1996-5003 GGRADING PFF.MIT PERMIT NO.:
ARCEL NO. 259-31107.00 PLAN NO.: 5003 -G
DB SITB~'KDORESS $a CINITAS BLVD. CASE NO.: 96113
SAN {DIEGO Y
T r F E N C I N I r A 5
E• HEERip113 5EP "ICES DEFAPTMT
5' }5 i. VULCAN AVE.
ENCINITAS. CA
vFADING PERMIT
FERItiLT I'lO.: 5�r'.�3GI
axaaaaravrrassaaara== cssrraaaaxsses. sraxaaaraaxcaaasaxasarrrssasaaarasesaaxasar
PAF.0 =L Nu, FLAN NO.: 5%03-C
JOb _c7TE•ADOFESS: 1:,01 ENCINITAS BLVD.
APPLICANT NAME ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO
HAILING. ADDRESS: 1001 ENCINITAS BLVD. PHONE NO.: 7eO- 75B-6254
CITY: ENCINI'TAS STATE: CA ZIP: 92024-
CONTRACTOR :
LICENSE NO.:
ENGINEER .
FERMI T ..ISSUE
FEFMIT EAF.
I14SFE-.-1•ijR: T
TONY WANKET CONSTRUCTION INC.
SOWARDS & BROWN ENGINEERING INC.
LATE: 11.,04/*^
DATE: 10i31i48 PERMIT ISSUED
IDD BAUNBACH
L. FLAN CHECK FEE :
2. INSPECTION FEE
3. FLAN CHECK DEPOSIT:
PHONE NO.: 700-944 -8440
LICENSE T'r'PE: b
1 NO 90po - 43c-850v-
6'Y t
PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS - -----------------------
3.5Civ.00 v. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: vv
5.945.06 3. SECURITY DEPOSIT 131,497.00
.Ov
DESCRIPTION OF WORT:
"PHASE 1" EARTHWORK /DRAINAGE IMFROVEMENTSiSTREET REPAIRSiSITE RETAINING
WALLSiEROSION CONTROL FOR ST JOHN THE EVANGELIST PARISH CEWTER EXPANSION
TO INCLUDE PERMANENT CLASSROOMS FOR k -8 5CHOOLtADMI14ISTRATIVE OFFICE3i
LIBRAFY P.. MEDIA CENTER IFLAYGROUND, ALL PER MUP 96 -113. LETTER DATED OCT
20 1797 APPLIES. ASSOCIATED PERMIT: 9348H (FLArGROUNb TMPRGVEMl%TfS).
- - -- LNSFECTION -- - - - - --
DATE
INITIAL INSFECTION
:OIIFA :TIrill REPORT• RECEIVED /-
ENGINEER CEFT. RECEIVED
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION 8
FINAL INSF£CTION
INSPECTOR'S SIG14ATURE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L HI =REE'i AC►:WOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATIO14 AND STATE THAT THE
INFORMATION IS CORFECT A14D AGREE TO COMFLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE
LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE FROVISIONS A14D CONDITIONS OF
ANY PERMIT ISSUED FUR;., IT TO THIS APPLICATION.
AL --
91631+: UFE
�F Lld' �dr+!•IE
/i 5Z
DATE SIGNED
'h
TELEPHONE NUH6EF
1;.'! _ _ JwhJE C. AGENT :3. OTHER aA4r1A C -n;Yt/ �" /��
C f T Y O F E N C I N I T A
El JEERING SERVICES DEPARTME
505 S. VULCAN AVE.
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
GRADING PERMIT
PERMIT NO.: 5003GI
PARCEL NO. : 259-311-0700 101,00, 10, 11 ) 310"d i PLAN NO.: 5003 -6
JOB SITE ADDRESS: 1001 ENCINITAS BLVD.
AFPLICANT NAME ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO
MAILING ADDRESS: 1001 ENCINITAS BLVD. PHONE NO.: 760- 753 -6254
CITY: ENCINITAS STATE: CA ZIP: 92024-
CONTRACTOR :
LICENSE NO.:
ENGINEER
PERMIT ISSUE
PERMIT EXF.
INSPECTOR: T
TONY WANKET CONSTRUCTION INC.
499679
SOWARDS & BROWN ENGINEERING INC.
DATE: 11/04/97
DATE: 10/31/96 PERMIT ISSUED
3DD BAUMBACH
1. PLAN CHECK
2. INSPECTION
3. PLAN CHECK
PHONE NO.: 760- 944 -8090
LICENSE TYPE: B
NO : 17 G- 436 -8500
BY:
- - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS -------- - - - - --
FEE 3,500.00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT:
FEE 5,945.00 5. SECURITY DEPOSIT
DEPOSIT: .00
------------------- - - - - -- DFSCRIFTION OF WORK ------- - - - - --
.00
131,497.00
"PHASE I" EARTHWORK /DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS /STREET REPAIRS /SITE RETAINING
WALLS/EROSION CONTROL FOR ST JOHN THE EVANGELIST PARISH CENTER EXPANSION
TO INCLUDE PERMANENT CLASSROOMS FOR K -8 SCHOOL /ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES/
LIBRARY" & MEDIA CENTER /PLAYGROUND, ALL PER MUP 96 -113. LETTER DATED OCT
20 1997 APPLIES. ASSOCIATED PERMIT: 9348H (PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS).
- - -- INSPECTION
INITIAL INSPECTION
COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED
ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION
FINAL INSPECTIO14
DATE -- - - - - -- INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE
INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE
LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF
ANY PERMIT ISSUED PURSUQQT TO THIS APPLICATION.
SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED
/Zo.✓ s � �� Wo �'3 Z y
PRINT NAME TELEPHONE NUMBER
CIRCLE ONE: I. OWNER E. AGENT 3. OTHER
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
RIVERSIDE, CA
VENTURA, CA
TRACY, CA
SACRAMENTO, CA
2414 Vineyard Avenue
12155 Magnolia Avenue
1645 Pacific Avenue
242 W. Larch
3628 Madison Avenue
Suite G
Suite 6C
Suite 107
Suite F
Suite 22
Escondido, CA 92029
Riverside, CA 92503
Oxnard, CA 93033
Tracy, CA 95376
N. Highlands, CA 95660
(760) 746 -4955
(909) 352-6701
(805) 486 -6475
(209) 839 -2890
(916)331.6030
(760) 746 -9806 FAX
(909) 352 -6705 FAX
(805) 486 -9016 FAX
(209) 839 -2895 FAX
(916) 331 -6037 FAX
FINAL REPORT FOR TESTING OF COMPACTED FILL
ST. JOHN'S, PHASE II
1003 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
CITY OF ENCINITAS GRADING PLAN NO. 5003 -G
PREPARED FOR:
ATTENTION: ROBERT TAYLOR
CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO
C/O HYNDMAN & HYNDMAN
2611 S. COAST HIGHWAY 101, SUITE 200
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA 92007
PREPARED BY:
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G
ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029
CTE PROJECT NO. 10 -6379T
MAY 13, 2004
GEOTECHNICAL a ENVIRONMENTAL a CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING a CIVIL ENGINEERING a SURVEYING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. ............................... 1
2.0 FILL PLACEMENT ................................................................................... ............................... 1
3.0 TESTING ................................................................................................... ............................... 1
4.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PADS ...................................................... ............................... 2
5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION .............................. ............................... 2
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... ............................... 2
6.1 Foundations and Slab Recommendations ...................................... ............................... 3
6.2 Shallow Foundations ...................................................................... ............................... 3
6.3 Foundation Settlement ................................................................... ............................... 4
6.4 Foundation Setback ........................................................................ ............................... 4
6.5 Lateral Load Resistance ................................................................. ............................... 4
6.6 Concrete Slab -On- Grade ................................................................ ............................... 5
6.7 Walls Below Grade ........................................................................ ............................... 5
7.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................... ............................... 6
TABLES
TABLE I COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
TABLE II LABORATORY TEST DATA
FIGURES
FIGURE 1 SITE INDEX MAP
FIGURE 2 COMPACTION LOCATION MAP
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 1
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
1.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
St. John's School is on the south side of Encinitas Boulevard, approximately 1 %: miles east of
Interstate Highway 5. The site elevation is approximately 280 feet above mean sea level (msl).
Figure 1 is a map showing the general site location.
2.0 FILL PLACEMENT
Compacted fill was placed during recent grading to prepare the building pads for the construction of
the proposed structures and associated improvements. Fill material was derived from on site
sources. Fill was generally placed in uniform compacted lifts at above optimum moisture content.
Grading was performed using standard heavy -duty construction equipment.
3.0 TESTING
Testing was performed to supplement field observations in promoting compliance with the
applicable project requirements. Field- testing of the compacted fill material was conducted in
accordance with ASTM D2922 and D3017 (nuclear method). Results of the field- testing indicate
that fill materials were compacted to the appropriate minimum required percentage of the laboratory
maximum dry density as determined by test method ASTM D -1557.
Tabulated results of the field compaction testing performed are provided in the attached Table I,
"Compaction Test Summary." Laboratory determination of the reference compaction values for the
fill materials is provided in Table II, "Laboratory Test Results." Figure 2 attached shows the
approximate location of the compaction tests performed.
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 2
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
4.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PADS
To prepare the building pad, materials were over - excavated to a minimum depth of three feet below
the bottom of all proposed foundations and to competent underlying materials and replaced as
properly compacted fill. These overexcavations extended a minimum of five feet laterally beyond
the building limits. Removals in other improvement areas extended to competent underlying
materials or the minimum depths indicated in the approved project soils report. Exposed subgrades
were scarified and moisture conditioned before compaction.
5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
Any additional grading and backfilling should be observed and tested to assure conformance with
recommendations presented herein and in the approved project soils report. However, prior to any
significant future development at the site, an appropriate update geotechnical investigation and report
shall be completed.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We conclude that the soil engineering and engineering geologic aspects of the grading are in
compliance with the approved geotechnical report and the grading plan (City of Encinitas grading
plan No. 5003 -G). The grading under permit 5003 -G has been performed in substantial conformance
with the approved grading plan or as shown on the as- graded plan. Therefore the subject site is
considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements and the site is considered adequate for
its intended use.
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 3
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
Proposed improvements shall generally be designed and constructed in accordance with the
recommendations of the referenced approved soils report, which have been restated in the subsequent
sections of this report. The recommendations presented herein generally remain unchanged from the
original approved soils report.
6.1 Foundations and Slab Recommendations
It is anticipated that proposed structure footings will be founded on engineered fill using shallow
spread and continuous footings. To eliminate the potential for differential settlements of these lightly
loaded structures, building foundations should bear entirely on engineered fills designed as indicated
herein.
6.2 Shallow Foundations
Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings should
not straddle cut/fill interfaces. We anticipate that all building footings will be founded entirely in
properly recompacted fills. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable
bearing values of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for minimum 18 -inch deep footings founded in
properly recompacted fill materials. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for
short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces.
Footings should be at least 15 inches wide and installed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent
subgrade elevation. Footing reinforcement for continuous and isolated foundations shall be designed
and placed as per the project structural engineer.
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 4
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
6.3 Foundation Settlement
The maximum post - construction compression settlement is expected to be on the order of 1.0 inch.
Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inches
across the building.
6.4 Foundation Setback
Footings for structures should be designed such that the minimum horizontal distance from the face
of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of seven feet. In addition, footings
should bear beneath an imaginary 1:1 plane extended up from the nearest bottom edge of adjacent
trenches and/or excavations. Footings may be deepened or backfilled with a two -sack slurry in order
to meet this requirement.
6.5 Lateral Load Resistance
The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in
engineered fill materials may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional
resistance equals the coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of
250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1,250 pounds per square
foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional
resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two- thirds of
the total allowable resistance.
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 5
St John's, Phase H
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
6.6 Concrete Slab -On -Grade
Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, but be a minimum of
five inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #4 reinforcing bars placed on 24-
inch centers, each way at mid -slab height. If elastic design is used, a modulus of subgrade reaction
of 150 pci should be used.
In moisture sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten -mil visqueen placed near mid- height of a
four -inch layer of compacted aggregate base (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) should be installed.
Slab areas subject to heavy loads or vehicular traffic may require increased thickness and
reinforcement. This office should be contacted to provide additional recommendations where actual
service conditions warrant further analysis.
6.7 Walls Below Grade
For the design of walls below grade where the surface of the backfill is level, it may be assumed that
the soils will exert an active lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of 35
pcf. The active pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the
wall height. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid
pressure of 55 pcf should be used, based on at -rest soil conditions. The recommended equivalent
fluid pressures should be increased by 20 pcf for walls retaining soils inclined at 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical) or less. Walls below the water level are not anticipated for the subject site.
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 6
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
In addition to the recommended earth pressure, subterranean structure walls adjacent to the streets or
other traffic loads should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf. This is the
result of an assumed 300 -psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is
kept back at least 10 feet from the subject walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.
Consideration should be given to waterproofing the subterranean structure walls to reduce moisture
infiltration.
The above values assume non - expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should be
taken to prevent a moisture buildup behind all walls below grade. Drainage measures should include
free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. Drains should discharge to an appropriate
offsite location. The project architect should evaluate the necessity of waterproofing or a relatively
flat composite drain system along the exterior of any basement walls.
We recommend that walls below grade be backfilled with soils having an expansion index of 20 or
less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 sloping plane, extended back from
the base of the wall. Wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction,
based on ASTM D1557 -91. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate
structural strength. Heavy compactors, which could cause distress to walls, should not be used
within three feet of the face of wall.
7.0 LIMITATIONS
As limited by the scope of the services that we agreed to perform, our opinions presented herein are
based on our observations, test results, and understanding of the proposed site development. Our
Final Report of Testing of Compacted Fill Page 7
St John's, Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
May 13, 2004 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
service was performed according to the currently accepted standard of practice and in a way that
provides a reasonable measure of the compliance of the grading operations with the job
requirements. No warranty, express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the performance
of the project in any respect. Submittal of this report should not be construed as relieving the
grading contractor of his responsibility to comply with the project requirements.
The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding testing
conducted, observations made during construction or recommendations presented herein, please do
not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTIO STING & ENGINEERING, INC.
Dan T. Math, RCE #61013 of Es
Senior Engineer ��� �'�ANo.
a~s p 61013 0
o
Exp.
y 12/31/04 a/
�i_ CIVIL :ter �'
TOPOI map printeO on 08/09/02 rrom "Cellfomle.tpo" and °UntltleO.tp9"
117. 18.000 W 117. 17.000' W 117 °16.000' W WGS64117 °11.
x 1
fs
P
z
G
r y
\—
F >.
1
z
CM
NO
/ SITE
o
I=
EDC'I DIi iS II 7 j °':.. • I°
•.
AN i t i r i
!�
z
- C3I I.11l I1V `7Yf �\l� 6 •. �� i �.A�
r
Z ) i
�
F
4 �
1\ c 1I
lli °lUASJ' W 117 °17.000' W 117-16,000'w WGSOa 117.
15000' W
TN{ /MN a a I WE
IT Ip®W96 WT 0 m 19p AatM
Roved aom TOM OA00 WOdi ' ROd¢Neee(.,m..0
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING,
INC.
er OEOTECWCAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
1414VINEYARDAVENOE•6TEG ESCONDTDOCA.92M(760)74"M
6NGINFEWN�.INf
SITE INDEX MAP
10 -6379T
40 FOOT CONTOUR ELEVATIONS PROPOSED ADDITIONS
- AS SHOWN
SAINT JOHN'S CHURCH
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
DAhl)3 t
]s
_ _ _ _ — --- n� _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I
/ O O O O
PROPO�D BUILDING C 5b 46
! O 55 56 5]O
�QI
4
W /
LEGEND
APPROXIMATE COMPACTION
TEST LOCATION
ae
a9
O
EXISTING
COURT YARD
SCALE
0 25 50feet
]H
16
39
l3 31 38
b
v 0 32
) O
6H
Cy z2
zo
H
13 � la
]i
O� 26
19 70 O
\ O 3v
------------
/
/
O
25
/
I)6 n /
P 6 /
L 36 63
A 63 3 59 /
SI /
16 /
/
93 �
/
/
I
I
1
1 `V
1
4
�v
p
Hxmxeeuxc.�m'
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING INC.
OEO14 VINEALANOCONE. STE GIOSCONDIDO CA 2029(10 AND INSPECTION
2111 VINEYARV AVENUE. STEG ESCON0100 CA. 93029 (10) 7464955
COMPACTION LOCATION MAP
PROPOSED ADDITIONS
SAINT JOHN'S CHURCH
EN CINITAS, CALIFORNIA
C EIOBNO
10-6379
SCALE
AS SHOWN
DATE 05/04 1 " I
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Mira eI
Job Aftel -ss iI% -_ fa5131 6 "_ ,?•.`..
aKe
Date
No.
V-00 .
Feet
Denstfy
pef
u'e
CoxAegf
%Dry:
yyei 't
, ,GoWpaddom
b {a-
4 a,.1.
Soil
Type
7/21/2003
1
See Map
283.0
111.0
12.3
94%
1
7/21/2003
2
See Map
281.0
108.4
12.8
92%
1
7/21/2003
3
See Map
284.0
109.9
13.0
93%
1
7/21/2003
4
See Map
282.0
105.9
13.0
90%
1
7/21/2003
5
See Map
285.0
108.1
15.3
92%
I
7/21/2003
6
See Map
285.0
108.3
12.8
92%
1
7/21/2003
7
See Map
283.0
110.2
13.9
93%
1
7/23/2003
8
Pad B See Map
282.5
113.6
13.0
90%
2
7/23/2003
9
Pad B See Map
284.0
111.2
12.7
94%
1
7/23/2003
10
Pad A See Map
281.5
116.5
11.9
92%
2
7/23/2003
11
Pad A See Map
281.0
122.3
9.5
97%
2
7/24/2003
12
Pad B See Map
281.5
121.5
11.6
96%
2
7/24/2003
13
Pad B See Map
281.0
113.9
13.0
97%
1
7/24/2003
14
Pad B See Map
281.0
121.3
10.0
96%
2
7/24/2003
15
Pad A See Map
281.0
119.0
10.1
94%
2
7/24/2003
16
Pad A See Map
281.0
112.2
13.1
95%
1
7/24/2003
17
Pad A See Map
281.0
115.7
12.6
98%
1
7/24/2003
18
Pad A See Map
283.0
122.1
11.4
97%
2
7/24/2003
19
Pad B See Map
282.5
120.3
9.8
95%
2
7/24/2003
20
Pad B See Map
282.0
119.6
11.8
95%
2
7/24/2003
21
Pad B See Map
282.0
120.2
10.9
95%
2
7/24/2003
22
Pad B See Map
283.5
120.1
11.7
95%
2
7/24/2003
23
Pad B See Map
283.5
120.8
10.8
95%
2
7/24/2003
24
Pad A See Map
285.0
110.0
13.1
93%
1
7/25/2003
25
Proposed Pad B See Map
284.0
116.8
11.3
92%
2
7/25/2003
26
Proposed Pad B See Map
284.0
118.8
12.2
94%
2
7/25/2003
27
Proposed Pad B See Map
284.0
114.9
12.2
91%
2
7/25/2003
28
Proposed Pad B See Map
284.0
113.6
12.8
90%
2
7/25/2003
29
Proposed Pad B See Map
285.0
109.5
13.1
93%
1
7/25/2003
30
Proposed Pad B See Map
285.0
111.0
13.2
94%
1
7/25/2003
31
Pro osed Pad B See Map
285.0
109.5
12.8
93%
1
7/25/2003
32
Proposed Pad B See Map
285.0
109.3
13.0
93%
1
7/25/2003
33
Proposed Pad B See Map
285.0
108.4
13.1
92%
1
7/25/2003
34
Proposed Pad A See Map
286.0
108.0
12.9
92%
1
7/252003
35
Proposed Pad A See Ma
286.0
107.0
13.1
91%
1
7/25/2003
36
Proposed Pad A See Ma
286.0
114.7
13.0
97%
1
7/29/2003
37
Proposed Pad B See Ma
SG
106.0
13.1
90 °/a
I
7/29/2003
38
Proposed Pad B See Ma
285.8
111.9
13.4
95%
1
8/11/2003
39
Storm Drain See Ma
284.0
116.5
9.13
92%
2
8/11/2003
40
Storm Drain See Ma
285.0
106.9
13.4
91%
1
8/11/2003
41
Storm Drain See Map
285.0
109.2
13.0
93%
1
8/12/2003
42
Storm Drain See Map
285.0
115.3
12.0
91%
2
8/12/2003
43
Storm Drain See Map
282.0
114.2
10.1
90%
2
8/13/2003
44
Storm Drain North East Comer Pad B
282.0
106.9
14.0
91%
1
8/13/2003
45
Sewer Line Pad C
284.0
107.4
13.0
91%
1
8/13/2003
46
Sewer Line Pad C
284.0
106.6
13.0
90%
1
8/13/2003
47
Sewer Line Pad A
284.0
106.9
13.4
91%
1
" TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
MA. .- 'i> -..tf„ •t �y, E Y��Zi i_s
Amuk
Jr
bL�
Sail
-Type
Type
13.1 94% 1
8/21/2003
48
Fire Line Trench
285.0
111.1
8121/2003
49
Fire Line Trench
285.0 1
116.0
13.7
98%
1
8/21/2003
50
Fire Line Trench
285.0
113.4
13.6
96%
1
8/26/2003
51
Electric Trench
75.0
109.9
11.4
93%
1
8/26/2003
52
Plumbing Trench
75.0
112.9
11.6
96%
1
8/16/2003
53
Plumbing Trench
75.0
110.6
12.2
94%
1
8/26/2003
54
Plumbing Main Line
75.0
107.9
13.2
91%
1
8/26/2003
55
Plumbing Main Line
75.0
109.4
12.4
93%
1
8/26/2003
56
Plumbing Main Line
75.0
110.6
10.4
94%
1
8126/2003
57
Plumbing Main Line
75.0
111.5
10.3
94%
1
8/26/2003
58
Plumbing Main Line
75.0
109.2
12A
93%
1
9/29/2003
59
Backfill
284.0
108.7
13.6
92%
1
912912003
60
Backfill
-3.5
110.8
16.7
94%
1
9/29/2003
61
Backfill
-7.0
109.4
14.6
93%
1
9/29/2003
62
Backfill
-5.0
108.0
13.8
92%
1
9/292003
63
Backfill
-4.5
111.9
13.3
95%
1
912912003
64
Backfill
-3.0
108.5
13.2
92%
1
9/29/2003
65
Backfill
-1.0
107.8
13.5
91%
1
10/8/2003
66
Sewer Line Trench 6" Fill
-
112.2
13.15
95%
1
10/8/2003
67
Sewer Line Trench 2' Fill
FSG
111.7
8.29
95%
1
10/8/2003
68
Sewer Line Trench 1' Fill
FSG
110.0
8.23
93%
1
10/8/2003
69
Sewer Line Trench 2' Fill
FSG
108.4
13.66
92%
1
10/8/2003
70
Sewer Line Trench 1' Fill
FSG
117.5
13.87
100%
1
10/82003
71
Sewer Line Trench T Fill
FSG
114.4
13.19
97%
1
10182003
72
Sewer Line Trench 1' Fill
FSG
114.7
13.18
97%
1 1
10/19/2003
73
See Ma
- SG
116.4
12.0
92%
3
10/19/2003
74
See Ma
- SG
119.8
10.8
95%
3
10/192003
75
See Ma
- SG
115.7
11.6
92%
3
4/7/2004
76
Fire Lane Class II Base
FS
131.8
8.4
95%
4
4/72004
77
Fire Lane Class H Base
FS
132.0
7.3
95%
4
4/72004
78
Fire Lane Class IT Base
FS
1 132.3
8.3
96%
4
** TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE II
LABORATORY TEST DATA
Job Name: St John's Phase It School Project
.lob No. 10 -63791'
.lob Address: 1003 Encinitas Blvd, Encinitas, CA
Date ' 5/11/2004
Marrinuun
Optimum
Sample No
Dry Density
Moisture
Soil
pci
Content
Description
/oNa
118.0 13.2 Brown Silty SAND
? 126.5 9.4 Gray brown silty SAND w /clay
3 126.0 11.0 Gray brown silty, SAND w /clay and rock
4 138.3 6.0
SOWARDS AND E_10WN ENGINEERI11Q,
March 5, 1999
City Engineer
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
FINAL GRADING ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ST. JOHN'S CHURCH,
1001 ENCINITAS BLVD.
GRADING PERMIT NO. 5003 -G
Pursuant to Section 23.24.310 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter report is
hereby submitted as a final grading report for the subject project. As supervising
grading engineer on the project. I hereby state all grading, lot drainage, and drainage
facilities on the site have been completed and installed in conformance with the
approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas Codes and Standards.
I have inspected the site and found the embankment and cut slopes to have been cut to
their proper line and grade in conformance with Sections 23.24.450 through 23.24.500.
All building pad sizes, elevations, drainage and berming have been completed in
substantial compliance with the approved plans and any approved revision thereto.
The pad elevation of Buildings'D', 'E', 'F', and 'G' were field surveyed and verified to be
within 0.1 feet of the design pad elevations as shown on approved Grading Plan No.
5003 -G.
An "As- Built" grading plan has been completed by me or under my direction and has
been suta2Ltted to the City for review and approval.
(Signature)
NAME
C '
3l5 I �
RCE #36190
�Q�pFESSIpN
.�. No 36190 ^�
cc A
1 Exp. 6/30100
OF CAV
2187 NEWCASTLE AVENUE • SUITE 103 • CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CA 92007
(760) 436 -8500 • FAX (760) 436 -8603
ENGINEERING, INC.
August 5, 2003
CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERING, INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
M%Y..RSIDE.CA
VENTURA. CA
TRACY, CA
LANCASTER CA
SACRAMENTO.CA
N.PA1.55SPRIN'GS.CA
2616 Vlueyerd Ave.
190 E. PH.M.tid C1.
1665 PeAlk Ave.
262 W. Leith
621" 1N0 SL W.
3621 MedW. Are.
19020 N. Iudlen Ave.
Suit, G
S.11, 71
Suite 105
Suite F
Udth
Su1M 22
Suite 2 -K
Frondido.('A 92029
C.,.ue.CA91719
Oeuerd, CA 93033
Try, CA 95376
LueuM, CA 935M
N. HiZhhnd,. CA 95660 N. Put. Spd.,, CA 92258
(760)7664955
(909)371 -1890
(11")6 "6675
(209)839 -28N
("1)726-9676
(916)3314030
(760)329.0077
17691 766-98" FAX
1909) 371 -21" FAX
(00514W"16 FAX
(10i 0 }205 FAX
("1) 726 W" FAX
(916) 331407 FAX
0"1320-1096 FAX
City of Encinitas
Engineering Services Permits
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
CTE Project No. 10 -6379S
Subject: Grading: Pad Certifications for Project #99-113
MVP /CDP/EIA
City of Encinitas Grading Plan 5003 -G
Reference: Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard
Encinitas, California
Gentlemen:
This is to certify the grading of lots 1, 2, and 3 under Grading Permit 5003 -G has been performed
insubstantial conformance with the approved Grading Plan, surveyed on July 30, 2003
Lot No. Pad Eley p,!r Plan
# 1 285.80
#2 285.80
#3 286.30
Pad Elev. per field measurement
285.78
285.82
286.25
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTION TE. TIN & ENGINEERING, INC.
("61,M QPpF ES S/ pN w
'god Ballard, RICE #43345 Wo ,Eru.e�, �t_ Robert Service. LS 456
Principal Engineer
No. C 0477451 T
m
Exo.O FA
Chief of Survey
ROBERT BRICE
s�FRvi�c�E��,,��
�P N2:&�—
GEOTECHNICAL 9 ENVIRONMENTAL 9 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING 9 CIVIL ENGINEERING 9 SURVEYING
ENGINEERING, INC.
July 31, 2003
CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERING, INC.
SAT DIEGO. CA
RIVERSIDE, CA
VENTURA,CA
TRACY. CA
2414 Vineyard Ave.
490 F. PrinceWnd CL
INS Pultk Ave.
242 W. Lnmh
Suite G
Su to 7
st to l05
Suite F
Euondid9, CA 92029
C..tt, CA 91719
0.td, CA 93033
Tnry, CA 95376
(7")7464955
(909)371 -18%
(805)466-6475
(209)839 -2590
(760) 7469806 FAX
(909) 371-2165 FAX
(505) 4869016 FAX
(209) 539 -2595 FAX
Attention: Mr. Robert Taylor
Catholic Diocese of San Diego
C/o Hyndman & Hyndman
2611 S. Coast Highway 101, Suite 200
Cardiff, California 92007
LANCASTER, CA
SACRAMENTO,CA
N.PALMSPRINGS,CA
42156 IM St. W.
3628 MA.. Ave.
19020 N. Indbn Are.
Unit it
State 22
S9Re 2-K
Lmeuter,CA93536
N. flighlnnde, CA 95660 N. Pn1u, Sprinp, CA 92258
(661)726 %76
(916)3314030
(760) 32946"
(661) 7260246 FAX
(916) 3314037 FAX
(760) 32848% FAX
CTE Project No. 10 -6379T
Subject: Report for Testing of Compacted Fill for Building Pads A, B, and C
St. John Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
City of Encinitas Grading Plan No.: 5003 -G
Reference: Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions
Saint John's School, 1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
CTE, Inc. Job No. 10 -5750, dated August 22, 2002
Mr. Taylor:
The attached report updates and documents our observations and tests performed on fill materials to
date for the referenced project. This is in accordance with the recommendations provided in the
referenced Geotechnical Investigation.
The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
ON TESTING &ENGINEERING, INC.
Dan T. Math, PE
Senior Engineer
GEOTECHNICAL 9 ENVIRONMENTAL* CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING -CIVIL ENGINEERING -SURVEYING
ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERING, INC.
SANDIEGO,CA
RIVERSEDE, CA
VENTURA. CA
TRACV.CA
LANCASTER CA
SACRAMENTO,CA
N.PALMSPRINGS,CA
1616 VVey6N Ave.
AO E. Pr1ocAnd CL
1669P. Ave.
212WLW
621 %1016 SL W.
36U MWbw Ave.
19F20 N. Imii. Ave.
Sub, G
Salle 7
SaIM 19
Sake F
Us k
SaD, 22
Sege 2 -K
Exmdide, CA 92029
Ceram, CA 91719
Oaurd, CA 93033
Tracy, CA 95376
L• ,curler, CA 93931
N. R1566mdc, CA 9%" N. Palm Sprlep, CA 92255
1769176 "5
(909)371 -IM
(US)6 75
(209)979-290
(6611 7 26-9676
(916)331f M
(760)3294677
176017149506 FAX
(959) 371 -2160 FAX
(MS) 656-9016 FAX
(29) 939-295 FAX
(661) 726-0266 FAX
(9161331-6037 FAX
(760) 32948% FAX
REPORT FOR TESTING OF COMPACTED FILL FOR BUILDING PADS A, B, AND C
ST. JOHN PHASE II
1003 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
CITY OF ENCINITAS GRADING PLAN NO. 5003 -G
PREPARED FOR:
ATTENTION: ROBERT TAYLOR
CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO
C/O HYNDMAN & HYNDMAN
2611 S. COAST HIGHWAY 101, SUITE 200
CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA 92007
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G
ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029
CTE PROJECT NO. 10 -6379T
JULY 31, 2003
GEOTECHNICAL a ENVIRONMENTAL* CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING • CIVIL ENGINEERING -SURVEYING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................... ..............................1
2.0 FILL PLACEMENT .................................................................................... ..............................1
3.0 TESTING ..................................................................................................... ..............................1
4.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PADS ........................................................ ..............................2
5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION ................................ ..............................2
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... ..............................2
6.1 Foundations and Slab Recommendat ions ........................................ ..............................2
6.2 Shallow Foundat ions ........................................................................ ..............................3
6.3 Foundation Settlement ..................................................................... ..............................3
6.4 Foundation Setback .......................................................................... ..............................3
6.5 Lateral Load Resistance ................................................................... ..............................4
6.6 Concrete Slab -On- Grade .................................................................. ..............................4
6.7 Walls Below Grade .......................................................................... ..............................5
7.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................ ..............................6
TABLES
TABLEI
TABLE II
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
LABORATORY TEST DATA
SITE INDEX MAP
COMPACTION LOCATION MAP
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 1
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
1.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
St. John's School is on the south side of Encinitas Boulevard, approximately Ph miles east of
Interstate Highway 5. The site elevation is approximately 280 feet above mean sea level (msl).
Figure 1 is a map showing the general site location.
2.0 FILL PLACEMENT
Compacted fill was placed during recent grading to prepare the building pads for the construction of
the proposed structures. Fill material was derived from on site sources. Fill was generally placed in
uniform compacted lifts at above optimum moisture content. Grading was performed using standard
heavy -duty construction equipment.
3.0 TESTING
Testing was performed to supplement field observations in promoting compliance with the
applicable project requirements. Field - testing of the compacted fill material was conducted in
accordance with ASTM D2922 and D3017 (nuclear method). Results of the field - testing indicate
that fill materials were compacted to the appropriate minimum percentage (90%a) of the laboratory
maximum dry density as determined by test method ASTM D -1557.
Tabulated results of the field compaction testing performed are provided in the attached Table I,
"Compaction Test Summary." Laboratory determination of the reference compaction values for the
fill materials is provided in Table II, "Laboratory Test Results." Figure 2 attached shows the
approximate location of the compaction tests performed in the building pad areas.
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 2
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
4.0 TREATMENT OF BUILDING PADS
To prepare the building pad, materials were over- excavated to a minimum depth of three feet below
the bottom of all proposed foundations and to competent underlying materials and replaced as
properly compacted fill. These overexcavations extended a minimum of five feet laterally beyond
the building limits. Exposed subgrades were scarified and moisture conditioned before compaction.
5.0 ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
All additional grading and backfilling should be observed and tested to assure conformance with
recommendations presented herein and in the approved project soils report
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We conclude that the soil engineering and engineering geologic aspects of the grading are in
compliance with the approved geotechnical report and the grading plan (City of Encinitas grading
plan No. 5003 -G). Therefore the proposed building pads are suitable for support of the proposed
improvements and the site is considered adequate for its intended use.
Proposed improvements shall be design and constructed in accordance with the recommendations of
the referenced approved soils report, which have been restated in the subsequent sections of this
report. The recommendations presented herein generally remain unchanged from the original
approved soils report.
6.1 Foundations and Slab Recommendations
The proposed project includes the construction of building improvements upon engineered fill soils.
It is anticipated that proposed structure footings will be founded on engineered fill using shallow
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 3
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
spread and continuous footings. To eliminate the potential for differential settlements of these lightly
loaded structures, building foundations should bear entirely on engineered fills designed as indicated
herein.
6.2 Shallow Foundations
Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings should
not straddle cut/fill interfaces. We anticipate that all building footings will be founded entirely in
properly recompacted fills. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable
bearing values of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for minimum 18 -inch deep footings founded in
properly recompacted fill materials. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for
short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces.
Footings should be at least 15 inches wide and installed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent
subgrade elevation. Footing reinforcement for continuous and isolated foundations shall be designed
and placed as per the project structural engineer.
6.3 Foundation Settlement
The maximum post - construction compression settlement is expected to be on the order of 1.0 inch.
Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inches
across the building.
6.4 Foundation Setback
Footings for structures should be designed such that the minimum horizontal distance from the face
of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of seven feet. In addition, footings
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 4
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
should bear beneath an imaginary 1:1 plane extended up from the nearest bottom edge of adjacent
trenches and/or excavations. Footings may be deepened or backfilled with a two -sack slurry in order
to meet this requirement.
6.5 Lateral Load Resistance
The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed
in engineered fill materials may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional
resistance equals the coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value
of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1,250 pounds per square
foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional
resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two - thirds of
the total allowable resistance.
6.6 Concrete Slab -On -Grade
Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, but be a minimum of
five inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #4 reinforcing bars placed on 24-
inch centers, each way at mid -slab height. If elastic design is used, a modulus of subgrade reaction
of 150 pci should be used.
In moisture sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten -mil visqueen placed near mid- height of a
four -inch layer of compacted aggregate base (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) should be installed.
Slab areas subject to heavy loads or vehicular traffic may require increased thickness and
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 5
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
reinforcement. This office should be contacted to provide additional recommendations where actual
service conditions warrant further analysis.
6.7 Walls Below Grade
For the design of walls below grade where the surface of the backfill is level, it may be assumed that
the soils will exert an active lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of 35
pcf. The active pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the
wall height. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid
pressure of 55 pcf should be used, based on at -rest soil conditions. The recommended equivalent
fluid pressures should be increased by 20 pcf for walls retaining soils inclined at 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical) or less. Walls below the water level are not anticipated for the subject site.
In addition to the recommended earth pressure, subterranean structure walls adjacent to the streets or
other traffic loads should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf. This is the
result of an assumed 300 -psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is
kept back at least 10 feet from the subject walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.
Consideration should be given to waterproofing the subterranean structure walls to reduce moisture
infiltration.
The above values assume non - expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should be
taken to prevent a moisture buildup behind all walls below grade. Drainage measures should include
free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. Drains should discharge to an appropriate
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 6
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
offsite location. The project architect should evaluate the necessity of waterproofing or a relatively
flat composite drain system along the exterior of any basement walls.
We recommend that walls below grade he backfilled with soils having an expansion index of 20 or
less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 sloping plane, extended back from
the base of the wall. Wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction,
based on ASTM D1557 -91. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate
structural strength. Heavy compactors, which could cause distress to walls, should not be used
within three feet of the face of wall.
7.0 LIMITATIONS
As limited by the scope of the services that we agreed to perform, our opinions presented herein are
based on our observations, test results, and understanding of the proposed site development. Our
service was performed according to the currently accepted standard of practice and in a way that
provides a reasonable measure of the compliance of the grading operations with the job
requirements. No warranty, express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the performance
of the project in any respect. Submittal of this report should not be construed as relieving the
grading contractor of his responsibility to comply with the project requirements.
Report of Testing of Compacted Fill For Building Pads A, B, and C Page 7
St Johns Phase II
1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
July 31, 2003 CTE Job No. 10 -6379T
The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding testing
conducted, observations made during construction or recommendations presented herein, please do
not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
CO ON TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
an .Math, RCE#61013 /;wpFEad�o
Senior Engineer
,emu, ri` No. ti7 �s
c slots = o
1Y /at /04 is
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Name: St John Phase B
Job Address: 1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
Job No. 10 -6379T
Date: 728/2003
Date
Tcsq
No.
Location
(See map)
Elevation
Feet
Density
pcf
Moisture
Content
% Dry
Weight
Relative
Compaction
%
Soil
Type
7212003
1
See map
283.0
111.0
12.3
94%
1
7212003
2
See map
281.0
108.4
12.8
92%
1
7212003
3
See map
284.0
109.9
13.0
93%
1
7212003
4
See map
282.0
105.9
13.0
90%
1
7212003
5
See map
285.0
108.1
15.3
92%
1
7212003
6
See map
285.0
108.6
12.8
92%
1
7212003
7
See map
283.0
110.2
13.9
93%
1
7232003
8
See map
282.5
113.6
13.0
90%
2
7232003
9
1 See map
284.0
111.2
12.7
94%
1
7232003
10
ISee m
281.5
116.5
11.9
92%
2
7232003
1 I
ISee map
281.0
122.3
9.5
97%
2
7242003
12
ISee map
281.5
121.5
11.6
96%
2
7242003
13
1 See map
281.0
113.9
13.0
97%
1
7242003
14
ISec map
281.0
121.3
10.0
96%
2
7242003
15
See map
281.0
119.0
10.3
94%
2
7242003
16
See map
281.0
112.2
13.1
95%
1
7242003
17
See map
281.0
115.7
12.6
98%
1
7242003
18
See map
283.0
122.1
11.4
97%
2
7242003
19
See map
282.5
120.3
9.8
95%
2
7242003
20
See map
282.0
119.6
11.8
95%
2
7242003
21
See map
282.0
120.2
10.9
95%
2
7242003
22
See map
283.5
120.1
11.7
95%
2
7242003
23
See map
283.5
120.8
10.8
95%
2
7242003
24
See map
285.0
110.0
13.1
93%
1
7252003
25
See map
284.0
116.8
11.3
92%
2
7252003
26
See map
284.0
118.8
12.2
94%
2
7252003
27
See map
284.0
114.9
12.2
91%
2
7252003
28
See map
284.0
113.6
12.8
90%
2
7252003
29
See map
285.0
109.5
13.1
93%
1
7252003
30
See map
285.0
111.0
13.2
94%
1
7252003
31
See map
285.0
109.5
12.8
93%
1
7252003
32
See map
285.0
109.3
13.0
93%
1
7252003
33
See map
285.0
108.4
13.1
92%
1
71252003
34
See map
286.0
108.0
12.9
92%
1
725!2003
35
See map
286.0
107.9
13.1
91%
1
7252003
36
See map
286.0
114.7
13.0
97%
1
7292003
37
See map
285.8
IWO
13.1
90%
1
7292003
38
See map
285.8
111.9
13.4
95%
1
'" TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE D
LABORATORY TEST DATA
Job Name: St John Phase H
Job No. 10 -6379T
Job Address: 1003 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, Califomia
Date 7/28/2003
Maximum
Optimum
Sample No.
Dry Density
Moisture
Soil
pcf
Content
Description
rAowt
118.0 13.2 Brown Silty SAND
126.5 11.0 Gray brown silty SAND w /clay
TOPOI map panted on 08/09/02 from "California, tpo" and "UnOMed.tpg"
117 °18.000' W 117 °17.000' W 117. 16.000' W WGS84117 °15.000' W
i
z
l - r -
1` x
m
•
,.-
-
t
vm; •:M .. a
y
i
r/
l .
Ate
i
�
� ` A
g
j y.. 1 a
�"• -
SITE
o
m
....��_.,
+r•7e suns '�'{ `l6 � • `: 4 i A
• • i I P �J
_
�
..
1 �
M 4 1 -,
�•
.�
Cardiff- by -thc Sca
'�
z
o
(C"ff)
117-18,000' W 117 °17.000' W
9
117 °16.000' W` WGS84 117-15.000'W
i Mt
TNf IMN
V1r ace",
�. mONRPt
Pslra6.TOfq mm6o wuam..r rvhMV f�.,rbPa emPA
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
p
CFAIriI rI ANUCONMUCI"P GQJFt]M TSSfOiG
ANU P15P9CIAON
tN01MfYPIXO.Mf
:414V01EYA AV6MA6 G FSCO MCAT" !!60)7464966
SITE INDEX MAP
10 6379r
40 FOOT CONTOUR ELEVATIONS
PROPOSED ADDITIONS
SAINT JOHN'S CHURCH
AS SHOWN
F.NCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
7�,
OAO/IU3
l
I
Y
1 /
/ 0 O O 0
i O PROPOSED BUILDING Q
rn
5
APPROXIMATE COMPACTION
TEST LOCATION
EXISTING
COURTYARD
SCALE
0 25 50Peet
L
33
O
b
00
O�
p
p
VO
S31
ll
e 1.
3B
4J O
t O
19
O
37
O
U29 j
/
/
/
/
/
,
ti
/
,
,
,
/ A
44
w�
CM 1Ga NO
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. COMPACTION LOCATION MAP �as�so
�jy PROPOSED 'S CHURCH GE AS SHOWN
� cEmECtiwlcAL.�w cor+sTxDCnau ENGwEnIwG rFSru9c AND wsEECnor+ SAINT JOHN'S CHURCN
UWVNEYA DAVFNUEMG ESCGDMCA.9=917�7J 55 ENCI ITAS.CALIFORNIA DATE 07/03 2
March 11. 1998
CONOIRUCTION STING & ENGINEERING, INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
2414 Vinryud Ave.
Sw12 G
Eseondido, CA 92029
(760) '464955
(760) 7469806 rut
RIVERSIDE, CA
490 E PnwWW Ct.
Suite 7
Caroni CA 91719
(909) 3711890
(909) 371 -2168 tez
Via FAX to 760/753 -3301
St. John's Catholic Church
C/o Ron Brockhoff- Harrison Company
4401 Manchester Avenue, Ste. 205
Encinitas, CA 92024
VENTURA,CA
1645 Pxufir Ave
Suite 105
On" G 93033
(805) 4866475
(805) 48&9016 FAX
Subject: Summary of Compaction Testing and Observation
St. John's Church Proposed Utilities for Buildings A -G
1001 Encinitas Boulevard
Encinitas, CA
TRACY, CA
392 W. larch Rd.
Suite 19
Trwy, CA 95376
(209) 839,2890
809) 839,2895 FAx
LANCASTER CA
42156 10th St. W
Unit K
Lancaster, 0193534
(805) 7269676
(805) 7269676 FAx
CTE Job No. 10 -1808
Reference: Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Classroom Facilities
St. John's School Encinitas, CA
Prepared by Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. Dated November 25, 1996
Mr. Brockhoff:
Pursuant to your request, we have provided compaction testing and observation during the recent utility
trench backfill for the proposed classroom buildings A -G. The results of our testing indicate that
materials were compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. Observation indicates that
the grading was performed in substantial conformance with preliminary geotechnical recommendations.
A final As- Graded report will be submitted following completion of all site grading.
If you have any questions regarding these recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
X dn TRUCT'ON T TIN
llar , G. E. 2173
Geotechnical Engineering Manager
RDB ,'JL /jl
cc: Job File
ENGINEERING, INC.
No. 2173
Exp. 8l3t1M
GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Name: ST. JOHN'S CHURCH
Job Address: ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Job No. 10 -1808
Date: 3/11198
Date
Test
No.
Location
(See map)
Elevation
Feet
Density
pcf
Moisture
Content
% Dry
Weight
Relative
Compaction
%
Soil
Type
10/27/97
1
FILL SLOPE
256.0
117.5
14.5
91%
1
10/28197
2
FILL SLOPE
257.0
117.1
13.7
90%
1
10/29/97
3
FILL SLOPE
258.0
118.4
10.6
91%
1
10129/97
4
FILL SLOPE
259.0
118.8
12.5
92%
1
10/29/97
5
FILL SLOPE
260.0
117.9
11.8
91%
1
10/29/97
6
FILL SLOPE
261.0
118.3
12.1
91%
1
10129/97
7
FILL SLOPE
259.0
116.8
11.4
900/0
1
10129/97
8
FILL SLOPE
259.5
1 17.7
12.3
91%
1
10/30/97
9
FILL SLOPE
258.5
118.5
10.6
92%
1
10/30/97
10
FILL SLOPE
260.0
1 17.8
11.4
91%
1
10/30/97
11
FILL SLOPE
261.5
1 17.3
10.9
91%
1
10/30/97
12
FILL SLOPE
262.0
120.3
9.9
93%
1
10/30/97
13
FILL SLOPE
259.5
118.1
10.3
91%
1
10/30/97
14
FILL SLOPE
260.0
119.2
11.1
92%
1
10/30/97
15
FILL SLOPE
260.5
117.9
12.4
91%
1
10/30/97
16
FILL SLOPE
261.0
1 18.5
10.5
92%
1
10/30/97
17
FILL SLOPE
260.5
119.6
10.0
92%
1
10/31/97
18
FILL SLOPE
261.0
114.4
12.4
92%
2
10/31/97
19
FILL SLOPE
261.5
1 15.3
11.8
93%
2
10/31/97
20
FILL SLOPE
262.0
112.5
13.1
91%
2
10/31/97
21
FILL SLOPE
263.0
1 15.7
11.5
93%
2
10/31/97
22
FILL SLOPE
263.5
1 13.9
12.7
92%
2
11/10/97
23
BLDG. G
283.5
1 12.5
10.4
93%
3
11/10/97
24
BLDG. G
284.0
110.9
11.3
92%
3
11/10/97
25
BLDG. G
285.0
111.4
10.9
92%
3
11/10/97
26
BLDG. G
285.0
111.8
11.7
93%
3
11/12/97
27
BLDG. G
285.0
1 l 1.6
12.9
93%
3
11/12/97
28
BLDG. G
286.0
110.5
13.1
92%
3
11/12/97
29
BLDG. G
286.5
112.2
11.8
93%
3
11/12/97
30
BLDG. G
286.5
111.9
12.5
93%
3
11/12/97
31
BLDG. E
284.5
119.3
10.4
96%
2
11/12/97
32
BLDG. E
284.5
121.0
10.9
98%
2
11/13/97
33
BLDG. E
285.0
111.6
13.3
93%
3
11/13/97
34
BLDG. E
285.0
112.5
12.9
93%
3
11113/97
35
BLDG. E
286.0
113.1
11.8
94%
3
11/13/97
36
BLDG. E
286.0
110.8
12.5
92%
3
11113/97
37
BLDG. E
285.5
120.1
10.1
93%
1
11/13/97
38
BLDG. E
286.0
110.0
13.4
91%
3
11/14'97
32
BLDG. D
283.5
120.7
10.3
93%
1
11/14/97
40
BLDG
283.5
119.1
9.9
92%
1
11/14/97
4l
BLDG. E
286.5
111.9
11.9
93%
3
11/14/97
42
BLDG. E
287.0
109.4
13.2
91%
3
I I/l4/97
43
BLDG. D
284.5
110.4
12.4
92%
3
'" TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Name: ST. JOHN'S CHURCH
Job Address: ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Job No. 10 -1808
Date: 3/11/98
Date
Test
No.
Location
(See map)
Elevation
Feet
Density
pcf
Moisture
Content
% Dry
Weight
Relative
Compaction
%
Soil
Type
11/14/97
44
BLDG.D
285.0
110.7
12.7
92%
3
11/17/97
45
BLDG. D
285.5
112.4
11.9
93%
3
11/17/97
46
BLDG. D
286.0
109.8
13.3
91%
3
11/17/97
47
BLDG. D
286.5
110.7
12.6
92%
3
11/17/97
48
BLDG. D
287.0
111.3
12.3
92%
3
11/18/97
49
BLDG. D
287.0
111.5
12.4
93%
3
11/18/97
50
BLDG. E
287.0
110.6
12.8
92%
3
11/19/97
51
BLDG. C
282.5
119.2
12.4
92%
1
11/19/97
52
BLDG. C
282.5
120.8
11.6
93%
1
1 1/19/97
53
BLDG. C
282.5
120.3
12.9
93%
1
11/19/97
54
BLDG. C
282.5
118.5
13.2
92%
1
11/20/97
55
BLDG. C
283.5
111.8
11.9
93%
3
11/20/97
56
BLDG. C
283.5
108.9
13.1
90%
3
11/20/97
57
BLDG. C
284.5
109.5
12.6
91%
3
11/20/97
58
BLDG. C
284.0
110.4
12.3
92%
3
11/20/97
59
BLDG. C
285.0
110.0
13.4
91%
3
11/20/97
60
BLDG. C
282.5
118.5
11.6
92%
1
11/20/97
61
BLDG. C
282.5
117.8
13.0
91%
1
11/20/97
62
BLDG. C
282.5
1 18.1
12.5
91%
1
11/21/97
63
BLDG. B
283.5
113.0
13.3
94%
3
11/21/97
64
BLDG. B
284.5
110.3
11.9
92%
3
11/21/97
65
BLDG. A
283.3
119.9
12.8
93%
1
11/21/97
66
BLDG. A
283.3
120.6
11.7
93%
1
11/21/97
67
BLDG. A
284.0
112.4
12.5
93%
3
11/21/97
68
BLDG. A
285.0
111.7
13.0
93%
3
11/24/97
69
BLDG. C
285.8
111.3
12.3
92%
3
11/24/97
70
BLDG. C
285.8
112.4
11.7
93%
3
11/24/97
71
BLDG. G
287.0
1 10.2
13.4
91%
3
11/24/97
72
BLDG. E
287.0
l I LO
12.7
92%
3
11/24/97
73
BLDG. E
287.5
111.5
11.9
93%
3
11/24/97
74
BLDG. D
286.5
109.7
13.0
91%
3
11/24/97
75 JBLDG.
C
287.0
1 10.3
12.2
92%
3
11/25/97
76
BLDG. E
288.5
109.7
12.4
91%
3
11/25/97
77
BLDG. E
287.5
1 11.6
11.6
93%
3
11/25/97
78
BLDG. D
286.5
108.8
13.5
90%
3
11/25/97
79
BLDG. B
285.0
110.1
13.0
91%
3
11/25/97
80
BLDG. B
285.5
110.4
11.8
92%
3
11/25/97
81
BLDG. A
285.5
111.3
12.7
92%
3
11/25/97
82
BLDG. A
286.0
109.3
12.1
91%
3
1/9/98
83
STORM DRAIN
285.0
118.0
10.6
91%
l
1/9/98
84
STORM DRAIN
286.0
118.6
11.2
92%
l
1/9/98
85
STORM DRAIN
285.0
120.2
9.8
93%
1
1/9/98
86
1 STORM DRAIN
284.0
118.7
11.5
92%
1
"TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Name: ST. JOHN'S CHURCH
Job Address: ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Job No. 10 -1808
Date: 3/11/98
Date
Test
No.
Location
(See map)
Elevation
Feet
Density
pcf
Moisture
Content
ova Dry
Weight
Relative
Compaction
ova
Soil
Type
1/9/98
87
STORM DRAIN
285.0
119.0
10.5
92%
I
1/9/98
88
STORM DRAIN
286.5
117.5
12.0
91%
1
1/9/98
89
SEWER LINE
285.0
117.9
10.1
91%
1
1/9/98
1 90
ISEWERLINE
286.5
118.3
1 11.7
1 91%
1
1/9/98
1 91
1 SEWER LINE
286.0
119.3
1 10.0
1 92%
1
TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE 11
LABORATORY TEST DATA
Job Name: ST. JOHN'S CHURCH
Job No. 10 -1808
Job Address: ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Date 3/11/98
Maximum
Optimum
Sample No.
Dry Density
Moisture
Soil
pcf
Content
Description
°I°Wt
129.5 9.5 Brown silty SAND
124.0 11.5 Brown sandy CLAY
120.5 9.5 Brown sandy CLAY
SOWARDS AND [
March 5, 1998
City of Encinitas
Engineering Department
505 S. Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
OWN ENGINEERI
Re: Pad Verification for St. John's Catholic Church, 1001 Encinitas Boulevard
Grading Plan No. 5003 -G
Dear Sir:
Our office field surveyed the grading in conjunction with the above referenced project
on March 5, 1998. We have verified that the pad grades are within 0.1 feet of the
elevations shown on City of Encinitas approved Grading Plan No. 5003 -G.
Feel free to contact this office if you have any questions after reviewing this letter.
Sincerely,
Randy R. Brown
LS 5406 c�WAND
cc: Ron Brockhoff ExNo.
9/30 5406 )�L A
960692. Nr
2187 NEWCASTLE AVENUE • SUITE 103 • CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CA 92007
(760) 436 -8500 • FAX (760) 436 -8603
CONSPRUCTION rRSTING &ENGINEERING, INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
RIVERSIDE, CA
2414 Vineyard Ave.
490 E Prinalatd Q.
Suite c
suite 7
Exmtdidq CA 92029
Carona, CA 91719
(760) 7464955
(9(09) 371 -1890
(760) 7469806 FAx
(909) 3712168 FAx
January 8, -7
Via FAX to 760/753 -3301
St. John's Catholic Church
c/o Ron Brockhoff- Harrison Company
4401 Manchester Avenue, Ste. 205
Encinitas, CA 92024
VENTURA, CA
TRACY,CA
I.ANCASr6R, CA
1645 Pacific Ave
392 A. lards 8d
42156 loth St W.
suite 105
MW 19
unit K
Oxnard, CA 93033
Tracy, CA 95376
Lancaster, G 93534
(805) 4866475
(209) 8392898
(805)7M9676
(805) 4869016 FAx
(209) 839-2895 FAx
(805) 7269676 in
Subject: Summary of Compaction Testing and Observation
St. John's Church Proposed Buildings A -G
1001 Encinitas Boulevard
Encinitas, CA
C�II F �Id7 �►bII<GII F:i�il
Reference: Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Classroom Facilities
St. John's School Encinitas, CA
Prepared by Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. Dated November 25, 1996
Mr. Brockhoff-
Pursuant to your request, we have providcl; compaction testing and observation during recent fine grading
for proposed classroom buildings A -G. The results of our testing indicate that materials were compacted
to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. Observation indicates that the grading was performed
in substantial conformance with preliminary geotechnical recommendations. Based on as- graded
conditions, building pads are founded on properly recompacted fill or competent formational material and
are considered suitable for support of the recommended bearing value provided foundation
recommendations are implemented. A final As- Graded report will be submitted following completion
of all site grading.
If you have any questions regarding these recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTR CTION T STIN & ENGINEERING,
oYnD. Va ar , G. E. 2173
Geotechnical Engineering Manager
RDB /JL /jl
cc: Job File
INC.
GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSTRUCTION TESTING& ENGINEERAG, INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
RIVERSIDE, CA
VENTURA, CA
TRACY, CA
LANCASTER, CA
SACRAMENTO, CA
N. PALM SPRINGS, CA
2414 Vlne,med Ave.
490 E. Pr celand Cl.
1445 PaviM Ave.
242 N. Larch
42156 10th R. M'.
36211 Madison Ave.
19020N. Indian Ave.
Salle G
Suite 7
Sexier 105
S.H. F
Unit it
Smite 22
Smite 2 -K
Escandido, ('A 92029 CoroOa, CA 91719
Oxnard, CA 93033
Tracy, CA 95376
Lancaster. CA 93534
N. Righbnda, CA 95660 N. Palm S,H.M CA 922M
(760)746-1955
19(9) 371 -1990
(90-1 49 75
1209) 9394X90
(661) 726 -9676
19161 33 1 6030
(760) 3294677
(760) 746-9906 FAX
(909) 371 -2168 FAX
(005) 466-9016 FAX
1209) X.19 -2995 FAX
1661) 726-0246 FAX
(916) 3316037 FAX
(76%3294996 FAX
UPDATED PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
PROPOSED CLASS ROOM FACILITY ADDITIONS
SAINT JOHN'S SCHOOL
1001 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
ST. JOHN'S SCHOOL
c/o HYNDMAN & HYNDMAN
2611 SOUTH HIGHWAY 101, STE. 201
CARDIFF, CA 92007
4AA7\ Ri l 7:ii
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G
ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029
CTF. JOB NO. 10 -5750
AUGUST 22, 2002
GEOTECHNICAL 9 ENVIRONMENTAL 9 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING 9 CIVIL ENGINEERING • SURVEYING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section page
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... ..............................1
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ...................................... ..............................2
2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................... ..............................2 .
2.2 Scope of Services ............................................................................. ..............................2
3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................. ..............................2
3.1 Site Location and Description .......................................................... ..............................2
3.2 Proposed Const ruction ..................................................................... ..............................3
3.3 Previous Work at Site and Area ....................................................... ..............................3
4.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ..................................... ..............................3
4.1 Field Investigations .......................................................................... ..............................3
4.2 Laboratory Investigation .................................................................. ..............................3
5.0 GEOLOGY .................................................................................................. ..............................4
5.1 General Physiographic Setting ......................................................... ..............................4
5.2 Geologic Conditions ........................................................................ ..............................4
5.2.1 Fills ......................................................................................... ..............................4
5.2.2 Eocene Toney Sandstone ........................................................ ..............................5
5.3 Groundwater Conditions .................................................................. ..............................5
5.4 Geologic Hazards ............................................................................. ..............................5
5.4.1 Local and Regional Faulting .......................... ............................... ......5
..................
5.4.2 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients ................ ..............................6
5.4.3 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation ............................................ ..............................6
5.4.4 Landsliding or Rocksl iding ..................................................... ..............................7
5.4.5 Compressible and Expansive Soils ......................................... ..............................7
5.4.6 Liquefaction Eval uation .......................................................... ..............................7
5.4.7 Seismic Settlement Evaluation ............................................... ..............................7
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... ..............................8
7.1 General ............................................................................................. ..............................8
7.2 Site Preparation ................................................................................ ..............................8
7.2.1 General .................................................................................... ..............................8
7.2.2 Site Excavations ...................................................................... ..............................9
7.2.3 Fill Placement and Compaction ............................................. .............................10
7.2.4 Fill Materials .......................................................................... .............................10
7.3 Temporary Construction Sl opes ..................................................... ..............................1 l
7.4 Foundations and Slab Recommendations ....................................... .............................12
7.4.1 General ................................................................................... .............................12
7.4.2 Shallow Spread Foundations .................................................. .............................12
F110.5750\Rpt_Gmcchnica1dac
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
7.4.3 Concrete Slabs -On- Grade ....................
7.5 Walls Below Grade ........ ...............................
7.6 Reactive Soils ................. ...............................
7.7 Plan Review ................... ...............................
8.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION ...................
FIGURES
Page
..........14
..........15
............................... .............................16
.............................. .............................16
.............................. .............................16
FIGURE 1 INDEX MAP
FIGURE 2 EXPLORATION MAP
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED
APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS
APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS
FA I0.575URpLGxtxhnicaLdm
• Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 1
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Our investigations were performed to provide site - specific geotechnical information for the
construction of the proposed classroom additions at the St. John's School site in the City of
Encinitas, California. The proposed development is feasible from ageotechnical viewpoint provided
that recommendations in our report are implemented.
Based on our review, soils beneath proposed Building B consist of approximately four feet of
compacted heterogeneous fill covering native Eocene Torrey Sandstone. Fill thickness appears to
increase toward the west. Areas beneath proposed Buildings A and B appear to consist of compacted
fills to a maximum of approximately 25 feet (above the westerly slope descending to the existing
playing field).
Groundwater was not encountered at this site. However, during seasonal changes in conditions areas
of local saturation may be encountered. From a review of preliminary project plans, we do not
anticipate that groundwater will affect the proposed development.
In general, the results of our review indicate that the proposed project can be constructed as planned
provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. Based on the geologic findings
and referenced review no active surface faults are known to exist at the site.
FA 0- 5750\Rpt_GcoW hnicaLdm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 2
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1 Introduction
Construction Testing and Engineering, Incorporated ( "CTE ") has prepared this geotechnical
engineering report for the proposed classroom additions at St. John's School, Encinitas, California.
Figure 1 is a map showing the general location of the site.
2.2 Scope of Services
Our scope of services included:
• Review of readily available geologic reports pertinent to the site and adjacent areas (Appendix A
contains a list of cited references).
• Explorations to determine subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed
construction.
• Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to provide data to evaluate the geotechnical
design characteristics of the site foundation soils.
• Definition of the general geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the site.
• Preparation of the report detailing the investigation performed and providing conclusions and
geotechnical engineering recommendations for design and construction.
3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 Site Location and Description
St. John's School is approximately 1% miles east of Interstate Highway 5. Land uses near the
existing church and school site are mixed residential and retail. Currently, the site consists of four
existing buildings at the east, parking and drive area at the north, central courtyard area, and lower
playing fields to the west. Currently, an existing playground area and two relocatable classroom
buildings occupy the proposed building site.
FA 10.5751TRp1_G m(=hnlcaldw
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 3
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint john's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
Bounding the site to the north is Encinitas Boulevard. Residential apartments occupy land across
Encinitas Boulevard. An approximately 25 -foot high slope bounds the west and southwest sides of
the site with existing playing fields at the toe of slope.
3.2 Proposed Construction
We understand that the proposed additions will include three new, permanent classroom buildings.
These structures will be of conventional masonry construction.
3.3 Previous Work at Site and Area
The general site area was previously mass graded during 1985 and 1988 as per compaction reports
dated October 11, 1985 and July 21, 1988 by Geotechnical Exploration Inc. Portions of the site were
also mass graded during 1992 (CTE, 1992).
4.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
4.1 Field Investigations
Field explorations on this site, performed August 8, 2002, included site reconnaissance, the
excavation of one test pit and six soil borings. Figure 2 is a map showing the approximate locations
of the explorations conducted by this firm.
4.2 Laboratory Investigation
Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples to evaluate physical properties and
engineering characteristics. These tests were conducted to determine the strength, compressibility,
FA 10.575(Mpt_Geotxhnicai doc
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 4
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint 'ohn's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
and grain -size distribution of the onsite soils. Test method descriptions and laboratory results are
presented in Appendix C.
5.0 GEOLOGY
5.1 General Phvsiographic Setting
Geomorphically, the proposed project site lies within the coastal mesa portion of the San Diego area.
The site, at approximately 280 feet above mean sea level (msl) consists generally of uplifted,
generally flat marine terraces dissected by gullies and ravines. Topographically, the site slopes gently
down to the west.
5.2 Geologic Conditions
Based on geologic observations during recent and previous investigations and grading work (CTE,
1992 and 1996; Geotechnical Explorations, Inc. 1985 and 1990) and mapping by Tan and Kennedy
(1996) surface and near surface soils at the site consist of fills, Quaternary Alluvium, and units of
Eocene Torrey Sandstone.
5.2.1 Fills
Based on a review of previous work at the site, engineered till materials (compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density at near optimum moisture
content) were emplaced directly over native Quaternary Alluvium or Eocene Torrey
Sandstone materials (CTE 1992 and 1996). The depth of the engineered fills apparently
varies depending on location at the site. This most recent investigation suggests a minimum
F: \ 10- 575MRpt_Geotechnical doc
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 5
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
of four feet and a maximum of approximately twenty feet of undocumented fill blanket over
native Torrey Sandstone material.
5.2.2 Eocene Torrey Sandstone
Units of Torrey Sandstone were observed during previous grading activities and in soil
borings and test pits (Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., 1990). These materials consist
generally of dense to very dense, orange -brown to yellowish brown slightly silty or clayey,
fine to medium - grained sandstone (CTE, 1996).
5.3 Groundwater Conditions
No groundwater was encountered during this most recent filed investigation. Although groundwater
levels may fluctuate, ground water is not expected to affect the proposed improvements if proper site
drainage is maintained.
5.4 Geologic Hazards
From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those
caused by violent shaking from earthquake generated ground motion waves. The potential for
damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed structures should be considered
low.
5.4.1 Local and Regional Faultine
Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our explorations, and a review of
appropriate geologic literature, it is our opinion that the site is not on known active fault
traces. According to the California Division of Mines and Geology, a fault is active if it
displays evidence of activity in the last 11,000 years (Hart and Bryant, 1997).
p:\ I0.57501Rpt_CKntechnicnlcim
r Updated Preliminary Geoteclmical Recommend5tions Page 6
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, approximately six kilometers to the west, is the closest known
active fault (Jennings, 1987). Other principal active regional faults include: The Coronado
Banks, San Clemente Fault zones, (about 17 and 53 miles southwest of the site); and, the
Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andres faults (about 27, 52, and 75 miles northeast of the
site).
5.4.2 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients
In accordance with the Uniform Building Code 1997 edition, Volume 2, Figure 16-2, the
referenced site is located within seismic zone 4 and has a seismic zone factor of Z =0.4. The
nearest active fault, the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, is approximately six kilometers to the west
and is considered a Type B seismic source. Based on the distance from the site to the Rose
Canyon Fault Zone, near source factors of Nv =1.3 and Na 1.1 are appropriate. Based on the
shallow subsurface explorations and our knowledge of the area, the site has a soil profile type
Of Sp and seismic coefficients of Cv=0.83 and C,=0.48.
5.4.3 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation
The site is not near any bodies of water that could induce Seiche damage. The potential for
tsunami damage at the site is nonexistent due to the site's distance from the ocean
(approximately 2 miles) and elevation (approximately 280 feet above msl).
FA I0- 575MRpt_Geottxhnicaldm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 7
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
5.4.4 Landsliding or Rocksliding
The potential for landsliding or rocksliding to affect the site is considered remote. Active
landslides or rocksliding were not encountered and have not been mapped in the immediate
area of the site (Tan and Giffen, 1995).
5.4.5 Compressible and Expansive Soils
Based on geologic observation and laboratory testing, soil materials located at the proposed
structure foundation level generally consist of medium dense to dense silty SAND. These
deposits are considered suitable for support of the proposed structure. Further, we anticipate
that any loose fills will be mitigated during construction. Mitigation measures for expansive
soils are not considered to be required based on our recent and previous observations.
5.4.6 Liouefaction Evaluation
Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine- grained sands or silts lose their physical strength
during earthquake4nduced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of point -to-
point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential
varies with groundwater level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and the intensity
and duration of ground shaking.
In our opinion the liquefaction potential of site soils is very low. This is based on the depth
to groundwater and the very dense or hard nature of soils at this site.
5.4.7 Seismic Settlement Evaluation
Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during seismic
events. The underlying site materials were generally dense to very dense or hard and are not
F:U0- 5750\Rpt_Geotechnicaldoc
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 8
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
considered likely to experience significant seismic settlement. Therefore, in our opinion, the
potential for seismic settlement resulting in damage to site improvements is considered low.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 General
We conclude that the proposed construction on the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint,
provided the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the
project. As stated, based on the preliminary information provided to our office, the proposed
construction will consist of conventional masonry classroom buildings.
Based on our subsurface investigation and engineering analysis, the proposed improvements can be
supported on a conventional shallow spread footing foundation system as recommended herein.
However, a relatively deep overexcavation and recompaction will be required to property prepared
the proposed building pads and to mitigate potential long -term settlements of the deep fill soils.
Specific recommendations for the design and construction of improvements at the subject site are
included in the subsequent sections of this report.
7.2 Site Preparation
7.2.1 General
Before grading, the site should be cleared of any existing improvements, debris and other
deleterious materials. In areas to receive structures or distress- sensitive improvements,
expansive, surficial eroded, desiccated, burrowed, or otherwise loose or disturbed soils
Fdlb- 575(ARpLGeotmhn iwL dm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 9
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
should be removed to the depth of competent material. Organic and other deleterious
materials not suitable for structural backfiill should be disposed of offsite at a legal disposal
site.
After clearing the site surface of unsuitable materials, the proposed building areas, and a
minimum five feet laterally beyond, shall be excavated to a depth of at least three feet below
the bottom of all proposed foundations, including deepened foundations, if proposed.
Deeper excavations may be required if localized areas of unsuitable materials are
encountered. The geotechnical representative, before the placement of structure foundations
or compacted structural fill, should evaluate the exposed subgrade.
Upon approval of the bottom of the excavations, exposed subgrade should be scarified a
minimum of nine inches, moisture conditioned, and properly recompacted prior to receiving
fill. All fill should be compacted to a minimum 90% relative compaction (as per ASTM
1557) at moisture contents between optimum and four percent above optimum. If proposed,
the upper 12 inches of subgrade and all aggregate base material beneath pavements should be
compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction, at similar moisture contents.
7.2.2 Site Excavations
Site excavations can generally be accomplished using heavy -duty construction equipment.
Design recommendations for temporary construction slopes are provided in the subsequent
section of this report. Site excavations should be observed by CTE. Such observations are
FA 10.575(Mpt_Cwtmhnicatdm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 10
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
essential to identify field conditions that differ from those identified during our subsurface
investigation and to adjust designs to actual field conditions encountered.
7.2.3 Fill Placement and Compaction
As stated, an engineer or geologist from CTE should be called upon to verify that the proper
site preparation has occurred before fill placement begins. As stated, following the
recommended removals, areas to receive fills or concrete slabs on grade should be scarified
to a depth of at least nine inches, moisture conditioned to between optimum and four percent
above optimum moisture content, and properly recompacted. Fill and backfill should be
compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by ASTM D -1557
at moisture contents between optimum and four percent above optimum. The optimum lift
thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment used.
Generally backfill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose
thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with
geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances.
7.2.4 Fill Materials
Soils derived from on -site materials are considered suitable for reuse on the site as fill,
provided they are screened of organic materials and materials greater than three inches in
maximum dimension.
Imported fill beneath structures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less
than or equal to 30 (per UBC 18 -1 -B) wi.h less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve.
F: \ I 0- 575MRpt_Geaechnical dac
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002
Page I 1
CTE Job No. 10 -5750
Imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils
engineer to determine strength characteristics before placement on the site.
7.3 Temporary Construction Slopes
Sloping recommendations for unshored temporary excavations are provided herein. The
recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep- seated failure, but may experience
localized sloughing. Recommended slope ratios are set forth in Table 1.
TABLE 1
RECOMMENDED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS
SOILS TYPE
SLOPE RATIO
(Horizontal: Vertical)
MAXIMUM HEIGHT
B (Eocene Torrey Sandstone)
I: I (MAXIMUM)
10 FEET
C (Fills)
1% :1 (MAXIMUM)
10 FEET
Actual field conditions and soil type designations must be verified by a "competent person" while
excavations exist according to Cal -OSHA regulations. In addition, the above sloping
recommendations do not allow for potential water seepage, or surcharge loading at the top of slopes
by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained
from the top of all unshored slopes.
F: \I0- 5750'.Rpt_Ce whnicaldw
• Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 12
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
7.4 Foundations and Slab Recommendations
7.4.1 General
Standard spread foundations are considered suitable for support of the proposed structure
provided preparatory grading is conducted in accordance with the recommendations
presented herein and all footings are embedded into competent materials as recommended.
7.4.2 Shallow Spread Foundations
Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at these sites. However, footings
should not straddle cut/fill interfaces. Based on the preparatory grading recommendations
previously prescribed, we anticipate that all proposed foundations will be founded upon a
minimum three -foot thick layer of properly recompacted fill materials. This underlying fill
blanket is required to mitigate the differential settlement potential of deep fill soils
comprising the descending fill slope and adjacent building pad areas.
For all building foundations embedded a minimum 18 inches into competent recompacted fill
materials and allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psfl is appropriate.
The minimum width of footings should be 15 inches. Due to the deep underlying fill soils,
no additional increase for added embedment or width of the foundation will be allowed.
However, a one -third increase in the bearing value may be used for wind or seismic loads.
FA I0 -5750 Rpt_GeUwhnicaldce
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 13
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
Minimum footing reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 4
reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom or as per the project
structural engineer. The structural engineer should design isolated footing reinforcement.
Based on our observations of the underlying site materials, and the preparatory grading and
design allowable bearing pressure recommended above, we anticipate total settlement of
structural footings designed as recommended herein to be less than 1.25 inches over the
anticipated life of the structure. Differential settlements for spread and strip footings across
the building are anticipated to be less than '/. -inch.
Lateral loads for structures supported on spread foundations may be resisted by soil friction
and by the passive resistance of the adjacent soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be
used between foundations or the floor slabs and the supporting soils.
The passive resistance of the natural and properly recompacted soils may be assumed equal
to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). A
one -third increase in the passive value maybe used for wind or seismic loads. The frictional
resistance and the passive resistance maybe combined without reduction in determining the
total lateral resistance.
FA 10.575URpt_Gectechnicaldac
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 14
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
7.4.3 Concrete Slabs -On -Grade
Concrete slabs -on -grade should be designed for the anticipated loading. If elastic design is
used, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pci should be used. Light to moderately loaded
concrete slabs -on -grade should be at least five inches thick and reinforced with #4
reinforcing bars placed on 24 -inch centers, each way, at mid -slab height. Concrete slabs
subjected to heavier loads due to automobile or other traffic may require increased thickness
and /or reinforcement as per the project structural engineer. A minimum four -inch layer of
compacted aggregate base (Sand Equivalent value of 30 or greater) should underlie concrete
slabs. A visqueen vapor barrier near mid - height in the underlayment material should be
installed beneath moisture sensitive slab areas.
It is recommended that all concrete slabs be moist -cured for at least five days in accordance
with methods recommended by the American Concrete Institute. Onsite quality control
should be used to confirm the design conditions.
Lightly loaded exterior slabs should be at least four inches thick and should be reinforced
with at least #3 reinforcing steel placed 18- inches on center, each way, at mid -slab height; or
as per the project structural engineer or architect. Dowelling exterior slabs into the
foundation or curb may decrease differential movement between buildings and exterior slabs,
or between sidewalks and curbs. Crack control joints should be spaced and detailed by the
project architect or structural /civil engineer.
FAI 0- 5750dtpt_GeamhniuLdm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 15
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
7.5 Walls Below Grade
For the design of subterranean structure walls where the surface of the backfill is level, it may be
assumed that the soils will exert a lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of
35 pcf. The active pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the
wall height. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid
pressure of 55 pcf should be used, based on at -rest soil conditions. The recommended equivalent
fluid pressures should be increased by 20 pcf for walls retaining soils inclined at 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical) or less. Walls below the water level are not anticipated for the subject site.
In addition to the recommended earth pressure, subterranean structure walls adjacent to the streets or
other traffic loads should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf. This is the
result of an assumed 300 -psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is
kept back at least 10 feet from the subject walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.
Consideration should be given to waterproofing the subterranean structure walls to reduce moisture
infiltration.
We recommend that all walls be backfilled with soil having an expansion index of 20 or less. The
backfill area should include the zone defined by a l :1 sloping plane, extended back from the base of
the wall. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction,
based on ASTM D1557 -91. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate
F: \10.575Mpt_Geotechniceldoc
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 16
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment, which could cause distress to walls, should not be
used.
7.6 Reactive Soils
Based on laboratory testing of similar soils at sites nearby the soluble sulfate content of onsite
materials is negligible and Type II cement should be suitable for use in concrete placed in contact
with onsite soils. From laboratory resistivity testing of similar soils, it appears that onsite soils are
mildly corrosive to ferrous metals. A corrosion consultant should be used to provide
recommendations for corrosion protection, if deemed necessary by the other project consultants.
7.7 Plan Review
CTE should review all project grading and foundation plans before the start of earthworks to identify
potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report.
8.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION
The recommendations provided in this report are based on the anticipated construction and the
subsurface conditions found in our explorations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be
checked in the field during construction to verify that conditions are as anticipated.
Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE
will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthworks should be observed
and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to the recommendations
F:110.57iURpt neotechnieetdm
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 17
Proposed Class Room Facility Additions, Saint John's School
1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California
August 22, 2002 CTE Job No. 10 -5750
contained within this report. The project engineer should evaluate all footing trenches before
reinforcing steel placement.
The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been
conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable
geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or
implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report.
Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered
during construction.
Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If
conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified
and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. We appreciate this
opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please
do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
, CEG #2136
No.2�38
10103
31013
12131101
Dan T. Math, RCE #61013 !�� csv
� OF C V-
Senior Engineer —
FA 10.5750\Rpt_GcotwMicaldm
4
TOPOI map pnnlad on 09/09/02 hom "Callfornla.tpo" and "Undd60.lpp"
117.18.000' W 117-17.000' W 117-16.000' W
WGSB4 117-15,000' W
ILI
� "i lw, o
lq t :. <'
Jr
r YYYY(1l I
"y9 1
L'/ O
,414 �:5,,: SITE 4
. ,xx nv a �. �`liy _ �. ♦. -
17'• V• ���� S �I RR F � -�•
t�.iIV II'It4Yt I,
.}/(l[1 y S• t
• j iii �R\ � :� �(' ,\
I.
C� y_ rrl` s � rl t� . � rl._.. s � !bs, -- -�' \�.- •1, M
40 FOOT CONTOUR ELEVATIONS
.{ y
ZZ
•{ r ' 2f
� t
WO584117'13.000' W
■ •i
Canliff -by- theses"'
g
(Oar01fQ l t
u
r'
117 °18.000' W
ill'V.000 W
117-16.000'W
TN
tjMH
VI
%o�ap Nll
'Iq Mw.la
PdNd aoa mn7 GMWddlb:.il Pmdximro(xw.I..ow
40 FOOT CONTOUR ELEVATIONS
.{ y
ZZ
•{ r ' 2f
� t
WO584117'13.000' W
/
/
/
— _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ v _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
=BUILDING
-1
PROPOS
LEGEND
TP -1 APPROXIMATE TEST
® PIT LOCATION
EXIS FIN(,
COURT YARD
B -1 APPROXIMATE BORING p 25 5Ofeet
® LOCATION
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
1. GECI ECNNICAL AND CONSIRUC nON ENGINEERING TESTING AND MSPECIION
2414 VINWARD AVENGE Sn G ECCONDIDO CA 92029 (1017M 4SS
wmuteu.m iK
/
/
/
1
TP -1
,
C+
Q�
' a
' 1
O
C+
/
/
/
/
EXPLORATION MAP
PROPOSED ADDITIONS
SAINT JOHN'S CHURCH
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
10 -5750
AS SHOWN
08/02 DRE 2
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES CITED
F:110- 575Mpt_Cwm hntcn l dm
REFERENCES CITED
1. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1992, "Report of Geotechnical construction
Control Observation and Testing of Compacted Fill, Saint John's Catholic Church, Encinitas,
California," [consultant report].
2. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1999, "Final Report for Testing of Compacted Fill,
Proposed Classroom Facility, Saint John's School, 1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas,
California," [consultant report].
3. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., 1985, "Report of Grading Observation and Density Testing,
St. John's Catholic Church, Phase I, Encinitas, California," [consultant report].
4. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., 1992, "Report of Soil Investigation, St. John's Church
Additions, Encinitas, California," [consultant report].
5. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, W.A., Revised 1997, "Fault- Rupture Hazard Zones in California,
Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps,"
California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.
6. Jennings, C. W., 1987, "Fault Map of California with Locations of Volcanoes, Thermal
Springs and Thermal Wells."
7. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, 1995, "Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego
Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California: Landslide Hazard Identification Map No.
35 ", California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Open -File
Report 95 -04, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California.
8. Tan, S. S., and Kennedy, 1996, "Geologic Map of the Northwestern part of San Diego
County, California ", California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and
Geology, Open -File Report 96 -02, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology,
Sacramento, California.
FA 10- 575UApt_Ceotechnicaldm
APPENDIX B
FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS
F910- 57%Rpt &otwhnicaldoc
Iv
FO
F5
?5-
,CONSTRUCTION TESTING Lot ENGINEERING, INC
GLOTECIINICAL AND CONSTRUCTION EWO.NEEIIING TESTING AND INSPECTION
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SMITE O EECONOIDO CA. %02017601146 -4931
ET'f.INFEyNIJ!A'
IECT: SL John's School Additions DRILLER: Pacific Drilling
JOB NO: 10 -3750 DRILL METHOD: Limited Access
GED BY: SF SAMPLE METY.OD: Drive Sampling
E
B
N
s
ti
BORING: B -1
e
i
DESCRIPTION
Surtace is har�e qn1l With s arse v t o
30
SM
Dense to very dense, dry to moist, light to dark brown, silty
ao
M
SAND, shell fragments and trace asphalt pieces (1 /2 inch).
SHEET: 1 of 1
DRILLING DATE: 81812002
ELEVATION: -
Laboratory Tests
TI I I ISC -SMI IDense to very dense, moist, olive gray to dark gray, silty SAND, I DS
32 organic fragments.
13
MAX
m SM Medium dense, moist, olive gray to light brown, silty SAND
' trace organics.
7
3u s m Medium dense, moist, dark gray to light brown, silty SAND,
so with fine to coarse subangular gravel, trace organics. ng Trick
otal depth = 19.5 feet below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
Boring backfilled with bentonite grout.
'CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
' GEOTECIINICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENU:NEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
2011 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE O ESCONDIDO CA, 12030 47601 7V9 -1913
�FADIlIIFRR:ffA:
PROJECT: St. John's School Additions DRILLER: Pacific Drilling SHEET; I of 1
CPE JOB NO: I0 -5750 DRILL METHOD: Limited Access DRILLING DATE: 8/8/2002
LOGGED BY: SF SAMPLE METHOD: Drive Sampling ELEVATION: -
8
E
E
Fp
8
e
RE
S
��7�'!
BO1�11V<J: B -2
Laboratory Tests
L
5
v
o
m
4
m
Z`
o
O
to
a
Uc3
DESCRIPTION
ace is Naveround
t' L/IJISIUKBU) SOILS
SM
Medium dense, moist, light brown, Silty fine SAND, with
fine to coarse gravel.
a
SC -SM
Medium dense, moist, light brown, clayey to silty SAND,
1VA
I
n
shell fragments.
Total depth = 6.5 feet below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
Boring backfilled with bentonite grout.
U
5
20
JOB NO:
GED BY:
r r
� m
?5
CONSTERUCTIONNTESTINGI& EERINQ ENGINEERING, DINC.
2616 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE O ESQONDIDO CA. 0202617601 746.6666
�P'�.METa�N
St. John a School Additions DRILLER Pacific Drilling SHEET: 1 or 1
10 -5750 DRILL METHOD: Limited Access DRILLING DATE: M002
SF SAMPLE METHOD: Drive Sampling E
K �
z BORING: B -3
v 1 1 tic sM Medium dense, moist, light to dark brown, clayey to silty
10 SAND, shell fragments and fine to coarse gravel.
depth = 6.5 feet below grade.
oundwater encountered.
g backftlled with bentonite grout.
Laboratory Tests
6I
r CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
S GLOTECNNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
L6 !AN VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 9202# 1710) 700.4055
FA'GDnFM'GINC
PROJECT: St. Johns School Additions DRILLER: Pacific Drilling SHEET: I of
CTE JOB NO: 10-5750 DRILL METHOD: Limited Access DRILLING DATE: 8/82002
LOGGED BY: SF SAMPLE METHOD: Drive Sampling ELEVATION: -
G:
a
y
s
BORING: B -4
Labomtory Tests
U.
3y
a
is
O
DESCRIPTION
0
Surtace III hare soil with rs vea7tation.
SM
Moist, dark brown, silty SAND, shell fragments, tine to
coarse gravel.
TERTIARY
TORREY SANDSTONE:
sM
Medium dense to dense, moist, light brown and orangish
1\ A
17
silty SAND.
,I
Total depth = 6.5 feet below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
0
Boring backfilled with bentortite grout.
i
_U
�S
{v CONSTRUCTION &N ENGEINEAERINEG,
NTESTING
INSPECTION
2610 VINEVAaD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 91019 (76 0 1 116 -4955
@:GDhEa1Nl1Vf.'
PROJECT: St. John's School Additions DRILLER: Pacific Drilling SHEET: 1 of I
CTE JOB NO: 10 -5750 DRILL METHOD: Limited Access DRILLING DATE: 8/S /tun_
LOGGED BY: SF SAMPLE METHOD: Drive Sampling ELEVATION: -
WN D D
>.7
DOlulV G; —5
Laboratory Tests
U.
Q
m
a
m+
G
O
i
V1
5
t7
DESCRIPTION
Surface is playground s n
URB ILN
Loose, moist, light to dark brown, silty SAND with shell
fragments and fine gravel.
S
7
Medium dense, moist, dark brown, silty SAND with fine
e
gravel.
MAX
1;
Dense, moist, light brown, silty SAND.
i;
'
Dense, moist, light to dark brwon, with gray green, silty
SAND with fine gravel and well rounded cobbles.
'u
5
Total depth = 14.5 foot below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
Boring backfilled with soil.
_0
5
[5I m
sit I I Dense, moist, light brown, silty SAND with shell fragments
and coarse gravel.
Total depth = 6.5 feet below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
Boring backtilled with bentonite grout.
k% A
s CONSTRUCTION
TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
G
2, GEO Tf.I'IIN IC AI. AND CONSTRUCTION
ENOiNEE RING TESTING AND INSPECTION
2010 VINEYARD AVENUE.
SUITE G ESC ONDIDO CA, 0203911!01 146-495$
PROJECT:
St. John's School
Additions
DRILLER. Pacific Drilling
SHEET: I of I
CTE JOB NO:
10 -5750
DRILL METHOD: Limited Access
DRILLING DATE: 8/8/ 2002
IAGGED BY:
SF
SAMPLE METHOD: Drive Sampling
ELEVATION: -
C
BORING: B -6
Laboratory Tests
N
N
U
t
DESCRIPTION
[5I m
sit I I Dense, moist, light brown, silty SAND with shell fragments
and coarse gravel.
Total depth = 6.5 feet below grade.
No groundwater encountered.
Boring backtilled with bentonite grout.
k% A
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
Y
9 GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 9202917661 745 -4955
'joTr�
PROJECT: St. Johns School Additions EXCAVATOR: CTE -
CTE JOB NO: 10 -5750 EXCAVATION METHOD: Hand Excavated EXCAVATION DATE: 8/8/2002
LOGGED BY: SF
SAMPLING METHOD: Bulk Samples ELEVATION:
c
V
O
V
E 6
D
a
e
T
00
4
N
TEST PIT LOG: TP -1
ri
u
Laboratory Tests
D
7
U
Ei
In
G
Surface is bare soil with sparse vegetation.
0
FILUDISTURBED SOIL-
Medium dense, dry to moist, light brown, silty fine
SAND, with small pieces of concrete debris.
Refusal to further excavation at 1.25 feet below grade.
No free groundwater encountered.
Test pit backfilled with spoils.
J,,CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. E
R GEOTECNNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
2614 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 1760) 166 -1035
EKG) R .
PROJECT: Proposed Additions to St. John's Church EXCAVATOR: CTE
CTE JOB NO: 10 -5750 EXCAVATION METHOD: Hand Excavated EXCAVATION DATE: $/$/2002
LAGGED BY: SF SAMPLING METHOD: Bulk Samples ELEVATION:
�
o
u
Y
V
`
6n
N
TEST PIT LOG: TP -I
In
v
Laboratory Tests
y
FILLIDISTURBED SOIL:
Medium dense, dry, light brown, silty fine
SAND with occasional small pieces of concrete
debris.
SM
Refusal to further excavation at1.25 feet below grade.
No free groundwater encountered.
Test pit backfilled with spoils.
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS
P\I M75Mpt_Ce whnicaldnc
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS
Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to detect their relative engineering
properties. Tests were performed following test methods of the American Society for Testing
Materials or other accepted standards. The following presents a brief description of the various test
methods used. Laboratory results are presented in the following section of this Appendix.
Classification
Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual
classifications were supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples according to ASTM
D2487.
Particle -Size Analysis
Particle -size analyses were performed on selected representative samples according to ASTM D422.
Direct Shear
Direct shear tests were performed on either samples direct from the field or on samples recompacted
to 90% of the laboratory maximum value overall. Direct shear testing was performed in accordance
with ASTM D3080 -72 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The
samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions
FA10.57501Rpt C=tahnicatdac
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
OEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCYION ENO [NEE RI NO TEST[ NO AND INSPECTION
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE O ESCONDIDO CA. 930!9 11601 741.4135
P 11IVTEYP U31C
200 WASH ANALYSIS
LOCATION DEPTH PERCENT PASSING
(feet) #200 SIEVE
B -2
B -3
B -4
B -6
TP -1
5
3
5
1.25
25.95
28.72
25.48
26.58
CLASSIFICATION
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
LABORATORY SUMMARY CTE JOB NO. 10 -5750
PRECONSOLIDATION
SHEARING DATA
D
60 U
1
0.03
1
0.02
i
r
y 3'AO -.
1
X0.0].
' Nwa _ —.
w
� 2500
y
D.w
OC moo _
.�
LL=
ieoo _
II
W 0.05
f- y
ION
0.06
I I
1 -. 'III .. .11 i wo
.
_ ..
D
I
0.07
0 E
10 25 a
a m
0.1
1 10 300
STRAIN ( %)
TIME (minutes) 2000 psf
VERTICAL STRESS �_ 3000 pef
40M DO
FAILURE ENVELOPE
5000
I
i
4000 i
{jI
1
In 3000
N
W
K
y
Z
a 2000
w
x
y I
1000
d, =0.008 in. /min
0
0 1000 2000 3000
4000 5000
VERTICAL STRESS (psi
SHEAR STRENGTH TEST
Sample Designation
Depth (ft)
Cohesion I Angle of Friction
Sample Description
B 1
10
1 270 psf 1 420
Lt. Olive greyish Sand w /silt .
c CONSTRUCTION
TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
CTE JOB NO:
10 -5750
.
OEOTECNNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
3410 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 02020 (7601 746-4915
FIGURE:
C -1
ENcvrnmry
14,
1 41
13:
13C
125
a120
F
5
V IIS
3
F
Z 110
r
a
0
105
100
95
90
95
0 5 10 I5 20 25 30 35
PERCENT MOISTURE ( %)
ASTM D1557 METHOD ® A ❑ D ❑ C
MODIFIED PROCTOR
RESULTS
LAB SAMPLE DEPTH •iruma�m
NUMBER NUMBER (FEET) SOIL DESCRIPTION DRY DENSITY MOISTURE
(PCF) CONTENT ( %)
12402 B -5 8 Yellow brown, silty SAND 118.0 13.2
CTE JOB NO:�; CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. DATE: 08/02
i 6POW-CHNICAL AND CONSTP ACTION ENGINEERINGTESTING AND INSPECTION
10 -5750 ermlxceu�0 nr 2414VINE1'AR AV WE,S'IEG ESCONDIDOCA 92029(760)1464955 FIGURE: E: C-2
UPDATED PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
PROPOSED CLASSROOM FACILITY
SAINT JOHN'S SCHOOL
1001 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
ST. JOHN'S SCHOOL
C/o HYNDMAN & HYNDMAN
2611 SOUTH HIGHWAY 101, STE.
CARDIFF, CA 92007
Prepared by:
201
FEB 11 1997 iJ
ENGINEERING SERVICES
OF ENCINITAS
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ,
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G
ESCONDIDO, CA 92029
CTE JOB NO. 10 -1808
November 25, 1996
GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
R,
��
CONS-
''TCTION TESTING &
^NGINEERING, INC.
r
C
SAN DIECO. CA •
RIVERSIDE, CA •
VENTURA, CA MODESCO, CA •
LANCASTER, CA • LAS VEGAS, NY • SEATTLE, WA
�5
2414 Vineyard Ave.
Suite G
490 E. Pdnaland CL
Suite 7
1645 Pacific Ave 3540 Oakdak Rd.
42156 10th St W 4560 S Valley View 235 S.W. 41st St
o
,�
Esaondida, CA 92029
Comm G 91719
Suite 105 Suite A2
Oxnard. U 93033 Modesto. CA 95357
Uak K Suite k3 Renton WA 98055
L=uter. G 93534 Iu VeM NV 89103 (206) 6561266
ENGINEERING, INC.
(619) 746-1955
(619) 7469806 rAC
(909) 371-1890
(909) 3712168 ra
(805) 4864475 (209) 5542271
(805) 4869016 ru (209) 5513593 tAa
(805) 7269676 (702) 7952278 (206) 6561265 rax
(805) 7269676 vex (702) 7264485 rea
UPDATED PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
PROPOSED CLASSROOM FACILITY
SAINT JOHN'S SCHOOL
1001 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
ST. JOHN'S SCHOOL
C/o HYNDMAN & HYNDMAN
2611 SOUTH HIGHWAY 101, STE.
CARDIFF, CA 92007
Prepared by:
201
FEB 11 1997 iJ
ENGINEERING SERVICES
OF ENCINITAS
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ,
2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G
ESCONDIDO, CA 92029
CTE JOB NO. 10 -1808
November 25, 1996
GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
r f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............ ..............................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ......................... 2
1.1 Introduction ............. ............................... 2
1.2 Scope of Services ......... ............................... 2
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 3
3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS ....................... 3
4.0 GEOLOGY ................... ..............................3
4.1 General Setting ........... ............................... 3
4.2 Geologic Conditions ....... ............................... 4
4.3 Groundwater Conditions ..... ............................... 5
4.4 Geologic Hazards ......... ............................... 5
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . r ...................... 9
5.1 General ............... ............................... 9
5.2 Grading and Earthwork ..... ............................... 9
5.3 Site Preparation ......... ............................... 10
5.4 Excavations ............ ............................... 10
5.5 General Fill Placement and Compaction ......................... 10
5.6 Rock Fill Placement and Compaction ........................... 11
5.7 Fill Materials ........... ............................... 11
5.8 Foundations and Slab Recommendations ......................... 12
5.9 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures .......................... 14
5.10 Exterior Flatwork ............................... ....... 15
5.11 Drainage .............. ............................... 16
5.12 Slopes .............. ............................... 16
5.13 Vehicular Pavements ...... ............................... 17
5.14 Construction Observation .... ............................... 19
5.15 Plan Review .......... ............................... 19
6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION .............................. 19
FIGURES
FIGURE 1
SITE INDEX MAP
FIGURE 2
LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 3
GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE MAP
FIGURE 4
BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL
FIGURE 5
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: REFERENCES CITED
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 1
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. i n -i RnR
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Available geotechnical data and the conceptual site improvement plan were reviewed to provide
site - specific geotechnical information for the proposed classroom facility, St. John's School,
Encinitas, California.
Based on our review, soils beneath the proposed Media Center /Classroom Building F consist of
units of the Eocene Torrey Sandstone. Areas beneath proposed Buildings A, B, C, D, E, and G
are apparently underlain by a minimum 3 foot thick blanket of compacted fill overlying native
sandstone materials. Fill thicknesses increase toward the west. The maximum fill depth is
estimated to be up to 25 feet (beneath the westerly slope descending to the proposed play field).
Groundwater was not encountered during rough grading of the proposed building pad area.
Saturated, spongy conditions were encountered during earthwork and underground construction
activities beneath the proposed play field area. However, groundwater is not expected to
adversely impact the proposed building pad areas if proper drainage is maintained.
In general, the results of our review indicate that the proposed project can be constructed as
planned provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. Based on the
geologic findings and reference review no active surface faults are known to exist at the site.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 2
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Introduction
This report presents the results of our geotechnical review and provides conclusions and
geotechnical engineering criteria for the design and construction of a proposed classroom facility
at the St. John's School in Encinitas, California. We understand the facility will consist of five
classroom buildings, administration and media center /classroom buildings, bell tower, and
associated improvements including concrete walks, basketball courts and grass play fields.
Specific recommendations for excavations, fill placement, and foundation design for the proposed
improvements are presented in this report. Appendix A contains a list of references cited in this
report.
The scope of services provided included:
• A review of readily available geologic and soils reports pertinent to the site and adjacent
areas.
• Definition of the general geology and an evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the
site.
• Soil engineering design criteria for the proposed improvements.
• Preparation of this summary report including geotechnical design and construction
recommendations.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 3
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
0
The site, at 1001 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California, is approximately 1.5 miles east of
Interstate 5. Land use near the existing church and school site is predominantly residential and
retail. Currently, the site consists of three tiers of rough graded pads. Ranging from 260 to 310
feet above mean sea level, the topography of the site slopes generally down from east to west.
Figures 1 and 2 are maps showing the location of the site and of the proposed improvements.
Field reconnaissance to observe the existing ground surface in the site area was conducted June
18, 1996. At the time of the reconnaissance the upper two building pad areas were found to be
undeveloped, rough graded pads with sparse vegetation. Piles of loose fill soils and construction
debris were observed on the lower play field area.
The site lies within the coastal mesa portion of the San Diego area. Land forms in the vicinity
of the site consist generally of uplifted, generally flat marine terraces dissected by gullies and
ravines. Locally, the topography slopes down to the west.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 4
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
Based on geologic observation during recent and previous site grading work (Construction Testing
and Engineering, Inc. [CTE], 1992) and mapping by Tan (1986) surface soils at the site consist
of undocumented and engineered fills and units of the Eocene Torrey Sandstone. Although not
mapped at the present ground surface, Quaternary Alluvium was encountered during previous
work at this site. ( Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., 1985 and 1990). Figure 3 is a reconnaissance
geologic map of exposed soils.
4.2.1 Undocumented Fills
Undocumented fills consist of loose soil and construction debris. These materials, placed
as end dump piles, were observed in the proposed play field area.
4.2.2 Engineered Fills
Engineered fill materials, consisting generally of reddish brown and brown silty sands with
some clay, underlie the western portions of the site. Based on a review of previous work
at the site, engineered fill materials (compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the
laboratory maximum density at near optimum moisture content) were emplaced directly
over native Quaternary Alluvium or Eocene Torrey Sandstone materials (CTE, 1992).
The depth of the engineered fills apparently varies depending on location at the site.
Beneath proposed Classroom Buildings A, B, C, D, E, and G a minimum of three feet of
engineered fill overlies the Eocene Torrey Sandstone. Engineered fills to a depth of 15
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 5
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
feet overlie loose, Quaternary Alluvium beneath the proposed play field area and the slope
descending from the play field area to the east (CTE, 1992).
Units of the Eocene Torrey Sandstone were observed during previous grading activities
and in soil borings and test pits ( Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., 1990). These materials
consist generally of medium dense to dense, orange -brown to yellowish brown, slightly
silty or, clayey, fine to medium - grained sandstone.
G�Z • •. EFERMO • • tialwl
No groundwater was encountered during rough grading of the proposed building pad area.
Saturated, "spongy" conditions were encountered during previous earthwork and underground
construction activities in the proposed play field area. Although groundwater levels may fluctuate,
groundwater is not expected to affect the proposed improvements if proper site drainage is
maintained.
From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to
those caused by violent shaking from earthquake generated ground motion waves. The
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 6
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
potential for damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed structure
should be considered low.
4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting
Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our explorations, and a review of
appropriate geologic literature, it is our opinion that the site is not on known active fault
traces. An unnamed fault has been mapped approximately 0.25 miles west of the site by
Tan (1986) and Eisenberg (1985). This fault, vertical to steeply dipping to the west,
apparently does not disrupt the Quaternary Marine Terrace deposits overlying it
(Eisenberg, 1985). As a consequence the fault is not mapped as active.
According to the California Division of Mines and Geology, a fault is active if it displays
evidence of activity in the last 11,000 years (Hart, 1994). The Rose Canyon Fault,
approximately 3.5 miles to the southwest, is the closest known active fault (Jennings,
1987). Other principal active regional faults include: the Coronado Banks and San
Clemente Fault Zones, (about 17 and 53 miles southwest of the site); and, the Elsinore,
San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults (about 27, 52, and 75 miles northeast of the site).
Table 1 is a summary, including the seismic characteristics, of the principal regional faults
considered most likely to rupture and possibly induce strong ground shaking at the site
during the useful life of the proposed construction. Estimated probable earthquake
magnitudes are derived from Greensfelder (1974) except where indicated.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 7
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
TABLE 1
SEISMICITY FOR MAJOR FAULTS
FFFAULTor
ESTIMATED
DISTANCE
(miles) AND
DIRECTION
FROM SITE
E STIMATED
PROBABLE
EARTHQUAKE
MAGNITUDE
PEAK BEDROCK
ACCELERATION
(in G- forces)
REPEATABLE
HIGH GROUND
ACCELERATION
(in G- forces)
Rose Can on
3.5 SW
7.0
0.588
Coronado
Banks
17 SW
6.7'
0.26g
San Clemente
53 SW
7.5
0.09
A6g
Elsinore
27 NE
7.5
0.26e
San Jacinto
52 NE
7.5
0.09
San Andreas
75 NE
8.3
0.08g
Estimated Probable Earthquake Magnitude from Artim et al, 1989
nt ITSTO •1
We have analyzed the possible bedrock accelerations at the site using procedures outlined
in Ploessel and Slosson (1974). For the intended use, it is our opinion that the most
significant seismic event would be a 7.0 moment magnitude earthquake on the Rose
Canyon Fault. This event could produce estimated peak bedrock accelerations of 0:5$ g
and repeatable high ground accelerations of 0.38 g.
•1 . 1 .4 R004= 20l
Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine - grained sands or silts lose their physical strengths
during earthquake induced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of
point -to -point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 8
Proposed Classroom Facility
1 St. John's School, Encinitas, California
1 November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
1 potential varies with water level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and
probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. Because of the generally dense nature
of onsite materials and the absence of a permanent groundwater condition it is our opinion
that the potential for liquefaction should be considered low in all areas of the project.
Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils density during
seismic events. In most areas of the site the on -site materials were generally found to be
medium dense to dense. Therefore, in our opinion, the potential for seismic settlement
resulting in damage to site improvements should be considered low. However, in areas
of the site underlain by loose, Quaternary Alluvium the potential for seismic settlement
exists.
4,4 .5 T unamic anA Srichg Evaluario
The site is not near any bodies of water that could induce seiche damage. The potential
for tsunami damage at the site is nonexistent due to the site's distance from the ocean
(approximately 2 miles) and elevation (approximately 270 feet above mean sea level).
Active landslides were not encountered and have not been mapped near the site (Tan,
1986). Landsliding is therefore not considered a significant hazard within or immediately
adjacent to the proposed structures.
Updated Preliminary Geotechrtical Recommendations
Proposed Classroom Facility Page 9
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996
CTE Job No. 10 -1808
4.4 .7 Cr mnreUible and Expansive Soils
Quaternary Alluvium, underlying engineered fills in the proposed play field area, should
be considered to be compressible. Placement of additional fills in this area is expected to
induce some additional settlement of these materials over time. Structures should not be
constructed within the play field area. Distress sensitive improvements constructed in this
area may require repairs and /or maintenance.
5.1 General
Based on the results of our evaluation, we conclude that the proposed construction on the site is
feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are
incorporated into the design of the project. Recommendations for the design and construction of
the proposed structure are included below.
CTE should continuously observe all grading and earthwork operations for this project. Such
observations are essential to identify field conditions that differ from those predicted by this
investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to confirm that the grading is
performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Our personnel should render
adequate observation and sufficient testing of fills during grading. This information will be used
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 10
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
to support the Geotechnical Consultant's professional opinion regarding compliance with
compaction requirements and specifications contained herein.
5.3 Site Pr nararig-u
After removal of any existing vegetation or debris, any loose or disturbed soils should be removed
to the depth of competent Eocene Torrey Sandstone or properly compacted fills within the
proposed fill or structure areas. Excavations should extend at least five feet beyond the structure
areas in plan view, where practicable. Exposed excavation bottoms should be inspected by the
geotechnical representative to verify that materials are suitable to receive proposed fills or
improvements.
Excavations in site materials should generally be accomplished with heavy -duty construction
equipment under normal conditions. Irreducible materials greater than 6 inches encountered
during excavations should not be used in structural fills or within 3 feet of finish grade irl,non-
structural play field areas on the site.
The geotechnical consultant should verify that the proper site preparation has occurred before fill
placement occurs. Areas to receive fills should be scarified, moisture conditioned and properly
compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90
L
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 11
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
percent as evaluated by ASTM D1557 at a moisture content of optimum or slightly above. The
optimum lift thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment
used. Generally, backfill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8- inches in loose
thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with
geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances. Figure 4 diagrams general procedures for
benching fills over natural soils.
Oversize materials to 24 inches in diameter may be dispersed in a granular fill matrix and
compacted as a rock fill in play field areas below 3 feet of finish grade and 10 feet from the face
of slopes. These materials should be thoroughly wetted and compacted to a minimum of 90
percent. In no case should rock materials be allowed to nest.
5.7 Fill Materials
Low expansion soils derived from the native Eocene Torrey Sandstone formation are considered
suitable for reuse on the site as compacted structural fill, provided they are screened of organic
materials and materials greater than 6 inches in a maximum dimension. If encountered, clayey
native soils may be blended with granular soils and reused in non - structural fill areas.
Imported fill beneath structures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less than
or equal to 30 (per UBC 29 -2) with less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve. Imported fill
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 12
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer to determine
strength characteristics before placement on the site.
The following recommendations are for preliminary planning purposes only. Foundation
recommendations should be reviewed after completion of earthworks and testing of near surface
soils.
Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings
should not straddle cut /fill interfaces; we anticipate all building footings will be founded
entirely in a recompacted fill or entirely in cut formation. Foundation dimensions and
reinforcement should be based on allowable bearing values of 2000 pounds per square foot
(psf) for footings founded on properly compacted fills or competent native materials. The
allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for short duration loading which
includes the effects of wind or seismic forces.
Where structure foundations are situated within 10 feet of a descending slope, the
allowable bearing value should be reduced to 1000 psf.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 13
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
Footings should be at least 12 inches wide and installed at least 18 inches below the lowest
subgrade. Footing reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No'. 4
reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom. Reinforcement
of isolated footings should be designed by the project structural engineer.
5-8,2 Foundation SnIemen t
The potential for foundation settlement should be analyzed once actual foundation loads
are known. Overall, for anticipated loads, total settlements are estimated to be 1 inch.
Differential settlement along continuous footings is not expected to exceed 1/2 inch in 20
feet. Settlement estimates may be reduced by '/o inch where foundations are to be situated
in competent sandstone materials.
F . .. Oi 9.
Footings for structures should be designed such that the minimum horizontal distance from
I
the face of adjacent slopes to the bottom outside edges of the footing is a minimum of 10
feet.
Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be a minimum of four inches thick. Minimum slab
reinforcement should consist of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed on 18 -inch centers each way
at mid -slab height. The minimum slab reinforcement should be increased to No. 4
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 14
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
reinforcing bars on 18 -inch centers for buildings with foundations situated within 10 feet
of a descending slope. In moisture sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten mil
visqueen overlying a three -inch layer of compacted clean sand, gravel, or crushed rock
11
should be installed. A one inch layer of clean washed sand should be placed above the
visqueen to protect the membrane during steel on concrete placement.
OMWIMN
G i �• ��
The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed
in firm, well- compacted fill material may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.35 (total
frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance
value of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of.1200 pounds per
square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the
frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed
two - thirds of the total allowable resistance.
Retaining walls up to ten feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the
equivalent fluid weights given in Table 3 below.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 15
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -18og
TABLE 3
EQUIVALENT, FLUID.UNIT: WEIGHTS :<
ounds per cubic foot y;-
LEVEL BACKFILL
SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1
(HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL
CANTILEVER WALL
38
60
YIELDING
RESTRAINED WALL
58
90
The above values assume non - expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should
be taken to prevent a moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should
include free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. Figure 5 is a diagram of a
recommended gravel and perforated pipe drainage system. These drains should discharge to an
appropriate offsite location.
1 * W
To reduce the potential for distress to exterior flatwork caused by minor settlement of foundation
soils, we recommend that such flatwork be installed with crack - control joints at appropriate
spacings as designed by the project architect. Flatwork, which should be installed with crack
control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. To mitigate the potential
for cracking in flatwork, reinforcing similar to that recommended for interior slabs should be
considered. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations
previously given before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained
next to all flatwork.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 16
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
Surface runoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate
erosion reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed
improvements. The project civil engineers should thoroughly evaluate the on -site drainage and
make provisions as necessary to keep surface water from deleteriously affecting the site.
Based on anticipated soil strength characteristics, fill slopes should be constructed at slope ratios
of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter. These fill slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety
greater than 1.5.
Although graded and existing slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be
somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of
slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities.
Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes.
Typically soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will tend to creep laterally. We do not
recommend distress sensitive hardscape improvements be constructed within five feet of slope
crests in fill areas.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 17
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
All aggregate base materials and the upper 12 inches of subgrade materials to receive pavements
should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent of the laboratory maximum
density (as determined by ASTM D 1557). Presented below are recommendations for both asphalt
and concrete pavement. Confirmatory R Value sampling and testing should be performed upon
completion of grading in vehicular pavement areas.
.1 u-,
Preliminary pavement sections presented below are based on an assumed Resistance "R"
Value of surficial site materials. The asphalt pavement design is based on California
Department of Transportation Highway Manual and on traffic indexes as indicated in
Table 4 below. Upon completion of finish grading, "R" Value sampling and testing of
subgrade soils should be conducted and pavement section modified if ngcessary.
TABLE 4 r: ;
ASPHALT PAVEMENT
Traffic Area
Assumed Traffic
Subgrade
AC
Class II Aggregate BAe
Index
°R" Value
Thickness
Thickness
(inches)
(inches)
Truck Drive/
6.0
15
3.5
11
Loadin Areas
Auto Parking
4.5
15
2.5
8
Areas
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 18
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
We understand that parking and drive areas may be paved with concrete pavements. The
recommended concrete pavement section for drive areas has been designed assuming single
axle loads of 15 kips, 10 repetitions per day. The above assumed values reflect light
industrial traffic loads. Corresponding pavement designs presented in Table 5 below may
not be adequate for larger axle loads and traffic volume. Concrete used for pavement
areas should possess a minimum 600 psi modulus of rupture. Pavements should be
constructed according to industry standards.
TABLE 5
- ;CONCRETE PAVEMENT.DESIGN
Traffic Area
Sub grade R -Value
PCC Thickness (inches)
Driveway
15
7.0
Auto Parking Areas
15
6.0
Concrete pavements placed directly on the expansive on -site materials should be reinforced
with a minimum of No. 3 reinforcing bars on 18 -inch or No. 4 reinforcing bars on 24; inch
centers each way at mid -slab height.
Control joints constructed in concrete pavements should be in filled with suitable filler
compound to minimize moisture infiltration into subgrade soils.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 19
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design assumptions for the
proposed construction and the subsurface conditions found in the previous exploratory borings and
during site grading activities. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the play
field during construction to verify that conditions are as anticipated.
Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE
will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthworks should be
continuously observed and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to
the recommendations contained within this report. All footing trenches should be evaluated by
the project engineer before reinforcing steel placement.
pilau .1 ..
CTE should review the project foundation plans and grading plans before commencement of
earthworks to identify potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report.
6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION
The play field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have
been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by
reputable geotechnical consultants doing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed
or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 20
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be
encountered during construction.
Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If
conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be
notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request.
Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 21
Proposed Classroom Facility
St. John's School, Encinitas, California
November 25, 1996 CTE Job No. 10 -1808
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions
regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
P b �. Ballard, GE #2173
Manager, Geotechnical Engineering
tAOres.s:o°
WAPROIEM% 10 I WMGTRM1.WPD
NO 2173
Exp. Ei °CrDJ !"
Of
92- 7
Ja Lynch, CEG #1890
Engineering Geologist
i o_r:t0
�r{ CERTIciE0
ir• @NriS "dEeFh:3
GEO: /,Olen
1
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. Artim, E.R, Estrella, H., Koehmstedt, M., Ferman, J.L.A., and Ledesma, J., 1989, The
Coronado Bank Fault: A Real Threat to San Diego, in Roquemore, G., and Tanges, S.,
eds., Proceedings of Workshop on "The Seismic Risk in the San Diego Region: Special
Focus on the Rose Canyon Fault System," The Southern California Earthquake
Preparedness Project, State of California Office of Emergency Services.
2. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc., April 22, 1992, "Report of Geotechnical
Construction Control Observation and Testing of Compacted Fill, St. John's Catholic
Church, Encinitas, California," [consultant report].
3. Eisenberg, L.I., 1985, Pleistocene Faults and Maine Terraces, Northern San Diego
County, in Abbott, P.L., ed., "On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in
Northern San Diego County ", San Diego Association of Geologists.
4. Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., October 11, 1985, "Report of Grading Observation and
Field Density Testing, St. John's Catholic Church, Phase I, Encinitas, California,"
[consultant report].
5. Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., October 25, 1990, "Report of Soil Investigation, St,
John's Church Additions, Encinitas, California," [consultant report].
6. Greensfelder, R., 1974, "Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in
California ", California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
7. Hart, Earl W., revised 1994, "Fault- Rupture Hazard Zones in Cali fornia,,Alquist Priolo,
Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 ", California Division of Mines and Geology, Special
Publication 42.
8. Jennings, Charles W., revised 1987, "Fault Map of California with Locations of
Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and Thermal Wells ".
9. Ploessel, M.R. and Slosson, J.E., 1974, "Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from
Earthquakes - Important Design Criteria," California Geology, p. 195 -199.
10. Tan, S. S. , 1986, "Landslide Hazards in the Encinitas Quadrangle, San Diego County,
California ", California Division of Mines and Geology, Open -File Report, OFR 86 -8.
CONSTRUCTIONTESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
0 114 112 1
0 1320 2530 5280
SOURCE: THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS
1996 SAN DIEGO EDITION
G,PR0JECTS,!04SpSUNQEx61AP CVS
MILES SITE INDEX MAP
FEET ST. JOHNS CLASSROOM BLDG.
10001 ENCINITAS BLVD.
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NUMBER: 10 -1808 I DATE: 7196 1 FIGURE: 1
'S
-
f Y
-
R.
e n
1.6
J
..9. �
� ��l
.•
.�A•CX3i
n
}.
}
f �
"I
n
F
—
[ `
1
4 .2
iM lVlf.
occ-rfl
•:ENCI!lITA$
ectio
Jr.rr '
.
•ie... 4+1'
'G -'-_ '�
~,
8 -_
3!
1'1
Till
-
0 114 112 1
0 1320 2530 5280
SOURCE: THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS
1996 SAN DIEGO EDITION
G,PR0JECTS,!04SpSUNQEx61AP CVS
MILES SITE INDEX MAP
FEET ST. JOHNS CLASSROOM BLDG.
10001 ENCINITAS BLVD.
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
JOB NUMBER: 10 -1808 I DATE: 7196 1 FIGURE: 1
LEGEND
— - - — PROPERTY LINE
I RETAINING WALL
----- - - - - -1 - - - - -- • - - - -- SLOPE OLMfNE
I I �♦
\ ENCINITAS BLVD.
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
o �•
0
/I
0
PLAYGROUND O EXISTING PARKING
CLASSROOM R / O
T WEN 1 \
3 / / AMPITNEATf■ CLASSROOM
i I 1,
TRELLIS
IR a COURT
'1 CLASSROOM D
I �`\ [IASSROOM E
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
OEOTICNNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENOINSSRINO TESTING AND INSPECTION
• ISIR VINEYARDAVENUE. STEC ESCONDIDOCA.1fEf11flp At.MN
tuNlNnunG,uc.
C V ROIECTf11 L- ItIDRGILGC CIS
MEDIA CTR.
CLASSROOM T
SITE FACILITIES MAP
ST. JOHN'S CLASSROOM BUILDING
10001 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
I
U:
a
z
c`
Y
f
- ID -ISOs
NO SCALE
11/9 nouRE:,
LEGEND
—' - — PROPERTY LINE
I
-- - — - _ —' - - — — - ��� RETAINING WALL
— — — — — SLOPE OUTLINE
I I I . . .. INNS ANN, GEOLOGIC CONTACT
\
ENCINITAS BLVD.
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
0
Qaf QUAT`ERNARYARTTFICIALFILL
QQUATERNARY ARTIFICIAL FU
(DEFIER FILL])
Tt TERTIARY'romySANDSTONE
/ I PLAYGROUND EEISTINO PARKING
O
CLASSROOM R / O
ItL
I /
TOWER ` O
A AMPITNEATER 1 CLASSROOM
I i► Tt
' i ^ \ /Qaf TRELLIS 1;
B e COURT
a 1
MEDIA CTI.
CLASSROOM P
I/ \ CLASSROOM A f
34h a ram
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOLOGIC RECONNAISANCE MAP
j M GEOTECIINIC ALAMD CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION ST. JOHN'S CLASSROOM BUILDING
C �AAA,tNNyRM NI{ VINEYARD ESCONDIDOCA..2.1.I {1I.L {.n,S 10001ENCINITASBOULEVARD C VROIECT3\10 -I fYI\GEORfCON CYS ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
0�
P.
D
N
Z
C
x
" 10 -1808
NO SCALE
11196 rlcuRE.
I
R
FILL SLOPE
SURFACE OF COMPETENT
EARTH MATERIAL.
E�p,y
�nhPti
15' MINIMUM. (INCLINED @ 2% INTO SLOPE)
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. I
e GEOTECNNICAL AND CON STSUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
WGYrtRVND `, LII VINEYARD AVENVE. STE G ESCONDIDO CA. SIDS +161'0116 -ul1
ST. JOHNS CLASSROOM BLDG.
1001 ENCINITAS BLVD.
RETAINING WAL /��/
WALL BACKFILL COMPACTED
TO 90% RELATIVE DENSITY
0
a.,
e o 3/4" GRAVEL SURROUNDED
BY FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI
140 N, OR EQUIVALENT)
a
po
&%.<
a
• O
D a
FINISH GRADE °o 0
r °
• °O
v 4
� a
.. 4" DIA. PERFORATED PVC
PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR
EQUIVALENT). MINIMUM
//� /� ` ' • / �j�� //
I% GWIENT TO SUITABLE
.a
WALL FOOTING MINIMUM 6 LAYER OF
FILTER ROCK UNDERLYING
PIPE
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. I
• GEOTECNNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
na GmE 2616 VINEYARD AVENUE. STE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 12021 (614) 14L.4v,S
ST. JOHNS CLASSROOM BLDG. $CALE......a
1001 ENCINITAS BLVD. k SCALE
C'IPRGIECTSI I U. H I EIR ET WALL CVS
DRAINAGE STUDY
FOR
WATER QUALITY ASIN
} V
1 L.i
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CITY OF ENCINITAS
St John's Church Phase II
Grading Plan 5003 -G
�OQp�OF ESS /�N�
1190
m
61 0104
PREPARED BY 6rCAUFOf
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
2187 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, STE 103, CARDIFF, CA 92007
(760) 436 -8500
02 -040
1129/03
GC
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
� i
x
JOB S OZ-o�o
SHEET NO. OF c
CALCULATED BY Ge DATE
CHECKED BY DATE _
fiS[.tj_. i._ySE vaL-
�
m
Vd
7 x
G it —vNot r (�Ef{lLI
L D.9 (• qi- D. 4s (.
I
j
-7g
J --
h
tI
1 .._ a.....
a
2-9 AL
_ 10
-7g
h
2-9 AL
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
5
SHEET HQ_
CALCULATED BY
CHECKED BY_
k.� s
Z
OF
DATE
66'
T2e.t
..
._ ,_ ._
tic- ut�.��� =. ✓
ry�>(. ,, ,Fete A
ToTMU-
joo`;
Do
._._ ..._.
Y-l�.f `.,, . .:
A i_ r '' r. �1 T i
! 5
l a tM 4y- I ovl ._,
Ian - -H •_
=F C.: -7,
(J
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB I. jnffzY'S 24k�Q -U+ O -D�{p
SHEET NO. l OF I
CALCULATED BY �/ ` DATE
CHECKED BY DATE
j i V
I
o p o S c�'j w4 tG �— C2 a L t cc t nin k -Mto,;v 0 CE
i..
2 6B� SF
I
fi' r'-�) VoLvA, \" C
_ _+ -
I I
-2� S x So'.
i
`%TAt. GF g Ruin, A -cZEF� ,,
C)
vc rE,�T>vN 3gst�s �5 5 «r
4215 Qu
Gt- !
.y
,OB '> -T z Hs Cigvazo- oz -o4.d
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING $MEET NO, OF
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103 CALCULATED BY ✓ DATE
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007 CHECKED BY DATE
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
D S`!LUi
•v,,':v Cz� Cy
Tp q�,�ti
A-. A-L-I G
ST
5o L. o' S
v ✓G lr I0 6
Joe
t'GOW/.U� !�I/
SHEET NO
OF
/,9
^ 0.0111
1
I 7-L
CALCULATED By
'
DATE ` 163
CHECKED BY
2
DATE
SCALE
4-ro 2KGIE
I
; 'T10�
. .. 1�7
LV I'V
v ✓G lr I0 6
�"�7S `�N1. E'
t'GOW/.U� !�I/
�/3
5
/,9
^ 0.0111
2
1:4q
p•5'��GY>�oo)
I2= `/P
-C� =
2
5 °oGrS
2.S GFS
7V6-
(, D
,
F
;
i
HANDBOOK OF HYDRAULICS
Table 74. For Determining the Area a of the Cross Section of a
Circular Conduit Flo-wing Part Full
depth of water D
Let diameter of channel = d and C, =the tabulated value. Then a = Cad =.
D
d
00
.01
.02
.03
. .04
.05
.06
.07
.08
.09
.0
.0000
.0013
.0037
.00 G9
.0105
.0147
.0192
.0242
.0294
.0350
.1
.0409
.0470
.0534
.0600
.0068
.0739
.0811
.0885
.09G1
.1039
.2
.1118
.1199
.1281
.1365
.1449
.1535
.1 G23
.1711
.1800
.1890
.3
.1982
.2074
.2167
.2260
.2355
.2450
.2540
.2G42
.2739
.2836
.4
.2934
.3032
.3130
.3229
.3328
.3428
.3527
.3G27
.3727
.3827
.5
.393
.403
.413
.423
.433
.443
.453
.4 G2
.472
.482
.6
.492
.502
.512
.521
.531
.540
.550
.559
.569
.578
.7
.587
.596
.605
.014
.623
G32
.640
.649
.657
.66G
.8
.674
.681
G89
.097
.704
.�2
.719
.725
.732
.738
.9
I .745
.750
.75G
.761
.766
.771
.775
.779
.782
.784
Table 7 -5. For Determining the Hydraulic Radius r of the Cross
Section of a Circular Conduit Flow•in& Part Full
depth of cater D
Let dismeter of channel e and C, =the tabulated valve. Then r = C.d.
D
d
00
.01
.112
.03
.04
.05
OG
.07
.08
.09
.0
I
- 000
.007
.013
.020
.026
.033
.039
.045
.051
.057
.1
.063
.070
.075
.081
.087
.093
.099
.104
.110
.115
2
.121
.126
.131
.136
.142
.147
.152
.157
.161
.166
.3
I .171
.176
.180
.185
.189
.193
.198
.202
.206
.210
.4
.214
.215
.222
226
.229
.233
.23G
.240
.243
.247
'a.5
I .2$0
.253
256
.259
.202
.265
.268
.270
273
.275
.G
.278
.280
.252
.284
.256
.288
.290
.292
.293
.295
2296
.295
.299
.300
.301
.311"
.302
.303
.304
.304
.8
.304
.304
.304
.3114
.304
.303
.301
.302
.301
.299
.9
I .298
.29G
294
.292
289
286
I 283
279
.274
267
STEADY tiNIFORM FLOW IN OPEN CHANNELS 7 -59
Table 7 -1:3. Values of K for Circular Channels in the Formula
n
D = depth of water d = diameter of channel
D
d I
i
.00
.01
.02
.03
.04
.03
.06
.07
.03
.09
.0
15.03
10.56
8.57
7.38
6.55
0.95
5.47
5.08
4.7G
.1
4.49
4.25
4.04
3.86
3.69
3.54
3.41
3.28
. 3.17
3.06
.2
2M6
2.87
2.79
2.71
3.63
2.3G
2.49
2.43.-
-2.36
2.30
.3
2.95
2.20
2.14
2.00
2.05
2.00
1.9G
1 1.92
1.37
1.84
.4
1.30
1.76
1.72
1.69
1.66
1.62
1.59
I 1.56
1.53
1.50
.5
1.470
1.442
1.415
1.388
1.362
1.336
1.311
1.281i
1.262
1. 235
.G
1.215
1.10 2
1.170
1.148
1.1 20
1.105
1.08+
1.06+
1.043
1.0 23
.7
1.004
.934
.965
.947
.923
.910
.391
.874
.8-56
.33
.8
.821
.804
.737
.770
.753
.73(i
.720
.703
.(587
.670
.9
.6541
.637
.621
AIN
.588
.571
.553
.533
.516
.496
1.0
: {Ii:SI-
-
--
I-
Table 7 -14. Valuati of / ' For Circular Channels in the Formula
1` _ 1
in _
D = depth of cater d = diaOletCr of channel
D
d
00
.01
.02
M031
.03
.0.1
.05
.06
.07
US
09
.0
.00007
.00074
.00138
.002222
.00325
.00455
.0060 -1
.00775
.1
.00967
.0118
.01-13
.O167
.019:)
.0225
.0257
.0291
.0327
.03(36
.2
.04OG
.0443
.0493
.0537
.0585
.0634
.0GSG
.0738
.0793
.0849
.3
.0907
.09GG
.1027
.1089
.1153
.1218
.1254
.1352
.1430
.1490
.4
.1561
.1G33
.1705
.1770
.1334
.1929
.2005
.3082
.21 GO
.3233
.5
.23f"
.239
.247
.255
.263
271
.379
287
.295
.303
.6
.311
.319
.327
.335
.343
.350
.358
.366
.3 73
.380
.7
.388
.305
.402
.400
.416
.422
.429
.435
.441
.447
.8
.453
.458
.463 i3
.4G8
.473
.477
.4S 1
.485
.488
.491
.9
.494
.496
.497
.498
.498
.498
.4136
.494
.489
.483
1.0
L
.4G3
MAXIMt VYA QUALITY TREATMENT' BAS114 I
I
PROP. & (TD SE ISYSrEM);.
'wL i �i,b995.F.
P x e r z}
k�
�f
asr
GRAPHIC 5CA E
jvr
—§--�f't'
- ARE �
L�3L ^G.Pi
I z Mill. A LAREA =?0 $ F�
�} >` �
n l° y,
wl� \
B 4 �K� '� s
fo- �Y tnL
BE TREA
PAD �R PPROP. YELWW to M
F n,77b S.F.
j
P BLUE �0 SWT40ZLY BW.- DITrW ;
t
T�
j�
SOWARDS AND [OWN ENGINEERII I
HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS STUDY
FOR
ST. JOHN'S CATHOLIC CHURCH
1001 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED BY:
2✓ n'lv
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING, INC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
2187 NEWCASTLE AVE., SUITE 103, CARDIFF, CA 92007 �{
(619) 436 -8500 �? V � % `V 1 D
puG 21 '1991
96-049
1 C, OF January 3, 1997
, S
2187 NEWCASTLE AVENUE • SUITE 103 • CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CA 92007 - 619/436 -8500
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB g(r-m'9
SHEET NO.
CALCULATED BY
CHECKED BY
DATE 1-1-1.7
DATE
t4t Q_U
!um:
At
�AIA
A
I
ve!51CW
4 �VL 100 Fr:kg
&A Cq *16�
TDf
Y� .4
P-*-M
A.-
rb
J_S
f g*:vkc'e
tA
iu To jy'di
01"
1A'r
k4-s
IALS'
4-A
. . . .......... .
L
- — ----- ------
If V9 QE> . 4*
Ar _w4 ..... .. . ..
I
zod IAU
4
yy
xc _4* .__.4.
41
r .... -J >d&
f
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY 1HE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB 962 -OGI
SHEET NO. z - OF
CALCULATED BY DATE
CHECKED BY
SCALE
DATE
MOM
MEN
I
P.
P 0
rM
RIP
PQ
M
MOM
NoMM
ME
NONE
MAINE
ONOMME
M
MIMMEMMEM
INNOMEMN
MENNEN!
MEMOMMM
-
MEMEMMOM
MOM
MOMME
NONE
E
■
MOM
IME
■
MAINE
IMMEM
No
EMME
MOM
mom
MENNEN
MEN
MOM
0
EMEMMIMMENEM
Irm
MOM
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
Joe to -Croq
SHEET NO.
CALCULATED BY 4'S
CHECKED BY — DATE
-3 -4-7
roA) 6F
.3 b AO
Laj
I
+,94q
I
-fee
q,55
t
04
-V jwmm W4-� NJ C d L
---L
AG
—T
f
J&I,
jM Q 0 (!;6q o S;
1 z
0.7q.
.. . ...... . -4-4
10
I
i
n
rt_r7
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB %
SHEET NO,
CALCULATED BY VS
OF
DATE 1-3-q-7
CHECKED BY - DATE
F�'p
A
4
6MIMIJA
5 A
-c-AW—MV-4
LE
E
�A
=
I 013co
4y,
a
L,
e
it
fJ
4
. .. ... -7
. . .. 4
A-r-e-A.-
-j-
(4
5C
.
... ......
ZE
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB 96 0(09
SHEET NO. 5 - OF
CALCULATED BY V5 - DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
Aj
S4'
C.-
aatirsa
Ij-
wu
T-1
U
_j_
- - - -
- - - - - -
-
- - --- -
T-
. .. . ...
. ..
. ......
7-1
. . .... ........ . ..
. .....
.............-
....A.._..-
. . .....
.... . ..
..........
..
.........
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB q( 0(-19
SHEET NO- 6-1 - OF
CALCULATED BY V!;- - DATE -3'-q7
CHECKED
............
Via
0
AIkJ
V1
of
.011
J�z
i i5
VC,
.. .... .
.....
....... ..
........ .
5
L
>
- II ie
0
Vo
1
11 /�
4
1
... X11(......:
....
r
. ........ ....
r
4,-OF,
..... . ... ..
.
'7
7'-
_jk
SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING
2187 Newcastle Ave., Suite 103
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007
JOB g(o 067
SHEET NO. I OF
CALCULATED BY VC- — DATE ( l 3 -q-7
CHECKED BY — DATE
C-4 o4
fM
pa
-IF
rp i4L
it%&
(V,
(ClAA
Id
0.S
.5'e,
V114*
x
rz�
2. 01107,
—
s'_
+
_ 1Ad
-1639OLSP
ft'19!tgLX6�i
-
x1z'
Ls
ll
4D
x
T-
�6t
4
�-fg
IA.)AAZ
Dm-
17-
L.,NT7 OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION S.
FLOOD CONTROL
451
''20-1 ISQPLUVIALS OF 160 -YEAR 6410UU
E RECIz iTA ION I"N L14TINS U AN I YTH
j
id cb : c151 •;I \ A
I NI LAG :. A QEACII —
j01 i 30
SAN CL h:ENTE
1
3
ls1 '
j PROJECT SITE
33° I 1
451
U.S. DEPARTMEN C OF comet RCE L
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. 0SPIt£R1C ADMINISTRATION
SPECIAL STUDIES DRANCN, OFFICC OF 11 DROLOOY. NATIONAL REATI(ER SERVICE
301
a 1181 451 301 151
v
lC
117°
Ll
451
27.5
301
151
• ,1
%ECCA 17
116°
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 100 -YEAR 2-4_1.10013 PRECIPITATION
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION b_ 1 4+ j
FLOOD CONTROL
, 20 _/ISGPLUV1ALS OF 100 -YEAR 24 -HOUR
PRECIPITATION. 11.1 TENTHS OF AN INCH
45' � � — rM,1'S �
lOD 4
tac I +n o ,clap ( t Snc£
30.
�Aft Ir
SAN CL M£NIE e D _ L - - \J - __ •`
70 n0 \100 46
ou
4.1.
I I •a .NSiuI. 1 _
4�� I �\ 701/
40 -
PROJECT SITE
33' — ' po'Wn _l - —70 :
1 '' _l \ 50 t
1 f 1
., ,rl ran• 1 1 � 1 i/ � �30 :\ �
,
70 i. 5 J Imo—
45'
Prep. .a bf
U.S. DEPARTMEN r OF COMMERCE ' � ` 70 '; 7�a cur. to I , �
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. OSPIIE RIC ADMINISTRATION / / /,f- -� `ro 0454 '
SPECIAL STUDIES BRANCH, OFFICE Of n DROLOGY, NATIONAL DEATITER SERVICE SA At. 6560
1.--- < 45160 0`80705 0
301
A
lit{° 30' 151 117° 45r lot 151 1lf.
w '
r.
s.
L
7.
e
,a
4.
]Re
1'1'�r1J ♦I l� ✓r!�'�vn ✓rJlurl Yul11./ i
Equation: I 7.44 P6 D
I fl Intensity (In. /fir.)
( p6 = 6 Hr. Precipitation (In.)
�II�Il,D Duration Win.) ,
1II!j:lit
;1
L�
,s •.:.i.( 1_�i fait ilk;
, -1111; k
i
A -r :- 1,•
I
X11
10: 15 20 30 40 50 1 .2 3 4
HiriuteS
:i�'• III
Z
ti
5
rn
,
x
0
c
-s
b
6.0 °;
5.5 0
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5 :r
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
F
_ 1g8A
Directions for Application:
1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr. an
24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency.
These maps are printed in the County Hydro
Manual (10, 50 and 100 yr. maps included i
Design and Procedure Manual).
2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (if necessary)
that it is within the range of 45% to 65%
the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not applicable
to Desert)
3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the right side
of the chart;,
4) Draw a line through the point parallel to
plotted lines.
5) This line is the intensity- duration curve
the location being analyzed.
Application Form:
0) Selected Frequency X00 yr..
1) P6 = 2.% in., P24= 7 3 , *P6 =67_.�S %i
P24
2) Adjusted *P6= 2.7 in.
3 ) tc = /O min.
4) I ZI .55 in /hr.
*Not Applicable to Desert Region
This chart replaces the Intensity -
Duration- Frequency curves used since
1955.
n
''f :'
NOTES:
(1) Type D soil to be used for all areas.
(2) Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated
imperviousness values of 80% or 90 %, the values given for coefficient C,
may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual
imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall
the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial
property on D soil.
Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 80%
Revised C = D x 0.85 = 0.53
— RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL.
METHOD) .
- DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN)
Land Use
Coefficient C
Soil Type to
Residential:
Single Family
.55
Multi -Units
,70
Mobile Homes
.65
Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre)
,45
Commercial (2)
80% Impervious
,85
Industrial (2)
90% Impervious
.95
NOTES:
(1) Type D soil to be used for all areas.
(2) Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated
imperviousness values of 80% or 90 %, the values given for coefficient C,
may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual
imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall
the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial
property on D soil.
Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 80%
Revised C = D x 0.85 = 0.53
l,lh 1`1
%
A MT
1 '
r
ONGq
ATOHIS PLAN N0. 9348 -0 1
fca THIS AREA �\ ( IV1Nli ��
e u
T '
�� B LDING B O
F.F. 286,5 -
'PAD 2858 P,
-" fill
M a
2 L�3
��tNtie' at i a2gaep a-Ad � W. ��{��'
QlAo 821ff ODC %> 1.1104 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I� U O n i J (JG7m1
W
d Bi
676
1 G I � � �•
jt� 455 Ff�lR 455141,E 14 5J
m D_
NQ IAI ND 4
J
I Q664
9qC I 036AC
4260
UWC 0064C
1, J5eg 10Mf4
1r
C
074
DSI
GBt d &2
�r�
a 55 tuf ; 0 55ru(
a 50ru N� 1 4 �5 l
a`
`'
s
s G
286 8
REVISIONS
APPROVED
DATE
REFERENCES
DATE
BENCH STARK
SCALL
i
i
—
P
s
a�e
TO
VD
\ a
3 �S A
Q
o �
X,
N �
C.
D'/
= a�
-_ -
ik
1va fll� l
Sys. a ewi n- h
BUILDING 'F't %� --
s
� -i✓-m— M FF 304 5 �
LOWER FF 29t5
PAD 290.8
z �
m
t E'
� BUILDING E' � ` `� � `/ i
4 > � tiP -
a
d"
%�
g,
-„W3933 A• 659 50
APPRGVALS TY F E.NCINI TAS PUBLIC V40RKS DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO
PLANS PRSh_D UNDER 9k ERN$IpN {ffi RE—DENOW
I ST. JOHN'S CHURCH (PHASE I)
� ' & °AT£ s 1001 ENCINITAS BLVD, SHEET OF I -
RANDY R. VNN gjaD/pp R,C E. R.C.E.
ENCIN 0,40DR- ��