The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPE 2.84.04; LA COSTA ESTATES NORTH LOT 18; Engineering ApplicationV19 RECEIVED Application for Grading Permit PE NO. 'Ll aA* 04 CITY OF CARLSBAD APR251984 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT :1200 Elm Avenue CITY OF CARLSBAD 438-5541 Validation by Finance p~VJEER DE~ARTMENT Department Buil a n eck No. FOR APPLICANT TO FILL IN ~bb nnn'r A61nn M Site Address Surety Company '76"n 4\1 o. 66"00 --2 AUNA60* f?A-CF, 44 4WA Legal DescZiption Map No. Surety Address OT Aj A , z Subdivision Name d Rec'd by Owner Phone Cash depo ReCd by Date filed ,lim Rlovce, lq4Z- 7717777 $ Owner's Address The following documents are required and shall become a part 6 &2. gi &i,06K P!JAC~F, 64CIAIJIM4 of the grading permit when they are approved. Plans by Civil Engineer R.C.E. Grading plans Specifications &PJAV-P,~, Soil report Geolog'Ic Report Address Phone 5%7 -/Vv' NNY Zt~W&ww *1-1616 Drainage structures Other Soil Engineer R.C.E. Phorle Compaction report 5oWAFIX 6440- -01-16fis G~a. ~iontractor Phone SPECIAL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE MADE \Sa- A. PART OFTH IS PERMIT Address 1 Authorized hours of operation: C 7:00 AM to Sunset, Monday - Friday. Party responsible for overall supervision ZA449--i9Z 2. Haul routes are to be approved by City Engineer. Proposed use of grade site K65,11,11PR%4TIA4. 471T& Num6er of cubic yards Cut Fill Import Waste Proposed Schedule of Start Finish _ L Operations- (dates) 1 hereby acknowledge that I have read the application and state-that the information I have provided is correct and agree to comply with all Citv ordinances and State laws renulatinn,excavatinn and nradinn Adequate provisions~ shall be made for erosion and siltation control. All slopes shall be planted per City Code. All fills to be.compacted to at least.90% of optimum density unless noted otherwise. I Under City Code Sec. 11-06 170 this grading is: and the provisions and conditions of any permit issued pursuant to [I REGULAR GRADING - City inspector will make inspections this application. jisted below. N,ONTROLLED GRADING - Private grading engineer shall Signature of Permi observe work, coordinate tests, make reports. Owner or authorized 7age INSPECTION DATE INSP. SIGNATURE /7 Initial - site prep. W ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE - Date ,Rough - prior to dralrfW~% E I A'Log No. I I ~ flzl.? I By 14M~; Final - slopes plantef- - IN-4 1, 9 1 , 1. 0 Compaction reports rec'd. Grading permit fee $ Plan c fee $ 1 RIAR 141984 Permit Issue 11 Rrivate engr. cert. rec'd. by Date ZA- gf — Copies: White-OeffyGof-tb .0) j AMSBAD Permit Expiration Date / Z-1- f / g-1 Yellow-Inspector; Oirik-Peimittee; Goldenrod-Finance THISFORMWHEN PROPERLY VALIDATED ISAPERMITTO DO THE WORK DESCRIBED THIS PERMIT IS VALID FOR A SIX (6) MONTH PERIOD COUNTY OF SAN DIEGG DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE c CODES DIVISION 13 San Die" Office~ North Countv,Offlce. 5201 Ruffin Road, Suite S3 334 Vla,Vere Crum RETURN TO: Son Dimp. CA. 92123 San Marcos, CA 92069 5664M 741-4236 Proj act Locatiow 10' A-6? U A Pl_,Nm.- of Permittee- 1,A CySerA Grading Permit A4* i ,2-9,+,0+ VW0J0r -Z57-1 5 1 This report form for a "ftinor" grading- project is- to be completed aT4 signed by the Registered,~I~ Engineer (or Architect) who has been designated on the Grading Plan and Per i ~as tke Engineer whiR~ furnish the. compaction report forwork authorized by a grading permit issued by the Depa-rtme*e-*E-?Tanning and Land Use. The intent of the, format is to provide information to the Departmeirkt of Planning and Land Use as to grading compliance with the approved Grading Plan and Permit :. Where the questions below refer to location, configuTation-or quantity of cut and/or fill areas, it is understood that your response will,not normally be based on an-actual land survey or detailed earthwork.quantity calculations. It should be noted, however, that~the Department is particularly concerned where there are possible infractions with respect to over- steepened slopes, encroachments of required setbacks, uncompacted fills placed, or where the quantity of fill .placed differs substantially from that authorized. -The Department 'of Planning. and Land Use requires that all fill& authorized by a Grading Permit be compacted to & minimum of9atof*maximum density with the exception that not more than 1211 of uncompacted and untested fills may be-dispersed over the land parcel. The-need1to,compact all fills that are beyond the present limits of the present proposed construction~.is to insure.that future proposed construction of room additions or swimming pools or similar structures will not require that uncompacted fills be,removed or recompacted, or that extensive foundation work be1nstalled. Comnaction r — will not be acc—ted unl a this form is.co—Leted and si—ed bv,the r—istered nerson. A. CMPATIBILr1T WrTH- GRADING PLAN AND PEW4rT Was the compacted fill placed only'in the appraidmte.loi:atioiis-designated.on the grading Yes X. No plan as areas to- be filled? — Did themquantity of fill material placecL approximately conform to the grading plan? Yes-X "p— S. Did the.toe of fill,or the . top of cut appear to meet.the prescribed property line setback Yes-2( No (1.S' forfill; 3.01 for cuts)? — 4. Were the finished fill slopes-equal.to or less.than 2 horizontal to.1 vertical! Yes s. If the fill material was obtained by cuts on the site, were the cuts made in the proper Yesx— No location and to the proper slope approximately as-shown on the approved grading plan? — 6. Were brow ditches constructed approximately as shown-on the.grading plan? Yes )e No s. Locnroii AND AmouNT oF compxnm TESTS 1. ~Have you attached a sketch,and.data showing.,the location and relative elevation forall Yesl No compaction tests? — .2. Was a compaction test made so that there, is at least one- test in, each 21 thick lens of Yesl No~ compacted material? Yes X, As indicated by inspections, observations and compaction test results, was the fill., No excluding the top 1.0.!, compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density? C. QUALITY OF FILL.CaXPAaI0N opmTroN Was the area to receive fill properly prepared.in terms of brush removal, benching, yes-X No_ wetting, removal of noncompacted fill or debris and related items? Was all detrimentally expansive soil placed in the fill at 3 1 or more below.finish grade? Yes X No- Have you attached a cory of your curve showing -the relationship between optimilm moisture Yes -y' No content 4nd.maximum density? — Was all material used as fill (earth, rocks. gravel) smaller than 1,21' in size? Yes-A No- 3. Are all areas of the fill suitable for sup rt of structares* I Po Yes X No — 6. Were all existing fills on the site recompacted in accordance with-th.e provisions of the- Yes_& No_ grading ordinance? 0 Rdv. r 0 D. STATISTICAL,DATA 7 Dates the grading work was performed: M AA4 Dates your representative was on site and number of hours on site for each date, and name of representative: 7-7 0 (AJA_fZ-V5 E. AS-BUILT DATA.' ,1. 1f the fill placement was not in accordance with the approved grading plan, did you notify Yes.; the permittee to obtain approval for deviation from the-plan before proceeding with- additional fill placement? 2. If.the approved grading plan-does not reflect the actual location, depth.and typ&of fill. Yes—_..;- No have you submitted for review;ind approval an as-built plan? REMARKS: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the informatidn provided in this certification is true to the-best of my knowledge and belief. Signa~ ate T b, ig 0 er or Arc4Ltect) Registration or Certification %mber 124:& '26F444- Address 5 27 ^4 .- A" /o 4;t-A~-q Telephone Number 4re t , w16 "'M -, . 0 OPL =7- Re%f. 3_-_71a