The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1678 CALLIANDRA RD; ; CBR2020-0623; PermitBuilding Permit Finaled Print Date: 04/26/2021 Job Address: Permit Type: Parcel#: Valuation: Occupancy Group: #of Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: Bathrooms: Occupant Load: Code Edition: Sprinkled: Project Title: 1678 CALLIANDRA RD, BLDG-Residential 2159002300 $7,473.85 Residential Permit CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4042 Work Class: Track#: Lot#: Project#: Plan#: Construction Type: Patio Orig. Plan Check#: CBR2020-0623 Plan Check#: ( City of Carlsbad Permit No: CBR2020-0623 Status: Applied: Issued: Finaled Close Out: Inspector: Final Inspection: Closed -Fina led 03/12/2020 04/21/2020 CRenf 04/26/2021 Description: MOLLER: 3 ALLUMAWOOD PATIO COVERS (2 ATTACHED) GAS & ELECTO BBQ & FIREPLACE// 6' SD REGIONAL STD RETAIN II WALL AT REAR OF PROPERTY FEE BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($2000+) BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEE (BLDG) Property Owner: MOLLER BRYCE C AND JESSICA N 1678 CALLIANDRA RD CARLSBAD, CA 92011 ELECTRICAL BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ ADDITION/REMODEL PLUMBING BLDG RESIDENTIAL NEW/ADDITION/REMODEL 581473 GREEN BUILDING STATE STANDARDS FEE STRONG MOTION-RESIDENTIAL Total Fees: $257.24 Total Payments To Date: $257.24 Contractor: INSTALL IT DIRECT INC 7310 MIRAMAR RD, # SUITE 300 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126-4226 (866) 640-1919 Balance Due: AMOUNT $97.22 $68.05 $41.00 $49.00 $1.00 $0.97 $0.00 Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the 11lmposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exaction." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning; grading or other similar application 'processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitation has previously otherwise expired. Building Division Page 1 of 1 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 760-602-2700 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov ·-·--·---- {'cicyof Carlsbad RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION B-1 Plan Check ~202.()-\)./)~ Est. Value PC Deposit --------- Date ___.,'.a~-_____,_.,12.,,_--=2.=0=--- Job Address _l:..._lfflc,..._-=0:........:C@.=-:C!..l _\ \_'7\_V)_;__d._~_;__:...__Q__d __ .Suite: ---,---APN: 21 '5 qoo 23 00 CT/Project#: _______________ Lot#: \ q ,q Fire Sprinklers: yes/ no BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Air Conditioning: yes/ no Electrical Panel Upgrade: yes/ no 3 pu1-ho c.,ovga-Sr eiu1s \"QJe&!vlc 1D _b{)JQ(F\Y-Q;~rt; f, y.e_ ~ O\U.., Addition/New: _____ Living SF, ____ Deck SF, ____ Patjo S,F, -~-Garage SF Is this to create an Accessory Dwelling Unit? Yes/ No New Fireplace? Yes/ No, if yes how many? __ D Remodel: ____ SF of affected area Is the area a conversion or change of use ? Yes/ No 0 Pool/Spa: ____ SF Additional Gas or Electrical Features? ___________ _ □ Solar: ___ KW, ___ Modules, Mounted: Roof/ Ground, Tilt: Yes/ No, RMA: Yes/ No, Battery: Yes/ No Panel Upgrade: Yes/ No D Reroof=------------------------~----------- Plumbing/Mechanical/Electrical Only: Fo'l'2-Pl vep\0t02-/ &B Q. D Other:----------------------------------- APPLICANT (PRIMARY CONTACT) PROPERTY OWNER Name: Jess\ CO--\\ADI \e.!1--Name: __ 5s1-b'.vu.!..LLLLL-"""'--'---------- Address: \LP7fo C.O..lho.~rv--, (2...,,( • Address: _______________ _ City: ~P;/"<D State: C-& Zip: °<Zoll City: _________ .State: __ .Zip: ___ _ Phone~-t)t'(Z. -3-53-z_ Phone: _______________ _ Email: (!f <;;;. <:;;\ c-mo\ utl'l--@ , Email: ___________________ _ ~-C-e,vv-- DESIGN PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR BUSINESS PC\ct ~·u QO.rz>\.a..n ~C... Name: C,ClYlj CY10.pvne1vi Name: ~i H\.J\S.<;.e,\W\C\V) Address: lo q Lp6 El (!~Y\'I 1\110 &~ I i'b-10!.-49Kddress: '5llP7 $-ffr-Le.S. 12-t:!ncJ-"\ 12 .,,._. City: CAf4.S~7 State:C-A Zip:C\U>o9 City: Dc~vis1d..L.-State: CA Zip: C\-ZOS:::=t- Phone: 7 (po· 2.7 :Z.. -<; 1 LfZ... Phone:] (DO-7 I 1 -~O(p Email: § tl10(? ~ F@,c,~des.,&75vvue. ClW1 Email: P?':Cl.-h c..~ ~@cox . rw- Architect State License:___________ State License:. __ ~~--Bus. License: _____ _ UC# C2.r LP"'tOSo2- (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he/she is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's license Law {Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code} or that he/she is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.S by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars {$500}). 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov B-1 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 06/18 ( OPTION A): WORKERS'COMPENSATION DECLARATION: I hearby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: □ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work which this permit is issued. □ I have and will maintain worker's compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company Name: ______________________ _ Policy No. ______________ Expiration Date: _________ _ □ Certificate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to be come subject to the workers' compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers compensation coverage ls unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to $100,000.00, in addition the to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor Code, interest and attorney's fees. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE: __________________ □AGENT DATE: _____ _ ( OPTION B ): OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION: I hereby affirm that I am exempt from Contractor's license Law for the following reason: 0 I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). ~I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). □ I am exempt under Section ________ Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. 0 Yes □ No 2. I (have/ have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. 3. I have contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name address/ phone/ contractors' license number): 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name/ address/ phone/ contractors' license number): 5. I will provide some of the work, b contrac ed (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name/ address/ phone/ type of work): OWNER SIGNATURE: DATE: 03 / 1-z_.../-zozo CONSTRUCTION LENDING A ncy for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec. 3097 (i) Civil Code). Lender's Name: _____________________ _ Lender's Address: _____________________ _ ONLY COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING SECTION FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ONLY: Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? □ Yes □ No Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? □ Yes □ No Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? □ Yes □ No IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION: I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representative of the City of carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CllY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINSTSAIDCllY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over S'O' deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at anytime after the work is commenced for a period of 180 a 10 .4 Uniform Building Code). 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, CA 9200 B-1 Ph: 760-602-2719 Fax: 760-602-8558 Page 2 of 2 Email: Building@carlsbadca.gov Rev. 06/18 ' PERMIT INSPECTION HISTORY for (CBR2020-0623) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Application Date: 03/12/2020 Owner: COOWNER MOLLER BRYCE C AND JESSICA N Work Class: Patio Issue Date: 04/21/2020 Subdivision: CARLSBAD TCT#92-03 AVIARA PHASE 03 UNIT#03 Status: Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 06/09/2021 Address: 1678 CALLIANDRA RD IVR Number: 25392 CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4042 Scheduled Actual Inspection Type Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection Date Start Date Status 03/30/2021 03/30/2021 BLDG-Final Inspection 153786-2021 Failed Paul Burnette Re inspection Incomplete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No BLDG-Plumbing Final No BLDG-Mechanical Final No BLDG-Structural Final No BLDG-Electrical Final No 04/06/2021 04/06/2021 BLDG-Final Inspection 154263-2021 Failed Paul Burnette Reinspectlon Incomplete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency No BLDG-Plumbing Final No BLDG-Mechanical Final No BLDG-Structural Final No BLDG-Electrical Final No 04/26/2021 04/26/2021 BLDG.final Inspection 155745-2021 Passed Paul Burnette Complete Checklist Item COMMENTS Passed BLDG-Building Deficiency Yes BLDG-Plumbing Final Yes BLDG-Mechanical Final Yes BLDG-Structural Final Yes BLDG-Electrical Final Yes Monday, April 26, 2021 Page 2 of 2 Building Permit Inspection History Finaled (city of Carlsbad -PERMIT INSPECTION HIS"l'ORY for {CBR.2020-0623) Permit Type: BLDG-Residential Application Date: 03/12/2020 Owner: COOWNER MOLLER BRYCE C AND JESSICA N Work Class: Patio Issue Date; 04/21/2020 Subdivision: CARLSBAD TCT#92-03 AVIARA Status: Scheduled Date 10/13/2020 10/20/2020 10/22/2020 11/0512020 11/1212020 11/18/2020 12/1112020 Closed -Finaled Expiration Date: 06/09/2021 IVR Number: 25392 PHASE 03 UNIT#03 Address: 1678 CALLIANDRA RD CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4042 Actual Inspection Type Start Date Inspection No. Inspection Primary Inspector Reinspection Inspection 10/13/2020 BLDG-SW-Pre-Con Checklist Item 140654-2020 COMMENTS Status Passed Chris Renfro BLDG-Building Deficiency 10120/2020 BLDG-11 Foundatlon/Ftg/Plers (Rebar) Checklist Item 141420-2020 Failed Chris Renfro COMMENTS BLOG-Building Deficiency Not ready, Rebar not complete and footings still being dugout 10/22/2020 BLDG-11 Foundatlon/Ftg/Plers (Rebar) Checklist Item 141651-2020 Passed Chris Renfro COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency 11/0512020 BLDG-12 Steel/Bond Beam Checklist Item 143246-2020 Partlal Pass Chris Renfro COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency CMU retaining wall first lift inspection only. Call for second lift inspection when complete. 11/12/2020 BLDG-66 Grout Checklist Item 143592-2020 COMMENTS Passed Chris Renfro BLDG-Building Deficiency 11/18/2020 BLDG-23 144167-2020 Passed Chris Renfro Gas/Test/Repairs Checklist Item COMMENTS BLDG-Building Deficiency Wall drains and underground gas test 12/11/2020 BLDG-11 146020-2020 Partial Pass Chris Renfro Foundatlonfftg/Plers (Rebar) Checklist Item BLDG-Building Deficiency COMMENTS Footings and foundation for one attached patio cover and one detached patio cover. OK to pour Complete Passed Yes Relnspectlon Incomplete Passed No Complete Passed Yes Relnspectlon Incomplete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Complete Passed Yes Reinspectlon Incomplete Passed Yes Monday, April 26, 2021 Page 1 of 2 Building Permit Finaled Revision Permit Print Date: 09/01/2021 Job Address: 1678 CALLIANDRA RD, (city of Carlsbad Permit No: PREV2020-0069 Status: Closed -Fina led Permit Type: BLDG-Permit Revision CARLSBAD, CA 92011-4042 Work Class: Residential Permit Revision Parcel#: 2159002300 Valuation: $4,930.00 Occupancy Group: #of Dwelling Units: Bedrooms: Bathrooms: Occupant Load: Code Edition: Sprinkled: Project Title: Track#: Lot#: Project#: Plan#: Construction Type: Orig. Plan Check#: CBR2020-0623 Plan Check #: Description: MOLLER: 6' SD REGIONAL STD RETAINING WALL AT REAR OF PROPERTY FEE BUILDING PERMIT FEE ($2000+) BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVISION ADMIN FEE SWPPP INSPECTION FEE TIER 1 -Medium BLDG SWPPP PLAN REVIEW FEE TIER 1-MEDIUM Property Owner: MOLLER BRYCE C AND JESSICA N 1678 CALLIANDRA RD CARLSBAD, CA 92011 Total Fees: $406.61 Total Payments To Date: $406.61 Building Division Applied: 05/07/2020 Issued: 07/28/2020 Finaled Close Out: 07/26/2021 Inspector: Final Inspection: Balance Due: AMOUNT $70.61 $35.00 $246.00 $55.00 $0.00 Page 1 of 1 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 I 760-602-2700 I 760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov {cicyof Carlsbad PLAN CHECK REVISION OR DEFERRED SUBMITTAL APPLICATION B-15 Development Services Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2719 www.carlsbadca.gov CBR2020-0623 & PREV2020-0069 Original Plan Check Number ________ Plan Revision Number ProjectAddress 1678 Calliandra Rd. Carlsbad 92011 General Scope of Revision/Deferred Submittal: ~melt retainin9 wall §Oing iFOA1 two :3' tiered walls to one SD Regional standard 6' retaining wall. CONTACT INFORMATION: Name Jessica Moller Phone 619-992-3332 ________ Fax,__ _______ _ Address 1678 Calliandra Rd City Carlsbad Zip 92011 Email Address jessicamoller22@gmail.com Original plans prepared by an architect or engineer, revisions must be signed & stamped by that person. 1 . Elements revised: Ii] Plans D Calculations D Soils D Energy D Other 2. 3. Describe revisions in detail List page{s) where each revision is shown Going from a 3' retaining wall at toe of slope to a 6' retaining wall. Soil sample taken and evaluated by Geotechnical Engineering firm CTE Inc. Report attached and appendix added showing CTE reviewed drawing and signed off on plans. 4. Does this revision, in any way, alter the exterior of the project? D Yes □ No 5. Does this revision add ANY new floor area(s)? D Yes D No 6. Does this revision affect any fire related issues? D Yes 0 No 7. Is this a complete 0 No Date 1635 Faraday Avenue, Ca Ph: 760-602-2719 Eill!: 760-602-8558 Email: building@carlsbadca.gov www.carfsbadca.gov GREGORY RYSIN 1682 Calliandra Rd. Carlsbad, CA 92011 Ph: (760) 683-5330/(832)-754-1397 Email: euro _ ship@yahoo.com September 14, 2020 City of Carlsbad, California Attn: Scott Chadwick-City Manager 1200 Carlsbad Drive Carlsbad, Ca 92008 Ph.: 760-434-2821 Email: manager@carlsbadca.gov Dear Mr. Chadwick: I am contacting you to report what I believe is a dangerous situation in my HOA. My Board of Directors has voted to allow Bryce Moller, 1678 Calliandra Rd. Carlsbad, Ca 92011, who is also a Vice President of Aviara Premium Collection HOA to take over portions of common land. This land is behind the metal fence at the rear of our properties. The area in question is a hill slope running upwards for approximately 200 feet at an estimated 45 degrees, with more homes at the top. This area was planted with trees and bushes and provided us with privacy and some security. Now neighbors can move their fence out about 30 feet and remove trees and vegetation and to also remove dirt to make it level. I believe this to be a dangerous situation, the trees and vegetation helped to stabilize the slope, especially during rainstorms. There are no drains at the bottom of the slope so during such storms rain water and mud did enter my property, but not excessively, but now that the trees and vegetation is being removed I expect that there could be a major problem with mud & water, plus there could be destabilization of the whole slope I do not know if my HOA management requested a permit to allow this reuse of common land, so I request that the appropriate City engineers inspect this situation. I have attached some imagery to show what is occurring. Yours Sincerely, Gregory Rysin Enclosores (},~ <..020-~-z.,3 -feno (IX,(J'S P( ev (f)a) -OOfoD\ -L<J,4.,I \ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Inspection I Testing I Geotectmlcal I Environmental & Conslruclion Engineering I Civil Eng._;,,g I SUlveylng June 16, 2020 CTE Pr. No. 10-15559G Ms. Jessica Moller 1678 Calliandra Road Carlsbad, California 92011 Telephone: (619) 992-3332 Via Email: jessicamoller22@gmail.com Subject: Ms. Moller: Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road Carlsbad, California 92011 As requested, Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has performed a site reconnaissance and limited-access geotechnical investigation for the proposed improvements at the subject site. Based on the findings of the limited evaluation, the following preliminary recommendations are provided. This work was performed in general accordance with CTE proposal G-4970, dated May 13, 2020. We understand that the proposed improvements will consist of retaining wall(s), flatwork, and a lightly loaded canopy shade structure to the north side of the existing residential structure. The subsurface evaluation consisted of the manual excavation and geologic logging of two exploratory borings within the improvement area. Subgrade conditions were observed in the field by a CTE Engineering Geologist. 1.0 INVESTIGATION FINDINGS 1.1 Geology Based on regional geologic mapping and recent investigation observations, the site subsurface consists of minor, fill materials underlain by Tertiary Santiago Formation. The Tertiary Santiago Formation was not observed during the investigation but is anticipated to underlie the entirety of the site at depth, and the proposed improvement area at depth. Where observed, Previously Placed Fill materials were generally found to consist of medium dense, moist, grayish brown, clayey sand and sandy clay. The underlying Tertiary Santiago Formation is generally anticipated to consist of dense to very dense, slightly moist, silty to clayey fine grained clayey sand. Groundwater was not encountered during the recent investigation. While groundwater conditions may vary, especially during and after periods of sustained precipitation or irrigation, it 1s not anticipated to affect the proposed improvements if proper site drainage is designed, --------------.----~---~---~---·---------.,---------------··-------------·----------- 1441 Montiel Road, Suite 115 I Escondido, CA 92026 I Ph (760) 746-4955 Fax (760) 746-9606 I www.cte-lnc.net Fi )- t c) Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page 2 CTE Job No. I0-15559G constructed, and maintained as per the recommendations of the project civil engineer or architect. Localized seepage may be encountered during site excavations and grading. 1.2 Grading Prior to grading, the improvement area should be cleared of any existing building materials or improvements that are not to remain, as well as debris and deleterious materials. Construction debris and vegetation, not suitable for structural backfill should be properly disposed of offsite. In areas to receive the proposed retaining wall and other minor improvements, existing soils should be overexcavated to a minimum depth of one foot below existing or proposed grades, to one foot below the bottom of proposed footings, or to the depth of competent underlying material, whichever is greatest. Localized overexcavation could extend to greater depths due to the potential presence of deeper than anticipated loose or unsuitable underlying soils. Overexcavation should extend at least two ( or equal to depth of overexcavation) feet laterally beyond the limits of the proposed improvements, as feasible. Non-building improvement areas such as pavements and flatwork should be scarified and recompacted to a depth of at least 12 inches below existing or proposed subgrade elevations, whichever is deeper. Localized overexcavation could be required due to the potential presence of deeper than anticipated loose or unsuitable underlying soils. Overexcavation should extend at least two feet laterally beyond the limits of the proposed improvements, where feasible. Suitability of the bottom of all over-excavations should be verified by the geotechnical representative during site grading. Following the recommended overexcavations, exposed subgrades should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted as recommended herein prior to placement of compacted fill. If present, existing below-ground utilities should be redirected around the proposed structures. Existing utilities at an elevation to extend through the proposed footings should generally be sleeved and caulked to minimize the potential for moisture migration below the building slabs. Abandoned pipes exposed by grading should be removed, securely capped to prevent moisture migration, or filled with minimum two-sack cement/sand slurry. A CTE geotechnical representative should observe the exposed bottom of excavations prior to placement of compacted fill or improvements. If localized areas of loose or unsuitable materials are encountered at the base of overexcavations, deeper removals (to the depth of competent underlying soil) will be required. S:\Projects\l0-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 1.3 Foundations Page 3 CTE Job No. 10-155590 Following the recommended preparatory excavation and grading, continuous and isolated spread footings are anticipated to be suitable for use for retaining wall and minor improvements at this site. Footings are not anticipated to straddle transitions from cut to fill. Proposed foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on an allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot for footings founded in competent previously placed fill materials and embedded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent subgrade elevation. However, as necessary, foundations may be depended to increase lateral bearing capacity to support lateral loading due to retained soil. Shade structure continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide; isolated footings should be at least 24 inches in least dimension. If deepened spread or pier footings are proposed, the bearing value may be increased by 250 psf for each additional six inches of embedment up to a maximum static value of 3,000 psf. The above bearing values may also be increased by one third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Minimum footing reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 4 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom or as per the project structural engineer. The structural engineer should design isolated footing reinforcement. Footing excavations should be maintained at above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. Foundation excavations that are allowed to dry may require presoaking just prior to concrete placement. The maximum total movement or settlement is expected to be less than 1.0 inch and the maximum differential settlement is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inch. This differential settlement is generally understood to take place across the width or length of the structural improvement. 1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction Following recommended removals of loose or disturbed soils, areas to receive fills or concrete slabs-on-grade should be scarified a minimum of six inches, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill within the behind the proposed retaining wall and below ancillary structure improvement areas should be compacted to a relative compaction of 90 percent at a moisture content of at least two percent above optimum, as evaluated by ASTM D 1557. The optimum lift thickness for fill soil will depend on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be placed in uniform, horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Fill placement and compaction should be conducted in conformance with local ordinances. 1.5 Fill Materials If properly moisture conditioned, low expansion potential soils derived from the on-site materials (which appear to be on the order of an Expansion Index of 20) are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used, these materials should be screened of organics and materials generally greater than three inches in maximum dimension. Irreducible materials S:Wrojects\l0-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page4 CTE Job No. I0-15559G greater than three inches in maximum dimension should not be used in shallow fills (within three feet of proposed grades). In utility trenches, adequate bedding should surround pipes. Imported fill beneath structures and walks should have an expansion index of 20 or less (ASTM D 4829). If proposed, imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer before being imported to the site. Retaining wall backfill located within a 45-degree wedge extending up from the heel of the wall should consist of soil having an Expansion Index of 30 or less (ASTM D 4829) with less than 30 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The upper 12 to 18 inches of wall backfill should consist of lower permeability soils, in order to reduce surface water infiltration behind walls. The project structural engineer and/or architect should detail proper waterproofing and wall backdrains, including gravel drain zones, fills, filter fabric, and perforated drain pipes. As evaluated, site soils are generally anticipated to be appropriate for retaining wall backfill but should be verified during site construction. 1.6 Foundation Setback Footings for structures should be designed such that the horizontal distance from the face of adjacent descending slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of 10 feet. In addition, foundations should bear beneath an imaginary I: I plane extended up from the nearest bottom edge of adjacent parallel trenches or excavations located generally within IO feet. Deepening of affected footings should be a suitable means of attaining the prescribed setbacks. 1. 7 Lateral Load Resistance The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in engineered fill materials may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals the coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1,500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. 1.8 Walls Below Grade Lateral loads acting against structures may be resisted by friction between the footings and the supporting compacted fill soil or passive pressure acting against structures. If frictional resistance is used, an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals the coefficient of friction multiplied by the dead load) is recommended for concrete cast directly against compacted fill. A design passive resistance value of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1,500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. If applicable, subterranean structure walls adjacent to the streets or other traffic loads should be designed to resist an additional uniform lateral pressure of I 00 psf. This is the result of an S:\Projects\10-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page 5 CTE Job No. 10-155590 assumed 300-psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet or a distance equal to the retained soil height from the subject walls, whichever is less, the traffic surcharge may be neglected. The project architect or structural engineer should determine the necessity of waterproofing the subterranean retaining walls to reduce moisture infiltration. Retaining walls up to approximately ten feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given below. WALL TYPE CANTILEVER WALL (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL LEVEL BACKFILL 34 64 SLOPE BACKFILL 2: I (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL 42 75 Lateral pressures on cantilever retammg walls (yielding walls) over six feet high due to earthquake motions may be calculated based on work by Seed and Whitman (I 970). The total lateral earth pressure against a properly drained and backfilled cantilever retaining wall above the groundwater level can be expressed as: PAE= PA+ ~PAE For non-yielding ( or "restrained") walls, the total lateral earth pressure may be similarly calculated based on work by Wood (1973): PKE =PK+ ~PKE Where P Alb= Static Active Earth Pressure= GhH2/2 PK/b = Static Restrained Wall Earth Pressure= GhH2/2 ~p AFib = Dynamic Active Earth Pressure Increment= (3/8) kh yH2 ~PKE/b = Dynamic Restrained Earth Pressure Increment= kh yH2 b = unit length of wall (usually 1 foot) kh = 1/2* PGAm (PGAm Table 2.0) Gh = Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (given previously Table 1.8) H = Total Height of the retained soil y = Total Unit Weight of Soil"' 135 pounds per cubic foot S:\Projects\10-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page 6 CTE Job No. 10-15559G * It is anticipated that the l/2 reduction factor will be appropriate for proposed walls that are not substantially sensitive to movement during the design seismic event. Proposed walls that are more sensitive to such movement could utilize a 2/3 reduction factor. If any proposed walls require minimal to no movement during the design seismic event, no reduction factor to the peak ground acceleration should be used. The project structural engineer of record should determine the appropriate reduction factor to use (if any) based on the specific proposed wall characteristics. The static and increment of dynamic earth pressure in both cases may be applied with a line of action located at H/3 above the bottom of the wall (SEAOC, 2013). These values assume non-expansive backfill and free-draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free-draining backfill materials and sloped, perforated drains. These drains should discharge to an appropriate off-site location. Waterproofing should be as specified by the project architect or the waterproofing specialty consultant. 1.10 Slope Stability The project site is located at the bottom of an approximately 24 feet high, 2: I (horizontal: vertical) slope that ascends to the north. According to mapping by Tan ( 1995), the site is located in area 3-1, which is described as "Generally Susceptible" to landsliding. However, Kennedy and Tan (2007) do not indicate the presence of mapped landslides at the subject site. In addition, on-site field observations did not indicate the presence of deep gross instabilities. Based on the investigation findings, the potential for deep seated landslides at the subject site is generally considered to be low. An evaluation of slope stability was performed using GeoStudio SLOPE/W software, based on laboratory determined soil parameters and a geologic cross section depicting existing subsurface conditions. The final input and output data from the limited evaluation of slope stability are presented in Appendix E. For the analysis, the existing slope was modeled based on topographic and geologic conditions. Based on laboratory direct shear testing of a bulk sample remolded to 90% compaction, the Previously Placed Fill yielded a soil strength value of phi = 37.0° and cohesion value = 300 psf. Due to the depth of the Santiago Formation, assumed strength values of phi = 40° and cohesion = 400 psf were utilized. To be conservative the Previously Placed Fill values of phi= 35.0° and cohesion= 200 psfwere utilized for the analysis. Based on the findings, the existing and proposed slope conditions are anticipated to exhibit global static factors of safety well in excess of 1.5 and pseudo-static factor of safety well in excess of 1.1. As such, the proposed slope conditions at the site are anticipated to be adequate as planned. However, it is anticipated that surficial soils will continue to erode and may develop shallow slumps and failures on the slope face. Therefore, it would likely be prudent to properly plant and landscape the slopes at the site to minimize erosion and surface degradation. S:\Projects\l0-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page 7 CTE Job No. 10-155590 Should the proposed wall design and placement be modified, CTE can run additional slope stability evaluations based on the proposed improvements, although, for a properly designed retaining wall not exceeding IO feet in height, placed approximately in the location of the upper tier, CTE anticipates the wall and slope conditions will generally exhibit factors of safety in excess of 1.5 and 1.1 for exhibit global static and pseudo-static conditions, respectively. 1.11 Exterior Flatwork To reduce the potential for cracking in exterior flatwork caused by minor movement of subgrade soils and typical concrete shrinkage, it is recommended that such flatwork be installed with crack-control joints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect, and measure a minimum 4.5 inches in thickness (for non-traffic areas). Additionally, it is recommended that flatwork be installed with at least number 3 reinforcing bars on maximum 18-inch centers, each way, at above mid-height of slab but with proper concrete cover. Flatwork, which should be installed with crack control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. Doweling of flatwork joints at critical pathways or similar could also be beneficial in resisting minor subgrade movements. Just prior to concrete placement, presoaking or minor pre- saturating flatwork subgrade materials to a minimum of three percent above optimum is also recommended. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at, or be elevated to, above optimum moisture content prior to concrete placement. 2.0 SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES Based on regional exposures, geologic map relationships, and known subsurface conditions in the site vicinity, we anticipate dense to very dense Eocene Santiago Formation underlying the near surface soils at relatively shallow depths beneath the site. Therefore, Site Class C is considered to be appropriate for seismic evaluation. The seismic ground motion values listed in the table below were derived in accordance with the ASCE 7-16 Standard and 2019 CBC. This was accomplished by establishing the Site Class based on the soil properties at the site, and then calculating the site coefficients and parameters using the United States Geological Survey Seismic Design Maps application. These values are intended for the design of structures to resist the effects of earthquake ground motions for the site coordinates 33.10835° latitude and -117 .281359° longitude, as underlain by soils corresponding to site Class C. S:\Projects\l0-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 .. PARAMETER VALUE Site Class C Mapped Spectral Response 1.017g Acceleration Parameter, S5 Mapped Spectral Response 0.369g Acceleration Parameter, S1 Seismic Coefficient, Fa 1.2 Seismic Coefficient, Fv 1.5 MCE Spectral Response 1.22g Acceleration Parameter, SMs MCE Spectral Response 0.553g Acceleration Parameter, SM1 Design Spectral Response 0.813g Acceleration, Parameter Sos Design Spectral Response 0.369g Acceleration, Parameter Sm Peak Ground Acceleration PGAM 0.535g 3.0 LIMITATIONS Page 8 CTE Job No. 10-15559G ,,,· •...• ·•.•·· . CBC REFERENCE (20 I 9) ASCE 7-16, Chapter 20 Figure 1613.2.1 (I) Figure 1613.2.1 (2) Table 1613.2.3 (I) Table 1613.2.3 (2) Section 1613.2.3 Section 1613.2.3 Section 1613.2.5 (I) Section 1613.2.5 (2) ASCE 7-16, Section 11.8.3 As indicated, the recommendations herein are based on our review of the preliminary design information and recent subsurface explorations. The anticipated conditions should be verified in the field during construction. The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. The recommendations presented herein have been developed in order to reduce the potential adverse effects of soils settlement and expansion. However, even with the design and construction precautions provided, some post-construction movement and associated distress should be anticipated. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes S:\Projects\10-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc ------------------·------- Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Page 9 CTE Job No. 10-155590 outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. CTE's conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed site conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, this office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ~ Dan T. Math, GE #2665 Principal Engineer Rodney J. Jones, RCE #84232 Senior Engineer RJJ/ AJB/DTM:nri Aaron J. Beeby, CEG #260 Senior Geologist S:\Projects\ 10-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Moller Residence Improvements 1678 Calliandra Road, Carlsbad, California 92011 June 16 2020 Attachments: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 2A Figure 3 Figure 4 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Site Index Map Exploration Location Map Cross Section A-A' Regional Fault Map Retaining Wall Drainage Detail References Exploration Logs Laboratory Results Standard Specifications for Grading Slope Stability Evaluation Page IO CTE Job No. I0-15559G S:\Projects\10-15559G\Ltr_Prelim Geo Recs 6-16-2020 (revsied).doc ---------····---·--· -~- \ \ 1 I ., c~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. ~c 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 SITE INDEX IIAP KOIUR RKSID!NCI 1678 CALWNDRA ROAD CARISlW), CAUFORNIA SCALE: AS SHOWN CTE JOB NO.: 10-15559G DATE: 6/2020 FIGURE: 1 A EXPLANATION B-2.(if) APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION Qppf QUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL A 1----i A I CROSS SECTION .ll /~'! i ' Cl'E~ Conllructlon TMllng & Engl.-ing, Inc. ~ 1441ManlliAll .. 11S.&car,Mt,,CA 1X1at ,ti(rm,1...,._ 20' 10' 20' B-2 ♦ Qppf A EXPLANATION APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION OUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL APPROXIMATE GEOLOGIC CONT ACT QUERIED WHERE UNCERTAIN 81. TANCf (;.'(')!Vi ''ECT18N AA A' 210 2, i 1 \I OU ,s '7< 12 0 5 12 ~-..-I I f 1 Inch • 12 ml. HISTORIC FAULT DISPLACEMENT (LAST 200 YEARS} HOLOCENE FAULT DISPLACEMENT (DURING PAST 11,700 YEARS) LATE QUATERNARY FAULT OISPLACMENT (DURING PAST 700,000 YEAR$) QUATERNARY FAULT DISPLACEMENT (AGE UNDIFFERENTIATED) PREQUATERNARV FAULT DISPLACEMENT (OLDER THAN 1.6 MILLION YEARS) . . . .. 1800- 1868 186~ 1931 1932- 2010 o•• 0 • • 0 • • ~ LAST TWO DIGITS OF M ! 6.5 ~ EARTHQUAKE YEAR ,~ '-1\ ::!-< L '' .:. '\ '·, ~ .. '· i:;.' '·,. ::;_ --~ ~ ·,, ---;::i' .;;-·---. ~,--\ l, ..... ~-, ( ._ I' R I ' • & Engu-ring, ~ Construction Testing CA.,.,. "'<'"'l'.....,. Cf'EJNC , .. ,_ .. ,..,,.._ RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING TO BE SPECIFIED BY ARCHITECT FINISH GRADE *CONCEPTUAL DRAWING ··.· , .... 12" TO 18" OF LOWER PERMEABILITY MATERIAL COMPACTED TO 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION ·,i .·::,._ .·. SELECT GRANULAR WALL / : .:_ ·-: : BACKFILL COMPACTED / · :·:·_ ·. :·-: TO 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION -----3/4" GRAVEL SURROUNDED BY FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 N. OR EQUIVALENT) -OR- PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE BOARD !'MIN 4" DIA. PERFORATED PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT). MINIMUM 1% GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET c,PL Construction Testin!l_8.Eng_i~~ering_,_lnc. ~c 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115. Escond<lo, CA 92026 Ph (760) 7464955 RBTAINING WALL DRAINAGB DBTAIL SCALE, NO SCALI DATE: 6/2020 CTE JOB NO.: FIGURE: !0-H559G ~ APPENDIX A REFERENCES I. ASTM, 2002, "Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort," Volume 04.08 2. California Building Code, 2016, "California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of2," California Building Standards Commission, published by ICBO, June. 3. California Division of Mines and Geology, CD 2000-003 "Digital Images of Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California, Southern Region," compiled by Martin and Ross. 4. Hart, Earl W., and Bryant, William A., Revised 2007, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist Priolo, Special Studies Zones Act of 1972," California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. 5. Jennings, Charles W., 1994, "Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas" with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions. 6. Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S., 2008, "Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California", California Geological Survey, Map No. 2, Plate I of 2. 7. Seed, H.B., and R.V. Whitman, 1970, "Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads," in Proceedings, ASCE Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures, pp. 103-147, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University. 8. Wood, J.H. 1973, Earthquake-Induced Soil Pressures on Structures, Report EERL 73-05. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology. APPENDIXB EXPLORATION LOGS Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVE Ls CLEAN •~:;rr GW ;;;;r <> WELL GRADED GRA vELS, GRA vEL-SAND MIXTURES MORE THAN GRAVELS -~ -~ _g<j LITTLE OR NO FrNES HALF OF < 5% FINES ;;;;-G~ ~JJ POORL y GRADED GL~c~~~g~~L SAND MCXTURES, COARSE mf-------,--=---=-=--===-=---'-":a:....:...;::..;.:;;;:,___,-----------1 FRACTION IS GRAVELS GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRA VEL-SAND-SrLT MCXTURES, LARGER THAN NON-PLASTIC FrNES WITH FINES -CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MCXTURES, NO. 4 SIEVE GC 1----------+-----· ____________ f-----------'P..::L::.:Ac:::.ST.:.:l.::::C..:.F.:.:.rN.:.::E::::S ________ ~ :.:.:-:.~ SW ~.:.:-:.~ WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO CLEAN SANDS < 5% FINES SANDS --• ____ --.. FrN ES :_/•• SP----• POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR ·c. NO FINES SANDS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE WITH FINES 1/// ., , :,, ;/~SC /"~ -, _SM _ I SfLTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MCXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FrNES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MCXTURES, PLASTIC FINES LU C/)~a::~ YS ::! o ~ C/J SIL TS AND CLA g ~ -;:£_ ~ LIQUID LIMIT IS ML rNORGANIC SILTS, VERY FrNE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAVEY FrNE SANDS SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAVEY SLLTS INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDrUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY SANDY, SfLTS OR LEAN CLAYS w ::E w LESS THAN 50 @~(/)~ OL z ZC/Jo ORGANIC SIL TS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY ~~~~ MH a:: t-:5 . Cl LU a:: O SIL TS AND CLAYS ~ ~ ~ <(~ LIQUID LIMIT IS 08 CH ~~ rNORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FrNE SANDY OR SIL TY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS rNORGANTC CLAYS.OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS ~ ..:: :::i: I GREATER THAN 50 t-HI ORGANIC CLAYS OF M EDIUM TO 1-flGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS 1------H-IG_H_.L_Y_O_R_G_A-NI_C_S_O_I_LS_____ T -----P--=E_A_T_AN__;D~Oc:.:TH::.:...:.:.E.:.:.R:::.H.::.IGa::Hc:..L..:..Y..:::Oa::R:..:.G.,:_;A::..N_IC--SO_IL_S--------1 GRAIN SIZES BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND T 1--C_O_AR-SE ___ F_TNE ___ C_O_A_R_S_E~I-ME_D_fUM-~I-F_IN_E----11 SIL TS AND CLAYS 12" 3" 3/4" 4 10 40 200 CLEAR SQUARE SlEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX-Maximum Dry Density GS-Grain Size Distribution SE-Sand Equivalent EI-Expansion Index CHM-Sulfate and Chloride Content , pH, Resistivity COR -Corrosivity SD-Sample Disturbed PM-Permeability SG-Specific Gravity HA-Hydrometer Analysis AL-Atterberg Limits RV-R-Value CN-Consolidation CP-Collapse Potential HC-Hydrocollapse REM-Remolded PP-Pocket Penetrometer WA-Wash Analysis DS-Direct Shear UC-Unconfined Compression MD-Moisture/Density M-Moisture SC-Swell Compression 0 1-Organic Impurities FLGURE:I BLl PROJECT CTEJOBNO LOGGED BY -" 9 0 " 8. t; 1l /:' 0 " "' 0 !::, C , -5 -" " " 8 " 0 0 Q "' oi 8 q ;? e__, ~ e c'l ~ "' ·o Q ::1 -0 - - - --- -5- - - -- -- -10-... --I .... -- -I - I 5- - - ,-- ,-- •20- >-- >-- >-- -- -25- -- 0 ,D E 00 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 DRILLER DRILL METHOD: SAMPLE METHOD: SHEET: DRILLING DA TE ELEVATION of >, "' 0 ..J BORING LEGEND Laboratory Tests '" :a <..i " "' 6 :i DESCRIPTION Block or Chunk Sample Bulk Sample Standard Penetration Test Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler (Cal Sampler) Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample Groundwater Table ~1--S6il Tvoe or Classification Change -?---?---?---?---?---?---?- \__ F~rmation ~hange f(A~proximat~ boundari~s queried ;?)l "SM" Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils exist in situ as bedrock FIGURE: I BL2 PROJECT MOLLER RESIDENCE DRILLER MANUAL AUGER SHEET, I of I CTEJOB NO, 10-15559G DRILL METHOD: SOLID FLIGHT DRILLING DA TE 5/28/2020 LOGGED BY AJB SAMPLE METHOD, RING, SPT and BULK ELEVATION· - " "" 0 0. !l 2, ~ !i q "' a "' BORING: B-1 0 ?' "--" 0 Laboratory Tests " 00 00 ..., c <O ~ i ui u " .,, " c..i :a ~ " ~ Cl 15. -"' 8 §-0 '3 @ " 0 00 "' Cl ::!! ::, c:, DESCRIPTION 0 SM/SC QUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL: -Medium dense, moist, grayish brown, silty to clayey fine to medium grained SAND with trace fine gravel. -- .. ----. ---· ------------------------------------------------------.. -Medium dense to stiff, moist, grayish brown, clayey fine to medium SC/CL .. -medium grained SAND/ sandy CLAY. ,-5-MAX,DS,CHM -------------------------------------------------------------'" -CL Stiff, moist, olive brown, fine to medium grained sandy CLAY. '" --- --Total Depth: 8.5' -l(t No Groundwater Encountered -- -- -- -- 15- - -- -- -- -2(j- -- -- -- -- -25- I B-1 PROJECT MOLLER RESIDENCE DRILLER MANUAL AUGER SHEET: I of I CTEJOBNO: 10-155590 DRILL METHOD: SOLID FLIGHT DRILLING DATE: 5/28/2020 LOGGED BY: AJB SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT and BULK ELEVATION: - " C' 0 u Q. 8 ~ ii' ~ & .€ "' E "' BORING: B-2 ,".: e., >, 0 Laboratory Tests " "' "' ..l !::. Co ~ e u; u C "" " ~ cj "' ~ -" " ~ 0 ~ " "3 8 0 "' ·;; "' e 0 "' iii 0 ~ ~ 0 DESCRIPTION '"0 SC QUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL: .. -Medium dense, moist, yellowish gray, clayey fine to medium grained SAND with discontinuous sandy clay chunks . .. - EI .. - .. - .. 5 .. -Total Depth: 5' No Groundwater Encountered .. - .. -. -- -10-.. - ----.. - >-I 5- .. - .. - .. - -- -20 -- -- -- -- -2,. I B-2 APPENDIXC LABORATORYRESULTS Job Name: Moller Res. ----------------Job No: 10-15559G Tested By: JH ----Lab No: 30786 Date Sampled: 5/28/2020 ----,,-----Soi I Location: 8-2@ 0-5' Date Tested: 5/29/2020 ------Soil Description: _L..,,._ig_ht_B_ro_w_n .,_(S_C,_) __________ _ LAB WORK SHEET EXPANSION INDEX TEST WET WEIGHT (q) DRY WEIGHT (q) % MOISTURE (%) WEIGHT OF RING & SOIL (q) WEIGHT OF RING (q) WEIGHT OF SOIL (lbs.) VOLUME OF RING (ft. 3) WET DENSITY (pcf) DRY DENSITY (pcf) % SATURATION (%) EXPANSION READING DATE TIME: INITIAL READING INCH 10.00361 FINAL READING 1""!1 o-. 0-1 """53!"11 EXPANSION INDEX ... I -1""'2---- NOTES: Equipment ID: 28 ASTM D 4829 TEST RESULTS Initial Final 149.3 261.8 134.3 217.1 11.2 20.6 744.6 364.9 0.8371 0.0073 115.1 103.6 48.3 VERY LOW 0-20 LOW 21-50 MEDIUM 51 -90 HIGH 91-130 VERY HIGH 130> El at saturation between 48-52% Measured El: 12.2 Measured Saturation: 48.3 El at 48-52% Saturation:1 ___ 1_2 ___ 1 LABORATORY COMPACTION OF SOIL (MOD.) ASTM D 1557 Project Name: Moller Residence Tested By: JF Date: 6/1/2020 Project No.: 10-15559G Calculated By : JF Date: 6/1/2020 Lab No.: 30786 Sampled By: AB Date: 5/28/2020 Sample Location: -=B;...-1.;..._ ____________ _ Depth (ft.) 0-8.5' Sample Description: Moderate Brown (SC) Moisture Added (ml) I t:::;1 NO. Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (q) Wt. of Mold (a) Net Wt. of Soil (a) Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (q) Dry Wt. of Soil+ Cont. (a) Wt. of Container (q) Moisture Content(%) Wet Densitv (ocf) Orv Densitv <ocf) 1 ___ P_R-OCEDURE USED X I Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if No.4 retained =/< 25% I Procedure B II-----' Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) May be used if 3/8" retained =/< 25% I Procedure C II-----' Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) May be used if 3/4" retained =/< 30% I 100 1 3928 1992 1936 226.0 206.0 0.0 9.7 128.1 116.8 .;:- 0 C. 130.0 125.0 f 120.0 C: 4) 0 c.':' 0 115.0 I 110.0 0.0 150 2 4004 1992 2012 229.0 205.5 0.0 11.4 133.2 119.5 OVERSIZE FRACTION Total Sample Weight (g):I 13410 Weight Retained (g) Percent Retained I Plus 3/4"1 0.0 I Plus 3/8"1 0.0 76 I Plus #41 0.6 I 200 I 3 4015 1992 2023 247.5 217.5 0.0 13.8 133.9 117.7 5.0 250 I I 4 3980 1992 1988 230.0 198.0 0.0 16.2 131 .6 113.3 \ \' ' \ ;\ ' '\ ,,Ir 7 • 10.0 Preparation Method: Dry [TI Moist[:] Mechanical Rammer[TI Manual Rammer[:] Hammer Weight:! 10.0 lb. Drop:! 18 in. Mold Volume (ft.3):! 0.03330 \ _... SP. GR.= 2.65 .k i..---v SP. GR.= 2.70 SP. GR.= 2.75 y _,.., .,,.... \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \' \ \ ,-~ \. \ \ ...... \ ,, ' ' \ \ .. \ ,\ '\. \ \ I\ ' I'\ '\ '\. \ \. I\ • I\ \. \ ~ I\ I\ ' \. \ \ 15.0 20.0 Moisture Content(%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) 119.7 11 .7 Rock Correction Applied per ASTM D 4718 Maximum Dry Density (pcf)~ Optimum Moisture Content(%)~ Proctor 30786 PRECONSOLIDATION SHEARING DAT A 0.023 5000 \ 0.025 ~, 4000 C ~ ....... Ill / 'iii 0.027 "1111 .!:: Cl> (/) .s:: 3000 c., - (/) / :§. w 0:: ~ --0.029 I- z ' (/) ~ ✓ ~ ~ 2000 '~ I-w / (/) 0.031 :I: ~--. (/) ...... 1000 ~ --.,,..--- 0.033 --... 0 0 2 • 6 • 10 12 14 16 18 20 0.035 0.1 1 10 100 I __ 1000ps:I STRAIN (%) TIME (minutes) VERTICAL -3000psf STRESS -S000psf FAILURE ENVELOPE 5000 4000 C Ill .!:: (/) 3000 (/) w 0 0:: I-(/) C) z ii: 2000 < w :I: (/) 1000 • ~-0.1200 mm./min I ~ 0 CT~c 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 VERTICAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR STRENGTH TEST -ASTM D3080 Job Name: Moller Residence Initial Dry Density (pct): 107.7 Project Number: 10-15590 Sample Date: 5/28/2020 Lnitial Moisture(%): 11.7 Lab Number: 30786 Test Date: 6/3/2020 Final Moisture (%): 23.6 Sample Location: 8-1 @ 0-8.5' Tested by: JH Cohesion: 300 osf Sample Description: Li~ht Brown {SC} [Remolded to 90%] Angle Of Friction: 37.0 APPENDIXD STANDARD SPEC I FICA TIO NS FOR GRADING ------------------------ AppendixD Page D-1 Standard Specifications for Grading Section I -General Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. presents the following standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein. Section 2 -Responsibilities of Project Personnel The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to general conformance with project specifications and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the client or his authorized representative. The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. The Contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency requirements. Section 3 -Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction site meeting should be arranged by the owner and/or client and should include the grading contractor, design engineer, geotechnical consultant, owner's representative and representatives of the appropriate governing authorities. Section 4 -Site Preparation The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 1 of 26 Appendix D Page D-2 Standard Specifications for Grading Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill areas. Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be protected by the contractor from damage or injury. Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Section 5 -Site Protection Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor. Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties, completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies. Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. Rain related damage should be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 2 of 26 AppendixD Page D-3 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations ( e.g., backcuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable. When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures. In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may recommend other slope repair procedures. Section 6 -Excavations 6.1 Unsuitable Materials Materials that are unsuitable should be recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. excavated under observation and Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured, weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill. If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 3 of 26 AppendixD Page D-4 Standard Specifications for Grading 6.2 Cut Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical Consultant. When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of the slope. 6.3 Pad Areas All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials, transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading, especially where deep or drastic transitions are present. For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes of 2 percent or greater is recommended. Section 7 -Compacted Fill All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant. 7.1 Fill Material Quality Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the requirements outlined. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 4 of 26 AppendixD Page D-5 Standard Specifications for Grading Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those requirements as field conditions dictate. Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill, special handling in accordance with the recommendations below. Rocks greater than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site. 7.2 Placement of Fill Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should observe and approve the area to receive fill. After observation and approval, the exposed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e. moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by appropriate government agencies. Compacted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed m consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions. When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal: vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area. Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 5 of 26 AppendixD Page D-6 Standard Specifications for Grading the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to placement of fill. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a 3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least 3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated. Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading performed as described herein. Rocks 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should be placed below the upper IO feet of any fill and should not be closer than 15 feet to any slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate. Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in the same vertical plane. It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 6 of 26 AppendixD Page D-7 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's client. Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-00, D 2922-04. Tests should be conducted at a minimum of approximately two vertical feet or approximately 1,000 to 2,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3 Fill Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2: I (horizontal: vertical). Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes should be over-built two to five feet and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface. At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore. During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 7 of 26 AppendixD Page D-8 Standard Specifications for Grading exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment, whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled. For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least two percent. Section 8 -Trench Backfill Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two feet deep may be backfilled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during construction. If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope areas. Section 9 -Drainage Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be installed in accordance with CTE's recommendations during grading. Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be installed in accordance with the specifications. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 8 of26 AppendixD Page D-9 Standard Specifications for Grading Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales). For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2 percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance. Section IO -Slope Maintenance IO.I -Landscape Plants To enhance surficial slope stabi]ity, slope planting should be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and arid areas may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best party to consult regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration. 10.2 -Irrigation Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during periods of rainfall. 1 0 .3 -Repair As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand, to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair. If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against additional saturation. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 9 of 26 Appendix D Page D-10 Standard Specifications for Grading In the accompanying Standard Details, appropriate repair procedures are illustrated for superficial slope failures (i.e., occurring typically within the outer one foot to three feet of a slope face). STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 10 of 26 FINISH CUT SLOPE ------ 5'MIN BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL FILL SLOPE SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL - 10' TYPICAL 15' MIN. (INCLINED 2% MIN. INTO SLOPE) BENCHING FILL OVER CUT FINISH FILL SLOPE SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL 10' TYPICAL 15' MIN OR STABILITY EQUIVALENT PER SOIL ENGINEERING (INCLINED 2% MIN. INTO SLOPE) NOTTO SCALE --- BENCHING FOR COMPACTED FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 11 of 26 MINIMUM DOWNSLOPE KEY DEPTH TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN FILL ------------------_-,..::;;,,.---)._ ---:1€-~\J>I --- ----1'~"\YI "111' --- --£>'-€-€-----su'"ll>I ------\)~ _,,,,_.,_ __________ -1 ---1 O' TYPICAL BENCH // ---WIDTH VARIES ~1 .,,,,,,,..,,,,,.,,,,,,,. / 1 ___ .,,,..,,.,,,,,. COMPETENT EARTH MATERIAL ~----' 2% MIN --- 15' MINIMUM BASE KEY WIDTH TYPICAL BENCH HEIGHT PROVIDE BACKDRAIN AS REQUIRED PER RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOILS ENGINEER DURING GRADING WHERE NATURAL SLOPE GRADIENT IS 5:1 OR LESS, BENCHING IS NOT NECESSARY. FILL IS NOT TO BE PLACED ON COMPRESSIBLE OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL. NOTTO SCALE 4' FILL SLOPE ABOVE NATURAL GROUND DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 12 of 26 ---------------•···-··· •. ~ )> z CJ )> :D CJ er, ""O -o m "'(") (0 -Cl) ::!l --' (") "' )> 0 ::l .... 0 r-.JZ Cl) er, "T1 0 :D G) :D )> CJ z G) REMOVE ALL TOPSOIL, COLLUVIUM, AND CREEP MATERIAL FROM TRANSITION CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON "AS-BUILT" NATURAL~ --TOPOGRAPHY _ ------------CUT SLOPE* -- FILL -------------o\/1:. -----c"1:.1:.l'·~1:.lJI --- ---,,lJlr,..~o '" ---- ---co\.\.u\J\v 1'"'...,'7-,....-------I ,ol'sol\.,;_. -----~ I F ---14'TYPICAL I 15'MINIMUM NOTTO SCALE 10' TYPICAL BEDROCK OR APPROVED FOUNDATION MATERIAL *NOTE: CUT SLOPE PORTION SHOULD BE MADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL FILL SLOPE ABOVE CUT SLOPE DETAIL _-,-------------~ .............. ' ,,,,,, <', COMPACTED FILL /~ \\ // \ I [ SURFACE OF COMPETENT MATERIAL \ \ / \' / / TYPICAL BENCHING .__ .... ,_.,, A--->-. SEE DETAIL BELOW MINIMUM 9 FT' PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED FILTER MATERIAL CAL TRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: ' / REMOVE UNSUITABLE DETAIL 1----.J..-.>1.- 14" MINIMUM MATERIAL INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2% GRADIENT MINIMUM MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) 6" FILTER MATERIAL BEDDING SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40 POLY-VINYL-CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 psi 1" ¾" ¾" NO.4 NO.8 NO. 30 NO.SO NO. 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA, SUBJECT TO FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING LENGTH OF RUN INITIAL 500' 500' TO 1500' > 1500' NOTTO SCALE PIPE DIAMETER 4" 6" 8" TYPICAL CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 14 of 26 TYPICAL BENCHING CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS [ SURFACEOF COMPETENT MATERIAL -~~-------------~ ..... ' /,,,,. ,'' COMPACTED FILL / '/ '' // ' I \' / '' / I ,_/ A--"-. ' / REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SEE DETAILS BELOW TRENCH DETAILS 6" MINIMUM OVERLAP INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2% GRADIENT MINIMUM OPTIONAL V-DITCH DETAIL MINIMUM 9 FT' PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL MINIMUM 0 24" MINIMUM MINIMUM 9 FT' PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL 60' TO 90' MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40 POLY- VINYLCHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 PSI. DRAIN MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA, SUBJECT TO FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING SIEVE SIZE 1 ½" 1" ¾" ¾" NO. 200 PERCENTAGE PASSING 88-100 5-40 0-17 0-7 0-3 LENGTH OF RUN INITIAL 500' 500' TO 1500' > 1500' NOTTO SCALE GEOFABRIC SUBDRAIN STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 15 of 26 PIPE DIAMETER 4" 6" 8" FRONT VIEW CONCRETE !·., .-r., ;'!·.,··'_l•.,·,::·;,.' :.-., .I~ 6" Min. --.:-·;. ·;.~·_;.,., . , . ,I I' CUT-OFF WALL ,:.,;,~.,;,'! ::.-._.!•.,. ~-; ... •'. -;~_-;~-;. ~ • -.'►.-• .-.·•· • ,"'··'-"--------•. -•. -•. -•. -~. --~--I SUBDRAIN PIPE ,.,,-~: ,:::, ,, •:,,. •:,·,. •: •,. •: 6" Min. SIDE VIEW L...__ 24" Min. - 6"Min. ---j 12" Min. f--6" Min. CONCRETE CUT-OFF WALL __ _.•_..-,'!.-.,' . ' ..... 6"Min . -------i_i;iim,w-7·• .· .. • .• '>-,--~Ia"'"--....... 1 ... •.i, NOTTO SCALE RECOMMENDED SUBDRAIN CUT-OFF WALL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 16 of 26 FRONT VIEW SUBDRAIN OUTLET PIPE (MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER) SIDE VIEW ALL BACKFILL SHOULD BE COMPACTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH PROJECT . ' . ' -• • I ►-'►-'►-' ' • br. • .. . b,, ' ... b,, ' A,,A,,f'., ►-"►-'►-' ,, 'br.. ''ti. ... '1:t,, • .0.. • ' .A,_ ' ' A • ' _.,.. -... -... ► -, ► -, ►-, ,, . b. . ,, 'l:tr,, • .. • b,, • """. , .c,,., , A 24"Min. SPECIFICATIONS. COMPACTION EFFORT ------J SHOULD NOT DAMAGE STRUCTURE 24" Min. NOTE: HEADWALL SHOULD OUTLET AT TOE OF SLOPE OR INTO CONTROLLED SURFACE DRAINAGE DEVICE ALL DISCHARGE SHOULD BE CONTROLLED THIS DETAIL IS A MINIMUM DESIGN AND MAY BE MODIFIED DEPENDING UPON ENCOUNTERED CONDITIONS AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS NOTTO SCALE 24" Min. 12" TYPICAL SUBDRAIN OUTLET HEADWALL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 17 of 26 1' 2' Ml 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN SLOPE PER PLAN FILTER MATERIAL 15' MINIMUM BENCHING H/2 AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER (GENERALLY 1/2 SLOPE HEIGHT, 15' MINIMUM} DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOTTO SCALE TYPICAL SLOPE STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 18 of 26 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN SLOPE PER PLAN 15' MINIMUM I ' I I I I I ..... : i FILTER MATERIAL BENCHING ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOTTO SCALE TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 19 of 26 FINAL LIMIT OF EXCAVATION OVEREXCAVATE OVERBURDEN (CREEP-PRONE) DAYLIGHT LINE FINISH PAD OVEREXCAVATE 3' AND REPLACE WITH COMPACTED FILL COMPETENT BEDROCK TYPICAL BENCHING LOCATION OF BACKDRAIN AND OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. EQUIPMENT WIDTH (MINIMUM 15') NOTTO SCALE DAYLIGHT SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 20 of 26 PROPOSED GRADING BASE WIDTH "W" DETERMINED BY SOILS ENGINEER NATURAL GROUND COMPACTED FILL NOTTO SCALE PROVIDE BACKDRAIN, PER BACKDRAIN DETAIL. AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR BACK SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. LOCATIONS OF BACKDRAINS AND OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. TYPICAL SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 21 of 26 FINISH SURFACE SLOPE 3 FT' MINIMUM PER LINEAR FOOT APPROVED FILTER ROCK' CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT A COMPACTED FILL 2.0% MINIMUM GRADIENT A 4" MINIMUM DIAMETER SOLID OUTLET PIPE SPACED PER SOIL ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS 4" MINIMUM APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE .. (PERFORATIONS DOWN) MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT TO OUTLET DURING GRADING TYPICAL BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN .. APPROVED PIPE TYPE: MINIMUM 12" COVER BENCHING DETAIL A-A OMPACTE BACKFILL 12" MINIMUM TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED SOLID OUTLET PIPE 'FILTER ROCK TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SCHEDULE 40 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 PSI SIEVE SIZE 1" ¾" ¾" N0.4 NO. 30 NO. 50 NO. 200 PERCENTAGE PASSING 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 5-15 0-7 0-3 NOTTO SCALE TYPICAL BACKDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 22 of 26 -···-·-· -------------- FINISH SURFACE SLOPE MINIMUM 3 FT' PER LINEAR FOOT OPEN GRADED AGGREGATE• TAPE AND SEAL AT COVER CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT COMPACTED FILL A 2.0% MINIMUM GRADIENT A MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER SOLID OUTLET PIPE SPACED PER SOIL ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM 12" COVER •NOTE: AGGREGATE TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 1 ½" 100 1" 5-40 ¾" 0-17 ¾" 0-7 NO. 200 0-3 TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL A-A OMPACTE BACKFILL 12" MINIMUM NOTTO SCALE MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL 4" MINIMUM APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT TO OUTLET BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED SOLID OUTLET PIPE BACKDRAIN DETAIL (GEOFRABIC) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 23 of 26 SOIL SHALL BE PUSHED OVER ROCKS AND FLOODED INTO VOIDS. COMPACT AROUND AND OVER EACH WINDROW. 10' FILL SLOPE 1 FILL SLOPE 1 CLEAR ZONE _/ /EQUIPMENT WIDTH__/ STACK BOULDERS END TO END. DO NOT PILE UPON EACH OTHER. 0 0 NOTTO SCALE --.... o-.--- ·/ 0 ~--STAGGER ROWS ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 24 of 26 --··•·»•» ---------------........ --·------ FINISHED GRADE BUILDING 10' SLOPE FACE NO OVERSIZE, AREA FOO_ FOUNDATION, UTILITIES, AND SWIMMING POOLS STREET 5' MINIMUM OR BELOW DEPTH OF DEEPEST UTILITY TRENCH (WHICHEVER GREATER) -... o... 0 0 15• r 4•~ WINDROW J TYPICAL WINDROW DETAIL (EDGE VIEW) GRANULAR SOIL FLOODED TO FILL VOIDS HORIZONTALLY PLACED COMPACTION FILL PROFILE VIEW NOTTO SCALE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 25 of 26 0 GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS CUT LOT .-,---------------__ -_ -_ -_ ~-:::::;:,,----ORIGINAL GROUND _, ---- 5' TOPSOIL, COLLUVIUM AND _ --- WEATHERED BEDROCK____ 5, MIN ----- 3'MIN ------,--UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OVEREXCAVATE AND REGRADE CUT/FILL LOT (TRANSITION) ---COMPACTED FILL -------,- T=o=p=s~O~IL-,~C~OLLUVIUM. --- -AND WEATHERED ~-------' BEDROCK -,-------UNWEATHERED BEDROCK NOTTO SCALE TRANSITION LOT DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 26 of 26 ----ORIGINAL ----,GROUND 'MIN 3'MIN OVEREXCAVATE AND REGRADE .. ··-·· ·····----------------- APPENDIXE SLOPE ST ABILITY EVALUATION .::-w w !::. z 0 ~ <( > w _J w A 240 230 220 - 210 200 190 - 180 - 170 Description. Qppf Model: MohrCoulomb WI· 120 Cohesion· 200 Phi; 35 P1ezomf!tnc Line: 1 .'lli§& ----------------------------------------------------------- ~on;Tsa Modol:Moh(Coulomb 1M: 120 Collfflon: 400 Phi, 40 A' 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 Pt.zometric Line. t 160 _...,---,--.---..----,----.----,.----.--.---..----,------,.----,-~-160 0 50 DISTAl'-.CE (FEE1) CROSS SECTIO\l A-A' 100 ~ UJ UJ !:S. z 0 f'.= <( > UJ ---' UJ 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 A A' ~ • ~-----~-~--~------~--~--~----~-~---~-~-240 Description: Oppf Model MohrCoulomb Wt: 120 Cohesion: 200 Phi: 35 Piezometlic Line. 1 Namec Propose .gsz Methdd: Spen~r --+-----l--D~i~re~ct~jo~n~o~f~mo=e~m~e~n~t:~L~ft~T~o~R0i,~h+t -230 Slip S rface Op ion: Ent Exit Horz $eismic L ad: O Vert ~eismic Load: 0 Facto of Safe1Yl_2.2oa 220 200 190 --------------------------·-----------180 0..crip1'on, TH Model, MohrCoulomb 1M. 120 Cohflion.400 Phl:40 Plezomelrfc: Line; 1 170 160 -41-----------------------,--------~-160 0 50 DISTANCE (FEE1) CROSS SEC110\I A-A' 100 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES 1. AU. NECESSARY' EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS SHALL & AVAILABLE ON SITE TO FACILITATE RAPID INSTALL1'TION OF EROS10N AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPs VMEN RAIN IS EMINENT. 2. THE OVttlER/COMTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE All fROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO THE SA'TISfACTION OF THE CITY INSPECTOR AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PROOUONG RAINFALL 3. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTAll ADOITIOlll.l EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE QTY INSPECTOR DUE TO INCOMPLETE CRAOING OPERATIONS m UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES l',HICH t.lAY ARIS!E. 4. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY lltlEN THE Fl',£ (5) DAY RAIN PROBABILITY FORECAST EXCEEDS FORTY PECEN T ( 40ll:). SILT ANO OTHER DEBRIS SHALL BE REIAO'v1: 0 AFTER EACH RAINFALL. 5. ALL GRAVEL BAGS SHALL CONTAIN 3/4 INOi MINMJt.l AGGREGATE. 6. ADEQUATE EROSION ANO S£Dlt.lENT CONffiOL AND PERI/JETER PROTECTION BEST IJANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEi\SURES t.lUST BE INSTAI.LEO ANO MAINTAINED. 7. 11-iE CITY' INSPECTOR SHALL HA YE TiiE AUTHOOITY TO PL TER THIS PLAN DURING OR BEFORE CONSTRUCTION AS MEED(O TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE v.lTH CITY STORM WATER QUALJTY REGULATIONS. OWNER'S CERTIFICATE: I UNDERSTANO ANO ACKN0\111.EOOC THAT I MUST: (1) IW'U.\IENl BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) DURING COHSlRUClON ACTIV,TIES TO TH( IIAXIIUIA EXTENT PRACTICABLE TO AVOO THE MOBIUZAllOH IF POI.LUTANTS SUCH AS SEDIMENT AMl TO A'IOIO THE EXPOSUllE Of SlORl.t WATER TO CONSlRUCTlOO RELAltO PCU.UTANIS; AND (2) ADHERE TO, 4110 AT .ILL 111.C[S, COI.IPLY 'MTH THIS CITY APPROVED TIER 1 COWSlRUCTIOI SWPPP TliROUGliOUT lHE WRATlON OF THE COIISTRIJCTION ACIJ\AllES UHTil ltiE COHSlR\ICTION WORK IS COMPL£1E ANO APPRC'.{0 STORM WATER COMPLIANCE FORM TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP E-29 CB ___ _ SW _ BEST w.NAGENENT PRACTICES (BMP) SELECTION TABLE Best Managemenl Practice' (BMP) Oesaiption ➔ CASOAOts~ ➔ CDnSlnllilon .,....., Grodin Soil Olslurbanoe Trendling xeovotlon Slockl>IIIM _Qr ii In• /Borino Ccnaele/Al!Jhall Sowcultlna 'Cor,CT11lo F'lolwor1< Pow,o ~o,,~il/Plpe ln1t0Hotion S\ucco/Mortor Wot!( Waste DltPotol S\oQinaA.ov Down ~eo EqulprMnt Molntenonct and Flllllno Hot.ordaua Swstonce Use/Storooe De•olering Sile Accns Acron Dirt Oth4r (11st}: !) 0 2 ,II ll !!! j .... I f.l E,oaion Comtol SMPs C7> ~ 11 C 01' j ti :3~ 3 ~~ 2 ... i! 8-l tll "' "' ' I I f.l /;l cl Stdimen!Conl'OIBMPs 81 !I Ii Ii Ii Ii O "' ~ i ¥ lJ :,; JI ti f 1 -E o-6 ~ J ·t "E -" 01 t O ~ ·! ~ J.~ ~ c5:§ "i ]~ cg E~ J ~~ s ~£ ~1il~l~I~ .... I"" I S? lll ~ l1l TE !C.. if ~ 7 V ...)£_ ✓ IY I✓ t;;7 v' Traddng Qinlrd lll,IPt ! ] ~ ~ li ! ... ~ .., > i e ~ ~ ~i,.:!!g V) .E V1 er: ~ N I ~ Non-SloimlVller 111.._.1tet.1Pa l'i 1 ~~ bB -... in: J. z C r~1 l "' <;;_ 8-<3 ' I.J a" 0 ',:I S.§ 3 6., a,D .!!. CIJii -31;:!!'li 0 0, -£ 4). Q.. a. >0 ,..., I .... I"' I ~ I V, .,, z z WIIC4 M0111gonwC ar<!Mliorlah PolubCO"IIOI BJ/Pt ... !i -i . 0 :! .,, .. 'II 'ii"' 'i -!s -"-0 2 V> :a Ii.., : : ~ ~~ : :.. -j_ !l- :::i E ~i ~n =-=~ .:l it'll Ii H ·H ;-o o'aoGo -J ili :;. !i a 6 li 6 en VJO 11>2 :z::t O =a: ~ I "'l"'I .... I 1 I I i J I f "' I i i "' I ~ ,,,, r7lv' Iv" vTv' v' v lnstnicll°"" 1, Q\eck the box to th• left or oU oppUcobJe c011structron ocU,ily (flNt column) upected lo occur during constr,c\ion. 2. located along the tq, of lh• BIP Tobie 11 o list of 81,!P's with it's con-aporefong Colifcmio Slcrmwot« Quo!ily Assoclo lion (CASOA) dtsi<Jnolion numbor. Choen ant or more Bl.IP• ycu inland lo ust Ming construction hm the list. 0,eck the box 'Ohara the chos.n actMty row liters-,cts •ilh the EMP column. 3. Rifer to the .CASQA construdlcn handbook fer information ond dttob of the choten 81.lf's end how to opply thtm lo lht project. SHOW THE LOCATIONS OF ALL CHOSEN BMPsABOVE ON THE PROJECTS SITE PLAN/EROSION CONTROL PLAN. SEE THE Rel/ERSE SIDE OF THIS SHEET FOR A SAMPLE EROSION CONTROL PLAN. I PROJ ECTfNFORMATION ,,,,y utth'And~ ~- Sitt A.dcl-m· 1r,1e. (A,Ll.-.1t:,l 11kt 11::~, AS1esso1's Por(OI Number. Z IS -"t<X>-23•q0 Em,r9ency Conlacl: N0111e: ~ \M1.'<..N-.hl,?i. <-C, 2~ Hour Phoe.-9 c.fq•~'Z'f ·fl<\s:'T 9J~~~i~"Ntol I Ov.NER(S)/OW1€R"S AGENT NAt.lE (Pflf{-= OYttlER(s~·-··-c--···-· ) ~~ -BMP's are subject to field Inspection- Con,truction Tllrta\ lo Stam Wot•r ~cllty (Chock Box) 0 MEDIUM ~ LOW E-29 Poge 1 of 1 REV D2/16