In 9 pr rr.ut nlnprs _..- .- .._._._.
rrl'1 •Inrrntln .nnrh Ir.nn, $ ro 9 prrrrnt alrpra, rrmkd - - - - --
reP7 I'l error In ."A, Im�js, n In is 1.rrcrnr r•rnrkd• - - --
1'fA •l aunt Inn., Ihlrl: <vr torn, it In ? prrernt
.Inpw..
I•rc I't nrrrltln •an•ly Inn., 11r14 ....faro, ! rn n prrernt
.1 'T`
rp over,. - . . ... .........
err fonr,rnrr•. nr "0 or ral•Ir.
16
p
p
n
to
A
A
A
11
n
U
n
n
U
b
D
n
n
t1
11
n
I
I rr..rllh l l i"
lA•rlrrnrr 1
Ix•drr,te 1
IY..ler. +lr
lYvir rnrr ?
IY.Jn rnrr I -.
IM.Ir rnrr I --
Ixnlrrnlr 1 -.
IYnlrinfr e ?-
nvere 1-
nvrtr 16.. .
I nip ,i Inv
• -I
r'.111
^.I i rho
^•1 lrl.r
rl t l•ht
"Iirl.
rl IPv
14•.I..y.
IL..I.•rnr.
IL •.1.. r,1.
rl I0.,
Sr veto
!.rl l
•;. ...,..
•n
Srverr
7 - --
51 Ills.
! 1'Lne• n.r•an Innd rn•.I•lr... n
2 - -•
^.l irhr,
5r,rre
16
prl•m1 Inn.l
16
, I'n +.a+ Ilnr !,u,11 Ir•:rM, rr• 5
Ir.
n. 1'n,a• Ilr.r nnr,.A b•nM, c Ir P
IA
?
! t'non+ fLrr ennd. Inm., n In n �r
Mdnl,
1 -• -
•
1'.•!n. vier +,n.ir Ir.:rM, n r.. le ,r
1
11 lrl.f
rn•Ir.l,
1 -• -_.
.rlirht. :
P,, ". nrrr .meh ton., le to In prrcnot •t..pr•.
7._ -..
rrlirhf
rrmlrrl,
L•
)fr -.__
S)Irl,t
na 1'n,nr oleo! nnr nnodr Imm�, n rn to prmi•nt
11
Inpr
1 - - --
IF.•k rnM
• I'r.. n. •tent floe !.mo.l1' I••nM, rl in to prrernt ��,
Ir•pr +, rl,•drd.
• 1'o•n+ ninny flor .mrrh• Inn.• ,n In AS
n 1 •,t•r n,
Lnrr rinv InnM, n to to I"Cent nleprs -
c
Omr rim' Inn., .hl In nn pr r,rnl
�•nMV . +11a1•inl Im1d -
n.) nl lnrinl Imul Ihnu lnrfr. rn.tgrl, n to Sn prr
+lrpr!, :err rr lY rrr.rhrl•
Inv.) nllncl sl Imod ____ __ __ _________ ______Ilvr
rinrrro. ... ...............look
L +nd -.- ... .. .. ._ ----------------------
to
Ilan kren rnm•r
Inns •nn.l) loon, ? rn ire nrrrrt alopr.- - - - - -- -------------
IkA 1^rcn seedy , yllnc, n for 7 pr rcrut shpes ----------
11IrA7 kren tint sandy In:r., n In 7 prrrrnt ,Iry1nA, ";,Jll -_ -,_
1hC kln.rq•hlr rock ..... .......... . .........
IhA bttarlllr Iwna)• rnnrnr !aver, 0 In 1 pr reerlt . lop es ------
Ihh Y•f 1.r 111E Ir:rwy rnnr.r <onrl, ? In n pr rrnnt •lope+----- -
thn Ftf ar'I lit Ire.)' ronr,r .nod. n 1- 15 prrernt sl(opr ......
II,A MI!rllle l.n.v rnar.e rend, vrt, 11 In ? ).wrrtnt
.Inpr•
'tor 111rrnhnln cnl•hly Inn., 7 to p pr1'rrnt .Irpra ...........
In" 111re W.M., "14.1, Inmv, r In V prrc,-nf ,Irpr.----- - -. -..
Clrr Jllvenh. +ln erhl•h' Inner, 'n In no prrernt altpr s---- -._ -_-
M'C
of 11 nln Iry lmn Imul rr.plrv, 7 In n prrrrnt .lerpes:
Irl l ernlm l rn
nrhan Imrd ___ ________ ______ _ ______
hl l° 111 renhaln- Irrt•an Imr.l r.l.plrn, of rr tp prrcent .Ilrpr.:
11rh.1 1nn4. - -. ............... .
rrA '1.,totls randy Ire., n In 7 prrrrnt elnpe______
rrr; Inrrotln ",.IV Ion., 1 In 9 pr rr.ut nlnprs _..- .- .._._._.
rrl'1 •Inrrntln .nnrh Ir.nn, $ ro 9 prrrrnt alrpra, rrmkd - - - - --
reP7 I'l error In ."A, Im�js, n In is 1.rrcrnr r•rnrkd• - - --
1'fA •l aunt Inn., Ihlrl: <vr torn, it In ? prrernt
.Inpw..
I•rc I't nrrrltln •an•ly Inn., 11r14 ....faro, ! rn n prrernt
.1 'T`
rp over,. - . . ... .........
err fonr,rnrr•. nr "0 or ral•Ir.
16
p
p
n
to
A
A
A
11
n
U
n
n
U
b
D
n
n
t1
11
n
I
I rr..rllh l l i"
lA•rlrrnrr 1
Ix•drr,te 1
IY..ler. +lr
lYvir rnrr ?
IY.Jn rnrr I -.
IM.Ir rnrr I --
Ixnlrrnlr 1 -.
IYnlrinfr e ?-
nvere 1-
nvrtr 16.. .
I nip ,i Inv
• -I
r'.111
^.I i rho
^•1 lrl.r
rl t l•ht
"Iirl.
rl IPv
14•.I..y.
IL..I.•rnr.
IL •.1.. r,1.
rl I0.,
Sr veto
1 - - --
•;. ...,..
Srverr
7 - --
51 Ills.
Sr V. re
2 - -•
^.l irhr,
5r,rre
16
Srrrrr
16
Srvrrr
Ir.
5rvr re
IA
Srvere
1 -• -
1110" ,
Srverr
1
11 lrl.f
Srrrre
1 -• -_.
.rlirht. :
Srvrrr
7._ -..
rrlirhf
Srrrre
)fr -.__
S)Irl,t
Srvrre
Srverr
1 - - --
IF.•k rnM
Sevrrr n.
5neere n.
Srvr rr p-
Snan re 9-
Srerro If.
,r1-11e In___ -I
Ihrdrrn�r 7
'1 Mohr.
llpht.
,r•1l rlr
SI i l'b
51 {rW
ntirl.t .
Joe— - --
RESOURCE DEVELOPII T CORP. SIIEETND— _ a
523 ENCINITAS Blvo. .04 �J-/-`c-�—/` '
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 CALCULATEDRY� DATE
(619) 942.1106 c11ECKED RY
onrE
• •,�-r -•�• - �• , vw�w mil. - .rw+ w. n.., now rrr.r, -i rr1 i nnr.� rw
SCALE
Tnn1.F 7
R1111111r
C11Frt'IrlEllls (RATIMISAL 11F.T11011)
DMIDrED AREAS (Urtonlq
Coef f lc lent C
_,
Soll Crouti (i)
Land use
A 6 C 0
Residentlnl!
sln le ramll
— .110 - .115 _ .50 .55
Ilultt -Units
,1,5 .50 .60 .70
Ilobt le ho,ves115SD
•SS65
Rural (lots greater
than 1/2 acra) ,30 .35 .110 ,h5
Cnnncrcinl(2)
.70 .75 .80 .95
DOX Imprtivlous
I1"dustrle101
,8U .85 .90 .75
90-4 Irrglervl nDs
110TE 5;
(I)$nll 1:roup mans are nvnilnhle
of thr nrrlcos of the bepartment or ruhile works.
Mllhere nchwl condltlons
deviate significantly rrom the tabulated Imprrvinus.
mess values or 807 or
9ov, the values glven for coerriclent C, may be revised
by multlplylnq 807 or
907 by the ratio of actual Imperviousness to the
tabulated 1lererviousness.
.ilnwever, In no case shall the rin51 coefrlcient
be less than 0.50. for example: Consider commercial property on D soll.gronp.
Artuill Imperviousness - 50X_
Tabulated Imperviousness - 80%
Revised e - x 0.85 0.51
Iv -A -9
ArrF.INIx 1x -D
Rev. ;/At
• •,�-r -•�• - �• , vw�w mil. - .rw+ w. n.., now rrr.r, -i rr1 i nnr.� rw
RESOURCE DEVELOPM, CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
I
AesA
Qvnou- cwe c i e n{' - o . 40
� 2I �53-14� ttyy
L. = l<z7 Me- ove(lk Al
TZ _
Arw A,., — 6v4r V:jol.,� Ac. LjoitJ Ave-
Tn rr' n = 1 C7 Min =� 1, = �i .2 n fi, r
�o Cr Vp cae-% id °� =0. ✓�l�o�Z.Z �7
7LI?9 C v = Z. Ci0 Min
T �
5.9 + o.? = Ci,7 y„Tn l'ge "'Ti)In c iofn �v
AZ - tom,, e PTev 4-o" �.,�MM A \je -�D I-Z` l-, �a �
-T-,7, I —Vz = Ib all •,n =i L ,Cp� 4Z Tn 1,r-
�/ L _:j1'V1 s1k 13
z = V 15Rty = b •Z wn.n
% t I T- -- c.,,-7 � o.z�
�n'rx[imw s.' —M,la =.r all r. ne. Ptai �ai.wn no;nsao
c o iihl
SHEET NO
OF_
CALCULATED BY
_
DATE��__
CHECKED By
c'.. F
DATE
AesA
Qvnou- cwe c i e n{' - o . 40
� 2I �53-14� ttyy
L. = l<z7 Me- ove(lk Al
TZ _
Arw A,., — 6v4r V:jol.,� Ac. LjoitJ Ave-
Tn rr' n = 1 C7 Min =� 1, = �i .2 n fi, r
�o Cr Vp cae-% id °� =0. ✓�l�o�Z.Z �7
7LI?9 C v = Z. Ci0 Min
T �
5.9 + o.? = Ci,7 y„Tn l'ge "'Ti)In c iofn �v
AZ - tom,, e PTev 4-o" �.,�MM A \je -�D I-Z` l-, �a �
-T-,7, I —Vz = Ib all •,n =i L ,Cp� 4Z Tn 1,r-
�/ L _:j1'V1 s1k 13
z = V 15Rty = b •Z wn.n
% t I T- -- c.,,-7 � o.z�
�n'rx[imw s.' —M,la =.r all r. ne. Ptai �ai.wn no;nsao
c o iihl
RESOURCE DEVELOPME CORP.
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942.1106
jDBci:5 --c r
SHEET NO
OF
CALCULATED BY BV
DATE �_
CHECKED
DATE
IS
Z % 0175
OH
Deoln OI] RESIDENTIAL SraEFT '� Q "j -.5-08 I ONE SI 0IE
M1LY
S =0.alo
IA
le —
1, —
12
IO --
4�T= i = s.9mP.s
6 — I
S�LJ;e =lo m;n
I
1
I
2
7
, 9
I I I I I
F T B 9 IO
DISCHARGE ICES)
EXAMPLE:
Given, 0= 10 S= 2.5%
Chart gives: Depth _ 04, Velmity ' 4.4 fps
W
I I I
]0 ,O b
SAN DIEGO COUNTY TTEN AND ROADW4V
DEPARTMENT nr SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DI cANGE- VELUCITY t%AR;
DESIGN / MANUAL —
APPROVED — 4.,4 -i'1124C 4�_ DATE _�_ 'j� 4 errE11D1% % -0
I•,..- •11- 1— .I.wn M."n.s Ili ME, INmm
W
7
.
W
A:
N
V
. C;.,
IR t
ID-
8� UxT'= (bmin
09-
I
1
I
2
7
, 9
I I I I I
F T B 9 IO
DISCHARGE ICES)
EXAMPLE:
Given, 0= 10 S= 2.5%
Chart gives: Depth _ 04, Velmity ' 4.4 fps
W
I I I
]0 ,O b
SAN DIEGO COUNTY TTEN AND ROADW4V
DEPARTMENT nr SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DI cANGE- VELUCITY t%AR;
DESIGN / MANUAL —
APPROVED — 4.,4 -i'1124C 4�_ DATE _�_ 'j� 4 errE11D1% % -0
I•,..- •11- 1— .I.wn M."n.s Ili ME, INmm
RESOURCE DEVELOPM J CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942.1106
,oB G11 —c w'r
SHEET NO. `-?_
CALCULATED BY DATE_ -( -9=7)
CHECKED BY DATE � l
C�i..f7 iT� ��LII.Sratc+CC / le�sky
A3 (1�
U)-;,e- Uwe- pi pp- -N&' A� Ire
Ir�Ctl IL � 1urllln J'K5 -> Llbp = �•2 ���r
Q A?
-7.4- c4t'
V Tn pTpe = I5.3 C-, L = txD +-t
T 3 = I-Tap—
C,JZ � C.vmJclhup- -(- O. i3O vX lL,r n
A�
I r�ai T = 10 ., -a L Ioo 4•Z '%oAIr-
�-Ylop = l—L� = CD•�x.4, Z�C�I+AZ�L�, +A4� _ �•���4,2x4.lo cc�F,}
Too - T-7 C- 7
V -T., pI p < - (S.4- a� C5"- uo'n kDFF� «- , 1
L- = 6,5 P4-
Teo = .[ - .4 "c CD. l m,n
Cj-9 ,LiICIC,VQ.. T = -7,0 +d,I =7.1 m, I,
rh Tr ,,Sl14 n , f.", IWI re01M41 IUI IMF I MI MM
RESOURCE DEVELOPME CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd.
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
JOB c15- _
_ _ _ __ _ _
1c�r-fi
SHEET NO I _J
OF
CALCULATED By B:7
DATE 4
CHECKED By
12" PVC Flow through Area No 2
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Pr ecl Descr Iloa
_o !__ —_
_ _ _ __ _ _
Protect File
eVmeeladl6nwyn5009.1ni2
Worksheet
12 PVC - Gravity Flow
Flow Element
Ckculm Channel
Mrtilod
Mannino, Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
Input Data
_ _ _ __ _ _
Ma"lgs Coefridenl
0.01
Channel Slope
0.100000 Ng
Diameter
12.00 In
Discharge
7.00 cis
Results
Depth
0 57
0
Flow Ares
046
R
Wetted Peilmelef
1.71
tt
Top Width
0.99
it
Critical Depth
0.90
it
Percent Full
57.06
Cdllcal Slope
0.034252 IUg
Velocity
15.12
We
Velocity Head
155
9
Specific Energy
4.12
(l
I'mude Number
9.90
Maximum Discharge
12.12
of$
Full Flow Capacity,
11.27
cis
Full Flow Slope
0.090600 IMM
Flaw Is superaitical.
DATE
07 x R. 11 , twrv..r.rrw Cwr. ~ r`,.A-1,,— r, In
10 7115, AM HnoaIMI WIIM . ir, 17 rlrmisMw nnM WM.wdry. C10e709 (M`1) 7T£n1afiA rare t M 1
RESOURCE DEVELOPML CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942.1106
JOB
SHEtT NO 4? OE �j�
CALCULATED BY t� 11 J DATE
�...E —�-
CHECKED BY
12" PVC Flow through Area No. 3
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Descrlptlo_n
_
_RoJect
Project Flip
c Ylaestadilmw4r,5009.fm2
Worksheet
12" PVC - Gandy Flow
Flow Element
Circular Channel
Method
Maiming', Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
hlpW Data
_
_
Mannings Coefficient
0.013
Channel Slope
0.100000 NR
Dlameler
12.00 In
Dlschar�7.40
etseb
Results
Depth
0.59
R
Flow Area
0.48
R'
Wetted Perimeter
1.75
R
Top Width
0.98
R
Critical Depth
0.98
R
Percent Fu8
89.13
Clilicol Slope
0.038833 RM
Velocity
15.31
Ns
Velocity Head
3.84
R
Specific Energy
4.23
R
Froude Number
3.85
Madlnum Dhcharge
12.12
ph
Full Flow Capacity
11.27
efs
Full Flow Slope
0.043145
NR
Flow Is auoercritical.
m �7n^r5 n.,,..,.. nMru...r11M f.nr.+.11er1
104320AM IlanlaM Mr1lwvH. lne. 37R,n ,Mn—f WiM.Nn.CT0a709 (MI)Y55-1W
.. _...... ... ,,.o, w..... m.s�m�lallweleoam�
DATE
r�, ,- r. In
ne(N 1 M 1
RESOURCE DEVELOPM CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
Me— G15 -Ccr
SHEET 40. 1:=> OF
CALCULATED BY [ / DATE
CHECKED BY
12 PVC Flow through Area No. 4
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Protect Deenlptlon -
--- _
Prnlect Fee
e:Vrae1nAfmAIn5009.hn2
Worksheet
12'PVC -Gravity Flow
Flow Elemerd
Ckrulnf Chnnnel
Mellmd
Man.Mg'v Fmmula
Solve For
Channel DeDlh
Input Dale
Mamklga Coew-
0 011
Channel Slope
0.100000 NO
Diameter
1200 . In
Discharge
7.70 CIS
Results
Depth
0.81
8
Flow Area
0.50
g'
Wetted Perimeter
119
8
Top Width
0.98
fl
Critical Depth
0.98
8
Percent Full
80.88
Critical Slope
0.042107 f08
Ve"
15.44
Ns
Velocity Head
0.71
8
Specific Energy
4.71
R
Froucle Number
18t
Maximum Discharge
12.12
cis
Full Flow CAPACITY
1127
cfa
Fug Flow Slope
0.048711
Will
Flow Is slnncr8lcal.
DATE
m]IiMM n.-- nrrv.La —,o C.vryxmbn rlr ....r r. to
1050 "AM rI...IM M.IIvnl., i— It flrmY.4M anon W~.".Crm7M (201)755-1W V.,I nrl
in+werrrr 11tM 1111111=nna
RESOURCE DEVELOPM. . CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd, #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942.1106
JOB q-0 ' cx> 1 /.
SHEET NO Lt CIF
CALCULATEDBV �1/ DATEy�[ -��
CHECKED BY
SCALE
DATE
m�u�rv�,I'Arywnl�raOa( �R.Graa Mr0Hn 11 n R(%(nl l%I In Mole
Pipe Flow - Area No. 4 to Headwall
Worksheet for Circular Channel
_ Pro ecl Desc�lptlon
_ _
Protect File.
e:lhneslnr9flmvun5009.fm2
Wmkslleel
15- PVC - Gravity Flow
Flow Element
Chcldnr ChAnTel
Method
Mmomb,g'e Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
_ NqW Dale _
MnnnNlgn CnelOcMnl
0 017
Channel Slope
0.018000Itlll
Dlameler
15.00 lh
Discharge
7.40 We
Results
Depth
0.89 R
Flow Area
017 fe
Welled Perimeter
2.5f R
Top Width
1.I0 R
Cdllcnl Deplh
1.08 R
Percent Full
71.07
Critical Slope
0.012022 AM
Veloc#y
7.93 M
VMocity Head
0.98 R
. -eNlk Energy
1.87 R
thud, Number
1.54
Maxhnum Discharge
932 cIs
rim Flaw CnpAcity
867 cls
Full Flow, siI pe
0.013124 NIA
Flow is supercrilical.
02rmm
I 1 !S P AM I Ia�alM Mntlwla LC l) DimNMn nnM ft n C I rpM9
�'/. ITIi) )!,!S -IrkNl n� I M 1
m�u�rv�,I'Arywnl�raOa( �R.Graa Mr0Hn 11 n R(%(nl l%I In Mole
RESOURCE DEVELOPME CORP
523 ENCINITAS Blvd. #204
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024
(619) 942 -1106
Joe
SHEET r10. I'7
CALCULATED BY
D -75 Ditch to Area No A
Worksheet for Triangular Channel
Project Descrlpdon
_
Project File
c:gtneslndlfmwtjn5009Jm2�
WWWleel
D -75 Dtlrh Flow
Flow Element
Trinngidar Channel
Method
Manning, rnnida
Solve For
Channel Deptlr
Input Data
Mentlngs Coer_6clen _
6, 013
Chanel Slope
0.100000 Nn
Len Side Slope
1 25000011 V
Mori Side Slope
1 150000 H : V
Discharge
7.10 crs
Depth
0.61
t1 —
FlowArea
0.52
n'
Welled Perimeter
2.06
n
Top Widt
1.60
n
Critical Dept
1.17
n
Critical Slope
OA04097 Nn
Velocity
11.37
Ns
Velocity Head
3.21
ft
Spednc Energy
7.55
It
Froude Number
4.47
Flow is superaitical.
OF
DATE.___
DATE
0710,99 ne,Mn.n DemuT.rwrs C.'aN FI.RM,w ✓. m
12 31 -V rM Ita.�lml Mnllxq., rm. ]I nrokslde nmN WWm". C T flM?M (7M) T. 1006 raan t of t
MMP%els. ! IFS .4r p e.n u06v e0F Mt W. mram
IN
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
SAN ELIJO AVENUE PARCEL MAP
(ADJACENT TO
1409 SAN ELIJO AVENUE)
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR
JAMES WEISS - STEIDER
LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 1997
GEOCON
INCORPORATED
Project No. 05936 -42 -01
September 4, 1997
James Weiss - Steider
333 Coast Boulevard, Apartment 2
La Jolla, California 92037
Subject: SAN ELIJO AVENUE PARCEL MAP
(ADJACENT TO 1409 SAN ELIJO AVENUE)
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Dear Mr. Weiss - Steider:
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
INEE F� £NC1NpSASES
In accordance with your authorization and our proposal dated April 24, 1997, we have performed a
geotechnical investigation for the subject project. The accompanying report provides geotechnical
recommendations, grading specifications and foundation recommendations for the proposed
development of the project.
If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the
undersigned at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
GEOCONINCORPORATED
%?,eC C.
James L. Brown Rodney C. ikesell
GE 2176 RCE 55080
DH:RCM:JLB:dmc
(6) Addressee
« *n\ Exp.06 /30 /00
Wa
ale Hame ehle
CEG 1760
6960 Flanders Drive ■ Son Diego, ColliTar-nio 92121 -2974 • Telephone`T6191 558 -6900 ■ Fax 16191
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ........................ ...............................
2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .. ...............................
3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ............................................................ ..............................1
3.1. Topsoil ( Unmapped) ............................................................................ ..............................2
3.2. Marine Terrace Deposits ( Qt) .............................................................. ..............................2
4. GROUNDWATER .............................................................................................. ..............................2
5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ..................................................................................... ..............................2
5.1. Faulting and Seismicity ...................................................................... ............................... 2
5.2. Liquefaction ......................................................................................... ..............................4
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................... ............................... 5
6.1. General ................................................................................................ ............................... 5
6.2. Grading ............................................................................................... ............................... 5
6.3. Slope Stabil ity ..................................................................................... ............................... 7
6.4. Foundations ......................................................................................... ............................... 7
6.5 Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads .................................................... ............................... 11
6.6. Slope Maintenance ............................................................................ ............................... 12
6.7 Drainage ............................................................................................... .............................12
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1, Vicinity Map
Figure 2, Geologic Map
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Figures A- I - A-6, Logs of Trenches
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Table B -I, Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture
Content Test Results
Table B -II, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results
Table B -III, Summary of Direct Shear Test Results
Figure B -1, Consolidation Curve
APPENDIX C
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
LIST OF REFERENCES
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the current site geologic conditions with respect to
the proposed site development and to provide grading recommendations and foundation design
criteria for the proposed residential structures.
The scope of the investigation consisted of a review of readily available published and unpublished
geologic literature (see List of References), performing a site reconnaissance, performing a field
investigation, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and preparation of this report. The field
investigation consisted of excavating six exploratory backhoe trenches. The approximate locations of
the exploratory trenches are presented on a copy of the Geologic Map (Figure 2). Descriptions of the
field investigation and trench logs are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory test results are
summarized in Appendix B.
2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The rectangular- shaped site is located on the east side of San Elijo Avenue in Cardiff, California.
Presently, the site is a vacant lot located next to a private residence at 1409 San Elijo Avenue. Site
elevations range from a low of 98 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) on the west side to a high of 127 MSL
on the east side. Vegetation consists of recently disced grasses.
A review of the Grading Plan For: Ocean View Villas, San Elijo Avenue, Cardiff, prepared by
Resource Development Corporation, undated, indicates site development will consist of the
construction of 4 single - family residential lots with a central private drive and short driveway
leading to each house. The four houses will be three stories high which includes a basement level.
Grading is anticipated to consist of excavations of up to 13 feet.
3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
One surficial soil type and one geologic formation were encountered during the field investigation.
The surficial soil deposit consists of topsoil. The formational unit consists of Quaternary-age marine
terrace deposits. The upper 8 to 10 feet of the terrace deposits are highly weathered and
compressible. The surficial soil type and the geologic unit encountered at the site are described
below in order of increasing age.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - I - September 4, 1997
3.1. Topsoil (Unmapped)
Topsoils were encountered within all six trenches and were observed to blanket the majority of the
site. The topsoils are characterized as loose, dry, brown, silty, fine to medium sand. Complete
removal and recompaction of the topsoils will be necessary in areas planned to receive structural fill
and/or settlement sensitive structures.
3.2. Marine Terrace Deposits (Qt)
Marine terrace deposits were observed to underlie the entire site below the above- mentioned surficial
soils. In general, the materials consisted of loose to medium dense, moist, yellow to orange and
reddish brown, silty, fine to medium sand. The upper 8 to 10 feet of the terrace deposits are highly
weathered and very porous. It should be noted that the sidewalls of our trench excavations
experienced extensive caving and instability within this weathered zone. Laboratory tests performed
on an undisturbed chunk sample of this weathered material indicates that this zone is subject to
collapse upon inundation of moisture. Based on our review of the grading plan, an estimated 2 to 5
feet of loose, highly weathered terrace deposits will remain in the front portion of each building pad
after the proposed cut excavations are performed. The materials below the weathered zone should
provide adequate support for fill placement, as well as, proposed site improvements. Specific
remedial grading recommendations with respect to this relatively thick weathered zone are provided
in the conclusions and recommendations portion of this report.
4. GROUNDWATER
Groundwater was not encountered during the subsurface field investigation. In addition, no springs,
seeps or perched groundwater conditions were observed during our field investigation of this
proposed residential project. Groundwater is not anticipated to adversely impact the proposed
project development.
5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
5.1. Faulting and Seismicity
Based on our reconnaissance, evidence obtained in the exploratory excavations, and a review of
published geologic maps and reports, the site is not located on any known active or potentially active
fault trace. The nearest known active fault is the northern extension of the Rose Canyon Fault
located approximately 3.5 miles to the west. Major earthquakes occurring on the Rose Canyon
Fault, or other regional active faults located in the southern California area, could subject the site to
moderate -to- severe ground shaking within the life span of the proposed structures.
Project No. 0593642 -01 .2. September 4, 1997
In order to determine the distance of known faults to the site, the computer program EQFAULT
(Blake, 1989a) was utilized. Principal references used within EQFAULT in selecting faults to be
included were Jennings (1975), Anderson (1984) and Wesnousky (1986).
In addition to fault location, EQFAULT was used to estimate earthquake ground accelerations at the
site for the maximum credible and maximum probable seismic events. Attenuation relationships
presented by Joyner and Boore (1982) were used to estimate site accelerations.
The results of the deterministic analyses indicate that the Rose Canyon Fault zone, the Offshore
Zone of Deformation, and Coronado Banks Fault Zone are the dominant sources for potential ground
motion occurring at the site. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is postulated as having the potential to
generate a Maximum Credible Magnitude earthquake of 7.0 and Maximum Probable Magnitude
earthquake of 6.5, respectively. The "maximum credible earthquake" is defined as the maximum
earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework, while
the "maximum probable earthquake" is the maximum earthquake that is considered likely to occur
during a 100 -year time interval (California Division of Mines and Geology Notes, Number 43).
Estimated maximum credible and maximum probable ground accelerations were determined to be
approximately 0.44 g and 0.34 g, respectively. Presented on the following table are the earthquake
events and site accelerations for the faults considered most likely to subject the site to ground
shaking.
TABLE 5.1.
Fault Name
Distance
From Site
(miles)
Maximum
Credible
Event
Maximum
Probable
Event
Maximum
Credible Site
Acceleration
Maximum
Probable Site
Acceleration
Coronado Banks Fault Zone
18
6.75
6.00
0.11
0.08
Elsinore Fault
29
7.5
6.75
0.09
0.06
Offshore Zone of Deformation
11
7.5
6.5
0.26
0.16
Rose Canyon Fault Zone
1 3.5
1 7.00
6.50
1 0.44
0.34
San Diego Trough
1 27
1 6.50 1
6.00
1 0.06
0.05
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 .3- September 4, 1997
5.2. Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon where loose, saturated and relatively cohesionless soil deposits lose
strength during strong ground motions. Primary factors controlling the development of liquefaction
include intensity and duration of ground accelerations, characteristics of the subsurface soil, in situ
stress conditions and depth to groundwater. Due to the dense nature of the formational materials, the
lack of shallow groundwater, and the densification of topsoils and highly weathered Terrace
Deposits, the liquefaction potential of the site subsoils is considered to be very low.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 4 - September 4, 1997
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1. General
6.1.1. No soil or geologic conditions were encountered which, in our opinion, would preclude the
development of the property, as presently planned, provided the recommendations of this
report are followed.
6.1.2. The topsoil as well as the weathered portions of the marine terrace deposit are not
considered suitable for the support of fill or structural loads in their present condition and
will require remedial grading in the form of removal and recompaction. However, it
should be noted that the basal 2 feet of the weathered portion is very granular and could be
moisture conditioned and recompacted in- place.
6.2. Grading
6.2.1. All grading should be performed in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading
Specifications (Appendix Q. Where the recommendations of this section conflict with
Appendix C, the recommendations of this section take precedence. All earthwork should
be observed and all fills tested for proper compaction by Geocon Incorporated.
6.2.2. Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with
the owner or developer, grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in
attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time.
6.2.3. Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation.
The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in the cut areas or soils to be
used as fill are relatively free of organic matter. Material generated during stripping
should be exported from the site.
6.2.4. The topsoil and highly weathered marine terrace deposits within areas of planned
development are not considered suitable for the support of the structural fill or structural
loads in their present condition and will require remedial grading in the form of complete
and/or partial removal and recompaction. It is anticipated that the proposed cut
excavations in each of the proposed building pads will remove most of these compressible
soils. However, it is estimated that 2 to 5 feet of highly weathered terraces deposits will
remain in the front portion of each pad after the proposed cut excavations have been
completed. A partial removal of these remaining highly weathered terrace deposits
No. 05936 -42 -01 . 5 - September 4. 1997
combined with removal and recompaction within the remaining portion of the building pad
will be required, to provide a uniform compacted fill mat for support of the structures.
6.2.5. With regard to the site improvements beyond the building pads, a partial removal of at
least 7 feet of topsoils and the upper weathered portion of the marine terrace, is
recommended. As previously discussed, the remaining approximately 2 feet of in- place,
weathered terrace deposits can then be moisture conditioned and properly recompacted in-
place prior to placing fill and/or structural loads. The lateral extent of the recommended
removal and recompaction should be at least 3 feet beyond the proposed building
perimeters. This removal and recompaction of compressible soils should include all areas
with settlement- sensitive improvements including proposed cut and/or fill slopes,
roadways and driveways.
6.2.6. The recommended remedial grading for most of the subject site's perimeter wall will
likely encroach into neighboring properties. Where the adjacent properties are un-
developed land, temporary cuts should be inclined at a minimum of I:1 (horizontal:
vertical). If instability is observed within these temporary perimeter cut slopes, it may be
necessary to lay the slope back more than a 1:1. In our opinion, the construction of the
perimeter wall adjacent to the existing driveway on the north side of the site will require
specialized stabilization measures to prevent any damage to this driveway. Excavations
adjacent to the existing driveway will likely be near vertical due to limited space in this
area. Temporary shoring or other type of stabilization in accordance with Cal OSHA
requirements utilized within the area to provide stability for the driveway.
6.2.7. The site should then be brought to final subgrade elevations with structural fill compacted
in layers. In general, soils native to the site are suitable for re -use as fill if free from
vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Layers should be no thicker than will
allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified
ground surfaces, should be compacted to least 90 percent of maximum dry density and
adequately moisture conditioned, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure
D1557 -91.
6.2.8. It should be noted that the proposed cut excavations and the recompaction of compressible
soils will create cut/fill transitions within each of the proposed building pads. To reduce
the potential for differential settlement, it is recommended that the cut portion of cut -fill
transition building pads be undercut at least 3 feet and replaced with properly compacted
"very low" to "low" expansive fill soils. The lateral extent of the undercut excavations
should extend at least 3 feet beyond the building perimeter.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 6 • September 4, 1997
6.2.9. Where practical, the upper 3 feet of all building pads and 12 inches in pavement areas
should be composed of properly compacted or undisturbed formational "very low" to
"low" expansive soils. "Very low" to `low" expansive soils are defined as those soils that
have an Expansive Index of 50 or less when tested in accordance with UBC Standard
No. 29 -2. Based on our laboratory testing, the on -site soils should vary from "very low" to
"low" expansive sandy soils.
6.3. Slope Stability
6.3.1. Slope stability analysis utilizing average drained, direct shear strength parameters, based
on laboratory tests and experience with similar soil types, indicates that proposed 2:1
(horizontal:vertical) cut slopes in unweathered terrace materials and compacted fill slopes
constructed of native materials will have calculated factors of safety in excess of 1.5 under
static conditions against both deep- seated failure and shallow sloughing conditions.
6.3.2. It is recommended that all cut slope excavations be observed by an engineering geologist
to verify that soil and geologic conditions do not differ significantly from those
anticipated.
6.3.3. All fill slopes should be compacted by back - rolling with a loaded sheepsfoot roller at
vertical intervals not to exceed 4 feet and should be track- walked at completion of each
slope such that the fill soils are uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction to the face of the finished slope.
6.3.4. It should be noted that the on -site soils are very granular with a uniform grain size and
very susceptible to erosion. All slopes should be landscaped immediately after grading
with drought - tolerant vegetation, having variable root depths and requiring minimal
landscape irrigation. In addition, all slopes should be drained and properly maintained to
reduce erosion.
6.4. Foundations
6.4.1. Specific structural building details were not available at this time. Determination of final
foundation design for a particular pad can be provided after site grading is completed and
when specific structure design plans are available. However, for preliminary planning
purposes, general foundation design guidelines for one- to three -story structures are
presented below.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 7 - September 4, 1997
6.4.2. The following foundation recommendations apply to one- to three -story structures and are
dependent on the estimated depth and geometry of fill soils for the subject site. These
recommendations pertain to pads excavated in or capped with a minimum of 3 feet of
"very low" to "low" expansive soils (Expansion Index of 50 or less).
6.4.3. Foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per
square foot (psf) (dead plus live load). This bearing pressure may be increased by one-
third for transient loads such as wind or seismic forces.
6.4.4. It is recommended that footings have a minimum depth of 18 inches and a minimum width
of 12 inches. It should be noted that these minimum recommendations are based on
geotechnical conditions and the architect may increase the size of the footings based on
structural issues. It should be noted that foundation excavations left open for an extended
period of time may dry back and result in side wall caving due tot he cohesionless nature
of the on -site soils.
6.4.5. Continuous footings should be reinforced with four No. 4 steel reinforcing bars, two
placed near the top of the footing and two near the bottom.
6.4.6. Concrete slabs -on -grade should be at least 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with No. 3
reinforcing bars spaced 24 inches on center in both directions and placed at the slab
midpoint. The slab should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand and, in areas
where moisture- sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen moisture barrier should
also be provided.
6.4.7. Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper
than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are
recommended due to the tendency for lateral soil movement to occur.
For fill slopes less than 20 feet high, building footings should be deepened such that
the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of
the slope.
• Where the height of the fill slope exceeds 20 feet, the minimum horizontal distance
should be increased to H/3 (where H equals the vertical distance from the top of the
slope to the toe) but need not exceed 40 feet. For composite (fill over cut) slopes, H
equals the vertical distance from the top of the slope to the bottom of the fill portion of
the slope. An acceptable alternative to deepening the footings would be the use of a
post- tensioned slab and foundation system or increased footing and slab reinforce-
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 8 - - September 4, 1997
ment. Specific design parameters or recommendations for either of these alternatives
can be provided once the building location and fill slope geometry have been
determined.
• For cut slopes in dense formational materials, or fill slopes inclined at 3:1 (hori-
zontal:vertical) or flatter, the bottom outside edge of building footings should be at
least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope, regardless of slope height.
Swimming pools located within 7 feet of the top of cut or fill slopes are not
recommended. Where such a condition cannot be avoided, it is recommended that the
portion of the swimming pool wall within 7 feet of the slope face be designed
assuming that the adjacent soil provides no lateral support. This recommendation
applies to fill slopes up to 30 feet in height, and cut slopes regardless of height. For
swimming pools located near the top of fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height,
additional recommendations may be required and Geocon Incorporated should be
contacted for a review of specific site conditions.
• Although other improvements which are relatively rigid or brittle, such as concrete
flatwork or masonry walls may experience some distress if located near the top of a
slope, it is generally not economical to mitigate this potential. It may be possible,
however, to incorporate design measures which would permit some lateral soil
movement without causing extensive distress. Geocon Incorporated should be
consulted for specific recommendations.
6.4.8. As an alternative to the foundation recommendations, consideration should be given to the
use of post- tensioned concrete slab and foundation systems for the support of the proposed
structures. The post- tensioned systems should he designed by a structural engineer
experienced in post- tensioned slab design and design criteria of the Post - Tensioning
Institute (UBC Standard No. 29 -4, Part II). Although this procedure was developed for
expansive soils, it is understood that it can also be used to reduce the potential for
foundation distress due to differential fill settlement. The post- tensioned design should
incorporate the geotechnical parameters presented on the following table entitled Post -
Tensioned Foundation System Design Parameters for the particular Foundation Category
designated.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 9 - September 4, 1997
TABLE 6.4.
POST - TENSIONED FOUNDATION SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS
6.4.9. UBC Standard No. 29 -4 Part Il uses interior stiffener beams in its structural design
procedures. If the structural engineer proposes a post- tensioned foundation design
method other than UBC Standard No. 29 -4, Part II, it is recommended that interior
stiffener beams be used. The depth of the perimeter foundation should be at least 12
inches. Where the Expansion Index for a particular building pad exceeds 50 but is less
than 91, the perimeter footing depth should be at least 18 inches; and where it exceeds 90
but is less than 130, the perimeter footing depth should be at least 24 inches. Geocon
Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by
the structural engineer.
6.4.10. The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of
slabs due to expansive soils (if present), differential settlement of deep fills or fills of
varying thicknesses. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations
presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs -on -grade placed on such conditions
may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of
concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their
occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper
concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic
intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - to- September 4, 1997
Post - Tensioning Institute (PTI) Design Parameters
I.
Thomthwaite Index
-20
2.
Clay Type - Mommorillonite
Yes
3.
Clay Portion (Maximum)
50%
4.
Depth to Constant Soil Suction
7.0 ft.
5.
Soil Suction
3.6 ft.
6.
Moisture Velocity
0.7 in. /mo.
7.
Edge Lift Moisture Variation Distance
2.6 ft.
8.
Edge Lift
0.78 in.
9.
Center Lift Moisture Variation Distance
5.3 ft.
10.
Center Lift
3.21 in.
6.4.9. UBC Standard No. 29 -4 Part Il uses interior stiffener beams in its structural design
procedures. If the structural engineer proposes a post- tensioned foundation design
method other than UBC Standard No. 29 -4, Part II, it is recommended that interior
stiffener beams be used. The depth of the perimeter foundation should be at least 12
inches. Where the Expansion Index for a particular building pad exceeds 50 but is less
than 91, the perimeter footing depth should be at least 18 inches; and where it exceeds 90
but is less than 130, the perimeter footing depth should be at least 24 inches. Geocon
Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by
the structural engineer.
6.4.10. The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of
slabs due to expansive soils (if present), differential settlement of deep fills or fills of
varying thicknesses. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations
presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs -on -grade placed on such conditions
may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of
concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their
occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper
concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic
intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - to- September 4, 1997
6.5 Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads
6.5.1. Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be
designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid density
of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Where the backfill will be inclined at no steeper
than 2.0 to 1.0, an active soil pressure of 45 pcf is recommended. These soil pressures
assume that the backfill materials within an area bounded by the wall and a 1:1 plane
extending upward from the base of the wall possess an Expansion Index of less than 50.
For those lots with finish grade soils having an Expansion Index greater than 50 and/or
where backfill materials do not conform to the above criteria, Geocon Incorporated should
be consulted for additional recommendations.
6.5.2. Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001 H at the top of the
wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, an additional uniform
pressure of 7H psf (where H equals the height of the retaining wall portion of the wall in
feet) should be added to the above active soil pressure.
6.5.3. All retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system adequate to prevent the
buildup of hydrostatic forces and should be waterproofed as required by the project
architect. The use of drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes, etc.) is
not recommended where the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely impact
the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The above recommendations assume a
properly compacted granular (Expansion Index less than 50) backfill material with no
hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. If conditions different than those described
are anticipated, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be
contacted for additional recommendations.
6.5.4. In general, wall foundations having a minimum depth and width of one foot may be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf, provided the soil within 3 feet
below the base of the wall has an Expansion Index of less than 90. The proximity of the
foundation to the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 could impact the allowable soil bearing
pressure. Therefore, Geocon Incorporated should be consulted where such a condition is
anticipated.
6.5.5. For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid
density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly
compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure
assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - I 1 - September 4, 1997
the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected
by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An
allowable friction coefficient of 0.4 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and
concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth
pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads.
6.5.6. The recommendations presented above are generally applicable to the design of rigid
concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 8 feet. In the event that
walls higher than 8 feet or other types of walls are planned, such as crib -type walls,
Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for additional recommendations.
6.6. Slope Maintenance
6.6.1. Slopes that are steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) may, under conditions which are both
difficult to prevent and predict, be susceptible to near surface (surficial) slope instability.
The instability is typically limited to the outer three feet of a portion of the slope and
usually does not directly impact the improvements on the pad areas above or below the
slope. The occurrence of surficial instability is more prevalent on fill slopes and is
generally preceded by a period of heavy rainfall, excessive irrigation, or the migration of
subsurface seepage. The disturbance and /or loosening of the surficial soils, as might result
from root growth, soil expansion, or excavation for irrigation lines and slope planting, may
also be a significant contributing factor to surficial instability. It is, therefore, recom-
mended that, to the maximum extent practical: (a) disturbed/loosened surficial soils be
either removed or properly recompacted, (b) irrigation systems be periodically inspected
and maintained to eliminate leaks and excessive irrigation, and (c) surface drains on and
adjacent to slopes be periodically maintained to preclude ponding or erosion. It should be
noted that although the incorporation of the above recommendations should reduce the
potential for surficial slope instability, it will not eliminate the possibility, and, therefore,
it may be necessary to rebuild or repair a portion of the project's slopes in the future.
6.7 Drainage
6.7.1 Adequate drainage provisions are imperative. Under no circumstances should water be
allowed to pond adjacent to footings. The building pads should be properly finish graded
after the buildings and other improvements are in place so that drainage water is directed
away from foundations, pavements, concrete slabs, and slope tops to controlled drainage
devices.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 - 12- September 4, 1997
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon
the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the
investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during
construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon
Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The
evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was
not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated.
2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his
representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are
brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the
plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry
out such recommendations in the field.
3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the
conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural
processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in
applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the
broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated
wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review
and should not be relied upon after a period of three years.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 September 4, 1997
srArt
I'.
CNiD.I, F1- -
i'Y- IIIF -SFA
N
nix J
G MM
SOURCE: 1996 THOMAS BROTHERS MAP
SAN DIEGO COUNTY. CALIFORNIA
lTtpUCm 'MiM .B«.00I. OMMm !Y i1l1WY
R p s T 5 4V
T11! 1MV i! CO/rR,O«r® T' 111UM� Sld WII. V{,YVI; i0 f1Tt
C« NB«COIICj .«1 fyt .Wr 1'NR Ted. YKIIl1 IC/1 PrIOdML 44 CII
aflKE r«I7alI Pa11�LM
rt ID
i .11r I• �- IR fimni wrn4
1 BLV t __ ie tV r nl OCINITAS
tr
ST
GEOCON
om
INCORPORATED
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CAUFORNIA 92121 -2974
RHONE 619 558-6900 - FAX 619 558.6159
RCM / JS
DSK / G0000
w
mtenro
n.
I
9. g.T - I5� -via 8
aim f 31
'9 ZIN
Y4
rmR
i1R
7, <
Ncm T
Z6
TJpR1 I: f�f 111
AAR I e•.9
N
NO SCALE
VICINITY MAP
CARDIFF PROPERTY
SAN ELIJO AVENUE
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA
DATE 914 97 PROJECT NC. 05938 -42 -01 FIG 1
GRADING PLAN
San
E! lo Averve, Garal
am :a RM
'I ,I f...._.
I
e
- r.� y a Nfa7787i'E IB604' e KDO
•� 1� i �� I �. -' -� '6 -° - �• -
3 / 'V 'd � - � �a O'
AIy �v °y 4- s 4 !.
`= t h1yWeathered) °° �" T-1
s K tl
zz I r 1 r rI
eT0 ♦� 05 _ +'rte P 1
v � � _L�f == ��rcul �ll c RI �Jrc�l I ,
v b �{ 1015 Ea••1nult, - 1105 &and Floor a m; l+ 16A Ga1M1Met -'171A 6t'whd Fber I ��
1010 Fad �, M5 ?ad �_ .�,• � bF
Highly ath ) N 0 5
stxt: Y - iC
_
—'6 _ _ sa,
S S
I i I I I I �� i1� —�fw lYSaMw•
I L
I
eatfiered
I 1,
-
"d '� �^ ParC91 g 1 c Qi
a I� - P� -�r�el �, =
1015 ea•. mml; -1105 &owed Floc '- [x�
I W.0 Pad 32 I RbA Bawnr - 147D &avd Floor r
a� —r _ - - +wxm
3 ks
ir 3 v( I y
t ].Iry C • a
I
\ j ( I u 1KT'IB'24f . t 180.04' '�d
dir
• � � Ili ,s1 it ¢ %
Y
GEOCON
GEOCON LEGEND
INCORPORATED
2d 2D'
Qt........MARINE TERRACE DEPOSITS (Highly Wearhered) �TE0�AL CONSULTANTS
r•' 6960 RArDERS DIM - SAN DECO, CAIFOINLA 9212}2974
TE
'`........APPROX. LOCATION OF TRENCH PRO E 53 NO. -FAX6W 2-019
PROJECT NO. 05936 -42 -01
FIGURE 2
GEOLOGIC MAP DATE 9/0/97
w wws I wrz t I DAM I BENCH MARK SCALE APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAMNO NO
ca IY ar sa Diego e. ma Ra. -SE r vLws RE9A9m UNDER 9aERMSxx of RECOMMENDED APPROVED CRADLYG PUNS FOR:
LocatM • Vy 01 IM Ralrma Tro6s Dowom GAIL r R arc Q1fYIFFR
660 1.,1 Na hn , 01 110 810,11 511.. I_IU OCEAN VIEW VIMS
Rsmra x,m 'Cwnq M sa Dlpo wren Coma Ycc xa: x1n o.re e.�
Da.. Npt� County. glncu " E� vnroe Saa Elijo Avenue, CardiTT
Fle 4 IQO.EO CObm. MY 91EEi w
RF.SOURCF DF:VF11)P11ENT CORPORATION JN97 -017 B
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was performed on August 15, 1997, and consisted of a site reconnaissance
and the excavation of six exploratory backhoe trenches. The trenches were excavated to depths
ranging from 9 feet to 13 feet below the existing ground surface using a John Deere 310E rubber -tire
backhoe.
The soil conditions encountered in the excavations were visually examined, classified and logged in
general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) practice for
Description and Identification of Soils (Visual -Manual Procedure D2844). Logs of the trench
excavations are presented on Figures A -1 through A -6. The logs depict the soil and geologic
conditions encountered and the depth at which samples were obtained. The approximate locations of
the trench excavations are shown on a reduced copy of the Grading Plan, Figure 2.
Project No. 0593642 -01 September 4, 1997
PROJECT NO. 05936 -42 -01
Figure A -1, Log of "french 1" 1 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
W ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE I ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
W
TRENCH T 1
CAD
J
H
z 0 W ^
F^
DEPTH
SAMPLE
_
3
°z
SOIL
FZ�
H
Wv
IN
FEET
CLASS
ELEV.(MSL.) 123 DATE COMPLETED 8/15/97
�H'a)
w-
�z
F~-1
C
(USCS)
F- N3
OV
HW
J
EQUIPMENT 310E
IzWm
wm
�a
W
Eo
0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
{'
SM
TOPSOIL
Loose, dry, brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND
2
TERRACE DEPOSITS(Highly weathered)
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
with silt, abundant pinholes
4
- Sidewalls caving from 0 to 9 feet
SM
6
8
10
Medium dense, moist, red, orange brown, few
'_�
{ _# {
pinholes
12
TI -1
;
{
SM
TRENCH TERMINATED AT 13 FEET
Figure A -1, Log of "french 1" 1 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
W ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE I ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
PROJECT NO. 05936.42 -01
Figure A -2, Log of Trench 'f 2 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL [] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE _ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
W
TRENCH T 2
DEPTH
J
3
SOIL
Z
~ Z�
N^
�"
IN
SAMPLE
ND.
O
O
CLASS
ELEV. (MSL.) 121 DATE COMPLETED 8/15197
¢ ¢ \
�U)
2LL
wow
7F
FEET
N
o
(USCS>
U) Hw
c�D
EQUIPMENT 310E
wwm
�a
ro
D�
O
U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
SM
TOPSOIL
Loose, dry, brown, Silty, fire to medium SAND
TERRACE DEPOSITS(Highly weathered)
2
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
with silt, abundant pinholes
4
- Sidewalls caving
SM
6
8
10
--------------------------------------
Medium dense, moist, Ted orange, fine to medium
SM
SAND with silt, few pinholes
TRENCH TERMINATED AT 11 FEET
i
Figure A -2, Log of Trench 'f 2 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL [] ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE _ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
PROJECT NO. 05936 -42 -01
Figure A -3, Log of Trench T 3 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 0 ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE D ... CHUNK SAMPLE t ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED, IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
w
TRENCH T 3
DEPTH
J
3
SOIL
z w
HZg
fH
WI
IN
SAMPLE
"o'
O
z
CLASS
ELEV. (MSC.) 113 DATE COMPLETED 8115197
¢¢\
ZLL
:3
FEET
H
J
a
(USCS)
�H3
0U
Hw
LSD
EQUIPMENT 310E
wWm
c
za
�o
a
o
U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
•�
�'
SM
TOPSOO.
Loose, dry, brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND
TERRACE DEPOSPPS(Highly weathered)
2
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
with silt
4
T3 -1
SM
-Becomes moist to very moist at 5 feet
6
8
10
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
SM
Medium dense, moist, yellow, orange red, fine to
medium SAND with silt
TRENCH TERMINATED AT I I FEET
Figure A -3, Log of Trench T 3 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 0 ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE D ... CHUNK SAMPLE t ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED, IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
PROIFCT NO. 05916 -42 -01
k1gure A-4, Log of Trench T 4 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ ...
SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL
11—
Lu
...
TRENCH T 4
SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ...
DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE
Q ...
CHUNK SAMPLE
Z ...
WATER
TABLE OR SEEPAGE
LD
3
Z
L)
}
DEPTH
IH
SAMPLE
SOIL
CLASS
Fa
�X
F
?
ELEV. 106 DATE COMPLETED S/15/97
��N
w�
�z
FEET
I,-I
(USCS)
f-H3
OU
NLU
LSD
EQUIPMENT 310E
Wwm
�
�a
0o
O-
❑
U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
TOPSOIL
i
-} i
SM
Loose, dry, brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND
2
TERRACE DEPOSrrS(Highly weathered)
4
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
with silt, abundant pinholes
- Sidewalls caving
6
SM
g---------------------------------------
SM
Medium dense, moist, orange, red brown, fine to
10
medium SAND with silt, few pinholes
TRENCH TERMINATED AT 10 FEET
k1gure A-4, Log of Trench T 4 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ❑ ...
SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL
11—
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
...
DRIVE
SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ...
DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE
Q ...
CHUNK SAMPLE
Z ...
WATER
TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
PROIFCT NO. 05936.42 -01
Figure A -5, Log of Trench T 5 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE D ... CHUNK SAMPLE _ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE Of SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
W
TRENCH T 5
ZW^
>
DEPTH
SAMPLE
J
O
3
O
SOIL
O2LL
yam.
W"
7r
IN
NO.
z
CLASS
ELEV.(MSL.) 106 DATE COMPLETED 8/15/97
¢¢\
Nu)
Z�
Wow
H-z
FEET
H
costs)
J
(.o
EQUIPMENT 310E
wwm
ca
Fo
a��
o
U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
{
TOPSOIL
TS -I
_�
i i
SM
Loose, dry, brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND
2
TERRACE DEPOSITS(Highly weathered)
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
4
with silt, abundant pinholes
6
SM
8
--------------------------------------
SM
Medium dense, moist, yellow, orange brown, fine
10
SAND with silt, few pinholes
TRENCH TERMINATED AT 10 FEET
I
Figure A -5, Log of Trench T 5 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE D ... CHUNK SAMPLE _ ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE Of SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
PROJECT NO. 05936 -42 -01
Npre A -6, Log of 'french T 6 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS "' SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE Z ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
W
TRENCH T 6
O
¢
ZW^
OU
�.
UU
DEPTH
SAMPLE
J
O
3
O
SOIL
HL)
H fjo
OH
IN
ND'
[LASS
ELEV. (MSC.) 110 DATE COMPLETED 8/15197
¢¢\
FU)
2�
0�
FEET
H
J
o
(USCS)
Hw
CAD
EQUIPMENT 310E
Wwm
o:..
>-a
= o
o.
o
U
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
SM
TOPSOIL
Loose, dry, brawn, fine to medium Silty, fine to
2
medium SAND
TERRACE DEPOSITS(Highly weathered)
Loose, moist, red brown, fine to medium SAND
4
with silt, abundant pinholes
T6 -1
- Sidewalls caving
SM
6
8
--------------------------------------
SM
Medium dense, moist, yellow orange, fine to
medium SAND with silt
TRENCH TERMINATED AT 9 FEET
Npre A -6, Log of 'french T 6 SEAPM
SAMPLE SYMBOLS "' SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)
® ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Q ... CHUNK SAMPLE Z ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE
NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE
DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected soil
samples were tested for their in -place dry density and moisture content, maximum dry density and
optimum moisture content, expansion potential, shear strength, and consolidation characteristics.
The results of our laboratory tests are presented as follows on Tables B -1 through B -11I and
Figure B 1.
TABLE B -I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS
ASTM D 1557 -91
Sample
Description
Maximum Dry
Optimum Moisture
No.
Before Test
( %)
Density (pcf)
Content (/o dry wt.)
T3 -1
Reddish - brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND
136.7
8.4
TABLE B -II
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
Sample
No.
Moisture Content
Dry
Density
(Pcf)
Expansion
Index
Classification
Before Test
( %)
After Test
( %)
TI-1
8.2
17.4
117.3
0
Very low
TABLE B -III
SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Sample No.
Dry Density
(pct)
Moisture Content
(/o)
Unit Cohesion
(psi)
Angle of Shear
Resistance (degrees)
T3 -1
115.4
10.7
375
34
Soil sample remolded to 90 percent relative density at near optimum moisture content.
Project No. 05936 -42 -01 September 4, 1997
PROJECT NO. 05936 -12 -01
SAMPLE NO. T4 -1
_Q
-2
0
z
0 2
H
H
O
H
J
O
N
Z Q
O
U
z
z
W
U
W B
a-
9
19
1Z
0.1 1 10 109
APPLIED PRESSURE (kst)
Initial Dry Density (cfl 116.0 Initial Saturation ( %) 31. 7
Initial Water Content ( %) 5.1 Sample Saturated at (kst) LO
CONSOLIDATION CURVE
CARDIFF PROPERTY SAN ELIJO AVENUE
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA
CPSEA Figure B -1
polio, XIdN3ddb'
G1111.1911414i
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
for
SAN ELIJO AVENUE PARCEL MAP
(ADJACENT TO 1409 SAN ELIJO AVENUE)
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. 05936 -42 -01
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
1. GENERAL
1.1. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the
Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom-
mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and
grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of
conflict.
1.2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be
employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for
substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these
specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and
observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion, the work was performed
in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the
Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so
that personnel may be scheduled accordingly.
1.3. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and
methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency
ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the
Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture
condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result in a quality of work
not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject the
work and recommend to the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable con-
ditions are corrected.
2. DEFINITIONS
2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading
work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading
performed.
2.2. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work.
2.3. Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or
consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-
gradedtopography.
2.4. Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm
retained to provide geotechnical services for the project.
2.5. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who
is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be
responsible for having qualified representatives on -site to observe and test the Contractor's
work for conformance with these specifications.
2.6. Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained
by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during the site
grading.
2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addendums) which may
include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically
for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are
intended to apply.
3. MATERIALS
3.1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or
imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction
of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil -rock fills or rock fills, as
defined below.
Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in
maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller
than 3/4 inch in size.
Soil -rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in
maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper
compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in
Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 inches.
• Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in
maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as material
smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than
approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity.
3.2. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the
Consultant shall not be used in fills.
3.3. Materials used for fill, either imported or on -site, shall not contain hazardous materials as
defined by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Articles 9
and 10; 40CFR, and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall
not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous
materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect
the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner the
termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading
operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the
suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations.
3.4. The outer 15 feet of soil -rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of
properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to
the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil
layer no thicker than 12 inches is track- walked onto the face for landscaping purposes. This
procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and
Consultant.
3.5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory
by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and, where
appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil.
3.6. During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the
Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be
notified immediately to evaluate the significance of the unanticipated condition.
4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED
4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of
complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man -made
structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried
logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and
other projections exceeding 1 -1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet
below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to
provide suitable fill materials.
4.2. Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly
disposed at an approved off -site facility. Concrete fragments which are free of reinforcing
steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of
this document.
4.3. After clearing and grubbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous
soils shall be removed to the depth recommended to the Geotechnical Report. The depth of
removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the
Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6
inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform
compaction by the equipment to be used.
4.4. Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or
where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance
with the following illustration.
TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL
FINISH GRADE
REMOVE AS RECOMMENDED
By SOIL ENGINEER -
(STING GROUND
SLOPE TO BE SUCH THAT
SLOUGHING OR SLIDING -
DOES NOT OCCUR
FINISH SLOPE SURFACE
NOTE I NOTE
NO SCALE
DETAIL NOTES: (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide
to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The
base of the key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the
natural slope.
(2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable
surficial material and at least 2 feet into dense formational material.
Where hard rock is exposed in the bottom of the key, the depth and
configuration of the key may be modified as approved by the Consultant.
4.5. After areas to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be
disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods. The area
should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted
as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications.
5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT
5.1. Compaction of soil or soil -rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented -steel
wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other types of
acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be
capable of compacting the soil or soil -rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the
specified moisture content.
5.2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3.
6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL
6.1. Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with
the following recommendations:
• Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should
generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly
mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The
entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than
12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3
of these specifications.
• In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum
moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557 -91.
• When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant, water
shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range specified.
• When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant
or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor
by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within the
range specified.
• After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly
compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent. Relative
compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in -place dry density of
the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as determined in accordance
with ASTM D1557 -91. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and
compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that the specified minimum
relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill.
• Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least
3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2
to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material.
Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve
proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over -built by at least 3 feet and
then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track- walking of
slopes, as described in the following paragraph.
• As an alternative to over - building of slopes, slope faces may be back - rolled with a
heavy -duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4 -foot fill height intervals.
Upon completion, slopes should then be track- walked with a D -8 dozer or similar
equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least twice.
6.2. Soil -rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance
with the following recommendations:
• Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be
incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15
feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet
below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper.
• Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be individually
placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock fragments up to
10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar methods. The acceptability
of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated
during grading as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to
placement.
• For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for
passage of compaction equipment.
• For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly
compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet deep in
maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with
approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be
compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an 'open- face" method
in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the
Consultant.
• Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to
or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum
horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center -to- center with a 5 -foot stagger or
offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing
between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom
of the next higher windrow.
• All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the
windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative.
6.3. Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with
the following recommendations:
• The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2
percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable
subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during
construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall
be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post - construction
infiltration of water.
• Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. Placement shall be by rock trucks
traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift.
Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill
shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall consist of water trucks
traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during
rock placement. Compaction equipment with compactive energy comparable to or
greater than that of a 20 -ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment
providing suitable energy to achieve the required compaction or deflection as
recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be utilized. The number of passes to be made will
be determined as described in Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered
with soil fill, no additional rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill.
• Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D1196 -64, may be performed in both the
compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of passes of the
compaction equipment to be performed. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing
tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative
compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be performed on areas of rock
fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment,
respectively. The number of passes required for the rock fill shall be determined by
comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock fill and by
evaluating the deflection variation with number of passes. The required number of
passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate
bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted
soil fill. In no case will the required number of passes be less than two.
• A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to verify
that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is being properly
applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The actual number of plate
bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. In general, at least
one test should be performed for each approximately 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock
fill placed.
• Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in his
opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled
with smaller rock material. In -place density testing will not be required in the rock fills.
• To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill
material, a 2 -foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift
of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be
determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded
filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is being excavated. Materials
typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow
design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of rock fill placement.
All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by
representatives of the Consultant.
7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING
7.1. The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during
clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in
vertical elevation of soil or soil -rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test
being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall
be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil -rock fill placed and compacted.
7.2. The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil -rock
fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted
as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any
disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion
thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be
reworked until the specified density has been achieved.
7.3. During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of
passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall
request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed
rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an
opinion as to whether the rock till is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied
to the material. If performed, plate bearing tests will be performed randomly on the surface
of the most - recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be performed to provide a basis for
expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The maximum
deflection in the rock fill determined in Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the maximum
deflection of the properly compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria indicate that a
layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area
shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture
applied.
7.4. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of
rock fill placement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as
recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical
Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading.
7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify that the drainage devices
have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications.
7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate:
Soil and Soil -Rock Fills:
• Field Density Test, ASTM D1556 -82, Density of Soil In -Place By the Sand -Cone
Method.
• Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, ASTM D2922 -81, Density of Soil and
Soil- Aggregate In -Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth).
• Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557 -91, Moisture- Density Relations of Soils and
Soil- Aggregate Mixtures Using !0 -Pound Hammer and 18 -Inch Drop.
• Expansion Index Test, Uniform Building Code Standard 29 -2, Expansion Index Test.
Rock Fills
• Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196 -64 (Reapproved 1977) Standard ,Method for
Nonrepresentative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement Components,
For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements.
8. PROTECTION OF WORK
8.1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide
positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be
controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The
Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such
time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas
subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the
Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures.
8.2. After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further excavation
or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant.
9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS
9.1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil
Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of
elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot
horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of
subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as -built plan
of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the
subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions.
9.2. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as- graded soil and geologic report
satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as- graded report should
be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical
engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the
geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the
Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications.
GI rev. 9/96
LIST OF REFERENCES
Abbott, P. L., On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County„
San Diego Association of Geologists, April 13, 1985.
Anderson, J. G., Synthesis of Seismicity and Geologic Data in California, U.S. Geologic Survey
Open -File Report 84 -424, 1984, pp. 1 -186.
Blake, T. F., EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal
Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, Usees Manual, 1989x, p. 79.
City of San Diego Seismic Safety Study, Development Services Department - 1995 Edition.
Jennings, C. W., Fault Map of California with locations of Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and Thermal
Wells, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1975 (revised 1987).
Tan, S. S., Landslide Hazards in the Encinitas Quadrangle, San Diego County, California, DMG Open
File Report 86 -8, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1986.
Tan, S. S. and Giffen, D. G., Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan
Area, San Diego County, California, DMF Open File Report 95 -04, California Division of
Mines and Geology, 1995.
Tan, S. S. and Kennedy, M. P., Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, DMG
Open File Report 96 -02, California Division of Mines and Geology, 1996.
Unpublished reports, aerial photographs, and maps on file with Geocon Incorporated.
Weber, H. Jr., Recent Slope Failures, Ancient Landslides, and Related Geology of the North - Central
Coastal Area, San Diego County, California DMG Open File Report 82 -12, California
Division of Mines and Geolotzv, 1982.
Wesnousky, S. G., Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California, Journal of
Geophysical Research, Vol. 91, No. B12, 1986, pp. 12, 587, 631.
No. 05936 -42 -01 September 4, 1997