Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RP 01-09; Carlsbad Village Self Storage; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (3)
BACKGROUND RECEIVED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I JUL 2 5 2001 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) HOUSING & REDEVELOPA/IEN ? DEPARTMENT CASE NO: gPO\"0^ DATE RECEIVED: l/zslo 1 (To be completed by staff) 1. CASE NAME: CAIR^LSR^O VjlAy/^f^ S6^F JTQlU^i^ 2. APPLICANT: V/m IfTU^iTnj^^^ 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Of? (M9A thf A- r 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ^ 3 STOlU^ T/l^ sr fAJ THe, Ctn C^^ne^re^/rO. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that would be potentially affected by this project. This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Public Services I I Population and Housing Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Geological Problems Energy & Mineral Resources Aesthetics I I Water Q]] Hazards Cultural Resources I I Air Quality Q Noise []J Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the envirormient. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the folloving pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses foilowing each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Sigmficant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. • Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures .that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overridmg Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? ( ) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) h) Expansive soils? ( ) i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) IV. WATER. Wouid the proposal resuh in: a) Changes m absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) Potentially Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Significan Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • D • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • No Impact Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) g) Altered du-ection or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) g) Rail, waterbome or au* traffic impacts? ( ) Potentially Significant Impact • Potentially Less Than Significant Significan Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • No Impact • • • • • • K • • • & • • • • • • • • • • • > • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Rev. 03/28/96 Potentially Significant Impact VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wastefiil and inefficient manner? ( ) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of fiiture value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • X • • • • • • K • • • IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (mcluding, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable bmsh, grass, or frees? ( ) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fu-e protection? ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) c) Schools? ( ) • • • K • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Rev. 03/28/96 d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) e) Other govemmental services? ( ) XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) b) Communications systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonsfrate negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontologicalj-esources?( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) c) Affect historical resources? ( ) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significan Impact Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • p. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • D • • • • • • • • • ^ Rev. 03/28/96 XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or resfrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or elimmate important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • Less Than No Significan Impact t Impact • X • X XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were vdthin the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions for the project. Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please use this area to discuss any of the environmental factors that were checked "No impacf yet lack any information citations and any factors that were checked "Potentially Significant Impacf or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." The City has adopted a "Statement of Overriding Consideration" with regard to air quality and circulation impacts resulting from the normal buildout according to the General Plan. The following sample text is intended to guide your discussion of the impacts to these environmental factors. AIR OUALITY: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent wdth and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attainment basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impacf. This project is consistent v^th the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Coimcil Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the Planning Department. CIRCULATION: The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections v^ll be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections 9 Rev. 03/28/96 are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impacf. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impacts is required. LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES QF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) 10 Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I. Land Use and Planning A. No Impact: The project is in conformance with the District 6 criteria of the Village Redevelopment Plan. "Storage Buildings / Warehouses" is a permitted use. B. No Impact: Self storage is a light industrial use meeting the environmental criteria set by the District 6 land use regulations, evidenced by the permitted use designation outline in IA. C. No Impact: The light industrial use is compatible with the District 6 regulations , again evidenced by the permitted use designation outlined in 1 A. D. No Impact: The existing site uses are not agricultural. E. No Impact: The proposed storage use is a quiet, low traffic generating use. II. Population and Housing A. No Impact: The proposed project is nonresidential, resulting in no population increase. B. No Impact: The proposed project is an infill project in a redevelopment area. The storage use is passive and has little impact on infrastmcture. C. No Impact: The existing site use is a glass / tile shop, resulting in no residential displacement. III. Geologic Problems A. No Impact: The project site is not in a known fault zone. B. No Impact: The project site is not in a known fault zone. C. No Impact: The project site is not in a known fault zone. D. No Impact: The project site is not on the coast, or near a volcano. E. No Impact: The project site is flat with no slopes. F. No Impact: The project site is currently developed, and appears stable. Environmental Impact Assessment Form Carlsbad Village Self Storage Carlsbad, California G. No Impact: The project site is currently developed, and appears stable. H. No Impact: Expansive soils, if determined to be on site by a soils report, can easily be mitigated by foundation design enhancements. I. No Impact: None are evident from site observations. IV. Water A. Less Than Significant Impact: The existing site is largely developed and paved, similar to the proposed project. Therefore, absorption rates will remain unchanged, as will the rate and amount of runoff. Drainage pattems will be slightly altered by the new site configuration of the proposed project. B. No Impact: The proposed project will have proper site drainage designed to City standards. C. No Impact: The site does not drain into surface waters, thereby not affecting surface water quality. D. No Impact: The site is small (approximately 2.02 acres) and does not drain to surface waters. E. No Impact: Drainage is surface mn-off to the west. F. No Impact: Drainage rates are unchanged and only slightly altered as noted in A above. G. No Impact: Groundwater is unaffected by replacement of existing constmction with the proposed project. H. No Impact: Groundwater is unaffected by replacement of existing constmction with the proposed project. I. No Impact: Groundwater is unaffected by replacement of existing constmction with the proposed project. V. Air Quality A. Less Than Significant Impact: The storage use will generate a minor amount of vehicular traffic and the associated auto emissions from that traffic. Environmental Impact Assessment Form Carlsbad Village Self Storage Carlsbad, California B. Less Than Significant Impact: As noted in V-A above. C. No Impact: The proposed project is too small to affect climate. D. No Impact: The proposed project does not create odors, as it is a passive storage use. VI. Transportation / Circulation A. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed storage use is a low traffic generator, but will most likely slightly increase traffic above the current land use. B. No Impact: The use is not agricultural, and does not re-route existing streets. C. No Impact: The proposed project is on private property, and does not affect City street alignments. D. No Impact: The parking demand of the project is met by the design of the site. E. No Impact: The project does not create any barrier to existing pedestrian / bicycle traffic in the area. Sidewalks would be added where there are none today, thereby improving pedestrian circulation in the area. F. No Impact: Bus tumouts and bicycle racks are not planned for this area. G. No Impact: Trains, boats and planes are not affected. VII. Biological Resources A. No Impact: Endangered or rare species are not known to exist at the site, as it is currently developed. B. No Impact: There are no significant trees existing on the site. C. No Impact: The site is developed and no natural communities are evident. D. No Impact: The site is not in a wetland area. E. No Impact: The site is small, fully developed, and not knovm to be part of a specific wildlife dispersal or migration corridor. Environmental Impact Assessment Form Carlsbad Village Self Storage Carlsbad, California VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources A. No Impact: The project would be required to comply with all state and energy laws at the time of building pennits. B. No Impact: As noted in VIII-A above. C. No Impact: The storage use is passive, and a very low energy user, including mineral resources. IX. Hazards A. No Impact: The storage use is passive, and not a manufacturing or processing land use. B. No Impact: The site is not part of an evacuation corridor. C. No Impact: Storage is a passive use. D. No Impact: Storage is a passive use. E. No Impact: The proposed project does not encroach into vegetated areas. X. Noise A. Less Than Significant Impact: The storage use includes loading / unloading from cars and small tmcks, which creates occasional low volume noise. B. No Impact: The storage use is passive, and creates a small amount of noise only. XI. Public Services A. Less Than Significant Impact: Fire services may be needed. B. Less Than Significant Impact: Police service may be needed. C. No Impact: The project is not residential. D. Less Than Significant Impact: Road maintenance may be needed occasionally due to minor traffic to and from the site Environmental Impact Assessment Form Carlsbad Village Self Storage Carlsbad, California E. No Impact: No other services would be needed or used. XII Utilities and Services Systems A. Less Than Significant Impact: Power would be used in the building, as would natural gas. The use is very minor, however B. Less Than Significant Impact: Phone and cable service would be used by the project. C. Less Than Significant Impact: Water and sewer would be used by the project. The use is very minor. D. Less Than Significant Impact: Sewer service would be used by the project, but not a septic system. E. Less Than Significant Impact: Storm water would discharge by surface flow to the west. The City storm drain system is not affected. F. Less Than Significant Impact: A minor amount of solid waste is generated by the project management. Trash enclosures are not accessible to the public at this facility. G. No Impact: The project is very small at 2.02 acres. XIII. Aesthetics A. No Impact: The site is flat, with no views. B. No Impact: The project is designed to a very high aesthetic criteria. C. Less Than Significant Impact: Minor light would be created by night use and night security lighting. No glare will spill offsite due to the use of shoe box type light fixtures. XIV. Cultural Resources A. No Impact: The site is developed and has no known paieontological resources. B. No Impact: The site is developed and has no knovm archaelogical resources. Environmental Impact Assessment Form Carlsbad Village Self Storage Carlsbad, California C. No Impact: The site is developed and has no knovm historical resources. D. No Impact: The site is developed and has no knovm ethnic cultural values. E. No Impact: The project would not affect religious or sacred uses. XV. Recreational A. No Impact: The project is not residential. B. No Impact: The project is self contained on its ovm site, and does not affect existing parks, beaches, etc. XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. No Impact: As detailed in sections I-XV above. B. No Impact: The scope of the project is small. C. No Impact: The scope of the project is small. CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE 10 YEAR STUDY FOR EXISTiNG AND PROPOSED RUNOFF '^^^ 25 2001 SUMMARY After careful hydrology studies for the 10 year runoff for both the existing and the proposed developments conditions; it was found that in the case of the existing situation, the total runoff was equal to 6.20 cfs directed to the existing drainage ditch on the AT&SF RR R/W. The proposed condition is having only a runoff of 3.75 cfs directed also to the same existing drainage ditch. This difference in runoff, mainly because of the proposed condition is having larger areas of landscaping. CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE (RMA Job No. 785 - 0100) 10 YEAR STUDY FOR EXISTING RUNOFF July 24, 2001 PREPARED BY HABIB WARWAR, P.E. APPROVED BY RONALD MARTIN, P.E. RON MARTIN & ASSOCIATES 942 CALLE NEGOCIO, SUITE 100 SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA 92673 (949)369 - 8080 HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS The hydrology study is performed for the 10-year storm runoff quantities for the existing developed conditions. Under this existing condition, the drainage of the site is directed to the southwest property iine to an existing debris basin and thence to the existing drainage ditch on the AT & SF RR R/W. The drainage area is divided into two tributary areas "A" and "B". Using the data, equations, charts and criteria ofthe County of San Diego Hydrology manual, the Rational Method is used to determine water runoff calculations ofthe drainage area shown on the 10 Year Study for Existing RunofT nfiap included. The soil group of the site can be classified as Soil Group "B". The site location is having a latitude of 33.157 degrees, and a longitude of 117.346. From the 10 - year 6 - hour precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in. CALCULATIONS Q = CIA AREA"A" Area "A" = L0 acre Area "A" can be classified as 17% pervious, and 83% unpervious. The vaiue of the nmoflf coeflBcient C can be detennined from appendix DC For an industrial developed area with 90% impervious. From the chart, for soil group "B" and 90% impervious, find C = 0.85 Revised C = 83 x 0.85 = 0.78 90 Elevation of most remote point = 46.8 ft. Elevation of point of concentration = 41.6 ft. Difference in elevation = 5.2 fl. Travel length = 450 ft. Slope = 5.2/450 = 1.2% From appendk X-C, find Tc = 12 min. From the 10-Year 6-Hour Precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in No adjustment is needed for P6 -0.645 Use the equation I = 7.44 P6 D -0.645 I = (7.44)(1.7)(12) I = 2.55 in/hr Q = (0.78) (2.55) (1.0) 0= 1.99 cfs AREA"B" Area "B" = 1.0 acre Area "B" can be classified as 0% pervious, and 100% impervious. The value of the nmoflf coeflBcient C can be detennined from appendk DC For an industrial developed area with 90% impervious. From the chart, for soil group "B" and 90% impervious, find C = 0.85 Revised C = 100 x 0.85 = 0.94 90 Elevation of most remote point = 46.1 ft. Elevation of point of concentration = 41.6 ft. Difference in elevation = 4.5 ft. Travel length = 300 ft. Slope = 4.5/300 = 1.5% From appendbc X-C, find Tc = 5 min. From the 10-Year 6-Hour Precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in No adjustment is needed for P6 -0.645 Use the equation I = 7.44 P6 D -0.645 I = (7.44)(1.7)(5) I = 4.48 in/hr Q = (0.94) (4.48) (1.0) 0 = 4.21 cfs Q tot = 1.99 + 4.21 = 6.20 cfs Q total for the existing condition O = 6.20 cfs RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) PgygLOPgD ARgAS (URBAN) Land Use Coefficient. C Soii Group Residentiai: Singie Family .40 .45 .50 .55 Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70 Mobile Homes .45 .50 .55 .65 Rural (lots greater than 1 /2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45 Commercial 80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 .85 Industrial 90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95 NOTES: Soil Group maps are avaiiabie at the offices of the Department of Pubiic Works. 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 shail the final coefficient be iess than 0.50. For example: Consider commerciai property on 0 soil group. Actual imperviousness ~ 50% Tabulated imperviousness » 80% Revised C = 5£ x 0.85 = 0.53 30 lV-A-9 APPENDIX IX Updated 4/93 £zt7/Tfp/a S/ofiia - AO % o/ ^Lt/7o//. C '.SO SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES APPROVED DESIGN MANUAL^ URBAN AREAS OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW CURVES DATE APPENDIX X-C IV-A-12 U>eB/?A/ y^^S^S Oi^£yeL/PyV£> T/AfS OF FLO[V CU/eVFS £xc7/7fp/a 0/Ve/? • Z^/r^//^ a/* F/ot^ • JOO //^ S/opa /.O % Cos//'/::/e/7/ o/ £it/7o//. C ' .SO SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DESIGN MANUAL APPROVED -JH r < URBAN AREAS OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW CURVES DATE /; APPENDIX X-C IV-A-12 GGOSOLSiMC. •NXXfNIITWW mac:(Minvwr NK(iaiTiijra oaNTwrKMRrKMirr 10 YEAR STUDY FQR EXI8TMG RUNOFF CM«»M) VUME SELF nORAGE I'li^L'tJ Ml No. I 1 OFI CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE (RMA Job No. 785-0100) 10 YEAR STUDY FOR PROPOSED RUNOFF July 24, 2001 PREPARED BY HABIB WARWAR, P.E. APPROVED BY RONALD MARTIN, P.E. RON MARTIN & ASSOCIATES 942 CALLE NEGOCIO, SUITE 100 SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA 92673 (949)369 - 8080 HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS The hydrology study is performed for the 10-year storm runoff quantities for the proposed developed conditions. Under this proposal, the drainage of the site is directed to the southwest property iine and thence to the existing drainage ditch on the AT & SF RR R/W. The drainage area is divided into two tributary areas "A" and "B". Using the data, equations, charts and criteria of the County of San Diego Hydrology manual, the Rational Method is used to determine water runoff calculations of the drainage area shown on the 10 Year Study for Proposed RunofT map included. The soil group of the site can be classified as Soil Group "B". The site location is having a latitude of 33.157 degrees, and a longitude of 117.346. From the 10 - year 6 - hour precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in. CALCULATIONS Q = CIA AREA"A" Area "A" = 1.18 Acres Area "A" can be classified as 75.8% impervious and 24.2% pervious. The value of the nmoflf coeflBcient C can be determined from appendix DC For a commercial developed area with 80% impervious. From the chart, for soil group "B" and 80% impervious, find C = 0.75 Revised C = 75.8x 0.75 = 0.71 80 Elevation of most remote point = 46.9 ft. Elevation of point of concentration = 42.4 ft. Diflference in elevation = 4.5 ft. Travel lengtii = 450 ft. Slope = 4.5/450 = 1.0% From appendk X-C, find Tc = 15 min. From the 10-Year 6-Hour Precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in No adjustment is needed for P6 -0.645 Use the equation I = 7.44 P6 D -0.645 I = (7.44) (1.7) (15) 1 = 2.21 in/hr Q = (0.71) (2.21) (1.18) 0 = 1.85 cfs AREA"B" Area "B" = 0.85 acre Area "B" can be classified as 16.6% pervious, and 83.4% impervious. The value of the runoff coeflBcient C can be determined from appendk DC For a commercial developed area with 80% impervious. From the chart, for soil group "B" and 90% impervious, find C = 0.75 Revised C = 83.4x 0.75 = 0.78 80 Elevation of most remote point = 46.5 ft. Elevation of point of concentration = 42.4 ft. Diflference in elevation = 4.1 ft. Travel lengtii = 300 ft. Slope = 4.1/300 = 1.4% From appendk X-C, find Tc = 10 min. From the 10-Year 6-Hour Precipitation, find P6 = 1.7 in No adjustment is needed for P6 -0.645 Use the equation I = 7.44 P6 D -0.645 I = (7.44) (1.7) (10) I = 2.86 in/hr Q = (0.78) (2.86) (0.85) 0= 1.90 cfs Qtot = 1.85+ 1.90 = 3.75 cfe Q total for the proposed condition O = 3.75 cfs COUHTY OF SAH DIEGO DEPARTHENT OF SANITATION ( FLOOD CONTROL '•5 10-YEAR 6-IIOUrt PnECIPITATION 16- ISOPLUVIftl-S OF 10-YEAR G-llflUa pnnciPiTATion iti unTiis OF AM INCH 30' 15 33* NATIOKAL OCEANIC AMD Al f PECIAL •TUDIC9 BRANCH, OFFICE OF lh 30' I. «i5 PMP U.S. DEPARTMEr}T OF COMMERCE - 118* RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN) Coefficient. C Soil Group Land Use A Q. Residential: Single Family .40 .45 .50 .55 Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70 Mobile Homes .45 .50 .55 .65 Rural (lots greater than 112 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45 Commercial . 80% Imoervious .70 .75 .80 .85 Industrial 90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95 NOTES: (11 (2) Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works. Where actual conditions deviate significantiy 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 shail the finai coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group. Actual imperviousness = 50% Tabulated imperviousness » 80% Revised C = x 0.85 = 0.53 80 IV-A-9 APPENDIX IX Updated 4/93 U^es^/^ /Py?£^S Oi<£/eLF/VD r/M£ OF FLO}^ (OU/?]/££ P/<'OP(^S^'^^' CO ^D^ T/O A/ £xa/79p/a O/ i^c/7 • I iT/rg/zh a/* F/ok^ • SOO /P. S/opa ' /.O % Ooe/Z'/^/a/f/ a/ £11/70//. C - .SO SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENTOF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DESIGN MANUAL_^ APPROVED ^ '' ^ i T URBAN AREAS OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW CURVES DATE nil APPENDIX X-C IV-A-12 UFBFA/ /?F£^S Oi/'£yeLF/V£> T/MF OF FLOW CUFVFS /9^F/? 'S'" £xa/rtp/a 0/ t^e/T • l^/r^/zh a/ F/o»v • SOO /A S/opa ' AO % Caa/A'Ac/s/?/ o/ Fif/7o//. C '.SO Feae:A • Ok^/rrAcna^ FAowA/nfe '/^ M//7Lr/<TS SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DESIGN MANUAL_ URBAN AREAS OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW CURVES SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES DESIGN MANUAL_ r^^rr /'/r/^A APPENDIX X-C T\/_ A .1 n APPENDIX X-C T\/_ A .1 n Ge06QU.MC. moNKQiqin-rai HNB, MC< INOaOTNHTMY WUi K tWnW MH44II m 10 YEM STUDY FOR PROPOSED RUNOFF CARLSBM) VUAGE SELF SIORAQE MNo. 10P1 Exhibit "Pll" ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: RPOl-09 DATE: November 1.2001 BACKGROUND 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CASE NAME: Carlsbad Village Self-Storage APPLICANT: HNB. Inc ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 29095 Rockv Point Wv. Escondido. CA 92026 760-751-2017 DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Julv 25. 2001 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Redevelopment Permit for the replacement of a glass and tile manufacturing building with a 148.000 square foot, three-storv self-storage facility with a 1.350 square foot office on an existing industrial lot. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. I I Land Use and Plaiming I I Population and Housing I I Geological Problems • water Air Quality Transportation/Circulation Q Public Services I I Biological Resources Q Utilities & Service Systems I I Energy & Mineral Resources Aesthetics I I Hazards I I Noise I I Cultural Resources I I Recreation I I Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 03/28/96 DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the enviromnent, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. XI I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I I I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a sigmficant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Comphance has been prepared. Date Planning Director'sSignafure Date Rev. 03/28/96 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impacf to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. Rev. 03/28/96 • If there are one or more potentially sigmficant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or detennine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end ofthe forai under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicimty? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 -5.6-18) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18) II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fauh rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) b) Seismic ground shaking? (# 1 :Pgs 5.1 -1 - 5.1 -15) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1.15) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) e) Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15) g) Subsidence ofthe land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) h) Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15) i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15) IV. WATER. Would the proposal resuh in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- 11) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (#1 :Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2- 11) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 -5..2-11) Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • m • s • • • X • • • X • • • X V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- 1 - 5.3-12) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) d) Create objectionable odors? (#1 :Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12) X • • • • • • X • • • X • • • X VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1-5.7.22) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 -5.7.22) g) Rail, waterbome or air tiaffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22) VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage frees)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1-5.4-24) • • • • • • Kl • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1-5.4-24) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#l:Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24) Potentially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • Less Than Significant Impact • • • No Impact Kl VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal? a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wastefiil and inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13- 1-5.13-9) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of fiiture value to the region and the residents ofthe State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1-5.13-9) IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1-5.10.1-5) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable bmsh, grass, or frees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9- 15) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9- 1 - 5.9-15) • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6) b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4) c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other govemmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7) • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). a) Power or natiiral gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1-5.13-9) b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water freatment or distribution facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7) e) Storm water drainage? (#1 :Pg 5.2-8) f) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3) g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7) Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • Less Than No Significant Impact Impact • • • • • • • Kl Kl Kl X X m XIII AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs • • • X 5.11-1-5.11-5) • • • X b) Have a demonsfrated negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs • • • X 5.11-1-5.11-5) • • • X c) Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.11-1 - 5.11-5) • • • X XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would tiie proposal: a) Disturb paieontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8- 10) c) Affect historical resources? (#1 :Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs 5.8- 1 - 5.8-10) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10) XV. RECREATIONAL. Would tiie proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1-5.12.8-7) XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the envfronment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 03/28/96 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b) Does the project have impacts that are individually | | [ [ | | ^ limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable fiiture projects)? c) Does the project have envfronmental effects which will |^ | [ | | ^ cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either dfrectly or indfrectly? XVn. EARLIER ANALYSES. The Carlsbad Village Self-Storage site has imdergone environmental review on two previous occasions. The previous environmental review documents include the Master Environmental Impact Report for the 1994 General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01) and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual. The MEIR reviewed the potential environmental impacts associated with buildout of the City's General Plan, including transportation and air quality. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual reviewed the potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Village Redevelopment Area in accordance with the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual. All applicable mitigation measures contained in these two documents that are relevant to the proposed project have been incorporated into the project design or are expressly listed in the mitigation measures below. As mentioned above, the project falls within the scope of the City's MEIR for the City of Carlsbad General Plan update (EIR 93-01) certified in September, 1994, in which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for cumulative impacts to air quality and traffic. MEIR's may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project except under certain circumstances. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real, has been mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. All feasible mitigation measures identified by the MEIR which are appropriate to this project have been incorporated into the project. Rev. 03/28/96 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The proposal involves the demolition of an existing glass and tile manufacturing facility and the construction and operation of a self-storage facility on an existing lot generally located on the west side of Tyler Street, between Oak Avenue and Chestnut Avenue in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The site is surrounded by industrial development on the north and south and is bordered by the North San Diego Railroad right-of-way on the west. To the east, across the Tyler Street right-of-way, is a mixture of vacant land, auto repair and single family residential development. The proposed self-storage facility would consist of two buildings totaling 148,000 square feet. The buildings would contain three stories and would measure 35 feet in height. An architectural feature on one ofthe buildings would reach 40 feet in height to the peak of the pitched roof The 148,000 square feet would also include a 1,350 square foot office for facility operations and management. The site has been reviewed through a geotechnical evaluation (Preliminarv Geotechnical Evaluation for 3235 - 3265 Tvler Street and Update Geotechnical Evaluation for 3267/3281 Tvler Street. Carlsbad. San Diego Countv. Califoraia. dated November 2, 2001, HNB, Inc.) and no significant adverse soils or geologic impacts will occur. The proposal conforms to all applicable regulations, including the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual as well as the City's General Plan. The proposed in-fill project, therefore, will not create any significant adverse environmental impacts. AIR OUALITY: In 1994 the City prepared and certified an EIR which analyzed the impacts which will result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concludes that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts in the form of increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attainment basin", any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan build-out, a variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alteraative modes of transportation including mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by 10 Rev. 03/28/96 City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR. This project is within the scope ofthat MEIR. This document is available at the Planning Department. CIRCULATION: In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at build-out. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out, numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop alteraative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the failure of intersections at build-out of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Coimcil Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all projects covered by the General Plan's Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning Department. A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years ago, the City's preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances imder which the MEIR was certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. 11 Rev. 03/28/96 EARLIER ANALYSES USED The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, Califoraia, 92008, (760) 602-4600. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City ofCarlsbad Planning Department. 2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Village Redevelopment Master Plan and Design Manual, adopted December 5,1995, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 3. Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for 3235 - 3265 Tvler Street and Update Geotechnical Evaluation for 3267/3281 Tvler Street. Carlsbad, San Diego County. Cahforaia, dated November 2, 2001, HNB, Inc. 12 Rev. 03/28/96 PIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES r r-^ 11 M > 742 GENEVIEVE STREET, SUITE G, SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 ^ ^ 858/259-3140 FAX: 858/259-3157 RECEfVEO JUL 2 5 2001 Jmie 20, 2001 HOUSING & REbM«E^ DEPARTMENT '^^'^ Mr. Robert Schmitt HNB, Inc. 29095 Rocky Point Way Escondido, CA 92026 RE: Environmental Site Assessment of the property located at 3235 to 3281 (odd) Tyler Street, Carlsbad, California Assessor Parcel Nos. 204-10-11 to 12 and 204-070-01 to 07 PIC Environmental Services (PIC) is pleased to submit this correspondence regarding an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the above-referenced property located at 3235 to 3281 (odd) Tyler Street, Carlsbad, California. This assessment was performed on behalf of HNB, Inc., : ...: ./^^^-A-A ; i-^ and prospective lenders providing funding to these parties. The scope of work consisted of the following: • An inspection of the property for evidence of hazardous materials releases; • Interviews with the current property owners; A reconnaissance inspection of adjacent properties; • A review of historical city directories; and A review of governmental database records regarding properties in the vicinity. On the basis of our investigation we have concluded that there is a low likelihood that the subject property has been significantiy impacted by releases of hazardous or regulated substances. PIC inspected the property, interviewed Mr. J.C. Fikes and Mr. Sean Gildea (property owners), and reviewed historical city directories between June 4 and June 11,2001. Mr. Fikes owns the property at 3235 Tyler Street and Mr. Gildea represents the owner of the property at 3251 -3281 (odd) Tyler Street Governmental database records were compiled in a report dated May 24, 2001. The results of our investigation are briefly summarized as follows: HNB, Inc. June 20, 2001 Price Self Storage Holding, LLC Page 2 The subject property is currently subdivided into two (2) pieces: 3235 Tyler Street and 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street, Carlsbad, Califoraia. The property referenced as 3235 Tyler Street consists of three (3) adjacent parcels (APNs 204-010-11, 204-010-12, and 204-070-01). Two (2) industrial buildings, divided into offices and warehouse space, are located on this site. The property referenced as 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street is comprised of six (6) adjacent parcels (204-070-02 to 204-070-07). Two (2) storage buildings and one (1) former residential building are located on this piece. Both pieces are currently occupied by Oceanside Glasstile, a tile manufacturing company. The property at 3235 Tyler Street is used for manufacturing purposes, and the property at 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street is used primarily for vehicle parking and storage. Evidence of hazardous materials and/or regulated substances storage and use were observed in the tile production area of 3235 Tyler Street. These materials were limited primarily to solid materials such as calcium carbonate, calcium fluoride, sodium nitrate, borax, soda ash, and zinc oxide, used for the production of glass tiles. No evidence of significant spillage or leakage was observed in association with these items. No other evidence of hazardous material and/or regulated substance storage or spillage was observed at the subject property. Historical use of the subject property was evaluated based on information provided by Mr. Sean Gildea and Mr. J.C. Fikes (property owners), a review of historical city directories, and 10 historical aerial photographs ranging in age from 1947 to 1999. The subject property and site vicinity may have been developed for agricultural use prior to 1947. The property at 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street appeared to be developed for residential use between 1947 and 1953. Approximately six (6) small residential buildings were present at this property from prior to 1953 until sometime between 1975 and 1980. Land use at this property appeared to become primarily commercial and/or industrial prior to 1980, and the warehouse building in the westem portion of the property was apparently constructed between 1975 and 1980. Commercial uses included a vehicle towing company, a concrete cutting company, and a rod iron fabricating company. This property has been owned and operated by Oceanside Glasstile from 1999 until present. The existing industrial buildings at 3235 Tyler Street were reportedly constructed in approximately the mid-1940s. The property was operated by aircraft parts manufacturing companies: Ametek Straza, Straza Industries, and Southera Califoraia Signal until the early-1990s. Tenants of the property since the early-1990s include Oceanside Glasstile, Virtuous Group, Kafana Wholesale, Heatherington Roofing, and Season Four Ceramics. PIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HNB, Inc. June 20, 2001 Price Self Storage Holding, LLC Page 3 4. An unknown quantity of cutting and machining oils that were generated from aircraft parts manufacturing operations were released to the subsurface soil at 3235 Tyler Street. The source of the release, discharging oil-laden water directly to the ground surface and an earthen sump, was terminated sometime prior to 1990. Based on the results of site assessment operations conducted at the site from 1992 to 1999, a plume of petroleum- impacted soil and groundwater is present, primarily in the southwest portion of this property. The plume of petroleum-impacted soil is well defined and appears to extend onto the northwest portion of the 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street piece. The product detected in soil and groundwater samples appeared to be oils that were characterized by relatively long carbon chains and did not possess toxic properties. The petroleum impacted soil and groundwater is non-hazardous and non-toxic. Based on the nature and extent of impacted soil and groundwater, the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) and State of Califoraia, Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (RWQCB) concluded that "No Further Action" was required with regards to site assessment and/or mitigation. A copy of the DEH letter indicating that No Further Action is required is attached. 5. The subject property is bounded to the east by Tyler Street, to the north by an automobile storage yard and residential property, to the west by a railroad easement, and to the south by an industrial facility. The area east of the subject property, across Tyler Street, is occupied by residences, an automotive repair facility, and a vacant parcel. The area west of the subject property, across the railroad easement, is occupied by residential properties. No evidence of hazardous or regulated substances spillage or contamination was observed on adjacent or nearby properties. 6. PIC reviewed a governmental database report dated June 4, 2001 that listed sites in the vicinity of the subject property where hazardous materials were stored or where there was a history of releases. According to the report, 63 listings are located within approximately one (1) mile of the subject property. The property at 3235 Tyler Street was listed as a closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site in association with the above referenced unauthorized release. This property was also listed in the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health database due to the storage of hazardous materials and/or regulated substances at this property. It has been determined that No Further Action is required with respect to regulated or hazardous substances at 3235 Tyler Street. A former tenant of the property at 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street, Jobe Gay Concrete Sawing, was listed in the report as a small quantity regulated waste generator. No action was/is warranted with respect to former waste generation at 3251-3281 (odd) Tyler Street. There were no other listings within the immediate site vicinity. 7. PIC recommends No Further Action at this time regarding environmental site assessment and/or mitigation. PIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HNB, Inc. Price Self Storage Holding, LLC June 20, 2001 Page 4 This correspondence is proprietary and confidential, to be delivered to, and intended for the exclusive use of, the above referenced clients only. Please note that the scope of work excludes inspections for asbestos containing materials or lead-based paint. PIC Environmental Services assumes no responsibility nor liability for the reliance herein or use hereof by anyone other than the above named clients. Furthermore, the results of the government database review was prepared and provided by Vista Information Solutions, Inc., which is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided. Thank you for the opportunity to work on your behalf If you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of this report, please contact Danny Oliver at (858) 259-3140. Respectfully submitted, PIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Scott Green Project Manager Daniel C. Oliver Califoraia Registered Geologist No. 4781 President attachments ES7728 ESA PIC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ CLIENT INFORMATION 1 1 Project Name/Ref #: ES7728 3235 3251 Tyler Street Carlsbad. CA Latitude/Longitude: ( 33.156615, 117.345125 ) Scott Green j PIC Environmental Services 742 Genevieve Street, Suite G i Solana Beach. CA 92075 | 1 Site Distribution Summary within 1/8 mile 1/8 to 1/4 mile 1/4 to 1/2 mile 1/2 to Imile Agency / Database - Type of Records US EPA US EPA US EPA STATE NPL National Priority List CORRACTS RCRA Corrective Actions (w/o TSD) TSD RCRA Corrective Actions and CORRACTS associated TSD State equivalent priority list 0 0 0 0 0 0 B) Databases searched to 1/2 mile: "STATE ! US EPA I ;US EPA i I STATE ; REG CO '\ STATE/ REG/CO STATE :STATE STATE SCL__ _ CERCLIS/" NFRAP TSD LUST SWLF DEED RSTR CORTESE State^equiyalenj_CERCLIS Hst Sites currently or formerly under review by US EPA RCRA permitted treatment, storage, disposaKacilities _ Leai<ing Underground Storage tanks Permitted as solid waste landfills, incinerators, or transfer stations Sites with deed restrictions 1 1 0 17 0 TOXIC I PITS IUSGS/STAT WATER ! WELLS STATE SPILLS State index of properties with hazardous waste Toxic Pits cleanup facilities Federal and State Drinking Water Sources State spills list C) Databases searched to 1/4 mile: RCRA violations/enforcement actions i US EPA i US EPA ' STATE RCRA Viol TRIS"^ UST/AST Toxic Release Inventory database Registered underground or aboveground storage tanks 0 0 For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page#1 Site Distribution Summary Agency / Database - Type of Records within 1/8 miie 1/8 to 1/4 mile 1/4 to 1/2 mile 1/2 to 1 mile D) Databases searched to 1/8 mile: US EPA ERNS Emergency Response Notification System of spills US EPA GNRTR RCRA registered small or large generators of hazardous waste COUNTY HE17 SD County Hazardous Materials/Waste/Violations Database 0 2 17 • - 1 US EPA NOTIFIER RCRIS Notifiers 0 - 1 {This report meets the ASTM standard E-1527 for standard federal and state government database research j in a Phase I environmental site assessment. A (-) indicates a distance not searched because it exceeds ! these ASTM search parameters. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY I Customer proceeds at its own risk in choosing to rely on VISTA services, in whole or in part, prior to proceeding with any I transaction. VISTA cannot be an Insurer of the accuracy of the information, errors occurring In conversion of data, or for j customer's use of data. VISTA and its affiliated companies, officers, agents, employees and independent contractors cannot be held liable for accuracy, storage, delivery, loss or expense suffered by customer resulting directiy or indirectly from any • information provided by VISTA. NOTES For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #2 SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT Map of Sites within One Mile Subject Site Miles Category: Databases Searched to: Single Sites Multiple Sites 1 mi. • • B 1/2 mi. C 1/4 mi. A A D 1/8 mi. O O Highways and Major Roads Roads Railroads Rivers or Water Bodies Utilities RCRA VIOL, ERNS, TRIS, UST GENERATORS NPU SPL. CERCLIS\ CORRACTS NFRAP, (TSD) TSD. LUST, SWLF, SCL If additional datattases are listed in the cover page of the report they are also displayed on this map. The map symbol used coaesporxls to the database category letter A.B.C.D For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403 Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Page if3 SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT Map of Sites within Quarter Mile Miles Subject Site Category: Databases Searched to: Single Sites Multiple Sites -J A 1 mi. • • B 1/2 mi. C 1/4 mi. D 1/8 mi. r) Highways and Major Roads Roads Railroads Rivers or Water Bodies Utilities NPL. SPL CERCL1S\ RCRA VIOL. ERNS, CORRACTS NFRAP, TRIS, UST GENERATORS (TSD) TSD, LUST, SWLF, SCL If additional databases are listed in the cover page of the report they are also displayed on this map. The map symbol used corresponds to the database category letter A.B.C.D. For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403 Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Page tM SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT Street Map Subject Site Highways and Major Roads Roads Railroads Rivers or Water Bodies Utilities For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403 Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Page #5 SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT SITE INVENTORY MAP ID PROPERTY ANDTHE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION IA IA COAST WEST SMALL ENGINE REPAI 3235 TYLER ST A CARLSBAD, CA 92008 6527385 0.00 Ml NA OCEANSIDE GLASSTILE CO. 3235 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 5447156 0.00 M/ NA IB DAVES RADIATOR SERVICE 3235 ROOSEVELT ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4040112 0.00 M/ NA IB FRED HERNANDEZ AUTOMOTIVE INC 3235 ROOSEVELT ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 4040113 0.00 Ml NA 10 ID JOBE GAY CONCRETE SAWING 3281 TYLER CARLSBAD. CA 92008 219150 0.00 Ml NA CCPAl NT/CARLSBAD VILLAGE AUTO 3293 ROOSEVELT ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 62427943 0.00 Ml NA IE K K LABS INC 3305 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 230146 0.00 Ml NA 2A A-1 RADIATOR 3197 TYLER ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 7770099 0.03 Ml NW 2A A-1 AUTO DISMANTLING 3195 TYLER CARLSBAD, CA 92008 1558 0.03 Ml NW 2A CARLSBAD AUTO SERVICE 3181 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 6613767 0.03 Ml NW X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #6 MAP ID PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION (0 2A A-1 AUTO CARE 3193 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3500019 0.03 Ml NW 2 A CARLSBAD VILLAGE AUTO-BODY 3191 TYLER ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 4044942 0.03 Ml NW 2B 20 CARLSBAD AUTO SVC 3163 ROOSEVELT AVE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 3498872 0.06 Ml N INDIANA PLUMBING SUPPLY CO 3135 TYLER CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4044940 0.07 Ml NW 2D BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF CARLSBAD 3115 ROOSEVELT ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65993563 0.09 Ml N 2E CARLSBAD VILLAGE RENTALS 505 OAK CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3079653 0.10 Ml NW JC'S MOBILE SERVICE 413 CHESTNUT AV#F CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4021974 0.07 Ml S CITY OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES 405 OAK CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3497362 0.11 Ml NW PUBLIC WORKS YARD 405 OAK CARLSBAD. CA 92008 1636758 0.11 Ml NW i 4 CITY OF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 65004379 0.11 Ml NW CARLSBAD CITY OF 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 70703 O.n Ml NW X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #7 MAP ID SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65402553 0.15 Ml NE CARLSBAD USD 801 PINE AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 70712 0.15 Ml NE ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING C 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 93164 7431919 0.18 Ml NW CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4824415 0.19 Ml NW ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3491773 0.19 Ml NW 7A LILLIAN WALKER 417 ELMAV CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4025774 0.20 Ml NW 7B JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4043602 0.21 Ml NW PACIFIC BELL 3368 HARDING STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 315258 0.22 Ml E .A. MAP 10 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) VISTA-iD DISTANCE DIRECTION CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 70700 0.25 Ml W J_L X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #8 MAP ID 10 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4-1/2 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4023460 0.30 Ml N CO 0) 10 10 TOSCO CORP #2705723 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65156397 0.30 Ml N GASCO SERVICE STATION #511 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4023452 0.33 Ml N 10 GASCO 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR511 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65993444 0.33 Ml N 10 GASCO SERVICE STATION 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4985325 0.33 Ml N 11 11 11 CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN HOMES 2855 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 7431920 0.36 Ml NW CARLSBAD BY THE SEA 2855 CARLSBAD CARLSBAD. CA 92008 6831158 0.36 Ml NW CARLSBAD BY THE SEA 2855 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD. CA 92008 65402551 0.36 Ml NW 12 CITY OF CARLSBAD 2779 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 5446427 0.40 Ml NW 12 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 2779 STATE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 5446428 0.40 Ml NW 12 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 2779 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65402016 0.40 Ml NW X = search criteria; . = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #9 MAP ID SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION CO 12 ALLIED MOVING STORAGE 2742 STATE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 f289924 0.4) Ml NW 13 CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 1044 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3995864 0.43 Ml NE 13 CARLSBAD CHEVRON 1044 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 4023453 043 Ml NE i I 13 CARLSBAD GAS PROPANE, INC 1089 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 65626716 0.43 Ml NE 13 13 CARLSBAD TEXACO 1089 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 SHELL SERVICE STATION 1145 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD. CA 92008 4023454 0.43 Ml NE 64559785 0.48 Ml NE 13 CARLSBAD SHELL 1145 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 4023455 0.48 Ml NE MAP 10 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/2 -1 mile) VISTA ID DISTANCE DIRECTION (0 -1 _l (0 III US H ^ (0 CL III O (£. (0 H O UJ _i tx: X H--J o o 1 0. o 1 (0 D <0 m u. <r-K- UJ O I z No Records Found X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page UIO UNMAPPED SITES VISTA ID (0 SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEACH HY 101 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 3494225 ! NORTH COUNTY LINCOLN MERC i5434 CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 7430800 PAC. SCENE FINANCIAL PROPERTY OOOO MAGNOLIA AV CARLSBAD, CA 92008 13509958 I VISTA BURNSITE IN AV/OCEANSIDE B OCEANSIDE, CAO 65506415 OCEANSIDE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 304 4TH ST OCEANSIDE, CA 0 65402024 AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER 6564f26 OWENS AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #11 SITE ASSESSMENT PLUS REPORT DETAILS PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) ! VISTA COAST WEST SMALL ENGINE REPAI VISTA 1D#: 6521385 1 Address*: 3235 TYLER ST A Distance/Direction: 0.00 MI /'NA ! ! CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point j |HE-17/SRC# 132 Agency ID: H35998 ; Map ID IA Agency Address: Permit No: Name: Address: City: Zip: State: H35998 COAST WEST SMALL ENGINE REPAI 3235 TYLER ST A CARLSBAD 92008 CA I Inactive Indicator: I Business Code Desc: ! Permit Exp Date: ! Phone: i Owner Name: Street No: Street Name: Building/Suite No: City: Zip: State: I Census Track No: I Inspection Date: ' Reinspection Date: Inspector Name: Contact: Delinquent Comment: Last Update: 1 GENL AUTO/CVCLE/TRUCK REP 0531 (619)729-6498 JEROME RICE 3235 TYLER ST A CARLSBAD 92008 CA 17900 03/04/1997 0:00:00 MAR 1998 CHAIRS JEROME RICE INACTIVATED 10/97 8/7/98 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Zip4(1). SIC(1). Status(l). Establisment Name(1). Street Direction(l). Zip4(1). Fire Dept Dist Name(1). EPA 10(1). Gas Station(l). Notice ol Violation Issued(l). Owner Name(1). Owner Street(2). Owner Direction(l). Owner Bldg/Suitett(1), Owner City(1). Owner Zip(1), Owner Zip4(1), Owner State(l), Tank Owner Name(1), Tank Owner Street(2), Tank Owner Direction(l). Tank Owner Bldg/SuitetHI). Tank Owner City(1). Tank Owner Zip(1). Tank Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner State(l), Status Desc(1), Tank Substance Stored Desc(1), Delinquent Flag( 1) i VISTA ' 'Address*: 1 i _ OCEANSIDE GLASSTILE CO. 3235 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 5447156 i VISTA ' 'Address*: 1 i _ OCEANSIDE GLASSTILE CO. 3235 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.00 Ml / NA i VISTA ' 'Address*: 1 i _ OCEANSIDE GLASSTILE CO. 3235 TYLER ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point |HE-17/SRC#132 Agency ID: H09657 Map 10 1A Permit No: H09657 ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Vefs/on2.7 Page #72 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. Name: OCEANSIDE GLASSTILE CO. Address: 3235 TYLER ST City: CARLSBAD izip: 92008 1 State: CA [Inventory Item No: D007 i Chemical Name: PROPANE. LPG ' Qty Stored at one Time: 55 {Annual Qty: 220 Units: GAL Storage Methods: CYLINDERS 1st Hazard Category: FIRE HAZARD ! 2nd Hazard Category: SUDDN RLSE OF PRES 1 . . ^ Inventory Item No: I Chemical Name: POTASSIUM ALUMINUM FLUORIDE 1 Qty Stored at one Time: 8000 Annual Qty: 45000 Units: LBS Storage Methods: FIBER/PLSTIC BOXES.CRTNS.CASES 1st Hazard Category: IMMED HEALTH HAZRD 2nd Hazard Category: OTHER Inventory Item No: D011 Chemical Name: LIME. CALCIUM CARBONATE 1 Qty Stored at one Time: 3000 Annual Qty: 6000 Units: LBS Storage Methods: BAGS: BRLAP.CLOTH.PAPER.PLSTIC 1st Hazard Category: FIRE HAZARD Inventory Item No: D010 Chemical Name: FLUORSPAR. CALCIUM FLUORIDE Qty Stored at one Time: 1000 Annual Qty: 2000 Units: Storage Methods: 1st Hazard Category: LBS BAGS: BRLAP.CLOTH.PAPER.PLSTIC IMMED HEALTH HAZRD Inventory Item No: ! Chemical Name: j Qty Stored at one Time: I Annual Qty: I Units: I Storage Methods: [ist Hazard Category: Inventory Item No: ' Chemical Name: Qty Stored at one Time: {Annual Qty: I Units: O009 POLYMERIC ISOCYANATE, W/POLYMERIC DIPHENYLMETHANE. PART A 55 165 GAL PLASTIC DRUMS.55 GALLONS IMMED HEALTH HAZRD 0008 AMINE CATALYST PART B. FOAM 55 165 GAL * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #13 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Inactive Indicator(l). Street Direction(l), Building/Suite No(1). Fire Dept Dist Name(1). EPA ID(1), Gas Station(l), Notice of Violation Issued(l), Owner Name(1). Owner Direction(l), Owner Bldg/Suite#(1). Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner Direction(l), Tank Owner Bldg/Suite#(1), Tank Owner Zip4(1), Tank Substance Stored Desc(1), Delinquent Flag(1), Waste Code(1) County LUST - County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#134 Agency ID: H04977 1 Agency Address: CITY OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES 405 OAKAV CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Establishment Permit #: H04977 iSite Name: CITY OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES Site Address: 405 OAKAV Site City: CARLSBAD Site State: Site Zip: CA 92008 Business Code: Permit Annual Expiration Date: Status: Inspection Date: Reinspection Date: Inspector Name: Site Contact: Media Affected: Substance Leaked: Discovery Date: PUBLIC UTILITIES DEC 31 ACTIVE SAM CASE, NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 10/25/2000 0:00:00 DEC 2001 CHAIRS GREG WOODS NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Release Occurence #: Historical Name: Date Release Began: Lead Agency: Case Type: Case Status: Case Status Date: 001 CITY OF CARLSBAD-PUBLIC WKSYD 4/23/1991 DEH TANK. RELEASE CLOSED 8/19/1999 1 Fields Not Reported by the Source Mailing street Directional(l). EPA ID #(1). is Facility a Gas Station(l). Tank 1 Agency for this Site: Subsfance Stored Descf t; County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 136 Agency ID: H04977 Agency Address: Name: Location: C/7"y OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES 405 OAKAV CARLSBAD. CA 92008 CITY OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES 405 OAKAV CARLSBAD. CA. 92008-3009 Total Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Total Underground Tanks: 2 Total Tanks Removed: 2 Permit No: H04977 Business Code Desc PU8L/C UTILITIES SIC No 9300 Permit Annual Expiration Date: DEC 31 Status 61 Business Phone: (760)434-2939 Owner Name: CITY OF CARLSBAD • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #42 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. 1 Second Establishment Name STREET DIVISION Mail Street No: 1635 Mail Street Name: FARADAY AV Mail City: CARLSBAD Mail Zip: 92008 Mail Zip4: 1949 Mail State: CA Corporate Code: 02 Census Tract No: 17900 Inspection Date 10/25/20000:00:00 Reinspection Date: 0112 Reinspection Date String: DEC 2001 Inspector Name CHAIRS Contact GREG WOODS Property Owner Street No 405 Property Owner Street Name OAKAV Property Owner City CARLSBAD Property Owner Zip 92008 Property State CA Tank Owner CARLSBAD CITY Tank Owner Street No 405 Tank Owner Street Name OAKAV Tank Owner City CARLSBAD Tank Owner Zip 92008 Tank Owner State CA Status Desc ACTIVE SAM CASE. NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 Business Plan Acceptance Date: 10/17/91 Delinquent Comment ACTIVE BUS AGAIN 11/9/00 Last Update: 12/23/00 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Permit No(1). Inactive Indicator(l), Mail Street Direction(l), Mail BIdg/Ste No(1), Map Code(1), Fire Dept Disthct(l), Epa ID(1), Gas Station (Y/N)(1). NoVce of Violation Issued(l), Property Owner(l), Property Owner Str Dir(1), Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Property Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner Street Dir(1). Tank Owner Bldg/Ste(1). Tank Owner Zip4(1). Tank Substance Stored Desc(1), Delinquent Flag(1), Last Delinquent Letter(1), Last Letter Type(1) VISTA Address*: PUBLIC WORKS YARD 405 OAK CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 1636758 VISTA Address*: PUBLIC WORKS YARD 405 OAK CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.11 MI/NW VISTA Address*: PUBLIC WORKS YARD 405 OAK CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point CORTESE/SRC# 53 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: List Name: Site ID: SAMEASABOVE LEAKING TANK 9UT1950 " VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #43 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. VISTA Address*: CITY OF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 65004379 VISTA Address*: CITY OF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.11 MI/NW VISTA Address*: CITY OF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point Regional LUST - Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 120 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Map ID I Agency Address: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site County: Site State: CITYOF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD. CA 0 CITYOF CARLSBAD. MAINTENANCE YARD 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD SAN DIEGO CA Case No: Local Case No: Case Type: Report Date: Lead Agency: Local Agency: Substance: Substance Qty Discovery Date: How Leak Was Discovered: How Leak Was Stopped: GW Depth Status: Datel: DateSa DateSb: Date9: Interim: Abatement Method: Stop Date: Basin: Beneficial Use: Beneficial Use Desc: Abatemethd Desc: Leak Cause: Leak Source: Priority: Program: 9UT1950 H04977-001 OTHER GROUND WATER NOT USEDFOR DRINKING OR NO BENEFICIAL USE 4/23/91 LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) SAN DIEGO GASOLINE 0 5/3/91 OTHER MEANS OTHER MEANS 8.7 CASE CLOSED 4/30/91 5/8/91 5/25/93 8/19/99 N ED 50^7 904.57 NBN NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USE EVACUATE AND DISPOSE UNKNOWN UNKNOWN MODERATE PRIORITY. HEALTH/SAFETY/ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: S//e Zip(1). Cross Street(l). Date5c(1), Date5r(1). Date7(1). Date8(1). Enforcement Type(1), Enforcement Date(1), Cao No(1). WdrNo(l), Npdes No(1) STATE LUST SRC#164 State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: Site Name: CITYOFCARLSBAD. MAINTENANCE 405 OAK ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 CITY OF CARLSBAD, MAINTENANCE * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #44 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. I Site Location: 405 OAK sr Site City: CAPLSBAD 1 Site State: CA i Site Zip: 92008 Site County: SAN DIEGO 1 Cross Street: VALLEY ST Water Quality Control Board Region: 09 Case ID #: 9UT1950 Local Case ID #: H04977-001 Media Affected: OTHER GROUNDWATER Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY LEAD Remediation Status CASE CLOSED Substance Leaked: GASOLINE Abatement Method: ED (CODE LOOKUP: CD-CAP SITE/CB-CONTAINMENT BARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCAVATE AND TREAT/FP-REMOVE FREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT AT HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOIUVE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIR SPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTIONREQUIRED) How was Leak Discovered OTHER MEANS How was Leak Stopped: OTHER MEANS i MTBE Tested MTBE NO T DETECTED Program Type: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Repsonsible Party: CITY OF CARLSBAD FLEET OPS Substance Quantity Leaked (G) 0 Cause of Leak UNKNOWN Source of Leak UNKNOWN Summary: NON-BEN USE GW BASIN. ALL PETROLEUM IMPACTED SOIL REMOVED FROM SITE IN "92. Date Leak was Confirmed: 4/30/1991 Date Preliminary Site Assessment Workpla 5/8/1991 Date Preliminary Site Assessment Began: 5/25/1993 Date Case was Closed: 6/19/1999 1 Date Leak was Discovered: 50/1991 MTBE Date 8/3/1999 1 Reported Date: 4/23/1991 Date Leak was Stopped: 5/3/1991 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Media Affected(l), Remediation Status(1), Enforcement Type(1). Funding By(1), How was Leak Discovered(l), How was Leak Stopped(l), Cause ofLeak(1), Source ofLeak(1), Longitude(1), Latitude(l), Date Pollution Characterization Began(l), Date Remediation Plan Submitted(l), Date Remedial Action Underway(l), Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Beg(1). Date of Enforcement Action(l) i VISTA ! Address*: i 1. CARLSBAD CITY OF 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 70703 i VISTA ! Address*: i 1. CARLSBAD CITY OF 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.11 MI/NW i VISTA ! Address*: i 1. CARLSBAD CITY OF 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point RCRA-SmGen - RCRA-Small Generator / SRC# 15 EPA ID: CAD981161516 Map ID 4 EPA Region: 09 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #45 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. Mailing Address: Significant Non-Complier Indicator: RCRA Facility Classification(s): Notification Type: Contact: Title: Phone: Contact Address: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Address: Owner/Operator Indicator: Owner/Operator Type: Owner/Operator Name: Phone: Address: Generator Indicator: Transporter Indicator: TSD Indicator: Burner/Blender Indicator: HWF Market to Burner Indicator: HWF Other Marketer Indicator HWF Burner Indicator: I Used Oil Fuel Marketer to Burner [indicat: iUsed Oil Fuel Burner Indicator: Specification Used Oil Marketing Indicat: Utility Boiler Indicator: Industrial Boiler Indicator: 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 HANDLER IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER AT BEGINNINGOF FISCAL YEAR. HANDLER IS NOTA MEMBER OFTHE SUBJECT TO CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIVERSE. HANDLER IS NOT A MEMBER OFTHE RCRA REGULATED TRANSPORTER UNIVERSE. HANDLER IS NOTA MEMBER OFTHE VERIFIED FULLY-REGULATED GENERATOR UNIVERSE. HANDLER IS A MEMBER OF THEVERIFIED SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR UNIVERSE. HANDLER IS NOTA MEMBER OFTHE VERIFIED CONDITIONALLYEXEMPT SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR UNIVERSE. FACILITY IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE VERIFIED STORAGE/TREATMENT UNIVERSE. FACILITY IS NOTA MEMBER OF THE VERIFIED LAND DISPOSALUNIVERSE. FACILITY IS NOTA MEMBER OF THE VERIFIED COMBUSTION UNIVERSE. NOTIFICATION DATA - CORE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER ENVIRO MANAGER (619) 438-5631 405 OAK AVE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 CURRENT OWNER MUNICIPAL CITYOFCARLSBAD (415) 555-1212 NOT REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED. ME 99999 CURRENT OPERA TOR MUNICIPAL NOT REQUIRED (415)555-1212 NOT REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED. ME 99999 SMALL OUANTITY GENERATOR UNVERIFIED NOTA TSD. UNVERIFIED UNVERIFIED NO GENERATOR-MARKETING-TO-BURNER ACTIVITY NO OTHER MARKETER ACTIVITY NO BURNER ACTIVITY NO MARKETING TO BURNER ACTIVITY NO USED OIL FUEL BURNER ACTIVITY NO SPEC. USED OIL FUEL MARKETING ACTIVITY NO ACTIVITY NO ACTIVITY • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #46 PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 1/8 mile) CONT. Industrial Furnace Indicator: Underground Injection Control Indicator: Used Oil Recycler Indicator: Used Oil Transporter Indicator: Used Oil Processor/Re-refiner: Air Transporter Indicator: Rail Transportation Indicator: Road Transportation Indicator: Water Transportation Indicator: Generator Status: Information Source: Date Submitted: NO ACT/wry wo ACTIVITY UNVERIFIED NO USED OIL TRANSPORT/TRANSFER FACILITY ACTIVITY NO PROCESS/RE-REFINE ACTIVITY DOES NOT TRANSPORT BY AIR DOES NOT TRANSPORT BY RAIL DOES NOT TRANSPORT BY ROAD DOES NOT TRANSPORT BY WATER RCRA REGULATED EPA INSPECTION 09/01/1996 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: HWF Other Marketer Indicator(l). Other Transportation Indicator(l), Generator Status Description(l), Transporter Status Descriptk>n(1), TSD Status Description(l), Burner/Blender Status(2), Transporter Status(l), TSD Status(l), Used Oil Recycler RCRA Regulatory Status(l) \ County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 | EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: Fuel Type: Size: WASTE OIL 250 CITY OF CARLSBAD UTILITIES 405 OAKAV CARLSBAD. CA 920083009 Tank Number: Tank Type: TOO 7 SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT I Pipe Type: iTank Id: CLOSED BY REMOVAL NOTAVAILA PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: 'unknown- I Test Status: i Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year installed: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Fuel Type: Size: REGULAR UNLEADED 2000 Tank Number: Tank Type: roo2 SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED ey REMOVAL NOTREPORTED SUCTION Alternate Monitor: "Not Available' Test Status: Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year Installed: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 65402553 VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.15 MI/NE VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point Regional LUST - Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 120 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Map ID 5 [Agency Address: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site County: I Site State: CAPLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD. CA 0 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD SAN DIEGO CA Case No: 9UT1080 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4. 2001 Version 2.7 Page #47 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. 1 Local Case No: H03066-007 'Case Type: OTHEP GROUND WATER NOT USEDFOR DRINKING OR NO BENEFICIAL USE 1 Report Date: 10/24/88 ; Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) j Local Agency: SAN DIEGO j Substance: KEROSENE Discovery Date: 10/24/88 How Leak Was Discovered: TANK CLOSURE How Leak Was Stopped: CLOSE TANK GW Depth 13.5 Status: CASE CLOSED 1 Datel: 10/24/88 Date3b: 10/24/88 1 Date7 4/4/90 ; Date9: 8/14/97 Interim: y Abatement Method: EDFP Stop Date: 10/24/88 Basin: 904.21 Beneficial Use: NBN Beneficial Use Desc: NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USE Leak Cause: UNKNOWN Leak Source: UNKNOWN Priority: MODERA TE PRIORI TY. WA TER RESOURCE PRO TEC TION \ Program: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST j Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Site Zip(1), Cross Street(l). Substance Qty(1), Date3a(1). Date5c(1). Date5r(1). Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Date8(1). Enforcement Type(1), Enforcement Date(1). Cao No(1). Wdr No(1). j Npdes No(1). Abatemethd Descf 7; ! VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD USD 801 PINE AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 70712 VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD USD 801 PINE AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.15 MI /NE VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD USD 801 PINE AVENUE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point STATE UST - State Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 45 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Map ID I Agency Address: i i Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: CAPLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 4 NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED CORTESE/SRC# 53 EPA/Agency ID: N/A [Agency Address: CARLSSAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 List Name: LEAKING TANK Site ID: 9UT1080 County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 EPA/Agency ID: N/A I Agency Address: I Fuel Type: Size: REGULAR UNLEADED 1000 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINEAV CARLSBAD. CA 920082430 Tank Number: Tank Type: TOO 7 SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #48 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. 1 Pipe Type: CLOSED By REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown" ! Tank Id: NOTAVAILA iTest Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED 1 Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: NOTREPORTED • Fuel Type: REGULAR UNLEADED Tank Number: T002 Size: 1000 Tank Type: SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown" Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year installed: NOTREPORTED Fuel Type: REGULAR UNLEADED Tank Number: T003 Size: 1000 Tank Type: SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown" Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year installed: NOTREPORTED Fuel Type: WASTE OIL Tank Number: 7004 Size: 500 Tank Type: S/NGLE IVALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown' Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: NOTREPORTED I County LUST - County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / iSRC#134 Agency ID: H03066 I Agency Address: i I Establishment Permit #: [Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site State: Site Zip: Status: Site Contact: Media Affected: Substance Leaked: Discovery Date: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINE AV CARLSBAD. CA 92008 H03066 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINEAV CARLSBAD CA 92008 ACTIVE SAM CASE. NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 KENNETH KUON NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Release Occurence #: 007 Historical Name: CAPLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST Date Release Began: 10/24/1988 Lead Agency: DEH Case Type: TANK, RELEASE (W) Case Status: CLOSED Case Status Date: 8/14/1997 Fields Not Reported by the Source ! Agency for this Site: Business Code(1). Permit Annual Expiration Date(1), Mailing Street Direclional(l). EPA ID #(1). Is Facility a Gas Station(l), Inspection Date(1), Reinspection Date(l). Inspector Name(1), Tank Substance Stored Desc(1), Business Plan Acceptance Date(1) ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #49 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. iCounty UST - County Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 136 [Agency ID: H03066 [Agency Address: I jName: iLocation: CARLSSAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINEAV CARLSBAD. CA 92008 CAf^SBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 801 PINEAV CARLSBAD. CA. 92008-2430 Total Aboveground Tanks: Total Underground Tanks: Total Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED 4 4 Permit No: SIC No Status Business Phone: Owner Name: Second Establishment Name Mail Street No: Mail Street Name: Mail City: Mail Zip: Mail Zip4: Mail State: Corporate Code: Census Tract No: Contact Status Desc Business Plan Acceptance Oate: Last Update: H03066 9400 67 ( ) • CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST #008372 1200 ELMAV CARLSBAD 92008 1949 CA 02 17900 KENNETH KUON ACTIVE SAM CASE, NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 / / 4/24/98 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Permit No(1). Inactive Indicator(l), Business Code Descf 7;, Permit Annual Expiration Date(1), Mail Street Direction(l), Mail BIdg/Ste No(1), Map Code(1). Fire Dept District(l), Epa ID(1), Gas Station (Y/N)(1). Inspection Date(1). Reinspection Date(1), Reinspection Date String(l), Inspector Name(1), Notice of Violation lssued(1). Property Owner(l). Property Owner Street No(1), Property Owner Str Dir(1), Property Owner Street Name(1). Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Property Owner City(1). Property Owner Zip(1), Property Owner Zip4(1), Property State(l). Tank Owner(l), Tank Owner Street No(1). Tank Owner Street Dir(1), Tank Owner Street Name(1), Tank Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Tank Owner City(1), Tank Owner Zip(1). Tank Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner State(l), Tank Substance Stored Descf 7;, Delinquent Comment(l), Delinquent Flag(1), Last Delinquent Letter(1), Last Letter Type(1) STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#164 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: CARLSSAD UNIFIED SCHOOL 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Site Name: CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL Site Location: 801 PINE AVE Site City: CARLSBAD Site State: CA Site Zip: 92008 Site County: SAN DIEGO Water Quality Controi Board Region: 09 Case ID #: 9UT1080 Local Case ID #: H03066-001 Media Affected OTHER GROUNDWATER * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID:627301901 Version 2.7 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Page #50 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. [ Lead Agency: LOCALAGENCyLEAD I Remediation Status CASE CLOSED ! Substance Leaked: KEROSENE , Abatement Method: i EDFP fCODE LOOKUP: CD-CAPSITE/CB-CONTAINMENTBARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCA VA TE AND TREA T/FP-REMOVEFREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT A T HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOILNE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIRSPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTION REQUIRED) Funding By RESPONSIBLE PARTY 1 How was Leak Discovered TANK CLOSURE How was Leak Stopped CLOSE TANK Program Type: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Repsonsible Party: CITY OF CARLSBAD Cause of Leak UNKNOWN 1 Source of Leak UNKNOWN Summary: SMALL AMOUNT OF PRODUCT REPORTEDL Y LEAKED FROM TANK WHENIT WAS CRUSHED DURING REMOVAL OPERATIONS. OTHERWISE. TANK APPEARED TO BE IN GOOD CONDITION.NBU B/E OC. GW FLOW TO NW Date Leak was Confirmed: 10/24/1988 Date Preliminary Site Assessment Began: 10/24/1988 Date Remedial Action Underway 4/4/1990 Date Case was Closed: 8/14/1997 Date Leak was Discovered: 10/24/1988 Reported Date: 10/24/1988 Date Leak was Stopped: 10/24/1988 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Cross Street(l). Media Affected(1). Remediation Status(l). Enforcement Type(1), Funding By(1). How was Leak Discovered(l), MTBE Tested(l). Substance Quantity Leaked (G)(1), Cause of Leak(1). Source of Leak(1), Longitude(l). Latitude(l). Date Preliminary Site Assessment Workpla(l). Date Pollution Characterization Began(l). Date Remediation Plan Submitted(l), Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Beg(1), Date of Enforcement Action(l), MTBE Date(1) VISTA 1 Address*: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING C 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE VISTA 1D#:. 7431919 VISTA 1 Address*: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING C 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE Distance/Direction: 0.18 MI/NW VISTA 1 Address*: CARLSBAD, CA 93164 Plotted as: Point CORTESE/SRC# 53 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: SAME AS ABOVE List Name: LEAKING TANK Site ID: 9UT2611 VISTA Address*: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 GARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 4824415 VISTA Address*: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 GARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.19 MI/NW VISTA Address*: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 GARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point STATE UST - State Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 45 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: SAME AS ABOVE Underground Tanks: ^ Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #51 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. VISTA Address*: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 3491773 VISTA Address*: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.19 MI/NW VISTA Address*: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point Regional LUST • Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 120 EP/VAgency ID: N/A [Agency Address: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site County: Site State: Case No: Local Case No: Case Type: Report Date: Lead Agency: Local Agency: Substance: Discovery Date: How Leak Was Discovered: How Leak Was Stopped: GW Depth Status: Date3b: Date9: Interim: Abatement Method: Stop Date: Basin: Beneficial Use: Beneficial Use Desc: Abatemethd Desc Leak Cause: Leak Source: Priority: Program: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD. CA 0 ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD SAN DIEGO CA 9UT2611 H20068-002 OTHER GROUND WATER NOT USEDFOR DRINKING OR NO BENEFICIAL USE 12/22/93 LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) SAN DIEGO DIESEL 11/10/93 TANK CLOSURE CLOSE TANK 76" CASE CLOSED 11/22/93 8/25/97 Y ED 11/10/93 904.31 NBN NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USE EVACUATE AND DISPOSE UNKNOWN PIPING HIGH PRIORITY. HEALTH/SAFETY/ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST i Fields Not Reported by the Source I Agency for this Site: S/(e Zip(1). Cross Street(l). Substance Qty(1). Datel(l). Date3a(1), Date5c(1). Date5r(1). Date7(1), Date8(1), Enforcement Type(1), Enforcement Date(1), Cao Nof 7;, WdrNo(l). Npdes No(1) County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 | EPA/Agency ID N/A Agency Address: Fuel Type: Size: DIESEL 10000 CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 920082304 Tank Number: Tank Type: roo7 SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE NOTAVAILA Alternate Monitor: 'unknown" * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #52 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. Test Status: NOT REPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: 1965 Fuel Type: LEADED Tank Number: T002 Size: 600 Tank Type: SINGLE WALL W/O SECNDRY CNTMNT Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: 'unknown" Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOT REPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: 1950 I County LUST iSRC#134 County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / Agency ID: H20068 Agency Address: Establishment Permit #: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site State: Site Zip: Status: Inspection Date Reinspection Date Inspector Name Site Contact: Media Affected: Substance Leaked: Discovery Date: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD. CA 92008 H20068 CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ACTIVE SAM CASE. NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 10/12/1993 0:00:00 OCT 1994 GALLAGHER MARK GOTTWIG NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Release Occurence #: Historical Name: Date Release Began: j Lead Agency: iCase Type: Case Status: Case Status Date: 007 CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 12/15/1988 DEH TANK. FAILED TEST CLOSED 12/29/1989 Release Occurence #: Historical Name: Date Release Began: Lead Agency: Case Type: Case Status: Case Status Date: 002 CONTINENTAL BAKING-CARLSBAD 11/10/1993 DEH TANK. RELEASE CLOSED 9/1/1997 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Business Code(1), SIC #{1). Pemiit Annual Expiration Date(1), Owner Contact(l). Mailing Street #(1). Mailing Street Directional(l). EPA ID #(1). Is Facility a Gas Station(l), Tank Substance Stored Descf 7; I County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 136 | Agency ID: H20068 Agency Address: Name: Location: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD. CA 92008 CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #53 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. CARLSSAD, CA. 92008-2304 [Total Aboveground Tanks: j Total Underground Tanks: NOT REPORTED 2 Total Tanks Removed: 2 Permit No: H20068 Status 67 Business Phone: f679;729-2887 Owner Name: CONTINENTAL BAKING CO Mail Street Name: P 0 BOX 2709 i Mail BIdg/Ste No 1401 Mail City: PAMONA Mail Zip: 91769 Mall Zlp4: 2709 Mail State: CA Corporate Code: 02 Census Tract No: 17900 Inspection Date 10/12/1993 0:00:00 Reinspection Date 9410 Reinspection Date String OCT 1994 inspector Name GALLAGHER Contact MARK GOTTWIG Property Owner Street No 171 Property Owner Street Name UTH ST Property Owner City SAN DIEGO Property Owner Zip 92112 Property State CA Tank Owner CONTINENTAL BAKING CO Tank Owner Street No 171 Tank Owner Street Name UTH ST Tank Owner City SAN DIEGO Tank Owner Zip 92101 Tank Owner State CA Status Desc ACTIVE SAM CASE. NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 Business Plan Acceptance Date: 10/03/91 Delinquent Comment CHANGED TO T75/00/00-1NAC Last Update: 7/10/98 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Permit No(1), Inactive lndicator(1). Business Code Desc(1), SIC No(1). Pemiit Annual Expiration Date(1), Second Establishment Name(1), Mail Street No(1), Mail Street Direction(l). Map Code(1). Fire Dept District(l), Epa ID(1), Gas Station (Y/N)(1), Notice of Violation lssued(1), Property Owner(1), Property Owner Str Dir(1), Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1) [STATE LUST !SRC#164 State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / EPA/Agency ID: N/A [Agency Address: Site Name: 'Site Location: Site City: Site State: ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD. CA 93164 ITT CONTINENTAL BAKING CO 571 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA * ViSTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #54 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. Site Zip: 93764 isite County: SAN D/EGO I Cross street HWY 5 1 Water Quality Control Board Region: 09 lease ID #: 9UT2611 1 Local Case ID #: H20068-002 j Media Affected OTHER GROUNDWATER ! Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY LEAD j Remediation Status CASE CLOSED 1 Substance Leaked: DIESEL 1 Abatement Method: 1 j ED (CODE LOOKUP: CD-CAP SITE/CB-CONTAINMENT BARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCAVATE AND TREAT/FP-REMOVE FREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT A T HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOILNE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIR SPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTIONREQUIRED) Funding By RESPONSIBLE PARTY How was Leak Discovered TANK CLOSURE How was Leak Stopped CLOSE TANK Program Type: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Repsonsible Party: IU CONTINENTAL BAKING CO Cause of Leak UNKNOWN Source of Leak PIPING Summary: 10K STEEL TANKNOT REPORTEDREFERENCING BASIN PLAN FOOTNOTE "C". 1.7PPMTPHD.BTEX BELOW DETECTION IN WATER. 3600PPM TPHD IN 50 CUBICYARDS OF CONTAMINITED SOIL LEFT ON SITE. Date Preliminary Site Assessment Began: 11/22/1993 Date Case was Closed: 8/25/1997 Date Leak was Discovered: 11/10/1993 Reported Date: 12/22/1993 Date Leak was Stopped: 11/10/1993 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Media Affected(l), Remediation Status(l), Enforcement Type(1). Funding By(1). How was Leak Discovered(l), MTBE Tested(l), Substance Quantity Leaked (G)(1), Cause of Leak(1), Longitude(l), Latitude(l), Date Leak was Confirmed(l), Date Preliminary Site Assessment Workpla(l). Date Pollution Characterization Began(l), Date Remediation Plan Submitted(l). Date Remedial Action Underway(l), Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Beg(1). Date of Enforcement Action(l). MTBE Date(1) VISTA Address*: LILLIAN WALKER 417 ELMAV CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 4025774 VISTA Address*: LILLIAN WALKER 417 ELMAV CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: Plotted as: 0.20 MI/NW Point County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Fuel Type: REGULAR UNLEADED Tank Number: T007 Size: 500 Tank Type: TANK TVPE Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown" Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: NOTREPORTED • VISTA address inciudes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #55 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 136 | Agency ID: | H32265 j Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE i Name: LILLIAN WALKER j Location: 417 ELMAV CARLSBAD. CA. 92008 Total Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Total Underground Tanks: 1 Total Tanks Removed: 1 Permit No: H32265 Inactive Indicator 1 Permit Annual Expiration Date SEP 30 Business Phone: (619)729-0356 Owner Name: LILLIAN WALKER Mail Street No 417 Mail Street Name: ELMAV Mail City: CARLSBAD Mail Zip: 92008 Mail State: CA Corporate Code: 02 Census Tract No: 17900 Contact LILLIAN WALKER Business Plan Acceptance Date: / / Last Update: 8/5/98 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Permit Nof 7;, Business Code Descf 7;, SIC Nof 7;, Status(l). Second Establishment Name(1), Mail Street Direction(l). Mail BIdg/Ste Nof 7/ Mail Zip4(1). Map Code(1), Fire Dept District(l). Epa ID(1), Gas Station (Y/N)(1). Inspection Date(1), Reinspection Date(1), Reinspection Date String(l). Inspector Name(1). Notice of Violation Issued(l), Property Owner(1), Pmperty Owner Street Nof 7;, Property Owner Str Dlrfl), PrxMerty Owner Street Name(1), Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1). Property Owner City(1). Property Owner Zipfl). Property Owner Zip4(1), Property State(l), Tank Owner(l), Tank Owner Street No(1), Tank Owner Street Dir(1), Tank Owner Street Name(1), Tank Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Tank Owner City(1), Tank Owner Zip(1), Tank Owner Zip4(1). Tank Owner State(l), Status Descf 7;, Tank Substance Stored Descf 7;, Delinquent Comment(l), [delinquent Flag(1), Last Delinquent Letter(1). Last Letter Type(1) VISTA Address*: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 4043602 VISTA Address*: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.21 MI/NW VISTA Address*: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point Regional LUST - Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 120 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Agency Address: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site County: Site State: .yOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATEST CARLSBAD. CA 0 JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPAIR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD SAN DIEGO CA Case No: j Local Case No: [Case Type: i Report Date: j Lead Agency: 9UT3645 H13731-001 OTHER GROUND WATER NOT USEDFOR DRINKING OR NO BENEFICIAL USE 3/9/98 LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #56 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. Local Agency: Substance: Substance Qty Discovery Date: How Leak Was Discovered: How Leak Was Stopped: GW Depth Status: Date3b: Date9: Stop Date: Basin: Beneficial Use: Beneficial Use Desc: Leak Cause: Leak Source: Priority: Program: SAN DIEGO GASOLINE 0 3/4/98 TANK CLOSURE CLOSE TANK 15 CASE CLOSED 3/13/98 3/15/00 3/4/98 904.21 NBN NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USE UNKNOWN UNKNOWN MODERATE PRIORITY. HEALTH/SAFETY/ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Site Zip(1). Cross Street(1). Datel(1), Date3a(1). Date5c(1), Date5r(1). Date7(1). Date8(1) Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 | EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: Fuel Type: Size: l^ASTE OIL 1000 JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD. CA 920082337 Tank Number: Tank Type: T001 TANK TYPE Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE NOTAVAILA Alternate Monitor: 'unknown" Test Status: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year installed: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Fuel Type: I Size: PLUS UNLEADED 750 Tank Number: Tank Type: T002 TANK TVPE Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE NOTAVAILA Alternate Monitor: 'unknown" Test Status: Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year Installed: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED j Fuel Type: i Size: PLUS UNLEADED 750 Tank Number: Tank Type: T003 TANK TyPE ! Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE NOTAVAILA Alternate Monitor: "unknown" j Test Status: f^OT REPORTED I Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year Installed: NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED County LUST - County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / Agency ID: H13731 SRC#134 Agency Address: I Establishment Permit #: Site Name: Site Address: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD, CA 92008 H13731 JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPR 2995 STATE ST * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #57 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. 1 Site City: CARLSBAD [Site State: CA Site Zip: 92008 i Media Affected: NOT REPORTED Substance Leaked: NOTREPORTED 1 Discovery Date: NOTREPORTED 1 Release Occurence #: 001 Historical Name: FORMER GAS STATION Date Release Began: 3/4/1998 Lead Agency: DEH Case Type: TANK, RELEASE Case Status: CLOSED Case Status Date: 3/15/2000 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Business Code(1), SIC #(1), Permit Annual Expiration Date(1), Status(l), Owner Name(1). Owner Contact(l). Mailing Street Directional(l), EPA ID #{1). Is Facility a Gas Station(l), Inspection Date(1). Reinspection Date(1). Inspector Name(1), Site Contact(l). Tank Substance Stored Descf 1), Business Plan Acceptance Date(1) County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 136 Agency ID: H13731 1 Agency Address: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPR 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 - Name: JOES TRANSMISSION AUTO REPR Location: 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD. CA. 92008-2337 Totai Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Total Underground Tanks: 3 1 Total Tanks Removed: 3 Permit No: H13731 Business Phone: ( ) - Mail Street No 2995 Mail Street Name: STATEST Mail City: CARLSBAD Mail Zip: 92008 Mail Zip4 2337 Mail State: CA Corporate Code: 02 Census Tract No: 17900 Business Plan Acceptance Date: / / Last Update: 4/24/98 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: 1 1 i 1 1 Permit No(1), Inactive Indicator(l). Business Code Descf 7;, SIC Nof 7;, Permit Annual Expiration Date(1). Status(l). Owner Name(1). Second Establishment Name(1), Mail Street Direction(l), Mail BIdg/Ste Nof 7;, Map Code(1). Fire Dept District(1), Epa ID(1). Gas Station (Y/N)(1). Inspection Date(1). Reinspection Date(1). Reinspection Date String(l). Inspector Name(1). Notice of Violation Issued(l). Contact(1), Property Owner(l). Property Owner Street No(1). Property Owner Str Dir(1), Property Owner Street Name(1), Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1). Property Owner City(1). Property Owner Zip(1). Property Owner Zip4(1). Property State(l). Tank Owner(1), Tank Owner Street Nop), Tank Owner Street Dir(1). Tank Owner Street Name(1). Tank Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Tank Owner City(1), Tank Owner Zip(1). Tank Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner State(l), Status Descf 1), Tank Substance Stored Desc(1), Delinquent Comment(l), Delinquent Flag(1), Last Delinquent Letter(1), Last Letter Type(1) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #58 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. i STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / iSRC#164 EP/VAgency ID: N/A 1 Agency Address: JOE'S TRANSMISSION AUTO REPA 2995 STATE ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 Site Name: JOE'S TRANSMISSION AUTO REPA Site Location: 2995 STATE ST Site City: CARLSBAD Site State: CA Site Zip: 92008 Site County: SAN DIEGO 1 Cross Street CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR 1 Water Quality Control Board Region: 09 [Case ID #: 9UT3645 {Local Case ID #: H13731-001 Media Affected OTHER GROUNDWATER Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY LEAD Remediation Status CASE CLOSED Substance Leaked: GASOLINE Abatement Method: (CODE LOOKUP: CD-CAP SITE/CB-CONTAINMENT BARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE Abatement Method: AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCAVATE AND TREAT/FP-REMOVE FREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT A T HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOIUVE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIR SPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTION REQUIRED) Funding By RESPONSIBLE PARTY How was Leak Discovered TANK CLOSURE How was Leak Stopped CLOSE TANK MTBE Tested MTBE NOT DETECTED Program Type: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Repsonsible Party: LEOR OPHIRA LAKRITZ Substance Quantity Leaked (G) 0 Cause of Leak UNKNOWN Source of Leak UNKNOWN Summary: ONE IK GAL WASTEOIL TWO 750 GAL GAS TANK REMOVED. Date Preliminary Site Assessment 3/13/1998 Began: Date Case was Closed: 3/15/2000 Date Leak was Discovered: 3/4/1998 MTBE Date 2/29/2000 Reported Date: 3/9/1998 Date Leak was Stopped: 3/4/1998 Fields Not Reported by the Source Media Affected(l). Remediation Status(l). Enforcement Type(1), Funding By(1), How was Leak Discovered(l), Cause ofLeak(l). Source ofLeak(l). Longitude(l) Agency for this Site: Media Affected(l). Remediation Status(l). Enforcement Type(1), Funding By(1), How was Leak Discovered(l), Cause ofLeak(l). Source ofLeak(l). Longitude(l) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #59 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. VISTA [Address*: PACIFIC BELL 3368 HARDING STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 315258 VISTA [Address*: PACIFIC BELL 3368 HARDING STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.22 Ml / E VISTA [Address*: PACIFIC BELL 3368 HARDING STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point STATE UST - State Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 45 EPA/Agency ID: N/A I Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: 3368 HARDING CARLSBAD. CA 92008 NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Map ID 8 County UST • County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 133 | EP/VAgency ID: | N/A I Agency Address: Fuel Type: Size: DIESEL 2000 PACIFIC BELL CRLSCA 11/DB118 3368 HARDING ST CARLSBAD, CA 920082424 Tank Number: Tank Type: T001 UNKNOWN Pipe Type: Tank Id: CLOSED Sy REMOVAL PIPE TYPE NOTAVAILA Alternate Monitor: "unknown" Test Status: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: Year Installed: NOTREPORTED 1978 Fuel Type: DIESEL Tank Number: T002 Size: 2000 Tank Type: DOUBLE WALL Pipe Type: PERMIT TO OPERA TE FLEXIBLE P Alternate Monitor: "Not Available" Tank Id: IPING Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: 1985 Fuel Type: DIESEL Tank Number: T003 Size: 550 Tank Type: TANK TYPE Pipe Type: CLOSED BY REMOVAL PIPE TYPE Alternate Monitor: "unknown" Tank Id: NOTAVAILA Test Status: NOTREPORTED Tank Status Date: NOTREPORTED Inspection Status: NOTREPORTED Year Installed: NOTREPORTED County UST - County Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 136 | Agency ID H05043 ! Agency Address: i jName: Location: PACIFIC BELL CRLSCA 11/DB118 3368 HARDING ST CARLSBAD. CA 92008 PACIFIC BELL CRLSCA 11/DB118 3368 HARDING ST CARLSBAD. CA. 92008-2424 Total Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Total Underground Tanks: 3 Total Tanks Removed: 2 Permit No: H05043 Business Code Desc PUBLIC UTILITIES SIC No 4811 Permit Annual Expiration Date JUN 30 Business Phone: (949)551-7718 OwnerName PACIFIC BELL Second Establishment Name C/O ENV. MGMT. RM 3E000T Mail Street Name: PO BOX 5095 \ 1 Mail City: SAN RAMON j " VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 Report ID:627301901 Version 2.7 800 - 767 - 0403. Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Page #60 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/8 -1/4 mile) CONT. jMail Zip: 94583 jMail Zip4 0995 'Mail State: CA [Corporate Code: 02 Census Tract No: 77900 Inspection Date 09/17/1999 0:00:00 Reinspection Date 0011 Reinspection Date String NOV 2000 Inspector Name HENDERSON Contact MARA STEVENS Property Owner PACIFIC BELL Property Owner Str Dir S Property Owner Street Name PO BOX 5095 RM IN200 Property Owner City SAN RAMON Property Owner Zip 94583 Property State CA Tank Owner PACIFIC BELL Tank Owner Street Name PO BOX 601883 Tank Owner City SACRAMENTO Tank Owner Zip 95860 Tank Owner State CA Business Plan Acceptance Date: 03/31/97 Last Update: 10/30/00 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Pennit No(1). Inactive lndicator(1). Status(l), Mail Street Nof t;, Mail Street Direction(l), Mail BIdg/Ste No(1). Map Code(1). Fire Dept District(l). Epa ID(1). Gas Station (Y/N)(1), Notice of Violation lssued(1). Property Owner Street No(1). Property Owner Bldg/Ste(1), Property Owner Zip4(1), Tank Owner Street No(1). Tank Owner Street Dir(1) SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA1D#: 70700 VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.25 Ml/W VISTA Address*: CARLSBAD CARLSBAD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point NFRAP/SRC# 18 Agency ID: 0902463 Map ID 9 I Agency Address: ! EPA ID: I Site ID: I Financial Management System ID: (EPA Region: Ownership Type: Federal Facility indicator: NPL Status: SAMEASABOVE CAD987627777 0902463 091*7 09 PR/VATE NOTA FEDERAL FACILITY NOT ON THE NPL NOT ON THE HAZARDOUS WASTEDOCKET Site incident Category Description: ABANDONED Action: REMOVAL ACTION Action Qualifier: CLEANED UP Action Lead: COAST GUARD • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #61 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) CONT. 1 Scheduled Start Date: JUNE 30, 1982 Scheduled Completion Date: JUNE 30. 1982 Actual Start Date: MAY 26. 1982 I Actual Completion Date: MAY 27, 1982 1 Financial Transaction ID: 0001 {Transaction Type: DECOMMITMENT Transaction Date: AUGUST 18. 1982 .Amount: $ 894.00 ' Financial Transaction ID: 0002 {Transaction Type: ACTUAL OBLIGATION [Transaction Date: AUGUST 78. 7982 {Amount: $ 894.00 Financial Transaction ID: 0002 Transaction Type: DECOMMITMENT Transaction Date: MARCH 18. 1983 Amount: $686.00 Financial Transaction ID: 0003 Transaction Type: ACTUAL OBLIGATION Transaction Date: MARCH 18. 1983 Amount: $ 686.00 Operable Unit ID: 00 Operable Unit Name: SITEWIDE Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: USGS Hydrologic Unit Code(1). Description(l). (1). (1), (1) VISTA Address*: UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 4023460 VISTA Address*: UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.30 Ml / N VISTA Address*: UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point Regional LUST - Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC# 120 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Map ID 10 Agency Address: Site Name: UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 0 UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 Site Address: 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR Site City: CARLSBAD Site County: SAN DIECO Site State: CA Case No: 9UT666 j Local Case No: H12427-001 |Case Type: SOIL ONLY Report Date: 8/22/85 Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) Local Agency: SAN DIEGO Substance: DIESEL Substance Qty 0 Discovery Date: 8/20/85 How Leak Was Discovered: TANK CLOSURE How Leak Was Stopped: CLOSE TANK * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #62 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) CONT. Status: Datel Date3b: Date9: {Interim: I I Abatement Method: I Stop Date: I Basin: I Abatemethd Desc ' Leak Cause: Leak Source: Priority: Program: CASE CLOSED 8/20/85 7/29/87 9/6/89 Y ED 8/20/85 904.31 EVACUA TE AND DISPOSE OVERFILL OTHER SOURCE LOW PRIORITY LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Fields Not Reported by the Source site Zip(1), Cross Street(l). GWDepth(l). Date3a(1). Date5c(1). Date5r(1). A»»n^w cs*«. Date7(1). Date8(1), Enforcement Type(1), Enforcement Date(1). Beneficial Agency ror inis one. Use(1). Beneficial Use Descf7;, Cao Nof7;, Wdr No(1), Npdes Nof7; STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#164 EPA/Agency ID: N/A Agency Address: Site Name: Site Location: Site City: Site State: Site Zip: Site County: Water Quality Control Board Region: SAME AS ABOVE UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #7263 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN DIEGO 09 Case ID #: Local Case ID #: Media Affected Lead Agency: Remediation Status Substance Leaked: Abatement Method: Funding By How was Leak Discovered How was Leak Stopped Program Type: Repsonsible Party: Substance Quantity Leaked (G) Cause of Leak Source of Leak Summary: Date Leak was Confirmed Date Preliminary Site Assessment Began: 9UT666 HI 2427-001 SOIL ONLY LOCAL AGENCY LEAD CASE CLOSED DIESEL ED (CODE LOOKUP: CD-CAP SITE/CB-CONTAINMENT BARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCAVATE AND TREAT/FP-REMOVE FREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT AT HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOIL/VE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIR SPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTIONREQUIRED) RESPONSIBLE PARTY TANK CLOSURE CLOSE TANK LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST UNOCAL CORPORATION 0 OVERFILL OTHER NBU B/E OCNO T REPOR TEDFORMERL Y ELM A VE 8/20/1985 7/29/1987 * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #63 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) CONT. Date Case was Closed: 9/6/1989 Date Leak was Discovered: 8/20/1985 Reported Date: 8/22/1985 Date Leak was Stopped: 8/20/1985 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Cross Street(l), Remediation Status(l). Enforcement Type(1), Funding By(1). How was Leak Discovered(l), MTBE Tested(l). Cause of Leak(1), Longitude(l) j VISTA 1 Address*: TOSCO CORP #2705723 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 65156397 j VISTA 1 Address*: TOSCO CORP #2705723 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.30 Ml / N j VISTA 1 Address*: TOSCO CORP #2705723 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point County LUST - County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#134 Agency ID: HI2427 Map ID 10 Agency Address: Establishment Permit #: Site Name: Site Address: Site City: Site State: Site Zip: Business Code Permit Annual Expiration Date Status EPA ID # Inspection Date SAMEASABOVE H72427 TOSCO CORP #2705723 880 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 FUEL-DISPENSE NO REPAIR DEC 31 ACTIVE SAM CASE. NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 CAL000138394 09/02/1998 0:00:00 Reinspection Date NOV 7999 Inspector Name GOHRES Site Contact STEPHEN BOYD Media Affected: NOTREPORTED Substance Leaked: NOTREPORTED 1 Discovery Date: NOTREPORTED 1 Release Occurence #: 001 Historical Name: CARLSBAD UNOCAL 76 iDate Release Began: 8/20/1985 Lead Agency: DEH {Case Type: TANK. RELEASE Case Status: CLOSED Case Status Date: 10/6/1989 Release Occurence #: 002 Historical Name: CARLSBAD UNOCAL Date Release Began: 7/5/1996 Lead Agency: DEH Case Type: TANK. FAILED TEST Case Status: CLOSED Case Status Date: 7/20/1996 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Mailing Street #f 7j, Mailing Street Directional(l). Is Facility a Gas Station(l). Tank Substance Stored Descf 7) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZiP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #64 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) CONT. ^ VISTA I Address*: i GASCO SERVICE STATION #511 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 4023452 ^ VISTA I Address*: i GASCO SERVICE STATION #511 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.33 Ml/N ^ VISTA I Address*: i GASCO SERVICE STATION #511 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point CORTESE/SRC# 53 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Map ID 10 Agency Address: List Name: Site ID: 920 CARLSBAD WLLAGE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 LEAKING TANK 9UT2724 Regional LUST - Regional Leaking Underground Storage Tank/SRC#120 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Agency Address: i GASCO SERVICE STA TION 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 0 Site Name: GASCO SERVICE STATION Site Address: 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR Site City: CARLSBAD Site County: SAN DIEGO Site State: CA Case No: 9UT2724 Local Case No: H20078-001 !Case Type: 1 OTHER GROUND WATER NOT USEDFOR DRINKING OR NO BENEFICIAL USE Report Date: 3/10/94 Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY (COUNTY) Local Agency: SAN DIEGO Substance: GASOLINE Discovery Date: y 10/94 How Leak Was Discovered: TANK CLOSURE How Leak Was Stopped: CLOSE TANK GW Depth 15 Status: CASE CLOSED Date3b: 4/11/94 Date9: 5/8/98 \ Stop Date: 3/10/94 \ Basin: 904.31 Beneficial Use NBN Beneficial Use Desc NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USE Leak Cause: CORROSION Leak Source: TANK Priority: MODERATE PRIORITY. WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION Program: LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Site Zip(1). Cross Street(1). Substance Qty(1). Datel(1). Date3a(1). Date5c(1). Date5r(1), Date7(1). Date8(1), Interim(l), Abatement Method(l). Enforcement Type(1). Enforcement Date(1). Cao Nof 7;, WdrNo(1), Npdes Nof 7;, Abatemethd Desc(1) * VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions. Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #65 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 miie) CONT. VISTA Address*: GASCO 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR 511 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 65993444 VISTA Address*: GASCO 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR 511 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.33 Ml / N VISTA Address*: GASCO 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR 511 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point County LUST - County Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#134 Agency ID: H20078 Map ID 10 Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Establishment Permit #: H20078 Site Name: GASCO Site Address: 920 CARLSSAD WLLAGE DR 57 7 Site City: CARLSSAD ! Site State: CA 1 Site Zip: 92008 [Business Code FUEL-DISPENSE NO REPAIR Permit Annual Expiration Date DEC 31 Status ACTIVE SAM CASE, NOT PREVIOUS STATUS 30 Inspection Date 06/21/2000 0:00:00 Reinspection Date JUN 2001 Inspector Name Site Contact CHAIRS JEFF CAMPUTARO Media Affected: NOTREPORTED Substance Leaked: NOTREPORTED Discovery Date: NOTREPORTED Release Occurence #: 001 Historical Name: GASCO DESERT PETROLEUM #511 Date Release Began: 3/3/1994 Lead Agency: Case Type: DEH TANK. RELEASE (W) Case Status: CLOSED Case Status Date: 5/8/1998 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Owner Contact(l). Mailing Street #(1), Mailing Street Dlrectlonal(l). EPA ID #(1). Is Facility a Gas Station(l). Tank Substance Stored Desc(1) 1 VISTA i Address*: { 1 GASCO SERVICE STATION 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA 1D#: 4985325 1 VISTA i Address*: { 1 GASCO SERVICE STATION 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.33 Ml / N 1 VISTA i Address*: { 1 GASCO SERVICE STATION 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank / SRC#164 EP/VAgency ID: N/A Map ID 10 Agency Address: SAME AS ABOVE Site Name: GASCO SERVICE STATION Site Location: 920 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR Site City: CARLSBAD Site State: CA Site Zip: 92008 Site County: SAN DIEGO Water Quality Control Board Region: 09 Case ID #: 9UT2724 Local Case ID #: H20078-001 Media Affected OTHER GROUNDWATER Lead Agency: LOCAL AGENCY LEAD • VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #66 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 -1/2 mile) CONT. [Remediation Status ; Substance Leaked: Abatement Method: Funding By How was Leak Discovered How was Leak Stopped Program Type: Repsonsible Party: Cause of Leak Source of Leak CASE CLOSED GASOLINE (CODE LOOKUP: CD-CAP SITE/CB-CONTAINMENT BARRIER/ED-EXCAVATE AND DISPOSE/ET-EXCAVATE AND TREAT/FP-REMOVE FREE PRODUCT/GT-PUMP AND TREATGW/RS-REPLACE SUPPLY/HU-TREATMENT AT HOOKUP/VS-VENT SOIUVE-VACUUM EXTRACT/AS-AIR SPARGING/IT-ENHANCED BIODEGRADATION/OT-OTHER/NA-NO ACTION REOUIRED) RESPONSIBLE PARTY TANK CLOSURE CLOSE TANK LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM UST WILLIAM KAY THOMPSON CORROSION TANK Summary: 4 TANKS APPROX 20 YEARS OLD.POSSIBLE IMPACT TO GROUNDWATER.CONTAM. LEFT IN SOIL: TPHG 2.8PPM, >1PPMBTEX. CONTAM. LEFT IN GW: TPHG 90PPM.BZN 1.6PPM. TLN 9.7PPM. XYLENE 8.5PPM, ETHLBZN 1.5PPM.MTBE 0.440PPM Date Preliminary Site Assessment Began: 4/11/1994 Date Case was Closed: 5/8/1998 Date Leak was Discovered: 3/10/1994 Reported Date: 3/10/1994 Date Leak was Stopped: 3/10/1994 Fields Not Reported by the Source Agency for this Site: Cross Street(1). Media Affected(l). Remediation Status(l), Enforcement Type(1), Funding By(1). How was Leak Discovered(l), MTBE Tested(l), Substance Quantity Leaked (G)(1), Source of Leak(1). Longitude(l). Latitude(l), Date Leak was Conrirmed(l), Date Preliminary Site Assessment Workpla(1), Date Pollution Characterization Began(l), Date Remediation Plan Submitted(l), Date Remedial Action Underway(l). Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Beg(1). Date of Enforcement Actiond). MTBE Date(1) VISTA Address*: CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN HOMES 2855 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 VISTA ID#: 7431920 VISTA Address*: CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN HOMES 2855 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Distance/Direction: 0.36 MI/NW VISTA Address*: CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN HOMES 2855 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Plotted as: Point SCL - State Equivalent CERCLIS List / SRC# 112 Agency ID: . 37830014 Map ID 11 Agency Address: Agency ID: Faciiity Name: Facility Address: Region: County: Branch: Status Date: Status: Status Description: Lead Agency: Type Name: SIC Number: SIC Name: Water Control Board Region: Number of Sources: SAMEASABOVE 37830074 CALIFORNIA LUTHERAN HOMES 2855 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CA. 92008 LONG BEACH SAN DIEGO CALMORTGAGE 07191996 NA NO ACTION - FOR CALMORTGAGEONLY DEPT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL CALMORTGAGE ONLY 83 SOCIAL SERVICES SAN DIEGO 0 ' VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #67 RCRA-LQG SRC#: 16 VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile ofyour property. The agency release date for RCRIS Large Quantity Generators was June, 2000. RCRIS-SQG SRC#: 15 The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation, storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Large Generators are facilities which generate at least 1000 kg ./month of non-acutely hazardous waste (or 1 kg./monlh of acutely hazardous waste). VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. The agency release date for RCRIS Small Quantity Generators was June, 2000. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation, storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Small Quantity Generators are facilities which generate less than 1000 kg./month of non-acutely hazardous waste. RCRIS-NOTI VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. SRC#: 1298 The agency release date for RCRIS Notifiers was June, 2000. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal.The RCRIS Notifiers contains information on formerly regulated RCRA sites with more complete historical information. HEI 7 VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1/8 mile of your property. SRC#: 132 The agency release date for San Diego County Environmental Health Services Database was February, 2001. The HE-17 database contains information concerning any site regulated by the San Dlego County Department of Health Services. Cases classified as releases appear under "County LUST" in this report regardless of the cause or case type. Sites classified as UST's appear under "County UST", and solid waste facilities appear under "County SWLF". End of Report • », ".. ! For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767 - 0403. Report ID: 627301901 Date of Report: June 4, 2001 Version 2.7 Page #91 DEH CLOSURE LETTER ""S?^"" DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASsTsi'JrDt^CTOR LAND AND WATER QUALITY DIVISION P.O. BOX 129261. SAN DIEGO. CA 92112*9261 (619) 338-2222 FAX (619) 338-2377 August 4, 1999 Ms. Lebriz Tosuner-Fikes P.O. Box 517 Carlsbaci, CA 92008 Dear Ms. Tosuner-Fikes: VOLUNTARY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM — DEH FILE NO. H09657-001 3235 TYLER STREET, CARLSBAD, CA The County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) has completed review of the environmental documentation prepared by PIC Environmental Services (PIC). With the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of existing conditions, it is the position of this office that no further act;ion is required at this time. Please be advised that this, letter does not relieve you of any liability under the California Health and Safety Code or the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act. If previously unidentified contamination is discovered which may affect public health, safety and/or water quality, additional site assessment and cleanup may be necessary. Thank you for your efforts in resolving this matter. Please contact Jim Schuck of the Land & Water Quality Division, at (619) 338-2908, if you require additional assistance. Sincerely, CHRIS GONAVER, Chief Land and Water Quality Division CG:JCS Enclosure cc: Regional Water Quality Control Board ' Daniel C. Oliver, PIC "Preventton Comes First' RECEIVED TRAFFIC / PARKING JUSTIFICATION NOV 0 2001 CARLSBAD VILLAGE SELF STORAGE ^ CITYOFCARLSBAD The parkmg reqiurements for self storage projects are based on traffic generation and are signmcsPBlBJirtWBlwi^ other commercial and industrial land uses. Very few municipalities have adopted parking standards which specifically address the self storage use. Those that have generally require parking at a rate of approximately 1 space per 5,000 sq. ft. or 1 space per 10,000 sq. ft. These spaces are normally located in driveways. Examples of Califomia cities with self storage specific parking standards include the following: • City of Buena Park 1 space per 150 storage units (4 minimum) plus 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of office (4 minimum) plus 2 for on-site living unit. This standard would require 11.5 spaces for our proposed project. • City of Costa Mesa 1 space per 200 storage units (2 minimiun) plus 2 spaces for on-site living unit. This standard would require 5.6 spaces for the our proposed project. • City of Long Beach 1 space per 100 storage units plus 3 spaces at office. This standard would require 14.3 spaces for our proposed project. Any of these criteria are easily met by our proposed project design, which provides parking spaces at the office area, plus parallel parking for loading / unloading at each storage building drive aisle. Lastly, the histitute ofTransportation Engineers has established a daily trip generation of 2.61 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, and a peak generation of 0.4 trips per hour at the peak time of noon to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday. For the Carlsbad Village project, this data translates to the following: Daily Trip Generation 146,637 sq. ft. - 1,000 = 146.6 x 2.61 = 382.6 daily trips 383-^-24 = 16 trips per hour average This equals 8 vehicles per hour. Peak Traffic Generation 146,637 GSF - 1,000 = 146.6 x 0.4 = 58.6 peak Uips 58.6 trips = 29.3 vehicles at peak hour of noon to 1:00 p.m. Saturday. An average stay of 20 to 30 minutes per customer on site equals an actual peak of 10 to 15 vehicles. The peak demand is met by office parking and drive aisle paiking as noted above. On this basis, we believe the proposed site plan meets the test of other cities' self storage parking standards and the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Research Data, thereby assuring proper fimctioning of the facility in terms of traffic accommodation, parking and loading. TRAFFIC GENERATION OFTHE SELF STORAGE INDUSTRY INDUSTRY BACKGROUND The self storage industry was created in the early 70's in an effort to accommodate the storage needs of a variety of users. Typically, facilities were located on secondary sites or industrially zoned properties. Constmction consisted of metal buildings, drives, and site fencing. Early facilities rarely contained manager's offices or residences. As the industry matured and began to answer the demand of its tenants, locations and facilities improved dramatically. Today's storage facility is located on highly visible conmiercial sites. They are constructed of masonry or concrete exteriors and facilities often include full time management with security residences on-site. Many facilities use computerized access control systems to provide security for the tenant and their goods. The industry generally offers two types of space: The standard drive-up access, where the tenant utilizes a roll-up door to access his storage unit, and climate control space. Climate control facilities provide the tenant space within one or several large climate controlled stmctures. A typical facility will contain approximately 80,000 gross square feet, with 25 to 30% being offered as climate controlled and the balance drive-up access. USAGE Today's self-storage facility serves a variety of tenant types. Most facilities are occupied by 70% residential users and 30% commercial/retail users. An example of goods stored include seasonal sporting goods, excess fumishings, records and documents, and seasonal stock. Tenants will travel approximately two to three miles to use a facility and the average tenancy is 1.4 years. OPERATION The facility's office is generally open during normal busiaess hours. A perspective user must enter into an agreement with the facility which specifies his access and usage of the storage facility. Each tenant is given a gate access code, which allows access to a particular unit. Most facilities use camera monitoring systems with time lapse recorders that record all activity on the site. Some facilities ami each tenant space and control the security of all spaces through sophisticated access control and alanmng devices. Tenants may store their personal belongings only. No other commercial activity or occupancy ofthe unit is allowed. TRIP GENERATION AND PARKING REOUIREMENTS Trip Generation, as prepared by the Institute ofTransportation Engineers (I.T.E.), is a widely accepted document which establishes the anticipated trip generation of a variety of uses. The 1991 Edition, under Land Use No. 151, describes mini-warehouse (self-storage), as "a mini warehouse in which a storage unit or vault is rented for the storage of goods. Each unit is physically separated firom other units and access is usually provided through an overhead door or other common access points". I.T.E. goes on to describe the average trip generation and general use characteristics of this land use type. LT.E. states the trip generation per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area is 2.61 trips per day. It is important to note that a trip is each movement, both entry and exit, across the facility's driveway; consequently, each two trips indicates one vehicle visit. LT.E. goes on to state "tmck trips accounted for 2-15% of the week-day traffic at the sites surveyed", and "vehicle occupancy ranged fi-om 1.2 to 1.9. persons per automobile on the average week-day". A typical example of facility trip generation follows: 80,000 SF GFA/ 1,000 = 80.00 X 2.61 trips 8.7 trips = 4.35 vehicles per hour 208.80 / 24.00 hours 8.7 per hour Following the I.T.E. Trip Generation Information, one can conclude that the typical facility v^U generate 8.7 trips her hour and will have an average of 4.35 vehicles per hour on site. LT.E. further lists the highest peak hour generator as being Saturday, between noon and 1:00 PM. They state tiiat 0.4 trips are generated per 1,000 square feet. An example of peak hour generation follows: 80,000 SF GFA/ 1,000= 80.00 X .40 trips 32.00 trips per hour 32 trips =16 vehicles per hour This example demonstrates that an 80,000 square foot facility would generate 32 trips per hour, or 16 vehicles visit per hour, at peak traffic generation. TRIP GENERATION An Informational Report Sth Edition its INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) is a professional society of more than 11,000 transportation engineers and planners who are responsible for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods on streets, highways, and transit systems. Since 1930 the Institute has been providing transportation professionals with programs and resources to help them meet those responsibilities. Institute programs and resources include professional development seminars, technical reports, a monthly journal, local, regional, and international meetings, and other forums for the exchange of opinions, ideas, techniques, and research. INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS 525 School St., S.W., Suite 410 Washington, D.C. 20024-2729 USA Telephone: 202/554-8050 FAX: 202/863-5486 © 1991 Institute ofTransportation Engineers. All rights reserved. PubiicuioR No. IR-0I6C Fbunh PrinufiK i.5M/AGS/391 Preface Trip Generation is intended as a tool for planners, traffic engineers, zoning boards, and others interested in estimating thc number of vehicle trips likely to be generated by a par- ticular land use. It is based on more than 3,000 trip generation studies conducted by public agencies, developers, and consulting firms and reported to the Institute. The first section of Trip Generation (pages I-l through 1-56) includes information on how to use this reference book; please take a few min- utes to acquaint yourself with that information, as it will be the key that unlocks the tme value and potential of the data listed in the ensuing section. Three methodologies are provided to assist in determining the average number of trips gen- erated by a land use: 1. Weighted average trip generation rate, or the number of weighted trip ends per one • unit of the independent variable (for ex- ample, per employee or per 1000 square feet of gross floor area). 2. A plot of the actual trip ends versus the size of the independent variable for each study. The numbers represented on the plots are not trip generation rates; they arc actual trip ends plotted against thc size of an independent variable. You may achieve slighdy different results when using the plot as opposed to the rate. 3. Regression equation of trip ends related to the size of the independent variable. You may achieve slightly different results when using the equation as opposed to the rate. A word of caution is in order here: In some cases, only limited data could be obtained for a land use, and thus the trip generation rates, plots, and equations may not be truly indica- tive of a particular land use. Because trip gen- eration charactenstics for a land use may vary, extreme care must be taken in the use of the data. You may wish to modify or adjust the trip generation rates and equations presented in this report to reflect a site's location, public transportation service, ridesharing program, proximity to other developments that may reduce vehicle trip-making through walking or combining trips, and special characteristics of the site or the surrounding area. You should collect local data for comparison when con- sidering use of.the data in this report. Trip Generation is an informational report of the Institute ofTransportation Engineers. The information has been obtained from the expe- riences of transponation engineering profes- sionals and research. ITE inform.ational re- ports are prepared for informational purposes only and do not include ITE recommenda- tions on the best course of action or the pre- ferred application of the data. Your comments on Trip Generation 2iTC invited; we have included a form at the back of the book for just that purpose. Through user feed- back, thc Institute has enhanced each of the five editions of Trip Generation^ and we seek your views on additional ways in which we can im- prove the value of succeeding editions of this book. Table of Contents I. Introduction I-1 Purpose I-l Changes in thc Fifth Edition I-l Use of the Report 1-2 II. Description of the Database 1-3 Field Data Collection 1-3 Data Reports 1-3 Data Format 1-3 Data Age 1-3 Data Limitations and Variations in Statistics 1-4 III. Definition of Terms 1-5 IV. Sampie Page 1-8 Level of Confidence 1-8 Calculation of Standard Deviation I-IO Miscellaneous Page Descriptions I-ll V. Instructions 1-12 Understanding the Methodologies 1-12 Guidelines for Determining Whether To Use TripT Generation Rates or Equations 1-13 Sample Problems 1-14 Choice of Day and Time Period 1-15 Choice of Independent Variable 1-15 Modification of Average Rate or Equation 1-16 VI. Conducting A Local Trip Generation Study 1-19 VII. Quantifying Pass-By and Diverted Linked Trips 1-21 Background 1-21 Estimation Theory 1-21 Database on Pass-By Trip and Diverted Linked Trip Percentages 1-22 Results of Statistical Analyses on Pass-By Trip and Diverted Linked Trip Percentages 1-23 Application of Pass-By Trip and Diverted Linked Trip Percentage Results 1-23 Data Needs for Pass-By Trips and Diverted Linked Trips 1-29 Interview Survey Form 1-39 Interview Summary Form 1-40 VIII. Multi-Use Developments / Quantifying Capture Rates 1-41 Background 1-41 Definitions 1-41 Available Data 1-42 Conclusions 1-49 Data Requests for Multi-Use Developments 1-50 Suggested Interview Questions 1-52 DC Update Procedure 1-53 X. List of Land Uses Codes for which More Data Are Desired 1-55 XI. Trip Generation Rates, Plots, and Equations (Refer to the index in the back of this report for a complete list of land uses and independent variables) Port and Terminal (Land Uses 000-099) 1 Industrial/Agricultural (Land Uses 100-199) 82 Residential (Land Uses 200-299) 255 Lodging (Land Uses 300-399) 518 Recreational (Land Uses 400-499) 584 Institudonai (Land Uses 500-599) 752 Medical (Land Uses 600-699) 884 Office (Land Uses 700-799) 939 Retail (Land U?es 800-899) 1096 Services (Land Uses 900-999) 1468 Appendices A. —Index A-l (Complete list of land uses and independent variables in the fifth edition) B. —Sources A-9 User Comments Form Insert at back of book Data Collection Form Insert at back of book III. DEFINITION OF TERMS Average Trip Rate A weighted average of the number of vehicle trips or trip ends per unit of independent vari- able (e.g., trip ends per occupied dwelling unit or employee) using a site's driveway(s). The weighted average rate is calculated by summing all trips or trip ends and all independent vari- able units where paired data are available, and then dividing the sum of the trip ends by the sum of the independent variable units. The weighted average rate is used rather than the av- erage of the individual rates because of thc vari- ance within each data set or generating unit. Data sets with a large variance would over-in- fluence the average rate if they were un- weighted. Average Trip Rate for Peak Hour of the Adjacent Street Traffic The highest one-hour weighted average vehicle trip generation rate between 7 and 9 A.M. or between 4 and 6 P.M. when the adjacent street traffic is at its peak. This rate represents trips using a site's driveways. Average Trip Rate for Peak Hour of the Generator A weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during the hour of highest volume of traffic en- tering and exiting the site in the morning (A.M.) or the afternoon (P.M.) It may or may not coincide in time or volume with the trip rate for the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic; the trip rate for the peak hour of the generator will be equal to or greater than the trip rate for the peak hour between 7 and 9 A.M. or between 4 and 6 P.M. This rate repre- sents trips using a site's driveways. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends (AWDVTE) The average 24-hour total of all vehicle trips counted to and from a study site from Monday through Friday. Average Weekday Trip Rate The weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during a 24-hour period for a weekday (Monday through Friday). This represents trips using a site's driveways. Average Saturday Trip Rate The weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during a 24-hour period for a Saturday. This rate represents trips using a site's drive- ways. Average Trip Rate for Saturday Peak Hour of Generator The weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during the hour of highest volume of traffic entering and exiting a site on a Saturday. It may occur in the A.M. or P.M. This rate represents trips using a site's driveways. Average Sunday Trip Rate The weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during a 24-hour period for a Sunday. This rate represents trips using a site's driveways. Average Trip Rate for Sunday Peak Hour of Generator The weighted average vehicle trip generation rate during the hour of highest volume of traffic entering and exiting a site on a Sunday. It may occur in the A.M. or P.M. This rate represents trips using a site's driveways. Diverted Linked Trips Trips that are produced from the traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator and require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway with access to the site. These roadways could include streets or freeways adjacent to the generator but without access to the generator. Trip Generation, }2nuzry 1991 .1-5 Gross Floor Area (GFA) ^ The gross floor area of a building is the sum (in square feet) of the area at each floor level, in- cluding cellars, basements, mezzanines, pent- houses, corridors, lobbies, stores, and offices, that are included within the principal outside faces of exterior walls, not including architec- tural setbacks or projections. Included are all stories or areas that have floor surfaces with clear standing head room (6 feet, 6 inches, minimum) regardless of their use. Where a ground level area, or part thereof, within the principal outside faces of the exterior walls is left unenclosed, the gross floor area of the un- enclosed portion is said to be considered as a part of the overall square footage of the build- ing. All unroofed areas and unenclosed roofed- over spaces, except as defined above, are to be excluded from the area calculations. For purposes of the trip generation calcu- lation, the gross floor area of any parking garages within the building shall not be in- cluded within the gross floor area of the entire building. A majority of the land uses in this re- port express trip generation -in terms of gross floor area. The unit of measurement for office buildings is currently gross floor area; however, it is desirable to also obtain data related to gross rentable area and net rentable area. Gross Leasable Area (GLA)^ Gross leasable area is the total floor area de- signed for tenant occupancy and exclusive use, including any basements, mezzanines, or upper floors, expressed in square feet and measured from the centeriine of joint partitions and from outside wall faces. For purposes of the trip gen- eration calculation, the floor area of any park- ing garages within thc building shall not be in- cluded within the GLA of the entire building. Gross leasable area is the area for which tenants pay rent; it is the area that produces income. GLA lends itself readily to measurement and comparison; thus, it has been adopted by the ^ Institute of Real Estaie Management of the Nationai Association of Realtors. Income/Expense Analysis, Offict BuiUinp, Downtown and Suburban. 1985, p. 236. ^ Urban Land Instirute. Dollars and Cents of Shopping Censers, 1984. shopping center industry as its standard for sta- tistical comparison. Accordingly, GLA is used in this report for shopping centers and other re- tailers of goods and apparel. For strip centers, discount stores, and freestanding retail facilities, it is usually assumed that GLA equals GFA. Gross Rentable Area (GRA)^ Gross rentable area shall be computed in square feet by measuring the inside finish of perma- nent outer building waJls, or from, the glass Une where at least 50% of the outer building wall is glass. Gross rentable area shall include all area within outside walls less stairs, elevator shafts, flues, pipe shafts, vertical ducts, and balconies. Net rentable area shall be computed in square feet by measuring inside the finish of permanent outer building walls or from glass line where at least 50% of the outer building wall is glass. Net rentable area shall include all area within outside walls excluding stairs, eleva- tor shafts, flues, pipe shafts, vertical ducts, bal- conies, air conditioning rooms, janitorial clos- ets, electrical closets, washrooms, public corri- dors, and such other rooms not actually avail- able to the tenant for his furnishings and per- sonnel and their enclosing walls. No deductions shall be made for columns and projections nec- essary to the building. Independent Variable A physical, measurable, or predictable unit de- scribing the study site or generator (e.g. gross floor area, employees, seats, dwelling units). Multi-Use Development / Capture Rate A multi-use development is a single real estate project that consists of two or more land uses. Because the nature of the land uses, the trip- making characteristics are interrelated. For ex- ample, it can be assumed that some of the trips attracted to a shopping center are generated by "on-site" residences constructed as part of a single project. Likewise, some of the shoppers are attracted from an "on-site" office complex ^ Institute of Real Estate Management of the Nationai Association of Realtors. Income/Expense Analysis, Offict Buildinp, Downtown and Suburban, 1985. p. 236. 1-6 Institute ofTransportation Engineers constmcted as part of the single project. Thus, while individual land uses generate or attract trips according to the statistics calculated in this report, trips at the perimeter (or imaginary cor- don line surrounding the development) are not simply a total of the trips from the individual land uses. A reduction is suggested to account for the internal trips or those "captured** within the single, overall development. This reduction in trips, expressed as a percentage, is referred to as a capture rate. Chapter VIII of this report provides additional information. Pass-By Trips Trip generation rates and equations are based on volume counts taken at the driveways to the site being studied. In the case of a new devel- opment, particularly retail establishments, cer- tain restaurants, banks, service stations, and convenience markets, trips are attracted from the passing traffic on adjacent streets—that is, traffic already "passing by" the site. Thus, when forecasted trips based on the trip generation rates or equations are distributed to the adja- cent streets, some reduction is made to account for those trips already there that will be at- tracted to the proposed development. That is, impacts at the entrances and exits to the pro- posed sites should be based on trip generation rates or equations; impacts on adjacent streets can be based on a reduced forecast to account for pass-by trips. Chapter VII of this report provides funher information. Trip A single or one-direction vehicle movement with either the origin or the destination (exiting or entering) inside a study site. Trip Ends One trip end is equal to one trip, as defined above. For trip generation purposes, total trip ends for a land use over a given period of time are the total of all trips entering plus all trips exiting a site during that designated time. Trip Generation, Januaiy 1991 1-7 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR 3235-3265 TYLER STREET AND UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR 3267/3281 TYLER STREET CARLSBfAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FOR HNB, INC. 29095 ROCKY POINT WAY ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92026 W.O. 3168-A-SC NOVEMBER 2, 2001 ^ RECOVID NOV Of 2001 HOUSING aiREOIViLOPMENT DEPARTMINT Geotechnical • Geologic • Environmental 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad, California 92008 • (760) 438-3155 • FAX (760) 931-0915 November 2,2001 W.O. 3168-A-SC HNB, Inc. 29095 Rocky Point Way Escondido, California 92026 Attention: Mr. Robert Schmitt Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for 3235-3265 Tyler Street and Update Geotechnical Evaluation for 3267/3281 Tyler Street, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California Dear Mr. Schmitt: In accordance with your authorization and request, GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI) has performed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation and update geotechnical evaluation of the subject property. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the onsite soils and geologic conditions in light ofthe currently proposed commercial development from a geotechnical viewpoint. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on our review of the available data (Appendix A), field exploration, laboratory testing, and geologic and engineering analysis, the proposed development appears to be feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided the recommendations presented in the text ofthis report are properly incorporated into the design and construction ofthe project. The most significant elements of this study are summarized below: • Removals of the upper 3 to 4 feet of weathered terrace deposits (due to the potential presence of underground utilities and associated backfill) will be necessary prior to fill placement. • Based on our laboratory analysis and experience in the vicinity, soils with a very low expansion potential exist onsite. Conventional foundations may be utilized forthese soil conditions. At the time of this report, corrosion testing results had not been received for 3235-3265 Tyler Street. An addendum report presenting those results will be provided when lab testing is complete. Corrosion testing results for the adjoining property to the south, previously evaluated by GSI (2000a), reported soils moderately corrosive to metals and a negligible corrosion potential to concrete. Both sites should be underlain by similar soils with similar geotechnical characteristics. Final determination of corrosivity of site soils should be determined based on testing of the soil upon completion of grading. Subsurface water is not anticipated to affect site development, provided that recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction and that prudent surtace and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater may be encountered during grading, or may occur after site development. It is our understanding that drainpipes are proposed on the north and south side of the property. Recommendations for the installation of the drainpipes are provided herein. Due to the close proximity of one- and two-story structures to the north and south of the proposed development, care should be taken when removing native soil adjacent to or in close proximity to an existing foundation. Shoring and bracing recommendations are provided herein. The seismicity acceleration values provided herein should be considered during the design of the proposed development. The geotechnical design parameters provided herein should be considered during project planning, design and construction by the project structural engineer and/or architects. HBN, inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC Rle:e:\wp7\3l00\3l68a.pge Page Two GeoSoils, Ine. The opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact any ofthe undersigned. Respectfully submitted, GeoSoils, Inc. Donna Gooley (J Project Geologist DG/JPF/DWS/jh Distribution: (4) Addressee )avid Civil Engineeh^RCE' HBN, inc. Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge W.O. 3168-A-SC Page Three GeoSoils, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE OF SERVICE 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 FIELD STUDIES 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 3 EARTH MATERIALS 3 Terrace Deposits 3 FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY 3 Faulting 3 Seismicity 4 Seismic Shaking Parameters 6 GROUNDWATER ^ 6 LIQUEFACTION 7 OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 7 LABORATORY TESTING 7 Classification 7 L-aboratory Standard 8 Direct Shear Tests 8 Expansion Potential 8 Corrosivity 8 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 9 General 9 Earth Materials 9 Expansion Potential 10 Corrosion/Sulfate Testing 10 Excavation of Foundations Adjacent to Existing Structures 10 Subsurface and Surface Water 10 Regional Seismic Activity 10 GeoSoils, Inc. EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 11 General 11 Site Preparation 11 Removals (Unsuitable Surficial Materials) 11 Fill Placement 12 Erosion Control 12 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 12 Preliminary Foundation Design 13 Bearing Value 13 Lateral Pressure 13 Construction 14 Very Low to Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index 0 to 50) 14 Shoring and Bracing 15 CORROSION 15 CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALL RECOMMENDATIONS 15 General 15 Restrained Walls 16 Cantilevered Walls 16 Wall Backfill and Drajnage 17 Retaining Wall Footing Transitions 17 FLATWORK AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS 21 Exterior Slabs and Walkways 21 ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS/DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA 22 Additional Site Improvements 22 Tile Flooring 22 Landscape Maintenance and Planting 22 Drainage 23 Drainpipes 23 Footing Trench Excavation 23 Trench Backfill 23 PLAN REVIEW 24 LIMITATIONS 25 HBN, Inc. Table of Contents Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 11 GeoSoils, Inc. FIGURES: Figure 1 - Site Location Map 2 Figure 2 - California Fault Map 5 Figure 3 - Schematic of Site Wall Drain Option A 18 Figure 4 - Schematic of Site Wall Drain Option B 19 Figure 5 - Schematic of Site Wall Drain Option C 20 ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A - References Rear of Text Appendix B - Boring Logs Rear of Text Appendix C - General Earthwork and Grading Guidelines Rear of Text Plate 1 - Boring Location Map Rear of Text in Folder HBN, Inc. Table of Contents Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 111 GeoSoils, Inc. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR 3235-3265 TYLER STREET AND UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR 3267/3281 TYLER STREET CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of our services has included the following: 1. Review of available soils and geologic data for the site area (Appendix A). 2. Geologic site reconnaissance and geologic mapping. 3. Subsurface exploration consisting of three exploratory borings, using a hollow-stem drill rig, for geotechnical logging and sampling (Appendix B). 4. Pertinent laboratory testing of representative soil samples collected during our subsurface exploration program. 5. General areal seismicity and liquefaction evaluation. 6. Appropriate engineering and geologic analysis of data collected and preparation of this report. SITE DESCRIPTION The site consists of a square-shaped parcel, located on the west side of Tyler Street between Walnut Avenue and Pine Avenue in the City of Carlsbad, California (see Figure 1). Three manufacturing structures (former tile manufacturing) occupy the north half of the site. A raised wood floor residence, masonry wall, and shed currently occupy the adjoining site to the south previously evaluated by GSI (2000a and 2000b). The property is flat-lying at an elevation of approximately 45 feet above mean sea level. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT It is our understanding that the proposed development would consist of grading to create a pad for four, three-story, self storage structures with an interior driveway and landscaped open areas. It is also our understanding that the buildings will utilize concrete block and wood-frame construction with slab-on-grade floors. Building loads are assumed to be typical for this type of relatively light construction. Sewage disposal is anticipated to tie into the municipal system. Two 8-inch drainpipes are proposed on the north and south portions ofthe property, draining to a proposed swale to the west with a 3 foot french drain outletting to a City of Carisbad storm drain. GeoSoils, Inc. I I Base Map: San Luis Rey Quadrangle, California—San Dieao Co., 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic), 1968 (photo revised 1975), by USGS, r=2000' N Scale 2000 4000 Feet W.O. 3168-A-SC SITE LOCATION MAP Figure 1 FIELD STUDIES Field studies conducted during our evaluation of the property for this study consisted of geologic reconnaissance, geologic mapping, and excavation of three exploratory borings with a hollow-stem auger drill rig for evaluation of near-surface soil and geologic materials. The borings were logged by a geologist from our firm, who collected representative samples from the excavations for appropriate laboratory testing. The logs of the borings are presented in Appendix B. Boring locations are presented on Plate 1. REGIONAL GEOLOGY The site is located in Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. The Peninsular Ranges are characterized by northwest-trending, steep, elongated ranges and valleys. The Peninsular Ranges extend north to the base ofthe San Gabriel Mountains and south into Mexico to Baja California. The province is bounded by the east-west trending Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the north and northeast, by the Colorado Desert geomorphic province to the southeast, and by the Continental Borderiands geomorphic province to the west. In the Peninsular Ranges, sedimentary and volcanic units discontinuously mantie the crystalline bedrock, alluvial deposits have filled in the lower valley areas, and young marine sediments are currently being deposited/eroded in the coastal and beach are^. EARTH MATERIALS Earth materials underlying the site consist of Quaternary-age ten'ace deposits. These earth materiais are described below: Terrace Deposits The site is underiain by the Quaternary-age terrace deposits (Tan and Kennedy, 1996). These competent native sediments generally consist of red to yellow brown, silty sand. These sediments were damp to moist and medium dense to dense. Generally, the upper 1 to 2 feet of these deposits are weathered. FAULTING AND REGIONAL SEISMICITY Faulting The site is situated in an area of active as well as potentially-active faults. Our review indicates that there are no known active faults crossing the site within the areas proposed HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 3 GeoSoils, Inc. for development (Jennings, 1994), and the site is not within an Earthquake Fault Zone (Hart and Bryant, 1997). There are a number of faults in the southern California area that are considered active and would have an effect on the site in the form of ground shaking, should they be the source of an earthquake. These include-but are not limited to~the San Andreas fault, the San Jacinto fault, the Elsinore fault, the Coronado Bank fault zone, and the Newport-Inglewood - Rose Canyon fault zone. The location of these and other major faults relative to the site are indicated on Figure 2. The possibility of ground acceleration or shaking at the site may be considered as approximately similar to the southern California region as a whole. The following table lists the major faults and fault zones in southern California that could have a significant effect on the site should they experience significant activity. ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE MILES (KM) Coronado Bank-Agua Blanca 21 (33) Elsinore 24 (39) La Nation 25 (40) Newport-Inglewood-Offshore 7(12) Rose Canyon 4(7) San Diego Trough-Bahia Sol 30 (48) Seismicity The acceleration-attenuation relations of Joyner and Boore (1982) and Campbell and Bozorgnia (1994) have been Incorporated into EQFAULT (Blake, 1997). For this study, peak horizontal ground accelerations anticipated at the site were determined based on the random mean and mean plus 1 sigma attenuation curves developed by Joyner and Boore (1982) and Campbell and Bozorgnia (1994). These acceleration-attenuation relations have been incorporated in EQFAULT, a computer program by Thomas F. Blake (1997), which perfonns deterministic seismic hazard analyses using up to 150 digitized California faults as earthquake sources. The program estimates the closest distance between each fault and a user-specified file. If a fault is found to be within a user-selected radius, the program estimates peak horizontal ground acceleration that may occur at the site from the upper bound ("maximum credible") and "maximum probable" earthquakes on that fault. Site acceleration as a percentage of the acceleration of gravity (g) is computed by any of the 14 user-selected acceleration-attenuation relations that are contained in EQFAULT. Based on the above, peak horizontal ground accelerations from an upper bound event may be HBN, Inc. 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC November 2, 2001 Page 4 SAN FRANCISCO SITE LOCATION (+): Latitude - 33.1568 N Longitude - 117.3461 W Oceanside Glasstile CALiFORNIA FAULT W.O. 3168-A-SC GeoSoils, Inc. Figure 2 on the order of 0.53 g to 0.79 g, and a maximum probable event may be on the order of 0.38 g to 0.46 g on the Rose Canyon fault zone, located approximately 4 miles from the subject site. Seismic Shaking Parameters Based on the site conditions, Chapter 16 of the Uniform Building Code (International Conference of Building Officials, 1997) and Peterson and others (1996), the following seismic parameters are provided. Seismic zone (per Figure 16-2*) 4 Seismic Zone Factor (per Table 16-1*) 0.40 Soil Profile Type (per Table 16-J*) SD Seismic Coefficient C, (per Table 16-Q*) 0.44 NA Seismic Coefficient Cy (per Table 16-R*) 0.64 Nv Near Source Factor N^ (per Table 16-S*) 1.0 Near Source Factor Ny (per Table 16-T*) 1.1 Seismic Source Type (per Table 16-U*) B Distance to Seismic Source 4 mi. (6.4 km) Upper Bound Earthquake Mw 6.9 * Figure and table references from Chapter 16 of the Uniform Building Code (1997). GROUNDWATER Groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately llVa feet during our investigation. Subsurface water is not anticipated to adversely affect site development, provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction. These observations reflect site conditions at the time of our investigation and do not preclude future changes in local groundwater conditions from excessive irrigation, precipitation, or that were not obvious, at the time of our investigation. Perched groundwater conditions along fill/bedrock contacts and along zones of contrasting permeabilities should not be precluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities. Should perched groundwater conditions develop, this of&ce could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions. HBN, Inc. 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge W.O. 3168-A-SC November 2, 2001 Page 6 GeoSoils, Inc. LIQUEFACTION Seismically-induced liquefaction is a phenomenon in which cyclic stresses, produced by earthquake-induced ground motion, create excess pore pressures in soils. The soils may thereby acquire a high degree of mobility, and lead to lateral movement, sliding, sand boils, consolidation and settlement of loose sediments, and other damaging deformations. This phenomenon occurs only below the water table; but after liquefaction has developed, it can propagate upward into overiying, non-saturated soil as excess pore water dissipates. Typically, liquefaction has a relatively low potential at depths greater than 45 feet and is virtually unknown below a depth of 60 feet. Liquefaction susceptibility is related to numerous factors and the following conditions should be present for liquefaction to occur: 1) sediments must be relatively young in age and not have developed a large amount of cementation: 2) sediments generally consist of medium to fine grained relatively cohesionless sands; 3) the sediments must have low relative density; 4) free groundwater must be present in the sediment; and 5) the site must experience a seismic event of a sufficient duration and magnitude, to induce straining of soil particles. Inasmuch as one or two of these five concurrent conditions do not have the potential to affect the site and the entire site is underiain by dense fonnational materials, our evaluation indicates that the potential for liquefaction and associated adverse effects at the surface of the site is low, provided our recommendations are implemented. OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS United States Department of Agriculture 1953 aerial photographs (USDA, 1953) were reviewed for the site. The site was developed at this time and there were no indications of paleoseismicity or fault activity (i.e., lineations, mima mounds, etc.), nor of landslides or related features. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of site earth materials in order to evaluate their physical characteristics. Test procedures used and results obtained are presented below. Classification Soils were classified visually in accordance with ASTM D-2487. The soil classifications are shown on the boring logs, Appendix B. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. Laboratory Standard The maximum density and optimum moisture content was determined for the major soil type encountered in the borings. The laboratory standard used was ASTM D-1557. The moisture-density relationship obtained for this soil is shown on the following table: LOCATION SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY (PCF) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) B-1 @ 1-5' Silty SAND, Red Brown 131.5 9.5 Direct Shear Tests Shear testing was performed on two representative undisturbed samples of terrace deposits in general accordance with ASTM test method D-3080. The residual test results are presented on the following table. LOCATION r COHESION (psf) INTERNAL FRICTION (degrees) B-1 (S 2-3' 253 30 B-2 @ 10-11' 172 35 Expansion Potential Expansion index testing was performed on a representative sample of the site materials in general accordance with Standard 18-2 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Results are presented in the following table. LOCATION SOIL TYPE EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL B-1 @ 1-5' Silty SAND, Red Brown 1 Very Low Corrosivity Laboratory test results for soluble sulfates, pH, and corrosion to metals have not been received as of the date of this report. Testing will be presented as an addendum upon HBN, Inc. 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street File:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge W.O. 3168-A-SC November 2, 2001 Pages GeoSoils, Ine. receipt of the results. Corrosion testing results for the adjoining property to the south, previously evaluated by GSI (2000a), reported soils moderately corrosive to metals and a negligible corrosion potential to concrete. Both sites should be underiain by similar soils with similar geotechnical characteristics. Final determination of corrosivity of site soils should be determined based on testing of the soii upon completion of grading. Based upon the test results, further evaluation by a qualified corrosion engineer may be considered. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS General Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical engineering analysis, it is our opinion that.the subject property appears suitable for the proposed commercial development from a geotechnical engineering and geologic viewpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in the following sections are incorporated into the design and construction phases of site development. The primary geotechnical concerns with respect to the proposed development on the site are: • Depth to competent bearing material. • Expansion and corrosion potential of site soils. • Excavation of foundations and earthwork adjacent to or in close proximity to existing structures. • Subsurface and perched water. • Regional seismic activity. The recommendations presented herein consider these as well as other aspects of the site. The engineering analyses performed concerning site preparation and the recommendations presented herein have been completed using the information provided and obtained during our field wori<. In the event that any significant changes are made to proposed site development, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the recommendations of this report verified or modified in writing by this office. Foundation design parameters are considered preliminary until the foundation design, layout, and structural loads are provided to this office for review. Earth Materials Terrace deposits will be encountered during site earthwork. The upper 1 to 2 feet of these materials are weathered. Recommendations for the treatment of the upper weathered 1 to 2 feet are presented in the earthwork section of this report. HBN, Inc. W.0. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 9 GeoSoils, Inc. Expansion Potential Our laboratory test results indicate that soils with a very low expansion potential underiie the site. This should be considered during project design. Foundation design and construction recommendations are provided herein for very low expansion potential classification. Corroslon/Sulfate Testing Typical samples of the site materials were analyzed for corrosion/sulfate potential. The testing included determination of pH, soluble sulfates, and saturated resistivity. At the time of this report the results were not received. An addendum to this report will be issued when results are received. Excavation of Foundations Adiacent to Existing Structures Due to the close proximity of one- and two-story structures to the north and south of the proposed development, care should be taken wheh removing native soil adjacent to or in close proximity to an existing foundation. Shoring and bracing recommendations are provided herein. Subsurface and Surface Water Subsurface and surface water, as discussed previously, are not anticipated to significantly affect site development, provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions along fill/bedrock contacts and along zones of contrasting permeabilities, should not be precluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities. Should perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions. The groundwater conditions observed and opinions generated were those at the time of our investigation. Conditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, or other factors that were not obvious at the time of our investigation. Regional Seismic Activity The seismicity acceleration values provided herein should be considered during the design of the proposed development. HBN, Inc. W.0.3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 10 GeoSoils, Inc. EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS General All grading should conform to the guidelines presented in Appendix Chapter A33 of the Uniform Building Code (adopted and current edition), the requirements of the City of Carlsbad, and the Grading Guidelines presented in this report as Appendix C, except where specificaily superseded in the text of this report. Prior to grading, GSI's representative should be present at the preconstruction meeting to provide additional grading guidelines, if needed, and review the earthwork schedule. Earthwork beyond the limits of the surficial, remedial overexcavations or those indicated on the grading plan should be reviewed by the geologist and/or geotechnical consultant prior to and following these additional removals. During earthwork construction all site preparation and the general grading procedures of the contractor should be observed and the fill selectively tested by a representative(s) of GSI. If unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field or if modifications are proposed to the rough grade or precise grading plan, they shouid be reviewed by this office and if warranted, modified and/or additional recommendations will be offered. All applicable requirements of local and national construction and general industry safety orders, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the Construction Safety Act should be met. GSI does not consult in the area of safety engineering. Excavations into the granular material on this site may be unstable. Site Preparation Debris, vegetation, and other deleterious material should be removed from the improvement(s) area prior to the start of construction. Removals (Unsuitable Surficial Materials) Removals should consist of the upper 3 to 4 feet of weathered terrace deposits to competent materials (due to the potential presence of underground utilities and associated) within areas proposed for settlement-sensitive improvements. Removals should be completed below a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection down and away from the bottom outside edge of any settlement-sensitive improvement or fill area. Care should be taken when removing soil adjacent to or in close proximity to an existing foundation. Once these materials are removed, the bottom ofthe excavations shouid be observed and approved by a representative of GSI. The bottom areas approved to receive fiil should be scarified in two perpendicular directions and moisture conditioned (at or above the soils optimum moisture content) to a depth of 12 inches and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction. At that time, the removed existing earth materials may be HBN, Inc. W.0.3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 11 GeoSoils, Inc. re-used as fill, provided the materials are moisture conditioned at or above the soils optimum moisture and compacted in accordance with the recommendations ofthis report. Fill Placement Subsequent to ground preparation, onsite soils may be placed in thin (6±inch) lifts, cleaned of vegetation and debris, brought to a least optimum moisture content, and compacted to achieve a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. If fill materials are imported to the site, the proposed import fill should be submitted to GSI, so laboratory testing can be performed to verify that the intended import material is compatible with onsite material. At least three business days of lead time should be allowed by builders or contractors for proposed import submittals. This lead time will allow for particle size analysis, specific gravity, relative compaction, expansion testing, and blended import/native characteristics as deemed necessary. Erosion Control Onsite soils and bedrock materials have a moderate erosion potential. Use of hay bales, silt fences, and/or sandbags should be considered, as appropriate during construction. Temporary grades should be constructed to drain at a minimum of 1 to 2 percent to a suitable temporary or pemn^ent outlet. Precise grades should be evaluated by the design civil engineer to reduce concentrated flows to less than 6 feet per second and into lined or landscaped swales. Evaluation of cuts during grading wili be necessary in order to identify any areas of loose or non-cohesive materiais. Should any significant zones be encountered during earthwork construction, additional remedial grading may be recommended; however, only the remedial measures discussed herein are anticipated at this time. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS In the event that the information concerning the proposed development is not correct or any changes in the design, location, or loading conditions of the proposed structures are made, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are for the subject parcel only and shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report are modified or approved in writing by this office. The information and recommendations presented in this section are considered minimums and are not meant to supersede design(s) by the project structural engineer or civil engineer specializing in structurai design. Upon request, GSI could provide additionai consultation regarding soil parameters, as related to foundation design. They are considered preliminary recommendations for proposed construction, in consideration of our field investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wpA3100\3168a.pge Page 12 GeoSoils, Inc. Preliminary Foundation Design Our review, field work, and laboratory testing indicates that onsite soils have a very low expansion potential. Final foundation recommendations should be provided at the conclusion of grading based on laboratory testing of fill materials exposed at finish grade. Bearing Value 1. The foundation systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with guidelines presented in the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code. 2. An allowable bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot may be used for design of continuous footings 12 inches wide and 12 inches deep and for design of isolated pad footings 24 inches square and 24 inches deep founded entirely into compacted fill or competent bedrock material and connected by grade beam or tie beam in at least one direction. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 12 inches in depth to a maximum vaiue of 2,500 pounds per square foot. The above values may be increased by one-third when considering short duration seismic or wind loads. No increase, in bearing, for footing width is recommended. Lateral Pressure 1. For lateral sliding resistance, a 0.35 coefficient of friction may be utilized for a concrete to soil contact when multiplied by the dead ioad. 2. Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 250 pounds per cubic foot with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot. 3. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third. 4. All footings should maintain a minimum 7-foot horizontal setback from the base of the footing to any descending slope. This distance is measured from the footing face at the bearing elevation. Footings should maintain a minimum horizontal setback of H/3 (H = slope height) from the base of the footing to the descending slope face and no less than 7 feet nor need be greater than 40 feet. Footings adjacent to unlined drainage swales should be deepened to a minimum of 6 inches below the invert of the adjacent unlined swale. Footings for structures adjacent to retaining walls shouid be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 projection from the heel of the wall. Alternatively, walls may be designed to accommodate structural loads from buildings or appurtenances as described in the retaining wall section of this report. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 13 GeoSoils, Inc. Construction The following foundation construction recommendations are presented as a minimum criteria from a soiis engineering standpoint. The onsite soiis expansion potentials are generally in the Very Low to Low (expansion index 0 to 50) range. Very Low to Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index 0 to 50) 1. Exterior and interior footings should be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches for one-story floor loads, and 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface for two-story floor loads. All footings should be reinforced with two No. 4 reinforcing bars, one placed near the top and one placed near the bottom of the footing. Footing widths should be as indicated in the Uniform Building Code (International Conference of Building Officials, 1997). 2. A grade beam, reinforced as above, and at least 12 inches wide should be provided across large (e.g. doon/vays) entrances. The base ofthe grade beam should be at the same elevation as the bottom of adjoining footings. 3. Residential concrete slabs, where moisture condensation is undesirable, should be underiain with a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of 6 mil polyvinyl chloride or equivalent membrape with all laps sealed. This membrane should be covered above and below with a minimum of 2 inches of sand (total of 4 inches) to aid in uniform curing of the concrete and to protect the membrane from puncture. 4. Residentiai concrete slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick, and should be reinforced with No. 3 reinforcing bar at 18 inches on center in both directions, per the UBC. All siab reinforcement should be supported to ensure placement near the verticai midpoint of the concrete. "Hooking" is not considered an acceptable method of positioning the reinforcement. 5. Residential garage slabs should be reinforced as above and poured separately from the structural footings and quartered with expansion joints or saw cuts. A positive separation from the footings should be maintained with expansion joint material to permit relative movement. 6. Presaturation is not required for these soil conditions. The moisture content of the subgrade soils should be equal to or greater than optimum moisture content in the slab areas. Priorto placing visqueen or reinforcement, soil moisture content should be verified by this office within 72 hours of pouring slabs. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 14 GeoSoils, Inc. Shoring and Bracing The existing structures located on the north and south side of the property have walls that lie in close proximity to the planned buiiding foundation (shown on Plate 1). It is not known at this time if the adjacent buildings have deep or shallow foundations. Although the recommended removals are anticipated to be on the order of 48 inches, these foundations may require additional support during planned construction at this site. Shoring and bracing for the adjacent building foundations should be evaluated further during design, after plans are made available to this office. Due to the proximity of the adjacent structures, we recommend that a pre-construction survey be conducted to document existing conditions of the structures and establish a basis for lateral and vertical control. The pre-construction survey work may also include photographic documentation of the existing buildings. CORROSION At the time of this report the results were not received. An addendum to this report will be issued when results are received. Upon completion of grading, testing of soiis for corrosion to concrete and metals (including import materials) should be considered prior to the construction of utilities andjoundations. Alternative methods and additional comments may be obtained from a qualified corrosion engineer. CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALL RECOMMENDATIONS General The equivalent fluid pressure parameters provide for the use of very low expansive select granular backfill to be utilized behind the proposed walls. The very low expansive granular backfill should be provided behind the wall at a 1:1 (h:v) projection from the heel of the foundation system. Very low expansive fill is Class 3 aggregate baserock or Class 2 penneable rock. Wall backfilling should be performed with relatively light equipment within the same 1:1 projection (i.e., hand tampers, walk behind compactors). Highly expansive soils should not be used to backfill any proposed walls. During construction, materials should not be stockpiled behind nor in front of walls for a distance of 2H where H is the height of the wall. Foundation systems for any proposed retaining walls should be designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Foundation Design section of this report. Building walls, below grade, should be water-proofed or damp-proofed, depending on the degree of moisture protection desired. Ail walls should be properly designed in accordance with the recommendations presented below. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2. 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 15 GeoSoils, Inc. Some movement of the walls constructed should be anticipated as soil strength parameters are mobilized. This movement could cause some cracking depending upon the materials used to construct the wall. To reduce the potential for wall cracking, walls should be internally grouted and reinforced with steel. To mitigate this effect, the use of vertical crack control joints and expansion joints, spaced at 20 feet or iess along the walls should be employed. Vertical expansion control joints should be infilled with a flexible grout. Wall footings should be keyed or doweled across vertical expansion joints. Walls should be internally grouted and reinforced with steel. Restrained Walls Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and compacting backfill material or that have re-entrant or male corners, should be designed for an at-rest equivalent fluid pressures (EFP) of 65 pcf, plus any appiicable surcharge loading. Expansive soils should not be used as backfill, only granular (very low expansive) backfill should be used. For areas of male or re-entrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of the wall laterally from the corner. Building walls below grade or greater than 2 feet in height should be water-proofed or damp-proofed, depending on the degree of moisture protection desired. The wall should be drained as indicated in the following section. For structural footing loads within the 1:1 zone of influence behind wall backfill, refer to the following section. Cantilevered Walls These recommendations are for cantilevered retaining walls up to 10 feet high. Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top ofthe wall is not restrained from minor deflections. An empirical equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit weights are provided for speciflc slope gradients of the retained material. These do not include other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, seismic events, expansive soils, or adverse geologic conditions. If traffic is within a distance H behind any wall or a 1:1 projection from the heel of the wall foundation a pressure of 100 psf per foot in the upper 5 feet should be used. Structural loads fl-om adjacent properties and their influence on site walls should be reviewed by the structural engineer, if within a 1:1 projection behind any site wall. However, for preliminary planning purposes, one third of the footing contact pressure should be added to the wall in pounds per square foot below the bearing elevation and for a distance of three times the footing width along the wall alignment. Alternatively, a deepened footing beyond the 1:1 projection (up from the heel) behind the wall may be utilized. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 16 GeoSoils, Inc. SURFACE SLOPE OF RETAINED MATERIAL (horizontal to vertical) EQUIVALENT FLUID WEIGHT FOR NON-EXPANSIVE SOIL* Level** 2 tol 40 55 *To be increased by traffic, structural surcharge and seismic loading as needed. **Level walls are those where grades behind the wall are level for a distance of 2H. Wall Backflll and Drainage All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate backdrain and outlet system (a minimum two outlets per wall and no greater than 100 feet apart), to prevent buildup of iiydrostatic pressures and be designed in accordance with minimum standards presented herein. See site wall drain options (Figure 3, Figure 4, and Figure 5). Drain pipe should consist of 4-inch diameter perforated schedule 40 PVC pipe embedded in gravel. Gravel used in the backdrain systems should be a minimum of 3 cubic feet per lineal foot of %- to 1-inch clean crushed rock wrapped in filter fabric (Miradrain 140 or equivalent) and 12 inches thick behind the wall. Where the void to be fitted is constrained by lot lines or property boundaries, the use of panel drains (Mirafi 5,000 or equivalent) may be considered with the approval of the project geotechnical engineer. The surface of the backfill should be sealed t^y pavement or the top 18 inches compacted to 90 percent relative compacfion with native soil. Proper surface drainage should also be provided. Weeping of the walls in lieu of a backdrain is not recommended for walls greater than 2 feet in height. For walls 2 feet or less in height, weepholes should be no greater than 6 feet on center in the bottom coarse of block and above the landscape zone. A paved drainage channel (v-ditch or substitute), either concrete or asphalfic concrete, behind the top of the wails with sloping backflll should be considered to reduce the potenfial for surface water penetration. For level backflll, the grade should be sloped such that drainage is toward a suitable outlet at 1 to 2 percent. Retaining Wall Footing Transitions Site walls are anficipated to be founded on footings designed in accordance with the recommendafions in this report. Wall foofings may transifion from formafional bedrock to select flll. If this condifion is present the civil designer may specify either: a) if transifions from bedrock to select fill transect the wall foofing alignment at an angle of less than 45 degrees (plan view), then the designer should perform a minimum 2-foot overexcavation for a distance of two times the height of the wall and increase overexcavafion unfil such transition is between 45 and 90 degrees to the wail aiighment. HBN, Inc. 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC November 2, 2001 Page 17 Cap drain (cut off) 18" below soil line Waterproofing Manufactured drainage Geoconnposite drain ( Mira drain 5000 or equivalent ) Note: Filter fabric wraps connpletely around perforated pipe and behind core material, core material wraps beneath bottom of pipe. ' 4" dio. min. perforated pipe placed with holes down and sloped at 1—2% to suitable outlet 4" min. granular material —' (class 2 permeable or 3/8-1" clean crushed rock wrapped in a filter fabric) Site retaining wall (structural design by others) Pavement section per GSI recommendations Parking lot surface O " a o / Q — Wall footing (designed by others) LOSANGELES CO. RIVERSIDE CO. ORANGE CO. SAN DIEGO CO. SCHEMATIC OF SITE WALL DRAIN OPTION A W.O. 3168-A-SC DATE 11/01 SCALEjjg;^ Figure 3 Waterproofing L Cop drain (cut off) 18" below soil line 12" thick (min.) drain rock (class 2 permeable) or other acceptable granular material, 1/8-1" clean crushed rock wrapped in 0 filter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent) 4" dia. min. perforated pipe placed with hole^ down and sloped at 1-2% to a suitable outlet 4 Min. 4_ Min.— 1 . . . 1 o • 1 1 1 o o ^ ^ 1 "Site retaining wall (structural design by others) Pavement section per GSI recomendotions — ZI Parking lot surface 1 o ' ' o . f . , . 1 o 4" Min. ' • / o » C 1 » o*' 1 O . f .o ko / o v: -Wall footing (designed by others) LOS ANGELES CO. RIVERSIDE CO. ORANGE CO. SAN OIEGO CO. SCHEMATIC OF SITE WALL DRAIN OPTION B W.O. 3168-A-SC DATE 11/01 SCALE None Fiaure d If finished surface is within 8" of top of footing wall drains shall be at 6' intervals along the length of the wall and located at the level of the bottom course of block. The drains shall be 4" in diameter 24" thick (min.) drain rock (class 2 permeable) or other acceptable granular material, 1/8-1" clean ' crushed rock wrapped in a filter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent) Waterproofing . . •••V*' A,.. .*,'..> ., . '.,•. , • f\ '••'/^AA-- r Cop drain (cut off) 18" below soil line Site retaining wall (structural design by others) Pavement section per GSI recomendotions 4" dio. pipe Parking lot surface iriace \ —^ \ •- 'A- J • l« ko f 1 A o ko 1 o ' , 1 r o « i_ t o o » 1 Co ' ^ . ^ « 0°. . .P / . o , O ^ I' 1 -WoiU footing (designed loy others) T LOS ANGELES CO. RIVERSIDE CO. ORANGE CO. SAN DIEGO CO. SCHEMATIC OF SITE WALL DRAIN OPTION C W.O. 3168-A-SC DATE H/OI SCALE None b) Increase of the amount of reinforcing steel and wall detailing (i.e., expansion joints or crack control joints) such that an angular distortion of 1/360 for a distance of 2H (where H=wall height in feet) on either side of the transition may be accommodated. Expansion joints should be sealed with a flexible, non-shrink grout. c) Embed the footings entirely into a homogeneous flll. FLATWORK AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS Exterior Slabs and Walkways Exterior concrete slab on grade construction should be designed and constructed in accordance with the following criteria: 1. Driveway pavement and all other exterior flatwork should be a minimum 4 inches thick. A thickened edge should be considered for all flatwork adjacent to irrigated and landscape areas. 2. Siab subgrade should be scarifled, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction. Subgrade shouid be moisture conditioned based on the representative expansion potential of the subgrade exposed (i.e. at or above optimum for low expansive) soiis. The subgrade moisture content shouid be maintained until the slab is poured. 3. The use of transverse and longitudinal control joints should ba considered to help control slab cracking due to concrete shrinkage or expansion. Two of the best ways to control this movement is; 1) add a sufflcient amount of reinforcing steel, increasing tensile strength of the slab, and/or 2) provide an adequate amount of control and/or expansion joints to accommodate anticipated concrete shrinkage and expansion. We would suggest that the maximum control joint spacing for un- reinforced slabs be placed on 8-foot centers (4 inch slab), 10-foot centers (5 inch slab) or the smallest dimension of the slab, whichever is least. 4. No trafflc should be allowed upon the newly poured concrete slabs until they have been properly cured to within 75 percent of design strength. 5. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Adjacent landscaping should be graded to drain into the street, paridng area, or other approved area. Ail surface water should be appropriately directed to areas designed for site drainage. 6. Concrete compression strength should be a minimum of 2,500 psi. HBN, Inc. W.0.3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 21 GeoSoils, Inc. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS/DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Additional Site Improvements If in the fljture, any additional improvements are planned for the site, recommendations concerning the geological or geotechnical aspects of design and construction of said improvements could be provided upon request this includes but not limited to appurtenant structures. This office should be notified in advance of any additional flll placement, regrading of the site, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes any grading, utility trench, and retaining wall backfills. Tiie Flooring Tiie flooring can crack, reflecting cracks in tiie concrete slab below the tile. Therefore, the designer should consider additional steel reinforcement of concrete slabs on-grade where file wiil be placed. The tile installer should consider installation methods that reduce possible cracking of the fiie such as slipsheets. Slipsheets or a vinyl crack isolation membrane (approved by the Tile Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute) is recommended between file and concrete slabs on grade. Landscape Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is signiflcantiy reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away fi'om graded slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life shouid be provided for planted slopes. Over-watering should be avoided. Onsite soil materials should be maintained in a solid to semisolid state. Brushed native and graded slopes (constructed within and utilizing onsite materials) would be potentially erosive. Eroded debris may be minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover soon after construction. Plants selected for landscaping should be light weight, deep rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Planting of large trees with potential for extensive root deveiopment should not be placed closer than 10 feet from the perimeter of the foundation or the anticipated height of the mature tree, whichever is greater, it order to minimize erosion on the siope face, an erosion control fabric (i.e. jute matting) shouid be considered. From a geotechnical standpoint, leaching is not recommended for establishing landscaping, if the surface soils area processed for the purpose of adding amendments they should be recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Moisture sensors, embedded into flll slopes, should be considered to reduce the potential of HBN, inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2,2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 22 GeoSoils, Inc. ovenrt^atering from automatic landscape watering systems. The use of certain fertilizers may affect the corrosion characteristics of soil. Review of the type and amount (pounds per acre) ofthe fertilizers by a corrosion specialist should be considered. Drainage Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away fi-om foundations and not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward the street or other approved area. Landscaping should be graded to drain into the street, or other approved area. All surface water should be appropriately directed to areas designed for site drainage. Roof gutters and down spouts should be considered to control roof drainage. Down spouts should outiet a minimum of 5 feet from proposed structures or tightiined into a subsurface drainage system. We recommend that any proposed open bottom planters adjacent to proposed structures be eliminated for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed bottom type planters could be utilized. An outiet placed in the bottom of the planter, could be installed to direct drainage away fi'om structures or any exterior concrete flatwork. Drainage behind top of walls should be accomplished along the length of the wall with a paved channel drainage v-ditch or substitute. Drainpipes It is our understanding that drainpipes are proposed along the north and south portions ofthe property. The existing structures on the north and south side of the property have walls that lie in close proximity to the planned building foundation (shown on Plate 1). It is not known at this time if the adjacent buildings have deep or shallow foundations. Schedule 40, non-perforated pipe should be utilized forthese drainpipes and they should not be surrounded by gravel. Soils surrounding the drainpipes should be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The trench for the drainpipes should not be left open during construction in the rainy season. Footing Trench Excavation All footing trench excavations should be observed and approved by a representative ofthis office prior to placing reinforcement. Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, if not removed from the site. Trench Backfill Ali excavations should be observed by one of our representatives and conform to OSHA and local safety codes. Exterior trenches should not be excavated below a 1:1 projection HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 23 GeoSoils, Inc. from the bottom of any adjacent foundation system. If excavated, these trenches may undermine support for the foundation system potentially creating adverse conditions. 1. All utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas and beneath hardscape features should be broughtto near optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Obsen/ations, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of this office to verify compactive efforts of the contractor. 2. Soils generated fi'om utility trench excavations shouid be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent (ASTM D-1557) if not removed fi'om the site. 3. Jetting of backflll is not recommended. 4. The use of pipe jacking to place utilities is not recommended on this site due to the presence of gravels and cobbles. 5. Bottoms of utility trenches should be sloped away from structures. PLAN REVIEW Finai site development and foundation plans shouid be submitted to this offlce for review and comment, as the plans become available, for the purpose of minimizing any misunderstandings between the plans and recommendations presented herein. In addition, foundation excavations and any additional earthwork construction performed on the site should be observed and tested by this office, ff conditions are found to differ substantially from those stated, appropriate recommendations would be offered at that time. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2. 2001 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 24 GeoSoils, Inc. LIMITATIONS The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory study are believed representative of the area; however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during site grading, construction, and our post-grading study. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. GSI assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing, or recommendations performed or provided by others. Inasmuch as our study is based upon the site materiais observed, selective laboratory testing and engineering analysis, the conclusion and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. During the fleld exploration phase of our study, odors or stained or discolored soils were not observed onsite or in our test pits or test pit spoils. However, these observations were made during our preliminary geotechnical study ahd should in no way be used in lieu of an environmental assessment, ff requested, a proposal for a phase I preliminary environmental assessment could be provided. HBN, Inc. W.O. 3168-A-SC 3235-3265 & 3267/3281 Tyler Street November 2, 2001 Rle:e:\wp7V3100\3168a.pge Page 25 GeoSoils, Inc. APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX A REFERENCES Blake, Thomas F., 1998, EQFAULT computer program and users manual for the deterministic prediction of horizontal accelerations from digitized California faults. Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 1994, Near-Source attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration from woridwide accelerograms recorded from 1957 to 1993: Proceedings, Fifth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. Ill, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, pp. 293-292. Frankel, Arthur D., Perkins, David M., and Mueller, Charies S., 1996, Preliminary and working versions of draft 1997 seismic shaking maps for the United States showing peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral acceleration response at 0.3 and 1.0- second site periods for the Design Basis Earthquake (10 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years) for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado. GeoSoils, Inc., Proprietary in-house information , 2000a, Soil corrosivity test results, 3267/3281 Tyler Street, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 2886-A-SC, dated June 19. , 2000b, Preliminary geotechnical evaluation, 3267/3281 Tyler Street, Carlsbad, California, W.O. 2886-A-SC, dated June 9. Greensfelder, R. W., 1974, Maximum credible rock acceleration from earthquakes in California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. Hart, E.W. and Bryant, W. A., 1997, Fault-rupture hazard zones in California: California Department of Consen/ation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. Housner, G. W., 1970, Strong ground motion in earthquake engineering, Robert Wiegel, ed., Prentice-Hall. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform building code: Whittier, California, vol. 1,2, and 3. Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault activity map of California and adjacent areas: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet No. 6, scale 1:750,000. Joyner, W.B, and Boore, D.M., 1982a, Estimation of response-spectral values as ftjnctions of magnitude, distance and site conditions, in Johnson, J.A., Campbell, K.W., and Blake, eds., T.F., AEG Short Course, Seismic Hazard Analysis, June 18,1994. GeoSoils, Inc. , 1982b, Prediction of earthquake response spectra, in Johnson, J.A., Campbell, K.W., and Blake, eds., T.F., AEG Short Course, Seismic Hazard Analysis, June 18, 1994. Krinitzsky, Ellis L, Gould, J.P., and Edinger, P.H., 1993, Fundamentals of earthquake resistant construction: John H. Wiley & Sons, Inc., 299 p. Petersen, Mark D., Bryant, W.A., and Cramer, C.H., 1996, Interim table of fault parameters used by the California Division of Mines and Geology to compile the probabilistic seismic hazard maps of California. Sadigh, K., Egan, J., and Youngs, R., 1987, Predictive ground motion equations reported in Joyner, W.B., and Boore, D.M., 1988, "Measurement, characterization, and prediction of strong ground motion", in Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics II, Recent Advances in Ground Motion Evaluation, Von Thun, J.L, ed.: American Society of Civil Engineers Geotechnical Special Publication No. 20, pp. 43-102. Sowers and Sowers, 1979, Unified soil classification system (After U. S. Waten/vays Experiment Station and ASTM 02487-667) in Introductory Soil Mechanics, New York. Tan, S.S and Kennedy, M.Pi, 1996, Geologic maps ofthe Northwestern part of San Diego County, California, DMG Open-File Report 96-02. United States Department of Agriculture, 1953, Black and white high altitude stereo photgraphs, AXN-14M-19 and -21. United States (^eoiogical Sun/ey, 1968, San Luis Rey quadrangle, California - San Diego Co., 7.5 minute series (topographic), photo revised 1975. Weber, Harold F., 1982, Geologic map of the central-north coastal area of San Diego County, California, showing recent slope failures and pre-development landslides: United States Geologic Sun/ey, Open-File Report 82-12. HBN, Inc. Appendix A Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. APPENDIX B BORING LOGS GeoSoils, Inc. BORING LOG W.O. 3168-A-SC PROJECT: BORING B-1 HNB, 3235-3265 Tyler St. DATEEXCAVATED SHEET OF 1 10-23-01 .c •s. Q Sample II o m (o5 o E CO 5, Dto Q CO CO SAMPLE METHOD: 140LB HAMMER ©30" DROP Standard Penetration Test Undisturbed, Ring Sample % Water Seepage into hole Description of Materiai 10- 15- 24 23 SM 111.8 116.3 7.6 8.0 42.2 50.5 23 23.4 45 22.1 0" - 3" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE. 3" - 5" BASE. tRRACE DEPDSnrS^ @ 5" SILTY SAND, red-brown, damp, medium dense; fine grained. @ 2' SILTY SAND, red-brown, dannp, medium dense; fine grained. (m 5' as at 2'. 10' as at 5'; wet to saturated. 11/2' GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED. 15' SILTY SAND, brown, wet, dense. 20- 25 Total Depth = 1672' Groundwater Encountered (® 1V/4' Backfilled 10/23/01 HNB. 3235-3265 Tyler St. GeoSoils, Inc. PMTE B-1 GeoSoils, Inc. BORING LOG W.O. 3168-A-SC PROJECT: BORING B-2 HNB. 3235-3265 Tyler St. DATEEXCAVATED SHEET 1 OF 1 10-23-01 sz •s. Q Sample to bi o m col DCO 8 If (0 CO SAMPLE METHOD: 140LB HAMMER @30" DROP Standard Penetration Test Undisturbed, Ring Sample ^ Water Seepage into hole Description of Material 5- 10- 15 SM 26 32 26 116.3 8.5 53.3 112.2 15.7 87.7 13.1 0" - 4" CONCRETE WITH WIRE MESH. jRRACE DEPOSITS @ 4" SILTY SAND, red-brown, damp, medium dense; fine grained @ 5' SILTY SAND, red-brown, damp, nnedium dense; fine grained. 10' as at 5'. 11/2' GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED. @ 15' SILTY SAND, brown, moist, dense;round 3" diameter cobble in shoe. 20- 25- Total Depth = 1672' Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 10/23/01 11/2' HNB. 3235-3265 Tyler St. GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE B-2 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: HNB. 3235-3265 Tyler St. BORING LOG W.O. 3168-A-SC BORING B-3 DATEEXCAVATED SHEETS OF 1 10-23-01 sz "S. Q Sample m D3 o CQ co5 O E CO >. DCO Q (0 CO SAMPLE METHOD: 140LB HAMMER @30" DROP Standard Penetration Test Undisturbed, Ring Sample ^ Water Seepage into hole Description of Materiai SM 5-17 8.7 10-41 111.7 17.8 97.9 0" - 4" CONCRETE WITH WIRE MESH. feRRACE DEPOSITS @ 4" SILTY SAND, red-brown, damp, medium dense; fine grained. @ 5' SILTY SAND, red-brown, damp, medium dense; fine grained. 10' as at 5'; dense. Total Depth = 11' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 10/23/01 15- 20- 25 HNB, 3235-3265 Tyler St. GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE B-3 APPENDIX C GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES General These guidelines present general procedures and requirements for earthwork and grading as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to fliled, placement of flll, installation of subdrains and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are part of the earthwork and grading guidelines and would supersede the provisions contained hereafter in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which couid supersede these guidelines or the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. The contractor is responsible forthe satisfactory completion of all eartiiwork in accordance with provisions of the project plans and speciflcations. The project soil engineer and engineering geologist (geotechnical consultant) or their representatives should provide obsen/ation and testing sen/ices, and geotechnical consultation during the duration of the project. EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Geotechnical Consultant ^ Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualifled geotechnical consultant (soil engineer and engineering geologist) should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the flils for conformance witii the recommendations of the geotechnical report, the approved grading plans, and appiicable grading codes and ordinances. The geotechnical consultant should provide testing and observation so that determination may be made that the work is being accomplished as specifled. It is the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultants and keep them apprised of anticipated work schedules and changes, so that they may schedule their personnel accordingly. All clean-outs, prepared ground to receive flll, key excavations, and subdrains should be obsen/ed and documented by the project engineering geologist and/or soil engineer prior to placing and flll. It is the contractors's responsibility to notify the engineering geologist and soil engineer when such areas are ready for observation. Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density tests to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with American Standard Testing Materials test method ASTM designation D-1557-78. Random field compaction tests should be performed in accordance with test method ASTM designation D-1556-82, D-2937 or D-2922 and D-3017, at inten/als of approximately 2 feet of flll height or every 100 cubic yards of flll placed. These criteria GeoSoils, Inc. would vary depending on the soil conditions and the size of the project. The location and frequency of testing would be at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Contractor's Responsibility All clearing, site preparation, and earthwork perfonned on the project should be conducted by the contractor, with observation by geotechnical consultants and staged approval by the governing agencies, as applicable. It is the contractor's responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the flli, to the satisfaction of the soil engineer, and to place, spread, moisture condition, mix and compact the fill in accordance with the recommendafions of the soil engineer. The contractor should also remove all major non- earth material considered unsatisfactory by the soil engineer. It is the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with applicable grading guidelines, codes or agency ordinances, and approved grading plans. Sufficient watering apparatus and compaction equipment should be provided by the contractor with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and climatic conditions, ff, in the opinion of the geotechnical consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable weather, excessive oversized rock, or deleterious material, insufficient support equipment, etc., are resulting in a quality of work that is not acceptable, the consultant will inform the contractor, and the contractor is expected to rectify the conditions, and if necessary, stop work until conditions are satisfactory. During construction, the contractor shall properiy grade all surfaces to maintain good drainage and prevent ponding of water. The contractor shall take remedial measures to control surface water and to prevent erosion of graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control measures have been installed. SITE PREPARATION All major vegetation, including brush, trees, thick grasses, organic debris, and other deleterious material should be removed and disposed of off-site. These removals must be concluded prior to placing fill. Existing fill, soii, alluvium, colluvium, or rock materials determined by the soil engineer or engineering geologist as being unsuitable in-place should be removed prior to fill placement. Depending upon the soil conditions, these materials may be reused as compacted fills. Any materials incorporated as part of the compacted fills should be approved by the soil engineer. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipelines, or other structures not located prior to grading are to be removed or treated in a manner recommended by the soil engineer. Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured, or othen/vise unsuitable ground extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condifion should be overexcavated down to HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\31(X)\3168a.pge Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. firm ground and approved by the soil engineer before compaction and filling operations continue. Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture conditioned should be re-compacted to the minimum relative compaction as specified in these guideiines. Existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of the fills should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches or as directed by the soil engineer. After the scarified ground is brought to opfimum moisture content or greater and mixed, the materials should be compacted as specified herein, ff the scarified zone is grater that 6 inches in depth, it may be necessary to remove the excess and place the material in lifts restricted to about 6 inches in compacted thickness. Existing ground which is not satisfactory to support compacted fill should be overexcavated as required in the geotechnical report or by the on-site soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Scarification, disc harrowing, or other acceptable form of mixing should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large lumps or clods, until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free from ruts, hollow, hummocks, or other uneven features which would inhibit compaction as described previously. Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench, which will act as a key, should be a minimum of 15 feet wide and should be at least 2 feet deep into firm material, and approved by the soii engineer and/or engineering geologist. In fill over cut slope conditions, the recommended minimum width ofthe lowest bench or key is also 15 feet with the key founded on firm material, as designated by the Geotechnical Consultant. As a general rule, unless specifically recommended othenA/ise by the Soii Engineer, the minimum width of fill keys should be approximately equal to Va the height of the slope. Standard benching is generally 4 feet (minimum) vertically, exposing firm, acceptable material. Benching may be used to remove unsuitable materials, although it is understood that the vertical height of the bench may exceed 4 feet. Pre-stripping may be considered for unsuitable materials in excess of 4 feet in thickness. All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and the toe of fill benches should be observed and approved by the soii engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placement of fill. Fills may then be properly placed and compacted until design grades (elevations) are attained. COMPACTED FILLS Any earth materials imported or excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill provided that each material has been determined to be suitable by the soil engineer. These materials should be free of roots, tree branches, other organic matter or other deleterious materials. All unsuitable materials shouid be removed from the fill as directed HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 3 GeoSoils, Inc. by the soii engineer. Soils of poor gradation, undesirable expansion potential, or substandard strength characteristics may be designated by the consultant as unsuitable and may require blending with other soils to sen/e as a satisfactory fill material. Fill materials derived from benching operations should be dispersed throughout the fiil area and blended with other bedrock derived material. Benching operafions should not result in the benched material being placed only within a single equipment width away from the fill/bedrock contact. Oversized materials defined as rock or other irreducible materials with a maximum dimension greaterthan 12 inches should not be buried or placed in fills unless the location of materials and disposal methods are specifically approved by the soil engineer. Oversized material should be taken off-site or placed in accordance with recommendations of the soil engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. Oversized material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade (eievation) or within 20 feet horizontally of slope faces. To facilitate future trenching, rock should not be placed within the range of foundation excavations, future utilities, or underground construction unless specifically approved by the soil engineer and/or the developers representative. ff import material is required for grading, representative samples of the materials to be utiiized as compacted fiil should be analyzed in the laboratory by the soil engineer to determine its physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, an appropriate analysis ofthis material should be conducted by the soii engineer as soon as possible. Approved fill material should be placed in areas prepared to receive fiil in near horizontal layers that when compacted shouid not exceed 6 inches in thickness. The soil engineer may approve thick lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and blended to attain uniformity of material and moisture suitable for compaction. Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum should be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers should be aerated by scarification or should be blended with drier material. Moisture condition, blending, and mixing of the fill layer should continue until the fill materials have a uniform moisture content at or above optimum moisture. After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture conditioned and mixed, it shouid be unifomnly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM test designation, D-1557-78, or as othenvise recommended by the soil engineer. Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and should be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 4 GeoSoils, Inc. Where tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the required relative compaction, or improper moisture is in evidence, the particular layer or portion shall be re-worked until the required density and/or moisture content has been attained. No additional fiii shall be placed in an area unfil the last placed lift of fill has been tested and found to meet the density and moisture requirements, and is approved by the soil engineer. Compaction of slopes should be accomplished by over-building a minimum of 3 feet horizontaiiy, and subsequentiy trimming back to the design slope configuration. Testing shall be performed as the fill is elevated to evaluate compaction as the fill core is being developed. Special efforts may be necessary to attain the specified compacfion in the fiii slope zone. Final slope shaping should be performed by trimming and removing loose materials with appropriate equipment. Afinal determinafion of fill slope compaction should be based on observation and/or testing of the finished slope face. Where compacted fill slopes are designed steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), specific material types, a higher minimum relative compaction, and special grading procedures, may be recommended. ff an alternative to over-building and cutting back the compacted fill slopes is selected, then special effort should be made to achieve the required compacfion in the outer 10 feet of each lift of fill by undertaking the following: 1. An extra piece of equipment consisting of a heavy short shanked sheepsfoot should be used to roll (horizontal) parallel to the slopes continuously as fill is placed. The sheepsfoot roller should also be used to roll perpendicular to the slopes, and extend out over the slope to provide adequate compaction to the face of the slope. 2. Loose fill should not be spilled out over the face of the slope as each lift is compacted. Any loose fill spilled over a previously completed slope face should be trimmed off or be subject to re-rolling. 3. Field compacfion tests will be made in the outer (horizontal) 2 to 8 feet of the slope at appropriate verticai intervals, subsequent to compacfion operafions. 4. After completion of the slope, the slope face should be shaped with a small tractor and then re-rolled with a sheepsfoot to achieve compaction to near the slope face. Subsequent to testing to verify compaction, the slopes should be grid-rolled to achieve compaction to the slope face. Final testing should be used to confirm compaction after grid rolling. 5. Where testing indicates less than adequate compaction, the contractor will be responsible to rip, water, mix and re-compact the slope material as necessary to achieve compaction. Additional testing should be performed to verify compaction. HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 5 GeoSoils, Inc. Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer in compliance with ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendation of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrains shouid be installed in approved ground in accordance with the approximate alignment and details indicated by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrain locations or materials should not be changed or modified without approval of the geotechnical consultant. The soil engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend and direct changes in subdrain line, grade and drain material in the field, pending exposed conditions. The location of constructed subdrains should be recorded by the project civil engineer. EXCAVATIONS Excavations and cut slopes should be examined during grading by the engineering geologist. If directed by the engineering geologist, further excavations or overexcavation and re-filling of cut areas should be performed and/or remedial grading of cut slopes should be performed. When fill over cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion ofthe slope should be observed by the engineering geologist prior to placement of materials for construcfion of the fill portion of the slope. The engineering geologist should observe all cut slopes and should be notified by the contractor when cut slopes are started. if, during the course of grading, unforeseen adverse or potential adverse geologic condifions are encountered, the engineering geologist and soil engineer should investigate, evaluate and make recommendations to treat these problems. The need for cut slope buttressing or stabilizing should be based on in-grading evaluation by the engineering geologist, whether anticipated or not. Unless otherwise specified in soil and geological reports, no cut slopes should be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. Additionally, short-term stability of temporary cut slopes is the contractors responsibility. Erosion control and drainage devices shouid be designed bythe project civil engineer and should be constructed in compliance with the ordinances ofthe controlling governmental agencies, and/or In accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 6 GeoSoils, Inc. COMPLETION Observation, testing and consultation by the geotechnical consultant should be conducted during the grading operations in order to state an opinion that all cut and filled areas are graded in accordance with the approved project specifications. After complefion of grading and after the soil engineer and engineering geologist have finished their observafions of the work, final reports should be submitted subject to review by the controlling governmental agencies. No fijrther excavafion or filling should be undertaken without prior notificafion of the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist. All finished cut and fill slopes should be protected from erosion and/or be planted in accordance with the project specificafions and/or as recommended by a landscape architect. Such protection and/or planning should be undertaken as soon as practical after completion of grading. JOB SAFETY General At GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI) getting the job done safely is of primary concern. The following is the company's safety corisiderations for use by all employees on multi-employer construction sites. On ground personnel are at highest risk of injury and possible fatality on grading and construction projects. GSI recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site and that site safety is the prime responsibility of the contractor; however, everyone must be safety conscious and responsitDle at all times. To achieve our goal of avoiding accidents, cooperation between the client, the contractor and GSI personnel must be maintained. In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following precautions are to be implemented for the safety of field personnel on grading and construction projects: Safety Meetings: GSI field personnel are directed to attend contractors regulariy scheduled and documented safety meefings. Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for and are to be worn by GSI personnel at ail fimes when they are working in the field. Safety Flags: Two safety fiags are provided to GSI fieid technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicie when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits. HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. Fiashing Lights: All vehicles stationary in the grading area shall use rotating or flashing amber beacon, or strobe lights, on the vehicle during ail field tesfing. While operating a vehicle in the grading area, the emergency fiasher on the vehicle shall be activated. In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above, we request that it be brought to the attention of our office. Test Pits Location, Orientation and Clearance The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. A primary concern should be the technicians's safety. Efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractors authorized representative, and to select locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferably outside of current traffic. The contractors authorized representative (dump man, operator, supervisor, grade checker, etc.) should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test period. Of paramount concern should be the soil technicians safety and obtaining enough tests to represent the fill. Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away form oncoming traffic, whenever possible. The technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates the fill be maintained in a driveable condifion. Alternatively, the contractor may wish to park a piece of equipment in fi-ont of the test holes, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access. A zone of non-encroachment should be established for all test pits. No grading equipment shouid enter this zone during the tesfing procedure. The zone should extend approximately 50 feet outward fi'om the center of the test pit. This zone is established for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration which typically decreased test results. When taking slope tests the technician should park the vehicle directiy above or below the test location. If this is not possible, a prominent fiag should be placed at the top of the slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe operation distance (e.g. 50 feet) away from the slope during this testing. The technician is directed to withdraw fi'om the active portion ofthe fill as soon as possible following tesfing. The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location, well away fi'om the equipment traffic pattern. The contractor should inform our personnel of all changes to haul roads, cut and fill areas or other factors that may affect site access and site safety. In the event that the technicians safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractors failure to comply with any ofthe above, the technician is required, by company policy, to immediately withdraw and notify his/her supervisor. The grading contractors representative will eventually be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. However, in the HBN, Inc. Appendix C Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 8 GeoSoils, Inc. interim, no further testing will be performed until the situation is rectified. Any fill place can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing, recompaction or removal. In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety guidelines, we request that the contractor brings this to his/her attention and notify this office. Effective communication and coordination between the contractors representative and the soils technician is strongly encouraged in order to implement the above safety plan. Trench and Vertical Excavation It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is needed. Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation or vertical cut which 1) is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back, 2) displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the trench, or 3) displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth. All trench excavations or vertical cuts in excess of 5 feet deep, which any person enters, should be shored or laid back. Trench access should be provided in accordance with CAL-OSHA and/or state and local standards. Our personnel are directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy requires that the soil technician withdraw and notify his/her supervisor. The contractors representative will eventually be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. All backfill not tested due to safety concerns or other reasons could be subject to reprocessing and/or removal. If GSI personnel become aware of anyone working beneath an unsafe trench wall or vertical excavation, we have a legal obligation to put the contractor and owner/developer on notice to immediately correct the situation, ff corrective steps are not taken, GSI then has an obligation to notify CAL-OSHA and/or the proper authorities. HBN, Inc. Appendix 0 Rle:e:\wp7\3100\3168a.pge Page 9 GeoSoils, Inc. CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL TYPE A PROPOSED COMPACTED FILL NATURAL GROUND COLLUVIUM AND ALLUVIUM (REMOVE) " TYPICAL BENCHING \S\\vll BEDROCIC SEE ALTERNATIVES TYPE B \ \ PROPOSED COMPACTED RLL NATURAL GROUND COLLUVIUM AND ALLUVIUM (REMOVEI TYPICAL BENCHING \/llt^\\ l/J^ SEE ALTERNATIVES NOTE: ALTERNATIVES. LOCATICN AND EXTENT OF SUBDRAINS SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. PLATE EG-1 CANYON SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE DETAILS ALTERNATE 1: PERFORATED PIPE AND FILTER MATERIAL A-1 MINIMUM OF 9 FT > ^^^^ 12-MINIMUM FILTER MATERIAL-MINIMUM VOLUME ur 9 n.- Z^H,^^^, -r. /LINEAR FT. 6" * ABS OR PVC PIPE OR APPROVED^ ••:.\lv.-.'^ SUBSTITUTE WITH MINIMUM 8 11/^" ^ PERFS i^'-.V-fe^ UNEAR FT. IN BOTTOM HALF OF PlPg. ASTM D2751. SDR 35 OR ASTM D1527, SCHD, 40 ASTM D303A, SDR 35 OR ASTM D1785, SCHD. AO FOR CONTINUOUS RUN IN EXCESS QF 560 FT. USE 8'PIPE 6* MINIMUM B-1 FILTER MATERIAL. SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PA??|Np 1 INCH ,100 •3/A INCH .90-100 3/8 INCH 40-100 NO.4 25-40. NO. 8 18-33 .NO. 30 -.5-15 NO. 50 .0-7 NO. 200 0-3 ALTERNATE 2: PERFORATED PIPE, GRAVEL AND.FILTER FABRIC J^fT^NIMUM OVERLAP 6" MINIMUM OVERLAP 6* MINIMUM COVER 4* MINIMUM BEDDING 4- MINIMUM BEDDING A-2 B-2 GRAVEL MATERIAL 9 Fr/LINEAR FT. PERFORATED PIPE SEE ALTERNATE 1 GRAVEL* CLEAN 3/4 INCH ROCK OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE FILTER FABRIC MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE PLATE EG-2 DETAIL FOR FILL SLOPE TOEING OUT ON FLAT ALLUVIATED CANYON TOE OF SLOPE AS SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE TO BE RESTORED WITH COMPACTED FILL B"ACKCUT\^ARIES. FOR DEEP REMOVALS. ^ BACKCUT ^VKSHOULD BE MADE NO ^Aj?' STEEPER THAliSiil OR AS NECESSARY FOR SAFETY ^.^^ONSIDERATIONS.,'^ COMPACTED RLL ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE ANTICFATED ALLUVIAL REMOVAL DEPTH PER SOIL ENGINEER. PROVIDE A 1:1 MINIMUM PROJECTION FROM TOE OF SLOPE AS SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN TO THE RECOMMENDED REMOVAL DEPTH. SLOPE HEIGHT. SITE CONDITIONS AMD/OR LOCAL CONDITIONS COULD DICTATE FLATTER PROJECTIONS. REMOVAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING FILL ADJOINING CANYON RLL COMPACTED RLL UMITS LINE ^^FOR DRAINAGE ONLY nn4 yOiQi ITO BE REMOVEDL / (EXISTING COMPACTED RLU / '^TM^^^^^^ -m^H^^^f^^^ r TQ BE REMOVED BEFORE PLACING ADDITIONAL COMPACTED RLL Qal ALLUVIUM LEGEND Qaf ARTIFICIAL RLL PLATE EG--3 LU Q LL CO CO UJ Od I— ^_ CD O < bl _J CO tn < o Q. >- PLATE EG-4 < UJ Q < 01 Q m ID CO CO to UJ Od h- I- m LL O LU m < X to < tr. LU I- < 2: rr LU z o p < o O LU Q. U) o z i o o Li. LU X Z LU -J < > 5 a LU o LU > o cr a < z < cr o o z u> to < 0. h- Z lU CJ cr LU Q- LU N I/) LU > LU to 0 0 0 0 n IT) T T I r> 1 ^~ I 0 0 in CO in cn oc o LU Z X 0 I o LL O LJ m X I o u z " Z o o z o o n in . . o o o o IN < X to LU > < cr O LL < u LL O LU a. to o z i o 0 z • • 1- I/) to z < lU .CL -J < EQUIV Z EQUIV ERCE a Q. lU > LU 0 zls PR zls CL LU < > z LU < ui o :z ta X o z ^ CN O z o o fM o z in LL O I-z LU 5 O LU < to GQ iS CO < o CL >- h- lU LL cr a. < LL K ° z cr m < CJ LU < Z J ZJ CL z I O 0- S LL 2 ir 2 < LU Z < cr ^ cr O tl. UJ m >- < o = o UJ > < cr o < cr LU < cr Ul cr lu Uj ..J Ul cr o X cr CD if cr LU u CQ if cr LU Ll. a UJ > o cr CL CL < a LU < o LU in m tr m < u. cr UJ to I-z o LU ^ > ,0 5 '5E a 3 UJ 2 n o to in to < 7 I Q > to < I o J5 ° cs < UI o X o 1^ to ^ S: 5 i a. 2; LL cr o z 2: LU IU a CD < < ar » to to LU DL CL cr lU I- < o 3 Q lU X u in fS in I Q Z 2E| »- < ^ o < i ° Z X o t < £ ^ z cr o < UJ . QL UJ i ^ 3 Z O Q Z P LU 5 < X 0= 0 «) p W Q it 2 § »^ p CL Q 1 o w Q O z °. 2 I- to W) IL w < O 2 cr X z o H- cr o o r5 tk ^ UJ 2 cr cc -3 OL »- to (/> a> LU Q. 51 U. O z o I--o CD U. O to < ce o LL cr LU CL X I- a LU i* o < o 111 ? »^ CD lu " i . o UJ u IL GQ fe o ° CD 0 III —I z s: Ul 5: o: 1 ° S 3 S £ S X = -i I- UJ > < CL LU CL - 0. fi: < »_ a. " S Z UJ r! < 9 t 5 > o ° O ° CD IT O 3 CL I- t/) Q LU U. U < CD LU OQ to LU CL I- Ul o (/) UJ =) o cr t o w IL I X z LU h- S z < UJ IT m Q -J X < z X LU to CD W >- z cr -J fe a z LU o Q LU Z -J < lU I/) LU 5 " < >- I- 3 U) 3 I/) -» Z s < o cc I- Q > < z LU 2 < ^ "1 Si LU < s; O O o < o z cr UJ Q h- < o o < o OD -J fH < O tr -J ° cr ^- UJ tn > tL ^ o ui «^ 5 UJ 5 fr- UJ LL O' O o 2 Z 2 cr >- tu Ul LU tr z O o i2 2 Q lU UJ cr X o < < a cc UJ tu K tu 5 2 a CD UJ z o: tu NHHINIH.Z PLATE EG-5 z UJ r— -1 Z (L O BU o X Z _J BU H 1- z CO u. AS UJ CL RLL o z Q o RLL < UJ o o z SL )RE ED OVIDE z MO UL STC MPACT OVIDE SIG SH TUf RE MPACT cr UJ lO < LU o Q. Q < z CD u PLATE EG-5 i5 UJ Q O Od LU O LL Q Z < a LU < > < U X C3 Z S LU LU Z o z UJ LU UJ CQ cr o Q a X (O u z o Qf o (L UJ X UJ CL O o z to LU CJ CS UJ to to X =f IL " O UJ 2 2 3=*" o »- a P >- 2 CO cr ? o 0- Ul I-1- . K S2 ID < O O 3 O w < o X > UJ K UJ O UJ I-o z PLATE EG-7 < Dd LH H- < LU CO Dd O LL U- ^ < _J CO CO to 01 _j < O UJ UJ oc o to OS o UJ ..J UJ tn 2 oc o o Z LL Ul QC ^ O Ul a IL IA DC Ul Ul UJ III 3 S $2 ^ X >- o CO o z oc UJ UJ z a z UJ a < a: UJ Ul z 3 z IJU Ul o I-u Ul Ul o-X Q 3= ^ Ul !£: fe UJ ^ Ul QC Ul £ LU ^ 3 IO Q H s 5 a ^ ^ a ^ a Ul LJI ^ cn < -< o: X Q U) CD «_ = ^ WJ • LU h- O z tll 9 X ^ ^ X >• 111 lil 2 -J 5E CO UJ • H- ^ UJ • a >i g < (D X M UJ I- ? i LL H z u < o X UJ I- o PUTE EG-8 o Od o < Q:: ID H < LL O CO PLATE EG-9 UJ CJ if cc m to Q UJ to o CL X Ul z o a Ul tn < ta Q tu z z QC Ul »-UJ Q UJ OQ 5 > UJ LO Q h- o: z 3 LU OQ Z cr LU UJ a fe UJ o cr (/) ^ IS 1 ^ ^ 2 >- 2 UJ »-^ a 2 < < CO ia Q: t: a a OQ 2 3 O lO u >- CQ >- QC < to CO UJ u UJ 2 Q UJ z z cr LU h-Ul a LL a Ul z oc o Ul to ft. 3 UJ o « ^ Q 111 -J O g i X — tn oc «- Ui u o Ul 2 Z Ul O X UJ oc ^ o a 75 2 Q < 5 2 o cr p Ul < w > 2 < CD X UJ UJ to DC -1 > ° O «^ Q ur < X o. UJ H O z PLATE E6-10 TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT LOT (MATERIAL TYPE TRANSITION) NATURAL GRADE COMPACTED RLL ?^ UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR APPROVED MATERIAL TYPICAL BENCHING CUT-FILL LOT (DAYUGHT TRANSITION) PAD GRADE NATURAL GRADE ^^S^^^^^VEREXCAVATE ANO RECOMPACT 5* MINIMUM ///^^/^//<^y//^^ 3 • MINIMUM !^ UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OR APPROVED MATERIAL TYPICAL BENCHING NOTE: •DEEPER OVEREXCAVATION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST IN STEEP CUT-RLL TRANSITION AREAS. PLATE EG-11 SETTLEMENT PLATE AND RISER DETAIL 2*X 2*X 1/4- STEEL PLATE STANDARD 3/4" PIPE NIPPLE WELDED TO TOP OF PLATE. 3/4- X 5* GALVANIZED PIPE. STANDARD PIPE THREADS TOP AND BOTTOM, EXTENSIONS THREADED ON BOTH ENDS AND ADDED IN 5' INCREMENTS. 3 INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE SLEEVE. ADD IN 5" INCREMENTS WITH GLUE JOINTS. RNAL GRADE MAINTAIN 5* CLEARANCE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT. MECHANICALLY HAND COMPACT IN 2'VERTICAL -rV LIFTS OR ALTERNATIVE SUITABLE TO AND J ACCEPTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. MECHANICALLY HAND COMPACT THE INITIALS' VERTICAL WITHIN A 5*RADIUS OF PLATE BASE. r ^ V-:•..:-v-:-.".-.^".:•/ BOTI BOTTOM OF CLEANOUT PROVIDE A MINIMUM 1* BEDDING OF COMPACTED SAND NOTE: 1. LOCATIONS OF SETTLEMENT PLATES SHOULD BE CLEARLY MARKED AND READILY VISIBLE (RED FLAGGED! TO EQUIPMENT OPERATORS. 2. CONTRACTOR SHOULD MAINTAIN CLEARANCE OF A 5* RADIUS OF PLATE BASE AND WITHIN SMVERTICAU FOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT. RLL WITHIN CLEARANCE AREA SHOULD BE HAND-COMPACTED TO PROJECT SPECIRCATIONS OR COMPACTED BY ALTERNATIVE APPROVED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. 3. AFTER 5'IVERTICAU OF RLL IS IN PLACE. CONSTRACTOR SHOULD MAINTAIN A 51RADIUS EQUIPMENT CLEARANCE FROM RISER. 4. PLACE AND MECHANICALLY HAND COMPACT INITIAL 2* OF FILL PRIOR TO ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL READING. 5. IN THE EVENT OF DAMAGE TO THE SETTLEMENT PLATE OR EXTENSION RESULTING FROM EQUIPMENT OPERATING WITHIN THE SPECIFIED CLEARANCE AREA. CONTRACTOR SHOULD IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING THE SETTLEMENT PLATES TO WORKING ORDER. 6. AN ALTERNATE DESIGN AND METHOD OF INSTALLATION MAY BE PROVIDED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. PLATE EG-U TYPICAL SURFACE SETTLEMENT MONUMENT RNISH GRADE 3-6' 3/8- DIAMETER X LENGTH CARRIAGE BOLT OR EQUIVALENT •-6" DIAMETER X 3 1/2'LENGTH HOLE CONCRETE BACKRLL PLATE EG-15 TEST PIT SAFETY DIAGRAM SIDE VIEW y TEST PIT j^P** I NOT TO SCALE ) FLAG TOP VIEW 100 FEET 50 FEET SPOIL PILE jilEST lil in 50 FEET APPROXIMATE CENTER OF TEST PIT • VBWTLE III LL O in FLAG I NOT TO SCALE ) PLATE EG~16 OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL VIEW NORMAL TO SLOPE FACE oo 20'MINIMUM PROPOSED FINISH GRADE MINIMUM (El CO oo 151MINIMUM (A) OO (G) oo OQ <oO ocalFl MINIMUM (C) BEDROCK OR APPROVED MATERIAL ^ VIEW PARALLEL TO SLOPE FACE PROPOSED RNISH GRADE FROM L MINIMUM CO BEDROCK OR APPROVED MATERIAL NOTE: (A) (B) IC) (D) (E) IR IG) ONE EQUIPMENT WIDTH OR A MINIMUM OF 15 FEET. HEIGHT AND WIDTH MAY VARY DEPENDING ON ROCK SCE AND TYPE OF EQUIPMENT. LENGTH OF WINDROW SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 100* MAXIMUM. IF APPROVED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST. WINDROWS MAY BE PLACED DIRECTLY ON COMPETENT MATERIAL OR BEDROCK PROVIDED ADEQUATE SPACE IS AVAILABLE FOR COMPACTION. ORIENTATION OF WINDROWS MAY VARY BUT SHOULD BE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST. STAGGERING OF WINDROWS IS NOT NECESSARY UNLESS RECOMMENDED. CLEAR AREA FOR UTILITY TRENCHES. FOUNDATIONS AND SWIMMING POOLS. ALL RLL OVER AND AROUND ROCK WINDROW SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION OR AS RECOMMENDED. AFTER FILL BETWEEN WINDROWS IS PLACED AND COMPACTED WITH THE UFT OF RLL COVERING WINDROW. WINDROW SHOULD BE PROOF ROLLED WITH A D-9 DOZER OR EQUIVALENT. VIEWS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC ONLY. ROCK SHOULD NOT TOUCH AND VOIDS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY RLLED IN. PLATE RQ-1 ROCK DISPOSAL PITS VIEWS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC ONLY. ROCK SHOULD NOT TOUCH AND VOIDS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY RLLED IN. RLL UFTS COMPACTED OVER ROCK AFTER EMBEDMENT r I I GRANULAR MATERIAL I I { COMPACTED RLL I I I I I SIZE OF EXCAVATION TO BE COMMENSURATE WITH ROCK SIZE ROCK DISPOSAL LAYERS GRANULAR SOIL TO RLL VOIDS, DENSIRED BY FLOODING 'LAYER ONE ROCK HIGH fl COMPACTED RLL PROPOSED RNISH GRADE MINIMUM OR BELOW LOWEST UTIU OOOCXDOCJCCC OVERSIZE LAYER ^ COMPACTED RLL oxyoootxxxxxyxKjo^^ T3'MINIMUM OOCXDCOC>COOOCOLA.^Oc:<^^ PROFILE ALONG LAYER LOPE FACE CLEAR ZONE 20*MINIMUM LAYER ONE ROCK HIGH PLATE RD-2