HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 15-35; JAMES RESIDENCE; SWPPP; 2016-01-30)
JAMES RESIDENCE
4020 JAMES DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Construction SWPPP
For
CDP 15-35
January 30, 2016
PACIFIC LEGACY
HOMES
Distinctive Homes for Inspired Living
JAMES RESIDENCE CDP 15-35
CONSTRUCTION SWPPP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Storm Water Compliance Form -Tier 2 Construction SWPPP E-30
Tier 2 Construction SWPPP Site Assessment Form
Erosion Control Plan
As-Graded Geotechnical Report
MIchael 0
Graham \
CC No. C49116
ExpO9-31-16 1
CIVIL
OF
STORM WATER
COMPLIANCE FORM - beveiopment Services it\ 0i TIER 2 CONSTRUCTION Land Development Engineering Carlsbad swppp 1.635 Faraday Avenue
-2750 E-30 wwwcarlsbadcà.gov;
I am applying to the City of Carlsbad for one or more of the following type ofconstruction permit(s):
Grading Permit Building Permit. R1 Right-ofWay Permit
Myproject does.nOt méet.any of the. following criteria for a project tIat.pesi significant threãtto. storm. water.quality:
/ My project does not include clearing, grading or other ground disturbances resulting:in soil disturbance totaling one
or more acres including any associated construction staging equipment storage stockpiling pavement removal
refueling and maintenance areas; and,
/ My project is not part.of a phased development plan that will cumulatively result in -soil disturbance. totaling one or more acres including any associated construction staging equipment storage stockpiling pavement removal
refueling and maintenance areas; and,
V' Miprojeot is not located inside or within .200 feet of an environmentally sensitivearea.and will nothavea significant:
potential for contributing pollutants to nearby receiving waters by way of storm water runoff or non-storm water
discharge(s).
My project requires preparation and approval of a Tier 2 Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
because my project meets one or more of the following criteria demonstrating that the project potentially poses a
moderate threat to storm water quality:
91 My project requires a grading plan pursuant to the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code); and/or,
U My PrOject will result in 2,500 square more of itsdistUrbandé. including any associated construction staging.
stockpiling pavement removal equipment storage refueling and maintenance areas and my project meets one or
more of the following additional criteria:
Project is located within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area or the Pacific Ocean
Project's disturbed area is located on a slope with a grade at or exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical
Projects disturbed area is located along or. within 30 feet of a storm drain inlet an open drainage channel or
watercourse; and/or
Project will be initiated during the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct 1 through April 30)
I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MYKNOWLEDGE THAT THE ABOVE CHECKED STATEMENTS ARE TRUE AND
CORRECT I AM SUBMITTING FOR CITY APPROVAL ATIER. 2 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP PREPARED IN
ACCORDANCE-WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY STANDARDS.
I UNDERSTAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST ADHERE TO, AND AT ALL TIMES, COMPLY WITH THE-CITY
APPROVED TIER 2 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
Aoolicant Information and Sionatüre Box
Address
420 jcV: Assessor's Parcel Numbers:
2.07- 5 - 0.0 Ap iicàntN me:
tAlc'1 Applicant Title:
12 A t+41
Applicant Signature: . Date:
I •. i
This B ox for City Use On!
Yes No
CIW Concurrehce:
By:
Date:
Project ID:
E-30 Page 1 of 1 REV.0711.4
Tier 2 Construction SWPPP Site Assessment Form
Project M: A2J7
Project Information:
Project Name: JM'I (01E
Project Address/Location; 412o cJ4i4&-5 12124VE
Responsible Parties/Contact information:
Name of Preparer: frttof3kt, f'
Qualification of Preparer (Registration/Certification): ?& -
Address: 160 t4. izJ,cao 4o0
City/State/Zip Code: #t\J M&( CA t-1-7
Phone Number: bl.156. HT
Name of Owner/Owner's Agent 1'k1to LA,4cr ffalkly, '&o /*4f*L ,4-ffr,iv1
Address: wo W t7e4dwo , T-40
City/State/Zip Code: 15Ad A- -( 7
Phone Number: 01. 7%. I
Name of Emergency Contact: AL-VitJ 1/JC7lJti
(during construction)
Address: (bf70 W. k4w PfZ, 4rx
City/State/Zip Code: PNJ OL?AO7 CA Z—tZ'7
Phone Number: 7ér 1. ?7737_
Page 1 of 10
Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08
Site andCônstiUëtiöu Activity -Description-
Construction Start Date "I&
If work begins in rainy season or cxends into rainy season, explain how
scheduled can he altered to avoid rainy season impacts or to lessen expo
season: co419ru271A/6 , - - r - &c.4 -j j ,_1ttPL5T.!
work can be
itedutiiia ra
),.
A-
e, (Ji f( w( -X'W ;?a4 71 çt
Grading Quantities: Cut:: CY; Fill- 12. CY; Jnort 0
Export %__CY
Any: Stockpile Proposed? TS If yes, then estimate.quantity: 122_CY
Estimated duration of stockpile 1Th11J Months
Soils Soustyj es .: I9JO__4
Does site contain, a preponderance of soils with USDA-Ni CS erc siOn factor kf greater :than .or equal to 049 14c?
Is-.a.-staging area proposed (yes/nor No
lfyes, thenwhere is it located?,
Isconcre.e washout. required. (yes/no)? Y
Where is it::located? Q/ I ii.
Any exlstmg site: c1tarninatiOn (yes/no)? Th
Where is it. located?
Any wliiele storage, maintenance or fliding area proposed (yes/no)? -
Where is it lOcated?
Any de-watering operation proposed (yes/no sJO
Where is it located?
Any other special operations proposed that may impair water. quality (yes/no)7 NO
What and where? tJ /A
Page 2 of 10
T5 2 SitAssesnñtFOrth 3Q4/08
Watershed Basin project drains to: LI Buena Vista Lagoon 0 Agua Hedionda Lagoon
0 Enemas Creek U Batiquitos Lagoon El Pacific Ocean
Is project drainage tributary to a CWA section 303(d) listed water body impaired for sediment
(includes .Buena Vista and Agua Hedionda Lagoons) (yes/no): 4O
If yes, describe additional controls that will be used on project site to mitigate for sediment
impairments (if any): N/A
Is project inside or within 200 feet of an, Environmentally Sensitive Area (yes/no): 40
If yes, describe additional controls that will be used on project site to mitigate for potential storm
water impacts (if any):
Are any agency permits required (yes/no)? !Jo
Check off permit types required: 0 Army Corps 404 permit
LI Regional Board Water Quality 401 Certification 0 Coastal Commission Certification
Li U.S. Fish and Wildlife Section 7 0 Fish and Game Stream Alteration Agreement
LI Other list:
Page 3 of 10
Tier 2 Site Assessment Form 3/24/08
C)
E — N -SAQ CD , = CD =3 .bO
0 (DI .o CD OO.0
0 O U
CD CD — O-...CJ) CD
8 .
C) Q) 0 W
0 CD 5
101
NS-1 Water Conservation Practices
NS-2 Dewatering Operations
NS-3 Paving and Grinding Operations
NS-4 Temporaly Stream Crossing . Z.
-. ------ __ -------------.- . NS-5 Clear Water Diversion a ------ . ---.---------- .
... 0.. NS6 Illicit Connection/Discharge.
NS-7 Potable Water/Irrigation
NS78 Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning
NS-9 Vehicle and..Equipm.ent:F.Uelin
NS-10 Vehicle-and Equipment Maihtenance
H . -.----------,---------..--
. 3. Pile Driving QpeatiPnS........................................................
NS42 Concrete Curing: w
NS:-13 Concrete.Finishing
NS-14. Material and Equipment.Use
NS-15 Derñolitioh Adjacent to Water
.
. .
NS-16. Temporary Batch Pla•nth
List materials that will be used on construction site and their handling and storage requirements
Material Characteristics/Toxicity Handling requirements
f 4?4 Sir
Ftitfi 1NU4if\J ZI/L £?UV M!P
W-TW _ M3AiI PEJU V&7' AM t)r27169--
tf4kii XlAkOT Aj'1 &fb,46€
If any toxic or hazardous materials are proposed, then a spill prevention plan is required. Is a spill prevention plan required (yes/no)? 110
If yes, attach spill prevention plan.
Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality rating:
Using the Construction Threat Assessment Worksheet for determination of the projects
Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality rating (E-33)
The Construction Threat to Storm Water Quality rating for this project is: 0 High N Medium
Signature of Plan Preparer:
Signature: Date: iO.L6
Print Name: 'am-L, FE. Title:
Attachments:
ER Storm Water Compliance Form - Tier 2
U Spill Prevention Plan
LI Hydrology and/or hydraulic study
Solis and/or geotechnical report(s)
U Other. List:
Page 4 of 10
lier 2 Site Assessment Form 3124/08
BMP Selection.
The:fO [owing tables:are provided to:help:identify and select appropriate Site specific BMPs for
the proposed project Review the list of potential site construction activities and site conditions
described along the left hand column of each sheet Then, for each activity or site condition that
is included in the proposed project, pick one or more of the BMPs described at the top of the
form and place an X(s) in the box(es) that form(s) an intersection between the activity/site
condition row and BMP column(s)
All structural(physica! facility) B be. sh6wi3 o.nthe site plan in the Construction
SWPPP drawing set Any proposed no-structural BMP should be noted in the Special Notes on
the Construction SWPPP drawing set
Page 5 of 10
ie2SitAssessment-Form 3/24/08
LTE
O.c LA. om CI) -000)-G)mo
CD5 3 CD CD 0 CD
(fl
CD CD CL o>5ö5 >O'U)
C1)
-E
OCn 4,
EC-1 Scheduling
Ix EC-2 Preservation of
Existing Vegetation
EC-3 Hydraulic Mulch
EC-4 Hydroseeding m
EC-5 Soil Binders B
EC-6 Straw Mulch
C)
EC-7 Geotextiles & Mats
EC-8 Wood Mulching 2.
w --------------
EC-9 Earth Dikes and
Drainage Swales
U) EC-lO Velocity Dissipation
EC-1 I Slope Drains
EC-12 Streambank
Stabilization
EC-1 3 Polyacrylamide
m
WE-1 Wind Erosion Control
(I)
U
CD CD. Cl)
.0
0
SE-1 Silt .Fence
SE2 Sediment Basin
SE-3, SediñieritTrap
:SE4 Check Dam
.$5. Fiber Rolls
SE-6: Gravel Bag Berm
SE 7 Street Sweeping anc
Vacuuming
SE-8 Sandbag Barrier
8E79 Straw Bale Barrier
SE-b Storm Drain Inlet
Protection.
SE-i 1 Chemical Treatment
mCnUOOCflHG)mQ
C)
—oocn
U,
0 cc
CD
D.CD.... a 0
U)
CD
CD
g
X>ç
00
0
oc,)r c)
CD ' =3
-
(
53 C) ()
0 > '-J
CD
- °C)CDU) CI)
0
-I >
r1 C) .i CD (I) (D w tZ
(I)Cfl<Q _CA CD (fl
0)-• -
CI)- (5 - o _-_
i.-.-
CI)
Stabilized Construction
Ingress/Egress 0
TR-2 Stabilized Construcion w s. to Roadway C)
TR-3 Ingress/Egress Tire
Wash 2.
ki
o —i
3 —CD00D)CDO)
()Q) co g C/) 0 =
NC
m cn;ci):
CD '
-o c) 0 o .
CD oa- Q)'6 5 -
g CD U)
-
eL:O0CDCW 3 0 CJ CD CDQ.C, > i0 96 imLi
0 D a) .1 , !
(/)1
a
(1) CD g
O: Di 0 C)'
-
CD :0 C C
M CL
-
5
:La -. —
CD -n Di .
.1 . '.1'. 4j CA
1Hfl X. . WM 1 Material Delivery and Storage
1t WM2
Material Use fu
t WM-3 : Stockpile Management flu
WM-4 : Spill Prevention and Control
'. >c WM-5 : Solid Waste Management
-
I I WM76 Hazardous Waste Management CD CL
------.---——r—-----
-D
WM-7 Contaminated Soil Management U)
ConcreteWasteManagemei-it
wM8
. 1!'
UY
I WM-9 Sanitary/ Septic Waste Management
0
--Ji WM10 Liquid WasteManagement
CDP 15-35
NOTES NOTES
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES:
TAO FOLLOMINSGENERAI SITE KWNUOMEHNTREOUIREMENT SHALL BEADYEREO TO TTIROIJAVOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION WORK (YEAR ROUND):
I.INCASE EMERGENCY WOW IS REQUIRED, PLEAOE
STORM WATER POLLUOON PREVENTION NOTES:
THE FOLLOWING RPJTEY SEASON SITE MONAOMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL SE ADHERED EOTHROUOEOUT THE RAINY SEASON DEFINED AS BEGINNING ON (OCTOBER I
OFCAY YEAR AND EXTENDING THHAAAUAAPRIL TOOY
THE FOLLOWING VEARL
/
S
LOT 9 MAP 5054 /
S LOT 4 MAP NO 11086 --
-
PACIFIC LEGACY
r-EC
- - - - V.. - - I CONTACT ALVIN WASHINGTON FROM OHNTNER AT TB020B.8T3 1. EROSION CONTROL, PERIMETER PROTECTION AND 2. DEVICES SHOWN ON CTTYAPPROVEO PLANS SHALL NOT BE MOVED OR MODIFIED WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY INSPECTOR.
SEDIMENT CONTROl. BEAT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BE UPGRADED IF NECESSARY TO PROVIDE SUFFUCIENT PROTECTION FOR STORMS LUAELV -. - -. -- - - - - - - - s. I ------
EXIST - I / FR - ---- -- - - - - I / LOT 3 MAP NO 11086 S - '7, I.- I I S----------
---------S I /
/ I I I I - _ - - .._ 5 . EXISTS' WOOD P/ND ) _.. - -< - - - ZrN.A ---_ -----
--THE PILASTER FENCE--- -' - - S. 'S _. —'_. VE.s/RI'_ -= -. - - - J,/._-- . \,-_ ,___.ZETRn,. 'I - I C / 'N/7 _S- - - 1L'S 1
\. S_st. ,( \ Si IN . '= _-._. '.. N. N I ', S -c'Z_ 2 -_ N. -s 9 \ ,E ,__._-. 7Y' - - - - 59 '9 I I
SRA EL \ U L.5P / / 7 ._-_ __. _Zr Zr - N, \ 5
\BASS - / - PROPS IB.B7IS (\ I T".1\ ,p' EXIST 5' WOOD FENCE
_ (N p5 \ 3, \/ MA/SLAt -- - - / RET WALE 5) I /
A5 \ I I 7" ' - GRAVEL -- - S I \I 5 ' ) 5/
BASS -- - - S N I ) 5
/ / T /
/ / N \EV S VA" 5 / / /5
N, -- - J'ANE - 9 5 /5
PARCEL 1 PM 17747
EXISTING 5 1 1 5 SsIT"'\is.JV
PAD ELEY, 133.5 I \ . 9 Y , - \ 9 5 I I I
I
SILT FENCE \ \\\ \, \ .5)
\ S ''N, \I
5/ \ , - I \ \ 5/ ECA.
N \, S 9 5 - - S I I I ' 7 'N S s / I " /5' 5 5 - S N, ' IA KEY .A 'SSA'tA S N S (I 5 I
\
AWE \ 59 - PROPOSED SS/C57 I H I ,,_", - - -
r . ' . - _ 'BLDG FOOTPRINT "NVA // -, S -
(5 5 \ CII,00 \ I S
\ I - • \ N '5/R -' ._-" "Is - I.
59 p1 S ',\ I •. I _.,-" \ 'AlA '5T' I, B°/,.S"- '
Er
G A
EXIST B'PRIVATESEWERAND DRAINAGE EASEMENT GRANTED TOPARCKLI, PER PMIT7AT
EXIST DVINYLFENCE
I/SOS, "\ I PARCEL 2 PM 10776
5-2 N,
' SNARBOATL9 'N
S s \ "\
(THE OWNERICONTRACTOR OH/ILL RESTORE ALA. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO THE OATISFACTIOHOFTHECITYENOIVEGRAFTEREACHRUN-OF PRODUC(NORAJNFALL
4. THE OWHEPJCONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL ME.NOUAESASMAYBE REQUIRED BT CITY ENGINEER DUE TO UNCOMPLKTTDARAOENS OPEREGONNGAUNFORODENCIRCUMATRECESWRIICl/IMAY ARISE.
THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE AND
TREE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT PUBLIC TRESPASS ONTO AREAS WHERE IMPOUNDED WATERS CREATE A HAZARDOUS CONDTTON.
B.ORADEDAREAOAROUNDTHEPROVECTPEAIMETERMUST DRAJN AWAY FROM IHHEFACE OF SLOPE ATTRECONCLUSIO OF EACH MOMS/NO DRY.
ALL REMOVABLE PRATECT1GD DEVICES SHALL BCIHPLRCE ST THE END OF EACH WEARING DAY WARM FIVE (5) DAY RASH PROM.RMILT'HFOAEC.NUTESCEEDAFORTYPERCENT(MT%).
SILTPJN001HERDEBRSAOHBLLBERDMOVEDPFTERERCH RAINFALL.
B. ALL GRAVEL BAGS SHALL. NE BURLAP TYPE WITH 34 INCH MIMIMUMAGGREGATE.
O.ALLGAAOEDMEAS MUST HAVE EROSION CONTROL PROTECTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES PROPERLY INSTALLED.
IEAAESUATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND PERIMETER PROTECTION BEST IWMIAEMENTPRACTICE MEMSURESMUSTBEINSTALLODAXDMA(NRWAMED.
II.AOEOAATEMEASURE00000NTRDLOFFOITEAEOIMEAET TRACK! NO MUST BEEUSTRLLEO AND BBBJNTAJNEO.
I2.AMINIMAMOFIDT%OF THE MATERIAL NEEDED TE INSTALL STANDBY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTISE MEASURES TO PROTECT THE EXPOSED AREAS FROM EROSION AND PRBUE ENT SEDIMENT DISCHARGES, MUST BE STORED GNOITE
AREAS ALREADY PROTECTED FROBBEROSION USING PITYSCALSTRAUJZAOUNOR ESTABLISHED AESETETEN STABILIZATION MEASURES ARE NOT CONSIDERED TOBE ¶GPOSEUFORPAMPOSESOFTREREOSIREEBENT,
,3.ThOOARERIDEVOLOPERIcONTRATOR MUST HAVE AN REPROVEDAEUTEEATHIOOEREO ACTION PLAN AND BE ABLE TO DEPLOY STANDBY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES TO COMPLETELY PROTECT THE EXPOSED PORTIONS OF THE SITE WITHIN MB HAS EFAPREDICTED STORM EVENT (A PREDICTED STORM EVENT IN DEFINED AS AFORACASTED.41% CHANCE OF RAIN BV THE NATIONAL
WEATHER SERVICE), ON REQUEST, THE UINNEP/CONTAACTO MLSTPBOISTOEPRUOFOFTHIACAUHASILTYTHATW
IM.DEPLOYMEVTOFPIOHSICRLORAEAEA1TONEROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUSTCOMMENCEASSOMAS SLOPESARE COMPLETED, THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR XXIV NOTCGRTINAETOAELYEMTHEABILT'YTO DEPLOY STANDS
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MATERIALS TO PREVENT EROSIONOFSLOPESTRATHAYE BEEN COMPLETED.
15, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED ON THE GRADING PLAINS ORTHECONSTRUCGON STORM WATER POLLUTION
PREVENTION FLAW DOCXMENTE, THE AREA THATCAN BE CLEAATED,ARADED.ANDLDFTESPOAEDATONETIMEIS
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BESTMANAGEMENT
NOT ACTIVELY BEING WORKED BEFORE ADDTTOEALGRAASNASSESSORSPARCUNUMBEIR
ISR1UOWEUTO PROCEED, AT THE DISCRETION OFTHEPUB RERAR INSPECTOR
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY.71
TO RECUR DURING THE RAINY SEASON.
S. EQUIPMENT AND WORKERS FOR EMERGENCY WORK 01555 BE MADE AVAILABLE AT ALL T1MESDURING THE RAINY SEASON. ALL NECESSARY MATERUNLSSHAULBSSTCEIUFILE
ON SITE AT CONVENIENT LOCATIONS TOFACILITATERAPID CONSTRUCTION OF TEMPORARY DEVICES WHEN RAN IO EMINENT.
I. ADEQUATE PFYHSICALOAAEAEAATION EROSION CONTROL BEATMBRRGEMEKTTRACIICEMEAAERESBAIISTBE INSTALLED AND ESTABLISHED FOR ALL COMPLETED SLOPES PRIOR TO THE START OF ThE RAINY SEASON TVESE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BE MAINTAINED 0 THROUGHOUT THE RAINY SEASON. IFASELECTED BEST BAHOAOEMENTPRACTICE FVULEIT MUST BE REPAIRED ARD IMPRESSED, OR REPLACED WITH AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERBIAT ASSOONASITIOSAFET000SO.THEFAB.UREOFAREST MNNAGMENT PRACTICE MEASURES INDICATES IT WAS NOT
REPAI OR REPLACEMENTS MUST BE THEREFORE PUT
MORE ROBUST NESTMANAGEMENT PRACTICE UEASUREIN PEACE.
4.RULVEAETAT1OREROSIONCOATROUMUSTBE
EATAMLISHEDPRIDR TO THE ENVY SEASON TONE CONSIDERED ASA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURE.
5. THE PAAOUNTOF EXPOSED SOIL ALLOWEDAT DIE TIME
SHALL NOT EXCEED THAT WHICH CAN BE ADEQUALY PROTECTEDBY DEPLOYING STANDBY EROSION CONTETRUL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES PRIOR TOA RED ICTEDRAINSTORM,
B.ADISTRURBEO AREA THAT ISNOTCOMPLETEOBOTTHAT ISNOTBEINGAcTIXELY GRADE DMUSTBEFULLYPROTEcTH FRONEROSIONIFLEFTFOR NGORMOREDAYS.THEAAILTTY
TSDEPLOHATANDBYBESTBAAIEASMDNTPRACTICEMCASU MATERIALNIN NOT SUFFUCIENT FOR THESE ABEAS.BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BEACTUALLY DEPLOYED.
Do
0 ('.1
z
0 LL. —
0
C
Cl)
.
(:1)
Lu
pd —
LI_i
C
0
CINI
0 1•"A '/5•
JOB NO. DGIS.XA
PLOTDATE DI.30.IN
CHECKED BY MEG
REVISIONS
LANCHECK OWOY A
PROJECT LOCATION
LE DESCRIPTION: ALL CF PAWCELIOY REV ITTAT IN T/E CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING
IIEOF
FICE F RIEOF RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. 0, ISM
"20 '022.65.00
LEGEND
I6870W,MERNARDODR
SAN DIEGO, CA 92127
MSW,CAA.1105 866.758.3313
InIO@PaRETWBASRNHAmeS.COm
o
WM.l B5XATERIALDELIVERY BSTORAGE
2 MATERIAL USE
SPILL PREVENTION ARID CONTROL
SCUD WASTE MANAGEMENT
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
FA~~ CONCRETE WASTE MANAGEMENT
FE 2 PRESERVATION OF EXIST, VEGETATION
fSE-1 I SILT FENCE
VICINITY MAP
. S / '
91\SiTM_S. 5 9 s(7/1
',it
EROSION CONTROL PLAN FSE.7 1 STREET SWEEPING AND VACUUMING
DOWNSPOUTS OVER DSCARE
LIRET FLOW-THROUGH PLRNTERNEG. DRIP C-2 MRUBEE SFHOIX#,AAMADAMAET
RELATIVE BORDER SCALE: 1" 1"
L
AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Martinet Property
4111 Park Drive, Parcel 2
Carlsbad, California
n
ii
HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING,. INC
HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY • HYDROGEOLOGY
November 28, 2000
Project 3720.1
Log No. 7150
Mr. Ed Martinet
2380 Camino Vida Roble, Suite F
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Subject: AS-GRADED GEOTECIINICAL REPORT
4111 Park Drive, Parcel 2
Carlsbad, California
References: Attached
Dear Mr. Martinet:
In accordance with your request, we have performed geotechnical services in conjunction with
grading of the subject site. Our services consisted of observation and testing during grading,
laboratory testing, and the preparation of this report which presents the results of our testing and
observations, and our conclusions and recommendations.
GRADING OPERATIONS
Grading was performed during the period August 24 through September 7, 2000. Grading
consisted generally of over-excavating existing unsuitable topsoil and cofluvium, and placement
of compacted fill to design site grades. Removals ranged from approximately 3 to 8 feet. The
attached Plot Plan, Figure 1 indicates the approximate limits of removals, thickness of fill and
locations of density tests. The earthwork was performed by Southwestern Heavy Equipment
utilizing plans prepared by Sea Crest Engineering, Inc. (Reference 4).
SITE PREPARATION
Prior to grading, the site was cleared of surface obstructions, vegetation and debris. Following
removal of unsuitable topsoil and colluvium, the exposed soils were scarified to a depth of 6 to 8
inches, brought to near optimum moisture conditions and recompacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction as determined by ASTM: D 1557-91A.
SOIL TYPES
The soils utilized as fill consisted of on-site materials composed of dark brown to red brown silty
- fine to medium sand and orange brown silty fine to medium sand.
5205 Avenida Encinas, Suite A • Carlsbad, CA 92008-4369 • (760) 931-1917 • Fax (760) 931-0545
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite C • San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-3610 • (949) 487-9060 • Fax (949) 487-9116
H AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
p Project No 3720.1
I 1 November 28, 2000
Page 2
p
p FILL PLACEMENT
Fill soils were placed in 6 to 8 inch thick, near honzontal lifts, moisture conditioned to near
n optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction as
determined by ASTM: D 1557-91A. Compaction was achieved by track walking with a
Caterpillar 975 loader and a Caterpillar DIO bulldozer in general accordance with the
p geotechmcal guidelines presented m the referenced "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
I (Reference 1). The approximate limits and thickness of compacted fill placement are shown on
the attached Plot Plan, Figure 1.
I. Density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM:. D 1.556 (Sand-Cone Method) and
.ASTM: D 2922 (Nuclear Method). The results of the density tests are presented on the attached
Summary of Field Density Tests, Table. I. The approximate locations of the field density tests
are indicated on the accompanying Plot Plan, Figure 1. Maximum dry density/optimum moisture
content determinations are presented on the attached Summary of Maximum Dry
Density/Optimum Moisture Content Determinations Table IT. Expansion and sulfate content test
results are presented. on the attached Tables. III and W.
H CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS'
1.. General
Based on our observations and the results of our testing, it our opinion that the subject
grading has been performed in general conformance with the recommendations contained in
the "Preliminary Geotechmcal Investigation..." (Reference 1), and the requirements of the
City of Carlsbad, California Should future construction be planned for the areas outside of
the limits of removals, additional geotechmcal work will be necessary since unsuitable I topsoil/colluvium remains in these areas.
.2 Foundation and Slab Recommendations
The proposed structure may be supported on conventional continuous footings founded in
compacted fill. Footings should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches. Footings located
on or adjacent to slopes should be extended to sufficient depth to provide at least 10 feet of
'horizontal distance between the footings. and the face of the slope. Footings located
adjacent to utility trenches should extend below a 1:1 plane projected upward from the
inside bottom corner of the, trench. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of
two #4 bars, one top and one bottom.
I
fl HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Project No. 3720.1
November 28, 2000
Page 3
Footings bearing as recommended may be designed for a dead plus live load bearing value
of 2000 pounds per square foot. This value may be increased by one-third for loads
including wind or seismic forces. A lateral bearing value of 250 pounds per square foot per
foot of depth and a coefficient of friction between foundation soil and concrete of 0.4 may
be assumed. These values assume that footings will be poured neat against the foundation
soils. Footing excavations should be observed by the Geotecimical Engineer to ensure that
they are founded in suitable bearing materials.
Floor slabs should have a minimum thickness of 4-inches (actual) and should be reinforced
with 93 bars spaced at 18-inches, center-to-center, in two directions, and supported on
chairs so that the reinforcement is at mid-height in the slab. In areas where moisture
sensitive floor coverings are planned, slabs should be underlain by at least 2-inches of clean
sand over a 6-mil visqueen moisture barrier.
Prior to placing concrete, the slab subgrade soils should be thoroughly moistened.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls free to rotate (cantilevered walls) should be designed for an active pressure
of 30 pounds per cubic foot, equivalent fluid pressure, assuming level backfill consisting of
on-site soils. Walls restrained from movement at the top should be designed for an
additional uniform soils pressure of 8xH pounds per square foot where H is the height of the
wall in feet. Any additional surcharge pressure behind the wall should be added to these
values. Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the previous
building foundation recommendations. Retaining walls should be provided with adequate
drainage to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure and should be adequately waterproofed.
4. Trench and Retaining Wall Backfill
All trench and retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction and tested by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Flatwork
Concrete flatwork should be at least 4-inches thick (actual) and reinforced with No. 3 bars
placed at 18-inches on center (two directions) and placed on chairs so that the reinforcement
is in the center of the slab. Slab subgrade should be thoroughly moistened prior to
placement of concrete. Contraction joints should be provided at 10 feet spacings
(maximum).
HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
AS-GRADED GEOTEC}{NTCAL REPORT
Project No. 3 720. 1
11 November 28, 2000
Page 4
L 6. Site Drainage
The on-site soils are sandy in nature and susceptible to erosion The following
recommendations are intended to minimize the potential adverse effects of water on the
structure and appurtenances.
a. Consideration should be given to providing the structure with roof gutters and
downspouts.
ps
b. All site drainage should be directed away from the structure and not allowed to flow
over slopes.
C. No landscaping should be allowed against foundations Moisture accumulation or
watering adjacent to foundations can result in deterioration of wood/stucco and may
effect foundation performance.
Irrigated areas should not be over-watered. irrigation should be limited to that
required to maintain the vegetation Additionally, automatic systems should be
seasonally adjusted to minimize over-saturation potential particularly in the winter
(rainy) season.
All slope, yard, and roof drains should be periodically checked to verify they are not
blocked and flow properly. This may be accomplished either visually or, in the case
of subsurface drains, placing a hose at the inlet and checking the outlet for flow.
Recommended Observation and Testing During Construction
The following testing and/or observations by the Geotechnical Consultant are
recommended during construction:
- Footing excavations prior to placement of reinforcing steel.
Interior (underslab) utility trench backfill.
Exterior utility trench hackfills.
Retaining wall backfill.
HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Project No. 3720.1
November 28, 2000
Page 5
Type Cement for Construction
Based on the results of sulfate tests, special provisions are not required for concrete in
contact with on-site soils.
Seismic Parameters for Structural Design
The following seismic parameters are for use in the design of structural elements for the
project. The basis for the following parameters is the geotechnical data that was
previously presented in our "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation..." (Reference 1) as
well as the data and guidelines presented in References 5 and 6. Seismic considerations
that should be used for structural design at the site include the following:
Ground Motions - The proposed structure should be designed and constructed to
resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in Chapter 16, Division
IV-Earthquake Design of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The basis for the
design is dependant on and considers seismic zoning, site characteristics,
occupancy, configuration, structural system and building height.
Soil Profile Type - In accordance with Section 1629.3.1, Table 16-i, and the
underlying geologic conditions, a site Soil Profile of Type S is considered
appropriate for the subject property.
C. Seismic Zone - In accordance with Section 1629.4.1 and Figure 16-2, the subject
site is situated within Seismic Zone 4.
Seismic Zone Factor (z) - A Seismic Zone Factor of 0.40 is assigned based on
Table 16-I. Since the site is within Seismic Zone 4, Section 1629.4.2 requires a
Seismic Source Type and Near Source Factor.
Near Source Factor (N. and NL— Based on the known active faults in the region
and distance of the faults from the site, a Seismic Source Type of B per Table 16-
U, and Near Source Factors of Na= 1.0 per Table 16-S and N= 1.2 per Table 16-
r T are provided.
Seismic Coefficients (Ca and CJ_— Using the Soil Profile Type and Seismic Zone
Factor along with Tables 16-Q and 16-R, the Seismic Coefficients Ca = 0.40(Na)
and C = 0.56 (NJ are provided, or Ca = 0.40 and C = 0.67.
HETHEPINGTON ENGINEERING INC.
AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Project No. 3720.1
November 28, 2000
Page 6
LIMITATIONS
Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable Soils Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar localities
No other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice
included in this report.
This opportunity to be of service is appreciate. d, If you have any questions, please call our office.
Sincerely,
INC.
\1' Civil Engineer 304
Geotechnical En
(expire 3/31/04) #1/
MDHIDC/ dkw t
Danny Cohen
Civil Engineer ssi
(expires. 3/3,'
NO, 2348
Exp. Ote
HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
REFERENCES
"Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Martinet Property, Proposed Parcel 2, 4111 Park Drive, Carlsbad,
California," by Hetherington Engineering, Inc., dated April 25, 1991.
"Grading Plan Review, Martinet Property, Parcel 2, MS812, Southeast End of James Drive, Carlsbad,
California," by Hetherington Engineering, Inc., dated December 9, 1993.
"Geotechnical Update, Martinet Property, Parcel 2, MS812, Southeast End of James Drive, Carlsbad,
California," by Hetherington Engineering, Inc., dated June 22, 1995.
"Grading Plans For: Ed Martinet, M.S. 812," by Sea Crest Engineering, Inc, dated November 28, 1995.
"Probilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California," DMG Open-File Report 96-08 and
USGS Open-File 96-706, dated 1996.
"1997 Uniform Building Code, Volume H, Structural Engineering Design Provisions," by International
Conference of Building Officials, dated April 1997.
I
r
HETHERrnIGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Test Test Soil Elevation Dry Moisture Relative
Location Date Type (feet) Density Content Compac
(pet) (%) tion
* 8-24-00 2 132.5 105 12.9 82
2 8-24-00 2 132.5 117 7.9 91 RT#1
3• * 8-25-00 1 .138 124 8.7 95
4 8-25-00 1 141 126 78 97
5 ** 8-25-00 1 127 1.28 7.8 98
6** 8-25-00 1 129 123 8.1 94
7 ** 8-25-00 1 130 119 6.8 92
8 ** 8-25-00 1 132.5 121 79 . 9.3
** 9-8-00 FG 127 3..8 98
10 ** 9-8-00 2 FG 124 4.1 .95
AS IM: U IX (Sand-Lone Metho(l)
ASTM: D 2922 Nuclear Method)
TABLE I.!
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURECO.NTET
DETERMINATIONS
(ASTM: D 1557-91A)
Optimum
Maximum Dry Moisture
Density Content
Soil Type Description (pet)
1 Dark brown to red brown silty sand 129 9.0
2 Orange brown silty sand . 13:0 9.0
TABLE III
EXPANSION TEST RESULTS
(ASTM: D 4829)
Soil Initial Compacted Final Expansion Expansion
Type Moisture Dry Moisture Index Potential
(%) Density NO
(pci)
1 7.8 118 13.3 0 Very Low
TABLE IV
SULFATE TEST RESULTS
(EPA 9038)
Soil Type Soluble Sulfate in Soil(%)
1 I 0.0058
Project No. 3720.1
Log No. 7150
LEGEND
O APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
DENSITY TEST
125.00 APPROXIMATE BOTTOM ELEVATION
OF REMOVALS
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF REMOVALS L
1 2
10 20 30 40
PLOT PLAN
C
- HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
I Martinet Lot Grading
PROJECT NO. 3720.1 1 FIGURE NO. 1