Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTRACT_16422_PRECISE GRADING PLAN11111111 lill Ill. 111111111111111111111111111111 lill *NEW FILE* TRACT_16422_PRECISE_ O%Nd Dept,/ •cQD County of Orange Main Office 30D N. Flower Street Inspection Office 22921 Triton Way 4 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Third Floor Santa Ana, CA Laguna Hills, CA 92653 PCOD c 92702 r sv For Inspections* Call: (949)472-7922 or (714) 796-0407 or Visit us on the web at: httD•//odsd oc.ca.gj)v PRECISE GRADING PERMIT Grading Permit Number: GB030176 Issue Date:12124/03 Description of Work/Dse:precise for production single family detached __ product _ _ Issued By: Ramon Kimpo Job Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff, Newport Coast Owner: Taylor Woodrow Homes ~ Additional Address:Tract 16422; Lots 1 through Address: 15 Cushing ,2g„oniy. Assessor Parcel No: 477-031-27 Irvine,CA 92618 Legal Description: 1642221 TR Phone: 949-341-1200 Related Permits: Waste Discharge ID No. (WDID): 830S319587 Approval Info: Grading Plan Check Approved By: Ramon Kimpo Date:12/24/03 Civil_ Engineer: Freidoun Gr Company: St. Paul Fire and Amount: $57,000.00 iunsa_ker & Associate_ s)3 Hughes Irvine, CA Insurance Company Type of Bond: S Bond#: T z Am"- By signing below, I certify that I have read this application and state that the above Information is correct. I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and stale laws relating to 'ding construction, and hereby authorize representatives of this county to enter upon the above -mentioned property for Inspection purposes. claraticnu I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that: ,i icenned Contractor Declaration Ell am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license Is In full force and effect ,License Class: No.: Contractor. 'Owner- Builder Declaration I am exempt from the Contractors' State license Law for the following reason !(Sep. 7031.5), Business and Professions Code: Any city or county that requires ,a permit to construct alter, jmprove, demolish, or repair any structure, prior Lo Its Issuance, also requires the applicant for the permit to file a signed statement that he or she Is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractors' JSM License Law (Chapter 9 commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he or she Is exempt there from and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500). ❑ 1, 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 Contractors' State License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or Improves thereon, and who does the work himself or herself or through his or her own employees, provided that the 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 or she did not build or Improve for the purpose of sale.). It1, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors , construct the project (Sec.7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractors' State License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or Improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractors' State License Law). ❑ 1 am exempt under Sec _, B & P.C. for this reason Congtructlon Lending Aaencv I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that there is a construction -lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit Is Issued (Sec. 3097, Civ. C.) Lender's Name. None Lender's Address: None ' Workers Compensation Declaration ❑ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self -insure for workers' - compensation, as provided for by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for -which this permit Is Issued. ,❑ I have and will maintain worker's compensation Insurance, as required by Secton 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit Is Issued. My workers' compensation Insurance carder and policy number are: Carrier: Policy Number: 'It 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 become subject to the workers' compensation laws of California, and agree that, if I should become subject to the workers' compensation provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code. I shall forthwith comply with those provisions. Warning: failure to secure workers' compensation coverage Is unlawful, and shall subject employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (SI00,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in section 3706 of the labor code, Interest, and attorney's fees. work shall result In revocation of this permit. Inspector may be contacted at (949) 472-7979. •Paflure to grade within 180 days will automatically expire the permit Bulidlna permit may be Issued after rough grading has been approved. 09:14AM PST tong NOV 13 2003 G1=(.'-AC DOG (CHECK APPLICABLE BOXES) I. SITE IDENTIFICATION COUNTY OF ORANGE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY REGULATION GRADING PRE -INSPECTION REPORT b3 m M-s SITE ADDRESS (1 P. W ti�I` - \31C� tFt' C GRADING PLAN CHECK NO. C00" 7 Cp OWNERul Ui 0�_ BUILDING PLAN CHECK NO. TRACT NO `Co 2_ _ LOT140. 2 PARCEL MAP NO. ( )� SINGLE FAMILY ( ✓)_ TRACT ( ) COMMERCIAL ( ) INDUSTRIAL ( ) STOCKPILE EXISTING PERMIT: TYPE & NO. ��6U3O------ II. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS (INSPECTOR, PLOT MISSING FEATURES ON GRADING PLAN) ( ) STRUCTURES; TYPE ( ) VEGETATION; TYPE _ - _______•____ ( ) DRAINAGE DEVICES; TYPE (.,.�EROSION CONTROL DEVICES; TYPE ( ) WATER WELL ( ) IRRIGATION LINE ( ) SEPTIC TANK ( ) OTHER ---------------------- III. DRAINAGE CONDITIONS ( ) OFF -SITE FLOW CROSSES SITE: (4 -.ON-SITE DRAINAGE BY: ( ) SHEET (, () SHEET FLOW ( ) CONCENTRATED OTHER _ _ __ ( ) PROJECT GRADING WILL DIVERT OR CONCENTRATE FLOW TO ADJACENT PROPERTY - ( ) CONVERT CONCENTRATED DRAINAGE TO SHEET FLOW ( ) ALL ROOF DRAINAGE MUST BE TAKEN TO THE STREET VIA ROOF GUTTERS IV. SOIL & GEOLOGY CONDITIONS ( ✓) GRADED PREVIOUSLY, DESCRIPTION ( ) HILLSIDE AREA ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDE AREA ( )Pn.c rBmE JiCD^TIFI FILL, ESTIYAATED DEPTH -----------'------------------------ _ (—%_-SOIL EXPANSIVENESS: ( ) UNDETERMINED EXPANSIVE ( ) NON -EXPANSIVE V. REPORTS & LETTERS Irr-IUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK ( ) HYDROLOGY REPORT (IF SIGNIFICANT OFF -SITE FLOW CROSSES PROPERTY ( ) PRELIMINARY SOIL REPORT (REASON: ( ) CUT OR FILL SLOPES ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDE OR SITE STAB_ILITY HA7ARD EXISTS ( ) SUBDIVISION, COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL OR MULTI- RES_DENTIAL PROJECT) ( ) PRELIMINARY GEOLOGY REPORT (REASON: ( ) CUT SLOPES ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDES EXIST ( ZGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS MAY AFFECT SITE STABILITY) GPADING PLAN REVIEW LETTER FROM SOIL ENGINEER ( ) SITE P^VISA LETTER FROM SOIL ENGINEER (IF SITE CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED SINCE DATC OF LAST REPORT) (See Other Side) . :R; c0250.77.VR1184) VI. SITE IRHMENTB FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE ( ) VIOLATION: DOUBLE PERMIT FEE REQUIRED ( ) PRE -INSPECTION FEE REQUIRED; ( 7Y"NOT REQUIRED ( ) ROUGH GRADE RELEASE WAIVED AFTER PRECISE GRADING PIWIT 15SUED (+C1" GRADING PERMIT RZQqIRW, BECAUSE OF: ,(ARDAGE ( IMPROVEMENTS }n SITE DRAINAGE CQNDITIONS ( ✓) C TO PRECISE PRELIMINARY PERMIT NO.���jQQ _l-p„ $ ------- REQUIRED, BzcAW OF: ( ) COMMERCIAL (XL) TRACT ( ) HILLSIDE AREA ( ) POSSISLE HAZARD A-.BAW AN ON CONTROL PLUS ( ) HYDROLOGY STUDY (�)ITEMPORARY (OCT. 15 TRRU APR. 15) ( 1 PERMANENT ( ) OSHA INDUSTRIAL SAFETY PERMIT (IF TRENCH CONDITIONS FT. DEEP) ( ) FISH AND GAME AGREEMENT (IF ADJACENT TO CONTROLLED WATSWOURBE) ( ) ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY PERMIT SECTION (IF WORE IN PUBLIC RM) ( ) LETTER OF CONSENT FROM ADJACENT OM ORS ACCEPTING RUMOFF AND/OR OFF-8ITL GRADING ( ) BRUSH LAND AREA; REQUIRE FIRE MARSHALOS APPROVAL VS'r'RETAINING WALL PERMIT REQUIRED CONCURRENTLY WITH GRADING PERMIT ( ) SILMOO CRITERIA VARIANCE REQUIRED SECAUSE: ( ) GRADED SLOPES > 454 ( ) GRADED SLOPES > 10 FT. VERTICAL HEIGHT ( ) VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC ROAD AND REQUIRES APPROVED LANDBCAPE PLAN . ( ) REMOVAL OF TREES > 5 IN. DIA. ( ) COASTAL ZONE AREA (**)PREECISE GRADING PERMIT MAY BE ISSUED jooryis ( ) MO : SEE COIRIEMTS. VI1. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ( ) EXISTING EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR PRELIMINARY PERMIT IS VALID FOR THIS PERMIT ( ) SEE NOTATIONS MADE ON COPY OF PLANS INSPECTOR DINE rr-. Jkv;-.--.-..r-w-.�..�a JM:jnRD12-27 1/20/94 1. COUNTY OF ORAKN .. r Leighton and Associates, Inc. PLANNING &DVIEON&GRPDPdGvr t11GE:5 A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY SUBDGRADING SEMION November 7 2003 Grading Permit Number � A P P R® V lEio t No. 830019-041 ecise Grading Permit No. GBO20318 To: Taylor Woodrow Homes tlneondionally ris Cushing � Conditionally Irvine, California 92660 ' Attention: Mr. Andrew J. Jarvis r Date 12-Z3-o3 Subject: Geotechnical Review of Precise Gra ing Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 ; (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Te ),Crysw-c, ce,.Nswport.-...., ' Coast, County of Orange, California E3-E"nginee4ng Geoiogist [Q Civil Engineer ' INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has prepared this review of the precise grading plan for Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 at Crystal Cove at the Newport Coast in the County of Orange, California (Figure 1, Site Location Map). Lots 1 through 24 were previously designated as Lots 204 through 227 of parent Tentative Tract 15586. Cross-reference of the lot numbers of the two tracts is presented in Table 1. This r report presents the results of our geotechnical review of the plans and includes our conclusions and recommendations for site construction and development. The subject of our review is the 10-scale Production Precise Grading Plan, Tract No. 16422, Lots 1 - 24, Crystal Cove, prepared by Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine, Inc., dated October 29, 2003. rSUMMARY OF SITE GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS rThe subject site was rough graded by Sukut Construction in June 2001 through October 2002 under the observation and testing of Leighton (2003a). Grading included removal of vegetation, I remedial removals of unsuitable soils, earthwork cuts, buttress key excavation, subdrain construction, overexcavation of transition lots exposing bedrock, and fill placement to r r 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com 1 830019-041 design grades. Earthwork cuts varied from a few feet to a maximum of approximately 40 feet in Lot 24. Removal areas, keys and excavation bottoms were observed/tested prior to the placement of compacted fill. After removals and key construction, compacted fill was placed to design ' grades. The subject lots are underlain by compacted fill varying in thickness from approximately 5 to 110 feet, with the thickest fill below Lot 17. The fill generally consists of silt and clayey, sandy silt. The fill is underlain by bedrock belonging to the Miocene -age Monterey Formation. The lots are supported by fill slopes, which are up to approximately 45 feet in height. Areas of cut exposing the Monterey Formation are present in the street. The results of laboratory testing of the near -surface soils taken at the completion of rough grading indicate the soils have a medium to high expansion potential (EI of 7-1 to 110) and soluble sulfate content ranging from 0.05 to 0.60 percent (negligible to severe categories per the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table 19-A-4). A total of 12 samples were obtained from parent Tentative Tract 15586 and tested for sieve and hydrometer. The percent clay of the tested samples, as defined by Section 1817 of the 1997 UBC, ranges from approximately 30 to 55 percent. A summary of the laboratory test data is presented in Table 2. PRECISE PLAN REVIEW The plan includes the building footprints, driveway, entry walkways and retaining wall locations, surface drainage and area drains. The pads have been rough graded to the precise grades. Between -lot retaining walls are planned on Lots 16 through 22. Surface drainage is directed either to the street or to area drains which also drain to the street. CONCLUSIONS The subject precise grading plan is acceptable from a geotechnical viewpoint provided the recommendations of this report and our referenced reports are implemented during site design and construction. n- 2 Leighton 830019-041 ' RECOMMENDATIONS Our recommendations should be considered minimum and may be exceeded by more restrictive ' requirements of the architect, structural engineer, building codes, governing agencies, or the developer. ' Earthwork Exposed subgrade soil surfaces, including subgrade surfaces below proposed pavements, should be observed by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of any fill or placement of ' pavements. Vegetation or debris should be removed. If soft, yielding, or unsuitable soils are exposed at the structural subgrade surface, then the unsuitable soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill soils. ISubgrade surfaces suitable for structural fill placement should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture -conditioned between optimum -moisture content and a few percentage points above optimum, and then compacted. The subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the ASTM Test Method DI557 laboratory maximum density. ' Structural fill soil should be placed in loose lifts of no more than 8 inches thick, moisture - conditioned to be at a uniform moisture content between optimum and a few percent above toptimum -moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Settlement ' Fill depths at the site range from 5 to approximately 110 feet. A settlement monitoring program was performed for the deeper fills (i.e., more than 85 feet in depth). Based on the nature of the site fill material and the results of settlement monitoring (Leighton 2003a, 2003b and 2003c), it is our opinion that the majority of the primary settlement occurred during construction and the post -construction settlement will be relatively small. A total and differential settlement for both the fill itself and applied foundation loads is estimated to be on the order of 1 inch and %2 inch over a horizontal distance of 20 feet, respectively. ' 3 Leighton J 830019-041 I Slab Foundations We recommend that the structural engineer design the post -tensioned foundation system using Ithe geotechnical parameters provided in the attached Tables 3 and 4 (rear of text) for high and medium expansion potential, respectively. Table 3 is applicable for Lots 11 through 22 and Table 4 is applicable for Lots 1 through 10 and 23 through 24. If grade elevations are changed due to any additional fine grading, additional laboratory testing must be performed to confirm that the above recommendations remain valid. ' Please note that UBC Chapter 18 is based on certain climatological assumptions with regard to soil -moisture conditions around and beneath the post -tensioned slabs. Soil -moisture change below slabs is the major factor in expansive soil problems. The UBC design method does not contain specific provisions to account for the effects of irrigation, pre-soaking, or other non - climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade soils. We, therefore, recommend that slab subgrades be pre-soaked as recommended in the attached Tables 3 and 4. Soil moisture around the immediate perimeter of the slab should be maintained at optimum -moisture content (or above) during construction and up to occupancy of the homes. ' Homeowners should be made aware of the potential negative consequences of both excessive watering, as well as allowing expansive soils to become too dry (i.e., the soil' will undergo ' shrinkage as it dries, followed by swelling during the rainy season, or when irrigation is resumed, resulting in distress to improvements and structures). Homeowners should be made aware of the possible problems associated with planters adjacent to foundations and trees near foundations. ' Studies have shown that trees planted within 20 feet of foundations have caused differential foundation movements. Planting shade trees closer to the structure than a distance equal to half ' the mature height could allow the root system to penetrate beneath the foundation. Homeowners and landscape architects should be made aware of impacts of trees, planters, and vegetation adjacent to foundations. Our recommendations assume a degree of homeowner responsibility, if the homeowners do not adequately maintain appropriate irrigation and drainage, or landscape inappropriately, some degree of foundation movement should be expected. Future homeowners and homeowners' associations should be informed and educated regarding the importance of maintaining a constant level of soil moisture. 4 Leighton I 1 Seismic Design Parameters The following seismic design parameters are based on the 1997 UBC: Seismic Zone: 4 Causative Fault: Newport -Inglewood Fault (offshore segment) Seismic Source Type: B Distance to Site: Approximately 2 km Maximum Credible Earthquake: 6.9 UBC Site Soil Profile: SD Near Source Factors: Na: 1.3 Nv: 1.6 1 Soil Bearing 830019-041 An allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum embedment of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface, This value may be increased by 500 psf for each additional foot of embedment or additional foot of foundation width to a maximum value of 4,000 psf. These allowable bearing pressures are applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 5H:1 V) conditions only. Resistance to lateral loads can be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.40 may be assumed with dead -load forces. Passive pressure is used to compute lateral soil resistance developed against lateral structural ' movement. Passive lateral earth pressure of 300 psf per foot of depth up to a maximum of 3,000 psf may be used for sides of footings poured against properly compacted fill. This passive pressure is applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 511:1 V) conditions only. In combining the total lateral resistance, either the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should be reduced by 50 percent. In addition, the lateral passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded structures will remain intact with time. Bearing values indicated above are for total dead -load and frequently applied live -loads. The above vertical bearing may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading, which will include the effect of wind or seismic forces. The passive pressure may also be increased by 33 percent of lateral loading due to wind or seismic forces. s Leighton I I 830019-041 Conventional Retaining Wall Design Lateral earth pressures for retaining wall design are provided below. These values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the civil and/or structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. A soil unit weight of 120 pcf may be assumed for calculating the actual weight of the soil over the wall footing. Due to the medium expansive potential of onsite soils, native soils are not recommended for use as backfill material. The recommended lateral earth pressures for clean sand (sand equivalent of 30 or greater) backfill material with drainage conditions as shown on Figure 2, Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail, are as follows: Condition for Select Backfill (SE>30) Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (psf/ft) Level Backfill 2:1 Slope Active 30 45 At -Rest 50 75 Passive 300 120 (sloping down) ' In addition to the above -lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharge due to improvements, such as an adjacent structure, should be considered in the design of retaining walls. Loads applied within a 1H:1 V projection behind the heel (or back) of the wall footing should be considered as lateral surcharge. ' A maximum probable horizontal ground acceleration, 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, of 0.42g has been estimated for the site. Calculation of the seismic lateral earth pressure was performed using 85 percent of this value as required by the County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department. For seismic conditions and the above -recommended sand backfill, an additional pressure of 30 pcf should be added to the static earth pressures. The seismic pressure distribution should be taken as an inverted triangle. To design an unrestrained retaining wall, such as a cantilever wall, which is free to move, the active earth pressure may be used. For a restrained retaining wall, such as a basement wall or restrained wall corners, the at -rest pressure should be used. Restrained wall conditions may be ' applicable for retaining walls that are at or near right angles as shown in plan view. If tilting of wall segments is acceptable and construction joints are provided at all angle points, at 20 to 30 feet spacing along straight wall sections, and more frequently along curved wall segments, the ' active earth pressure may be used. 410, ' 6 Leighton F1 830019-041 '.J Backfills for retaining walls should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557) or densified by jetting of clean sand (sand ' equivalent of 30 or greater). During construction of retaining walls, the backcut should be made in accordance with the requirements of Cal/OSHA Construction Safety Orders. Relatively light construction equipment should be used to achieve compaction requirement behind retaining walls. ' Retaining wall designs and plans should be reviewed by the project geotechnical consultant to confirm that the appropriate soil parameters are used. Footing Setbacks For footings located above a slope having a total slope height of 10 feet or less, a setback of 5 feet minimum measured from the outside edge of the footing bottom along a horizontal line to ' the face of the slope should be maintained. For footings above slopes greater than 10 feet in height, the setback should be equal to half of the total height of the slope but need not exceed 20 feet. Depth of embedment for footings adjacent to swales should be measured from bottom of the swale if those footings are located less than 5 feet (horizontally) from the flow line of the swale. These setback requirements may be accomplished by deepened footings or drilled piers. It is not possible to precisely predict the depth and distance behind the top -of -slope where slope creep may occur. Therefore, the suggested minimum setbacks may not be sufficient to minimize the effects of slope creep. ' Lot Stretching The magnitude of lateral lot extension near the top -of -slope due to slope creep is a function of a number of factors including slope height, slope angle, irrigation regime, and composition of the slope soils. As with all fill slopes some degree of slope creep/lot stretching should be expected for this site. Slope creep and lot stretching are expected to be particularly prevalent within approximately 5 to 15 feet of the crest of descending slopes. Top -of -slope improvements, such as decorative ' walkways, patios, and other landscaping features should be constructed with flexibility to accommodate the effects of creep/lot stretching. Ei 'J 7 Leighton 830019-041 Freestanding Walls Freestanding wall footings should be founded a minimum of 24 inches below the lowest adjacent ' grade. To reduce the potential for unsightly cracks, we recommend inclusion of construction joints at 10- to 20-foot intervals. ' Where freestanding walls are constructed close to the top of a slope, rotation and movement of the wall can be expected. To reduce the potential for such movement, drilled cast -in -place concrete pier foundations, connected together by a grade beam located on or above the ground surface, can be used. Geotechnical parameters for designed pier foundations are presented on ' Figure 3, Geotechnical Parameters for Top -of -Slope Walls. Swimming Pool/Spas Pools should be set back per Section 1806.5.4 of the 1997 UBC and in accordance with the Swimming Pool and Spa Design Criteria Detail, Figure 4. In addition, the portion of the pool wall within a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet from the top of the slope shall be capable of supporting the water in the pool without soil support. Soil expansion forces must be taken into account for the design and construction of a swimming pool and/or spa. For soils having a moderate to high expansion potential or where expansion potential at depth is unknown, an ' equivalent lateral fluid pressure of 125 pef can be used for design of the pool and/or spa shell. Consideration should be given to performing additional subsurface testing to verify expansion potential of soils in contact with a proposed pool and/or spa shell. Additional recommendations for pool/spa construction are provided on Figure 4. It is recommended that the geotechnical consultant evaluate pool designs on an individual basis for setback and appropriate lateral earth pressures. Concrete Due to the anticipated variation in sulfate content of the onsite soils, Type V cement or equivalent should be used for concrete in contact with the near -surface onsite soils. The concrete should be designed in accordance with the severe category of Table 19-A-4 of the UBC, 1997. 1 Concrete is subject to hazards such as excessive cracking, excessive water -vapor transmission, sulfate attack, efflorescence, and other modes of decay. Adherence to the following guidelines will help reduce the susceptibility of completed work to the above hazards. 8 Leighton 830019-041 ' • Exposure to sulfate containing solutions: Comply with 1997 UBC; and ' - Maintain concrete slump below 5 inches. • Drying shrinkage cracking: - Follow recommendations of ACI 302.1F for industrial/commercial structures, or follow recommendations of ACI 332.R for residential construction, as appropriate; Maintain concrete slump below 5 inches; Use minimum cement required to achieve desired strength; - Provide effective concrete curing; Design control joints into slab; and - Do not place concrete on hot, windy, low -humidity days. Reduction of vapor transmission: ' - Maintain concrete slump below 5 inches; Avoid construction punctures of vapor barriers; ' - Seal vapor -barrier joints; Extend vapor barrier into grade -beam concrete; ' - Prevent overirrigation of landscaping; and Use floor -covering adhesives that are not water-soluble. ' Soil Corrosivity ' A corrosion suite was performed on a sample obtained from Lots 23 and 24 of Tract 16422 (previously Lots 226 and 227 of Tentative Tract 15586). Results indicated a minimum resistivity ' of 310 ohm -centimeters, chloride content of 774 parts per million (ppm), soluble sulfate content of 1,896 ppm (0.19 percent), and a pH of 7.7 (Leighton, 2003a). Based on the test results, the soil is considered severely corrosive to ferrous metal. Special measures for corrosion control of steel or other metallic elements embedded in soils, such as cathodic protection, corrosion allowance or use of protective coatings or sleeves will be required. The corrosion information presented in this report should be provided to your underground subcontractors. 9 Leighton 830019-041 E Concrete Flatwork and Paving Cracking of concrete is often not due to settlement/heave of soils, but often due to other factors such as the use of too high a water/cement ratio, and/or inadequate steps being taken to prevent moisture loss during curing. Appropriate steps, such as recommended in this report, should be taken to reduce cracking of the concrete due to these factors. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking due to expansive soil forces, concrete walkways ' should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals (e.g., every 6 feet or less). A layer of crushed rock, gravel, or clean sand and ' presoaking of the slab subgrade should be considered for concrete flatwork, especially near the top -of -slope. LI Presoaking of the subgrade, such as with a sprinkler system is recommended. Reinforcement should also be considered to further reduce unsightly cracking. Expansion Index Presoaking Criteria Medium (51-90) 1.3 x optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches High and Very High (>91) 1.4 x optimum moisture to a depth of 24 inches Concrete pavement subject to vehicle traffic should be a minimum of 6 inches thick and provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals (e.g., every 6 feet or less). It should be reinforced with No. 3 bars at a minimum of 18 inches on -center each way. A ' minimum of 4 inches of aggregate base should be placed on the subgrade. Subgrade and aggregate base should be compacted in accordance with the Earthwork section of this report. Surface Drainage I 1 Adequate surface drainage is a very important factor in reducing the likelihood of adverse behavior of foundations, hardscape, and slopes. Surface drainage should be sufficient to prevent ponding of water anywhere on the site and especially near structures and top -of -slopes. Surface water should not be allowed to flow over the top -of -slopes. Care should be taken so that future landscaping or construction does not hamper drainage. Therefore, surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during fine grading, landscaping, and construction. Positive surface drainage should be provided and maintained to direct surface water away from structures and slopes and towards suitable drainage collection facilities. EJ I 10 Leighton i 830019-041 ' Inadequate control of runoff water or heavy irrigation within the site or surrounding development area may result in groundwater conditions such as shallow, perched groundwater and seepage. Maintaining adequate surface drainage, proper disposal of runoff water, and control of irrigation ' within the development will reduce the potential for future moisture problems. ' Slope Maintenance To reduce the potential for erosion and slumping of graded slopes, all slopes should be planted ' with ground cover and deep-rooted vegetation as soon as practical upon completion of grading. Surface water runoff and standing water at the top -of -slopes should be avoided. Oversteepening ' of slopes should be avoided during construction activities and landscaping. Maintenance of site drainage systems, undertaking of property improvements in accordance with sound engineering practice, and proper maintenance of vegetation, including regular slope irrigation, should be ' performed. Slopes should not be overwatered. Trenches excavated on a slope face for utility of irrigation lines and/or for any purpose should be properly backfilled and compacted by a vibratory plate, or equivalent, in order to obtain a minimum 90 percent relative compaction, in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557, to the slope face. Observation/testing and acceptance by the geotechnical consultant during trench backfill is recommended. A rodent ' control program should be established and maintained. ' Geotechnical Observation/Testing Durina Construction Observation and/or testing should be performed by the geotechnical consultant at the following ' stages: ' During any grading; After footing excavation and prior to pouring concrete; During construction for area drain and utility trenches; ' During construction and backfilling of retaining walls; After presoaking pad subgrade and prior to pouring concrete; and ' When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during any construction operation subsequent to issuance of this report. 11 Leighton 830019-041 I u 1 i If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 140.2378 —^ Exp. 8.34�5 ' v Djan handra, PE, GE 2376 �pCSenior Associate Engineer / ff4Y, Robert Lemmer, CEG 2265 Project Geologist SFE/DJC/REL/Ir 0 Attachments: Table I — Cross -Reference of Lot Numbers, Tract 16422 and Tentative Tract 15586 Table 2 — Expansion Index and Soluble Sulfate Test Results Table 3 — Preliminary Parameters for Post -Tensioned Slab Design for High Expansion Potential (Lots 11 through 22) Table 4 — Preliminary Parameters for Post -Tensioned Slab Design for Medium Expansion Potential (Lots 1 through 10 and 23 through 24) Figure 1 — Site Location Map Figure 2 — Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Figure 3 — Geotechnical Parameters for Top -of -Slope Walls Figure 4 — Swimming Pool and Spa Design Criteria Detail Appendix A — References Distribution: (2) Addressee (3) Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine, Inc. Attention: Mr. Kory Lynch Eli 1 12 Leighton 830019-041 ' Table 1 - Cross -Reference of Lot Numbers between Tract 16422 and Tentative Tract 15586 n u I 1 F II LJ Tract 16422 Lot No. Tentative Tract 15586 Lot No. 1 204 2 205 3 206 4 207 5 208 6 209 7 210 8 211 9 212 10 213 11 214 12 215 13 216 14 217 15 218 16 219 17 220 18 221 19 222 20 223 21 224 22 225 23 226 24 227 830019-041 ' Table 2 - Expansion Index and Soluble Sulfate Test Results 1 1 t 1 Sample Location Expansion Expansion Soluble Sulfate Index Potentiaf Content (%) Lots 1 - 4 of Tract 16422 85 Medium 0.20 Moderate (Lots 204 - 207 of TT 15586) Lots 5 — 7 of Tract 16422 81 Medium 0.14 Moderate (Lots 208 — 210 of TT 15586) Lots 8 - 10 of Tract 16422 71 Medium 0.30 Severe (Lots 211 - 213 of TT 15586) Lots 11 -13 of Tract 16422 110 High 0.38 Severe (Lots 214 - 216 of TT 15586) Lots 14 - 16 of Tract 16422 109 High 0.60 Severe (Lots 217 - 219 of TT 15586) Lots 17 -19 of Tract 16422 100 High 0.10 Negligible (Lots 220 - 222 of TT 15586) Lots 20 - 22 of Tract 16422 98 High 0.05 Negligible (Lots 223- 225 of TT 15586) Lots 23 - 24 of Tract 16422 87 Medium 0.20 Moderate (Lots 226- 227 of TT 15586) I = UBC Standard 18-2, Expansion Test. 1 2 = UBC Table 18-I-13. I I 1 I I I830019-041 I ITABLE 3 I I I I I I I I I FI L L_J Preliminary Parameters for Post -Tensioned Slab Design for High Expansion Potential (Lots 11 through 22) Geotechnical Engineering Parameters for Post -Tensioned Expansion Index High Slab Design E. Moisture Variation for Edge Lift (feet) 3.5 E. Moisture Variation for Center Lift (feet) 5.5 Y. Edge Lift (inches) 1.5 Y. Center Lift (inches) 4.0 Minimum Perimeter Embedment (inches) 18 Presoak 1.2 times optimum moisture @ 18" Additional Recommendations: 1. Install a 6-mil Visqueen (or equivalent) moisture barrier where moisture migration through slabs is undesirable (carpeted, tiled, and other areas). The Visqueen should be sandwiched within a minimum of 2-inch thick layer of sand. 2. Coefficient of sliding friction = 0.35. 3. Modulus of subgrade reaction, K = 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci), assuming presoaking as indicated above. The above values are in compliance with Chapter 18 of the UBC assuming the clay type to be Montmorillonite, which is prevalent in Southern California. It should be noted, however, that the geotechnical engineering parameters in the UBC are provided for climatic conditions and are not directly related to the expansion potential of the subgrade soils. To mitigate the effects of the nonclimatic conditions such as irrigation, the code value for edge lift differential swell has been modified. It is also imperative that presoaking of slab subgrade and maintenance of a positive drainage away from the footings and slabs be implemented. I ' 830019-041 ' TABLE 4 ' Preliminary Parameters for Post -Tensioned Slab Design for Medium Expansion Potential (Lots 1 through 10 and 23 through 24) I I I I F n I n Geotechnical Engineering Parameters for Post -Tensioned Expansion Index Medium Slab Design E. Moisture Variation for Edge Lift (feet) 2.5 E,,, Moisture Variation for Center Lift (feet) 5.5 Y. Edge Lift (inches) 0.8 Y. Center Lift (inches) 4.0 Minimum Perimeter Embedment (inches) 18 Presoak 1.2 times optimum moisture @ 18" Additional Recommendations: 1. Install a 6-mil Visqueen (or equivalent) moisture barrier where moisture migration through slabs is undesirable (carpeted, tiled, and other areas). The Visqueen should be sandwiched within a minimum of 2-inch thick layer of sand. 2. Coefficient of sliding friction = 0.35. 3. Modulus of subgrade reaction, K = 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci), assuming presoaking as indicated above. The above values are in compliance with Chapter 18 of the UBC assuming the clay type to be Montmorillonite, which is prevalent in Southern California. It should be noted, however, that the geotechnical engineering parameters in the UBC are provided for climatic conditions and are not directly related to the expansion potential of the subgrade soils. To mitigate the effects of the nonclimatic conditions such as irrigation, the code value for edge lift differential swell has been modified. It is also imperative that presoaking of slab subgrade and maintenance of a positive drainage away from the footings and slabs be implemented. 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 JJJ. -i j /74 a 745 f -•,/ , r i � r 9 \Mu�tar d 2 h I )j�q'c i h. 4LC T r PROJECT \ CrystalSITE 10 Reef.Point 91 Morro Ba Nw. TOPO'. N I hl Pmtlw'� ems -Tr lag a Nry.�, (nld � s Minnie Vuxlrmgly �� � }C SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. 830019-041 LOTS 1 THROUGH 24, TRACT 16422 Scale(approx) 1:18,000 vi Engr./Geol. DJUREL CRYSTAL COVE BQ-� Leighton and Associates, Inc. NEWPORT COAST, CALIFORNIA Drafted By xn x..,.nP.xr Date 11/03 Figure No. I SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF >50 WALL HEGIT OR HEEL WIDTH WHICHEVER IS GREATER �` WATERPROOF PER DESIGN 12'/ ENGINEER WEEP HOLE (SEE NOTE 5) •, . 6' FBN GENERAL NOTES: CLEAN SAND BACKFILL WITH S E>30 APPROVED BY SOILS ENGINEER AY BE DENSIFIED BY COMPACTION OR WATER JTT TING) FILTER FABRIC (SEE NOTE 4) 4' PERFORATED PIPE AND GRAVEL (SEE NOTES 2 AND 3) NOTE AS AN AL7ERNATETO CLEAN SAND BACMI1, CLEAN GRAVEL MY BE UTILIZED WITH APPROVED FILTER FABRIC. A SECOND ALTERNATE IS TO UTILIZEANAUGREGATE BASE tMTER1AL COMPACTED TO 70 % RELATIVE COMPACTION. A SOM OFTHE PROPOSED BASE MUST BE APPROVED BYTHEGEOIECHEBCAL CONSULTANT PRIOR TO BACKFILL FOR SUITABILITY. COMPACTION SHOULD BE ACHIEVED WITHOUT DAMAGING THE WALL ' Waterproofing should be provided where moisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirat le. ' Water proofing of the walls is not under purview of the geotechnical engneer * All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum 'Outlet portion of the subdrain should have a 4-inch dameter solid pipe dscharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project engineer. The subdram pipe should be accessitie for maintenance (rocdng) 'Other subdrain backfiil options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters. Notes: 1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and maybe densified by water jetting. 2)1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gavel wrapped In filter fabric 3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 orASfM D1785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 inch in diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-Inch on center (stagger 4) Filter fabric should be Mirafi 14ONC or approved equivalent. 5) Weephole should be 3-Inch minimum diameter and provided at 10-foot maximum intervals. If exposure is permitted, weephces should be located 12 inches above finished grade. If exposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement -type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided. 6) Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. 7) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modficatrons to the above requirements. RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT - *4 WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF >50 Figure 2 r � s� � � s a� � >• � is � i ALLOWABLE VERTICAL LOADS Allowable Bearing Pressures:_ 1,500lbs/sq. ft at a Depth of 12 inches Below Creep Zone. Allowable Increase: 300 Ibs/sq. ft per foot of Increased Depth to a Maximum of 2,000 Ibs/sq. ft (Neglecting the Top 5 Feet) Allowable Skin Friction: 600 Ibs pWfoot of Depth (Neglecting the Top 5 Feet) 2 e 1 Gtee9 n / LATERAL LOADS Fa = (45 x 52 / 2) x L = 625 L, Where L = Caisson Spacing Pp = 120 psf / ft Fp = (600 -I- 120d) / 2 x (d-5) x (3xD) Where D = Caisson Diameter and d = Depth Below Ground 10' to 15' Pier DRILLED PIER Ignore Passive Pressure In Upper 5' ft 0 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS Project No. 830019-041 FOR TOP OF SLOPE WALLS Project Name: Crystal Cove �► Engineer: DJC Date: 11/2003 Figure No. 3 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC Additional loading due to the building structure should be taken into consideration for design of this portion of the pool shell or the pool should be kept beyond the foundation influence zone 14 10±' 10 U, PROPOSED POOL OR SPA FOUNDATION INFLUENCE ZONE Assuming a total 1 of soil support for this portion • Observation/testing should be performed by a geotechnical consultant during pool excavation to verify that exposed sod conditions are consistent with the design assumptions. • Heavy-duty pipes and couplings should be used for the pool plumbing system to minimize leaking which may produce additional local high pressures to the pool shell. • Installation of a pressure release valve system beneath the pool bottom is recommended. • The pool contractor should provide a sufficient level of inspection and control to assure that approved pool plans and specifications are implemented during construction. • Soil expansion forces should be taken into consideration for design of the pool shell. The use of an equivalent lateral fluid pressure of 125 pcf for soils with moderate to very high expansion potentials provides a reasonable level of protection. • For a pool near a descending slope consisting of soils with moderate to very high expansion potentials, the pool shell should be designed assuming a total loss of soil support for the upper portion located within the creep zone or setback beyond the creep zone. • To reduce the potential for excessive cracking due to expansive soil forces, pool deck concrete slabs should be a minimum of 4-inches-thick and provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals (e.g., every 6 feet or less). Slabs should be underlain by a layer of crushed rock, gravel or clean sand having a minimum thickness of 2 inches for low expansion potential areas and 4 inches for medium, high, or very high expansion potential subgrades. This layer is not required for very low expansion potential subgrades. Presoaking the subgrade (with a sprinkler system) to a minimum of 120 percent of optimum moisture content to a minimum depth of 12 inches, 130 percent to 18 inches, or 140 percent to 24 inches for medium, high, or very high expansion potentials, respectively, is also recommended. For very low or low expansion potential subgrade, water spraying the subgrade prior to pouring concrete is considered adequate. Presoaking should be observed, tested and accepted by a geotechnical consultant prior to pouring the concrete. Reinforcement of slabs may also be considered to further reduce unsightly cracking especially for high or very high expansion potential areas. These presoaking recommendations will minimize but not necessarily eliminate differential uplift potential between decking and coping. • For swimming pool decks on subgrades having high or very high expansion potential, a subdrain system consisting of 4-Inch diameter perforated pipes (PVC Schedule 40, SDR 35, Amoco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent), wrapped with filter fabric (Mirall 140N, MONS, Supac 4NP, Amoco 4545, Trevira 1114, or approved equivalent) should be provided within the sand layer. One line of subdrain around the swimming pool area is considered sufficient. The purpose of this subdrain is to drain potential accumulated water within the sand layer and outlet the water Into the area drain system minimizing this accumulation from substantially percolating down into the underlying subgrade soils. • The above criteria are also applicable for spas. • Decking level should be designed and constructed a minimum of 2 inches below the weep screed level, and should be separated from the foundations, a minimum separation of'h inch, (such as with felt or Styrofoam -filled, mastic capped joint) is recommended. SWIMMING POOL AND SPA DESIGN CRITERIA DETAIL I 4/ Figure No. 4 ueociypmgmp aala6VJUuu t 1 830019-041 IAPPENDIX A References ' Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1997, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated February 21, 1997 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading of Wishbone Hill, Tract 14064, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-017, dated April 3, 1997. 1999, Geotechnical Review of Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3A-2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 12, 1999. , 2000, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to Remaining Comments of the County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated May 12, 2000, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 11, 2000. ' 2001a, Response to County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 14, 2000, and Geotechnical Review of Change to Proposed Delta 1 to the ' Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated January 8, 2001. ' , 2001b, Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated November 19, 2001. 2002a, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 3 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to OCPDSD Verbal Comments Regarding Evaluation and Recommendations for the 250-Foot Extension Northerly of the Muddy Canyon Buttress, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated June 10, 2002. ' , 2002b, Geotechnical Review of Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated July 25, 2002. I A-1 830019-041 ' APPENDIX A (Cont'd) ' References ' , 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of ' Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. ' , 2003b, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. ' 2003c, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. Post -Tension Institute, 1996, Design and Construction of Post -Tensioned Slabs -on -Ground, Post - Tensioning Institute, 2"a Edition. Uniform Building Code (UBC), 1997, International Conference of Building Officials. I ' A-2 F APPROVER R®VER �F Leighton and Associates, Inc. cc�Fs � �o GFo A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY f,S August 4+�, 2004 Project No. 830019-041 Precise Grading Permit No. GB030176 Site Address: 8178 Whaler's Bluff To: Taylor Woodrow Homes, Inc. 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. A. J. Jarvis Subject: Geotechnical Observation and Testing during Postgrading Construction Operations for Lots 1, 2, 22, 23 and 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has provided geotechnical services during postgrading construction operations for the Lots 1, 2, 22, 23 and 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast in the County of Orange, California. Our services included periodic observation and testing of building pad subgrade presoaking, building footing excavations, interior plumbing trench backfill, retaining wall footing excavations and retaining wall backfill. This report presents the results of our observation and testing and provides our conclusions. Building Pad Subgrade Presoaking Building pad subgrades of the subject lots were presoaked as recommended. Adequacy of presoaking was confirmed by testing at a depth of 18 niches, where soil -moisture content was approximately 1.3 times the optimum -moisture content of the soils. 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■-www.lelghtongeoxom 830019-041 Building Footing Excavations Our observation and probing indicated that the bottom of excavations made for building footings consisted of firm, competent fill material. The footing and slab excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Interior Plumbing Trench Backfill Depths of the interior plumbing trenches varied from approximately 1 to 3 feet. The trenches were shaded with clean sand having sand equivalent of 30 or greater. The sands were jetted with water to achieve densification. Retaining Wall Backfill The retaining walls at the front of Lot 22 and in between Lots 21 and 22 were backfilled with onsite soils. The backfill material was moisture -conditioned and compacted with a vibratory plate or a hydro -hammer attached to a backhoe. The compacted backfill was observed, probed, and tested. Test results indicate that a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction was achieved at the tested locations. A subdrain system consisting of a four -inch perforated pipe, surrounded with %-inch crushed rock and wrapped in filter fabric, was placed behind the retaining wall at front of Lot 22. Retaining Wall Footing Excavations The footing excavations for the retaining wall at the front of Lot 22 were observed. Our observation and probing indicated that the footings were excavated into firm, competent material. The footing excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density testing was performed in our soil laboratory in general accordance with the ASTM Test Method D1557, to establish the compaction criteria for compacted fill. Laboratory density test results are presented in Table 1. Field density tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). The results of the field density tests are presented in Table 2. Approximate field density test locations are shown on Figure 1, Field Density Test Location Map. - 2 - Leighton 830019-041 Conclusion Based on our observation and testing, it is our opinion that the work covered by this report that was observed and/or tested by Leighton was performed in substantial compliance with our recommendations, job specifications, and the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code. The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility if defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications. 49 - 3 - Leighton 830019-041 If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No. C 63286 �9%)) Exp.06/30/06 \ Y� �- Vikram Kulkarni, RCE 63286 Project Engineer , V< a, Na. «137u Dj Chandra, PE, GE 2376 yFP. , Seni r Associate Engineer 9a�TFruN� VSK/DJC/lr Attachment: References Table 1— Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Table 2 — Summary of Field Density Test Results Figure I — Field Density Test Location Map Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) White Sails Field Office (Via Fax) Attention: Mr. John Rodriguez (2) County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Attention: Mr. Tim Hertel ri -4- Leighton 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Review of Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3A-2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 12, 1999. 2000, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to Remaining Comments of the County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated May 12, 2000, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 11, 2000. 2001a, Response to County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 14, 2000, and Geotechnical Review of Change to Proposed Delta I to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated January 8, 2001. 2001b, Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated November 19, 2001. 2002a, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 3 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to OCPDSD Verbal Comments Regarding Evaluation and Recommendations for the 250-Foot Extension Northerly of the Muddy Canyon Buttress, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated June 10, 2002. 2002b, Geotechnical Review of Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated July 25, 2002. 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. 830019-041 References (Cont'd) , 2003b, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. 2003c, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. , 2004a, Geotechnical Release of Precise Grading/Recertification, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 6, 2004. , 2004b, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 Revision to the Precise Grading Plan, Lots I through 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails II in Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 19, 2004. 830019-041 TABLE 1 Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Soil Type Description Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Content 1 Black to Dark Brown Silty Sand w/Clay 91.5 24 10 Light Brown Clayey Silt 93 24 45 Gray Sandy Clay 94.5 20 TABLE 2 Summary of Field Density Test Results Test No. Test Date Test Location Soil Type Test Elev./ Depth Dry Density 1 Moisture Content % Relative Compaction Field Max Field I Opt. 2004 R10 2/19 Lot 22, Tract 16422 45 TW-2' 85.5 94.5 24.7 20.0 90 Rl1 2/19 Lot 22, Tract 16422 10 TW-l' 84.3 93 29.3 24 91 R19 7/28 Lot 22, Tract 16422 1 TW-l' 84.7 91.5 28.2 24 93 List of Abbreviations: R = Retaining Wall TW = Top of Wall ,M" r n. r_ Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY October 8, 2004 To: Taylor Woodrow Homes, Inc. 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. A. J. Jarvis RECEIVED OCT 12 2004 SCR81GRAD11va OCT 1 Project No. 830019-041 Precise Grading Permit No. GB030176 Site Address: 8178 Whaler's Bluff Subject: Geotechnical Observation and Testing during Postgrading Construction Operations for Lots 3 through 6, 20 and 21 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has provided geotechnical services during postgrading construction operations for Lots 3 through 6 and Lots 20 and 21 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast in the County of Orange, California. Our services included periodic observation and testing of building pad subgrade presaturation, building footing excavations, interior plumbing trench backfill, joint utility trench backfill, retaining wall footing excavations and retaining wall backfill. This report presents the results of our observation and testing and provides our conclusions. Building Pad Subgrade Presaturation Building pad subgrades of the subject lots were presoaked as recommended. Adequacy of presaturation was confirmed by testing at a depth of 18 inches, where soil moisture content was at least 1.2 times the optimum -moisture content of the soils. 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com S. r 830019-041 Building Footing Excavations Our observation and probing indicated that the bottom of excavations made for building footings consisted of firm, competent material. The footing and slab excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Interior Plumbing Trench Backfill Depths of the interior plumbing trenches varied from approximately I to 3 feet. The trenches on Lots 3 and 4 were observed. Select sands having sand equivalent of 30 or greater were used to backfill the trenches. The sands were jetted with water to achieve densification. Joint Utility Trench Backfill Joint utility trenches varied from approximately 1 to 3 feet in depth. The trenches were bedded and shaded with sand and then backfilled with native material, which was moisture conditioned and compacted. A hydro -hammer and hand held wacker were used to compact the backfill. The compacted backfill was observed, probed, and tested. Test results indicate that a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction was achieved at the tested locations. Retaining Wall Footing Excavations The footing excavations for the retaining walls at Lots 20 and 21 were observed. Our observation and probing indicated that the footings were excavated into firm, competent material. The footing excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Retaining Wall Backfill The retaining walls at the front of Lot 20 and in between Lots 20 and 21 and in between Lots 19 and 20 were backfilled with onsite soils. The backfill material was moisture conditioned and compacted with a vibratory plate or a hydro -hammer attached to a backhoe. The compacted backfill was observed, probed, and tested. Test results indicate that a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction was achieved at the tested locations. A subdrain system consisting of a fl- inch perforated pipe, surrounded with 3/4-inch crushed rock and wrapped in filter fabric, was observed behind the retaining walls at Lots 20 and 21. -2- Leighton 830019-041 Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density testing was performed in our soil laboratory in general accordance with the ASTM Test Method D1557, to establish the compaction criteria for compacted fill. Laboratory density test results are presented in Table 1. Field density tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). The results of the field density tests are presented in Table 2. Approximate field density test locations are shown on Figure 1, Field Density Test Location Map. Conclusion Based on our observation and testing, it is our opinion that the work covered by this report that was observed and/or tested by Leighton was performed in substantial compliance with our recommendations, job specifications, and the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code. The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility if defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications. -349 - Leighton x 830019-041 If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. V ' No. C 63286 Z m Exp. 06/30/06 rn * Vikram Kulkarni, RCE 63286 /1rnA J g C/ ����P Project Engineer lC�1� VSK/DJC/lr Attachment: References Table 1 — Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Table 2 — Summary of Field Density Test Results Figure 1 — Field Density Test Location Map Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) White Sails Field Office (Via Fax) Attention: Mr. John Rodriguez (2) County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Attention: Mr. Tim Hertel Ej -4- Leighton a 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Review of Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3A-2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 12, 1999. 2000, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to Remaining Comments of the County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated May 12, 2000, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 11, 2000. 2001a, Response to County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 14, 2000, and Geotechnical Review of Change to Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated January 8, 2001. , 2001b, Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated November 19, 2001. , 2002a, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 3 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to OCPDSD Verbal Comments Regarding Evaluation and Recommendations for the 250-Foot Extension Northerly of the Muddy Canyon Buttress, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated June 10, 2002. , 2002b, Geotechnical Review of Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated July 25, 2002. , 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. 830019-041 References (Cont'd) , 2003b, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. 2003c, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. , 2004a, Geotechnical Release of Precise Grading/Recertification, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 6, 2004. 2004b, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 Revision to the Precise Grading Plan, Lots I through 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails II in Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 19, 2004. 830019-041 TABLE 1 Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Soil Type Description Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Content 1 Black to Dark Brown Silty Sand w/Clay 91.5 24.0 10 Light Brown Clayey Silt 93.0 24.0 TABLE 2 Summary of Field Density Test Results Test No. Test Date Test Location Soil Type Test Elev./ Depth Dry Density Moisture Content % Relative Compaction Field I Max Field I Opt. 2004 R12 2/19 Lot 21, Tract 16422 10 TW-2' 83.7 93.0 30.1 24.0 90 R13 2/23 Lot 21, Tract 16422 10 TW-l' 85 93.0 27.8 24.0 91 R14 2/23 Lot 20, Tract 16422 10 TW-2' 86.1 93.0 26.2 24.0 93 R15 2/23 Lot 20, Tract 16422 1 TW-21 82.0 91.5 29.3 24.0 90 R20 10/6 Lot 20, Tract 16422 1 TW-l' 84.6 91.5 27.1 24.0 92 U26 1 7/22 1 Lot 4, Tract 16422 i 10 1 FG-1' 1 88.0 93.01 28.2 1 24.0 95 List of Abbreviations: FG = Finish Grade R = Retaining Wall Backfill TW = Top of Wall U = Joint Utility Trench Backfill /!l `C �l�� "°".4 j � � P r� / �c,�_'' �� � � fir.. i �`� }�'�1t 19'_3 yih. ♦ram I- T .• r 1� Al .fir j ene,L. J..,- -_ '• i\ �'` eo.J J `.1 1 �. j 1 f l •Z ( S- r /� /yam, / .. ./ .J� � �' U 26 � \ ,�� 1Y' 2y,- rrr� j / ! �J� '/ I .� JCrB � •.>�J�q I I�-+^� � 4 � L�Y� `.�>� ��4{�O. �. s' �\,.. r�` - e o � � to lcl la> •; � �s. e �. J ��yrr � 1 \% ,// , sF-~>q r1 `. xf 2. 1 zs or ass+! ` t f /y }: f FF�4✓�a :ii'°'be �Y�e .r J -� i r 3443 t9 o3Vi1J!rJ (! F. _ 34,. J °7 + �' 1 LOT 4too I 1 1 �I �r,AJ/I 1'S 4;::::-=LIMITS OF REPORT m s 1 P _1e1.5�^f 1�8 FL \6 . SOS = t 5�i sn ' R � R-12 • � _ -- R-20 • — yW Op ' a L 2 / R-140�'- — m �[ Q.20 T w..•",sso' ��`J>SA° 71ay. - s /fy, i N o/ }1�— 0 X t � of � . lr �F�'sH y y r u�P r u 100 a r s k l SCALE FEET FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP LOTS 3 THROUGH 6 AND 20, 21, TRACT 16422 WHITE SAILS II AT CRYSTAL COVE NEWPORT COAST, CALIFORNIA 8 11 LEGEND: APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD DENSITY TEST R-20 • RETAINING WALL BACKFILL U-26 • JOINT UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL Figure 1 • Proj: 830019-041 Scale: 1 "=50' Date: 10/04 7A Eng./Geol. VSK/ELB Drafted By: BQT CP By: BQT - !ClI',tloi,''''Il A's''F,',Iic'. WC P:\DRAFTING\830019\041\OF_10-8-04\FIGUREI.DWG (10-08-0410:16:49AM) Plotted by: btran Leighton and Associates, Inc. RECEIVED A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY NOV 15 2004 P,??' a skovember 11, 2004 SCRB/GRADING 1� To: TayloodrowHomes, Inc. 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. A. J. Jarvis Project No. 830019-041 Precise Grading Permit No. GB030176 Site Address: 8178 Whaler's Bluff Subject: Geotechnical Observation and Testing during Postgrading Construction Operations for Lots 7 through 19 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has provided geotechnical services during postgrading construction operations for Lots 7 through 19 of Tract 16422, White Sails at Crystal Cove, Newport Coast in the County of Orange, California. Our services were provided on a part-time basis based on the request by the superintendent for Taylor Woodrow Homes, and included periodic observation and testing of building pad subgrade presaturation, building footing excavations, joint utility trench backfill, retaining wall footing excavations and retaining wall backfill. This report presents the results of our observation and testing and provides our conclusions. Building Pad Subgrade Presaturation Building pad subgrades of the subject lots were presoaked as recommended. Adequacy of presaturation was confirmed by testing at a depth of 18 inches, where soil moisture content was at least 1.2 times the optimum -moisture content of the soils. 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com 830019-041 Building Footing Excavations Our observation and probing indicated that the bottom of excavations made for building footings consisted of firm, competent material. The footing and slab excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Joint Utility Trench Backfill Joint utility trench backfill for Lots 7 through 10 was observed and tested. The trenches were bedded and shaded with sand and then backfilled with native material, which was moisture conditioned and compacted. A hydro -hammer and hand-held wacker were used to compact the backfill. The compacted backfill was observed, probed, and tested. Test results indicate that a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction was achieved at the tested locations. Retaining Wall Footing Excavations The footing excavations for the retaining walls at Lots 17, 18 and 19 were observed. Our observation and probing indicated that the footings were excavated into fine, competent material. The footing excavations were free of loose soil material at the time of our observation. Retaining Wall Backfill The retaining walls in between Lots 16 and 17, in between lots 17 and 18, and in between Lots 18 and 19 were backfilled with onsite soils. The backfill material was moisture conditioned and compacted with a vibratory plate or a hydro -hammer attached to a backhoe. The compacted backfill was observed, probed, and tested. Test results indicate that a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction was achieved at the tested locations. Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density testing was performed in our soil laboratory in general accordance with the ASTM Test Method D1557, to establish the compaction criteria for compacted fill. Laboratory density test results are presented in Table 1. Field density tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). The results of the field density tests are presented in Table 2. Approximate field density test locations are shown on Figure 1, Field Density Test Location Map. .01 - 2 Leighton ' 830019-041 Conclusion Based on our observation and testing, it is our opinion that the work covered by this report that was observed and/or tested by Leighton was performed in substantial compliance with our recommendations, job specifications, and the County of Orange Grading and Excavation Code. The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility if defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No. C 63286 ? N Exp.06/30/06 �m * Vikram Kulkarni, RCE 63286 C1V�t 0.,01 Project Engineer SFE/VSK/DJC/lr Attachments: References Table 1 — Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Table 2 — Summary of Field Density Test Results Figure 1 — Field Density Test Location Map Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) White Sails Field Office (Via Fax) Attention: Mr. John Rodriguez (2) County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Attention: Mr. Tim Hertel 4 - 3 Leighton 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Review of Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3A-2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 12, 1999. , 2000, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to Remaining Comments of the County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated May 12, 2000, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 11, 2000. 2001a, Response to County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 14, 2000, and Geotechnical Review of Change to Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated January 8, 2001. 2001b, Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated November 19, 2001. , 2002a, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 3 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to OCPDSD Verbal Comments Regarding Evaluation and Recommendations for the 250-Foot Extension Northerly of the Muddy Canyon Buttress, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated June 10, 2002. , 2002b, Geotechnical Review of Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 313-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated July 25, 2002. 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. 830019-041 References (Contd) 2003b, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. , 2003c, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots I through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. 2004a, Geotechnical Release of Precise Grading/Recertification, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 6, 2004. , 2004b, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 Revision to the Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails II in Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated January 19, 2004. 830019-041 TABLE 1 Summary of Maximum Density Test Results Soil Type Description Maximum Dry Density c Optimum Moisture Content 1 Black to Dark Brown Silty Sand w/Clay 91.5 24.0 10 Light Brown Clayey Silt 93.0 24.0 TABLE 2 Summary of Field Density Test Results Test No. Test Date Test Location Soil Type Test Elev./ Depth Dry Density Moisture Content % Relative Compaction Field Max Field 0 t. 2004 R16 2/23 Lot 19, Tract 16422 1 TW-1' 81.9 91.5 28.1 24.0 90 R17 2/23 Lot 18, Tract 16422 1 TW-1' 84.7 91.5 24.1 24.0 93 R18 2/23 Lot 17, Tract 16422 1 TW-I' 84.2 91.5 26.8 24.0 92 U24 7/22 Lot 10, Tract 16422 10 FG-1' 87.6 93.0 26.7 24.0 94 U25 7/22 Lot 7, Tract 16422 10 FG-1' 86.4 93.0 29.4 24.0 93 List of Abbreviations: FG = Finish Grade R = Retaining Wall Backfill TW = Top of Wall U = Joint Utility Trench Backfill fel: r: •ri:::' :r. Leighton and t��A/�'�sttss^ociiat.t�p1(�1s, Inc. A L E I G H Ia tEGQ U•P � 1'JMM41 DEC 18 2003 GRADING 2 COUNTY OF ORANCt? INNING & DEVELOPMEI4T SUBDIVISION & GRADING SEfi'v ICES GRADING SECTION Grading Permit Number eAI�0�0VED jtnCQQndianall Project No..830019 Yrecise &adin g Permit No. GB03f ® Conditioni fte Address: 8178 Whalers I To: Taylor Woodrow Homes 15 Cushing Date _ i Z-?3.0 3 Irvine, California 92660 Attention: Mr. Andrew J. Jarvis Qf-Enginaering Geologist Subject: Response to OCPDSD Geote92LbLL%9Meview Sheet Dat=November25, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has prepared this report to respond to the County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department (OCPDSD) Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 25, 2003 regarding our review of the precise grading plan for Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove at the Newport Coast in the County of Orange, California (Leighton, 2003e). A copy of the review sheet is attached. The comments are repeated herein, followed by our response. Comment No. 1 "Please review the plan to be used (i.e. grading plan). Provide additional recommendations as necessary." Response to Comment No. 1 We have reviewed the 10-scale Production Precise Grading Plan, Tract No. 16422, Lots 1 - 24, Crystal Cove, Sheets 1 through 11 of 11, prepared by Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine, Inc. This plan has the latest revision date of November 25, 2003, and a plot date of December 4, 2003. Based on our review, the recommendations in our referenced report (Leighton, 2003e) remain valid and no additional recommendations are necessary. 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com 830019-041 Comment No. 2 "Please specifically address all building setbacks that require setbacks more than 20 ft. per the UBC. Amend your setback recommendations to be consistent with the UBC for slopes over 60 ft. high." Response to Comment No. 2 Lots 11 through 24 have descending slopes at the rear of the lots. However, the maximum slope height is approximately 50 feet. The building setbacks shown on the precise grading plan meets the requirements of UBC. Comment No. 3 "Note your report dated Aug. 19, 2003 (2003c) has not yet been approved. Please clear -up." Response to Comment No. 3 Response reports to the verbal comments from OCPDSD regarding the report were previously submitted to OCPDSD (Leighton, 2003f and 2003g). Based on the fill thickness, the time that the fill has been in place, and the settlement monitoring data, it is our opinion that the differential settlement due to self weight of the fill and structural load is expected to be on the order of Much over a horizontal distance of 20 feet. We suggest that this information be provided to the structural engineer for their comments from a structural standpoint and incorporated in the structural design of the proposed buildings. 40,1 -2- Leighton 830019-041 If you have any questions regarding this response report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No• 2376 Djan Chandra, PE, GE 2376 Senior Associate Engineer AdwardSteiner, CEG Principal Geologist DJC/EAS/lr Attachments: References OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 25, 2003 Distribution: (4) Addressee (1) Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine, Inc. Attention: Mr. Kory Lynch (2) County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Attention: Mr. Nick Bebek Ej -3- Leighton 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. , 2003b, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated March 21, 2003. , 2003c, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. 2003e, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots I through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. 2003f, Response to Verbal Comments from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 15, 2003. 2003f, Response to Additional Verbal Comment from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 17, 2003. • • r VVYMSJ VL V.VY..... U*C1,01c,11r, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARMWML GRADING SECTION I;ECE�b 300 North Flower St. �3 �L �`1' S P.O. Box 4048 Santa Aaa, DEC -1 2003 CA 92702-4048 Fax Machine Telephone IRVINE 834-4772 (714) B34-$32g 6EOTECffi1ICAL REPORT REVIEW SSEET REVIEW OF GEOTECBNICAL REPORTS INCLUDING REPORT DATE DATE RECEIVED TYPE OF REPORT ❑ Soil Report ❑ preliminary (Initial) ❑ Ingrading or Interim (2 Geologic Report (giTeotechnical No'' yToo3 P-J°"' 101Zoo3 Roughgrade Compacting 0 Supplement or Addendum ❑ Response 2-1r-ading Plan Review ❑ ❑ Paving Design ❑ Final B the Consulting Firm I-- TSSoc. Their Sob # 83 oo \`( -C ( ) 1 2 Tract No. :l9`'lZ'L Lots Cotes Site Address: [j-Grading Plan Check No. G oo 3 O �'l6 piGrad. Permit 0 ❑ Preliminary Grad. Permit # ❑recse Developer/owner: Address: Soil Engineer: Engineering Geologist: ❑ Report -Approved ❑ Report Approved Subject? to Conditions Below: 9-Irrior to approval of report attend to items below: ❑ Prior to County Rough Grade approval and issuance of building permits submit Report Reviewed By: Date: (:LS-03 NICKNJ. BEBEK (PC:32) ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST �X WJ Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY RECEIVED jAN 0 6 2004 SCRBIGRADING January 6, 2004 To: Taylor Woodrow Homes, Inc. 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. Andrew J. Jarvis RECEIVED JAN 0 6 2004 SCRB/GRADIN93 Project No. 830019-041 Precise Grading Permit No. GB030176 Site Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Subject: Geotechnical Release of Precise Grading/Recertificati , Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Or fornia In accordance with your request, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has provided geotechnical services during rough/precise/recertification grading of Lots 1 through 24 in Tract 16422 in Crystal Cove at the Newport Coast, California. The precise grades are essentially the same as the rough grades (Leighton, 2003a and 2003e). The upper foot of the building pads were ripped and processed with additional moisture, and then recompacted to satisfy the minimum project requirements. The building pads were observed and tested and found to be in competent condition. The geotechnical conditions and recommendations provided in our referenced reports are still applicable. 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com 830019-041 � y f If you have any questions regarding this letter -report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No. 2376 �' 0,30.05 Chandra, PE, GE 2376 associate Engij Edward A. Steiner, CE Principal Geologist DJC/EAS/lr Attaclunent: References Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) Hunsaker and Associates Irvine, Inc. Attention: Mr. Kory Lynch (2) County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Attention: Mr. Tim Hertel �n -2- Leighton I 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. , 2003b, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated March 21, 2003. , 2003c, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. 2003e, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. , 2003f, Response to Verbal Comments from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 15, 2003. 2003g, Response to Additional Verbal Comment from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 17, 2003. 2003h, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated November 25, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots I through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 17, 2003 Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY January 19, 2004 To: Taylor Woodrow Homes, Inc. 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Mr. Andrew J. Jarvis o4?2- 2' RECEIVED jAN 2 6 2004 SCRB/GRADING Project No. 830019-041 Precise Plan Check No. GB030176 Site Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Subject: Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 Revision to the Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, White Sails II in Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California In accordance with your request, Leighton and Delta i Revision to the precise grading plan for Cove, Newport Coast, California. The subject of Grading Plan, Tract No. 16422, Lots 1 - 24, Cryst Irvine, Inc., dated January 14, 2004. The propo; follows: . The lot line between Lots 17 and 18 has been The proposed change is acceptable from a of our referenced reports are implemented. Inc. has in Crystal Cove, fNWdtgpkC1Kdg8fFCVdKs7ssociates, l change to the plan can be summarized as Grading Permit Number #'/�R;530/-;t/ A i�+P�ROVE® .al ffl4R ehggd�ed the recommendations ® Conditionally 'Al FM 1120 Date Geologist civil 17781 Cowan ■ Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.250.1421 ■ Fax 949.250.1114 ■ www.leightongeo.com t 830019-041 If you have any questions regarding this letter -report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No. 23"' �• C,3405 a q Cli Dj Chandra, PE, GE 2376 CAI IFS Senh r Associate Engineer Edward A. Steiner, CEG 1408 Principal Geologist DJC/EAS/lr Attachment: References Distribution: (4) Addressee (4) Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine, Inc. Attention: Mr. Kory Lynch - 2 - Leighton - T 830019-041 References Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Review of Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3A-2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 12, 1999. , 2000, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to Remaining Comments of the County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated May 12, 2000, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated August 11, 2000. , 2001a, Response to County of Orange Geotechnical Report Review Sheet dated November 14, 2000, and Geotechnical Review of Change to Proposed Delta 1 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated January 8, 2001. 2001b, Preliminary Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated November 19, 2001. , 2002a, Geotechnical Review of Proposed Delta 3 to the Preliminary Grading Plan and Response to OCPDSD Verbal Comments Regarding Evaluation and Recommendations for the 250-Foot Extension Northerly of the Muddy Canyon Buttress, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated June 10, 2002. , 2002b, Geotechnical Review of Delta 2 to the Preliminary Grading Plan, Tentative Tract 15886, Phase 2, Planning Area 3B-1, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-031, dated July 25, 2002. , 2003a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 128, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tentative Tract 15586, Phase 2, Beachtown 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated January 24, 2003. 830019-041 References (Confd) , 2003b, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated March 21, 2003. , 2003c, Addendum to Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated March 6, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 81 through 125, Lots 145 through 180, Lots 192 through 227, Lots 234 through 262, and Adjacent Slopes and Streets, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated April 4, 2003. , 2003d, Geotechnical Release of Lots 214, 246 through 252, 254, and 258 through 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated August 19, 2003. 2003e, Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422 (Lots 204 through 227 of Parent Tentative Tract 15586), Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-041, dated November 7, 2003. 2003f, Response to Verbal Comments from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 15, 2003. 2003g, Response to Additional Verbal Comment from OCPDSD Regarding Settlement Monitoring on Lots 214, 248, 254 and 262, Tract 15586 Phase 2, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 17, 2003. , 2003h, Response to OCPDSD Geotechnical Report Review Sheet Dated November 25, 2003 Regarding Geotechnical Review of Precise Grading Plan, Lots 1 through 24 of Tract 16422, Crystal Cove, Newport Coast, County of Orange, California, Project No. 830019-037, dated December 17, 2003. GB030176 Grading Plan Check Corrections General F 1 A) Show Assigned project address on title sheet of plan. f" 2 B) Show site acreage and earthwork quantities on plans: 2.1 Site Acreage Acres h 3 C) Each sheet of all plan sets must be stamped and signed by the Civil Engineer or Architect of Record for the project. 4 E) Submit an itemized summary of the unit and total cost of all drainage devices, grading, paving, and erosion control. h 5 F) Show on Plans: 5.1 Grad Legend 5.2 Grading Limits and Off -Site Grading Limits 5.3 Permit Limits 5.4 Property Lines (P.L.) 5.5 Tract Boundary and Number rr 6 H) Show location of retaining walls on grading plan plus top of wall elevations, adjacent finished surface elevations, top of footing elevations, provide a cross section detail showing subdrain design, indicate drainage outlet for all retaining walls. Retaining walls are not a part of the grading permit. Submit for separate building permits; show connection of subdrain to storm drain. Note on plans. r. 7 M) Show driveway widths and include cross-section detail. 1% 8 N) Show all easements, (i.e. drainage, utilities, etc.). 9 Q) Approved erosion control measures are to be installed and functional during the rainy season from October 15 to April 15. Justify design with hydrology and hydraulic calculations. Submit three (3) copies of an erosion control plan and a cost summary of erosion control facilities. If proposed grading will take place after April 15, continue to show erosion control plans. Grading may extend into the next rainy season. 1% 10 U) Show percent grade of all driveways (first 18 feet). Page 3 of 4 11/17/20033:28 PM I?" = Indicates line item not Cleared. HUNSAKER � &ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Preliminary Budget for Bondin Project Name: WHITE SAILS TRACT 16422. Location: 8178 WHALERS BLUFF, CRYSTAL COVE, ORANGE COUNTY, CA /w� Type of plan: PRECISE GRADING PLAN UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST EARTHWORK --CUT 450 CY $ 1.00 $ 450.00 FILL 450 CY $ 1.00 $ 450.00 TOTAL EARTHWORK DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AREA DRAIN INLET 4' PVC OR SDR - 35 -W'PVC SHC. 40 DRAIN PIPE 42"PVC SHC. 40 DRAIN PIPE TOTAL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES EROSION CONTROL TOTAL EROSION CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS PARKING STRIPING 3" AC OVER NATIVE PARKING LOT HANDICAP SIGN & BLUE STRIPINGS $ 900.00 172 EA $ 100.00 $ 17,200.00 4,530 LF $ 14.00 $ 63,420.00 560 LF $ 21.00 $ 11,760.00 653 LF $ 25.00 $ 16,325.00 $ • 108,705.00 2,520 EA $ 1.50 $ 3,780.00 $ 3,780.00 0 0 $ • 0.50 $ - 0 0 $ 1.14 $ 0 0 $ 150.00 $ TOTAL IMPROVEMENTS $ 00 GC e -ha Prepared by: Kory Lynch on 12/4/2003 - ad 42-225 precise bond estimate- 16422.XLS Bond Estimate Page 2 C gf2" 47 �G p00,— ��12/4/2003 9:49 AM .p`�a9d Der�,�QA County of Orange Main Office a PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 300 N. Flower Street Santa Ana, CAs2702 4048 00 ' �.o' BUILDING PERMITS DIVISION w�+adaQ'3 . Grading Plan Check Corrections Corrections shall be made on the tracings and three(3) new sets of plans shall be submitted. If you make changes to the plan other than or in addition to what Plan Check has requested, yellow highlight the changes on one set of the re -submitted plans. Return the original check print with corrected plans. Payment of a new plan check deposit may be required for all plans on which no action is taken by the applicant for a period of 180 days. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of submittal shall expire by limitation, and shall be discarded. Project Number: GB030176 Submittal Date: Nov 10, 2003 CBC Edition: 2000 Job Address Owner Address Plan Check Date:1111712003 3:28 PM 8178 WHALERS BLUFF Taylor Woodrow Homes Description: precise for production NEWPORT COAST, CA • 15 Irvine Cushing 8 single family detached product Current • 1st Plan Check Plan Checked By Michael Fisher MIcbael Fisher5.pdsd.ocgov.com 714-834-6156 Contact Address Elaine Krepp 3 Hughes Irvine CA92618-2021 949-768-2561 949-465-1261 FAX ekrepp0hunsakercom Si nat`I Fisher, Reason: Plan Checked By Location: Santa Ana Office, Ca Page 1 of 4 GB'030176. GENERAL INFORMATION Please provide 24-hour notice to your plan checker, prior to obtaining the grading Permit.Return the original check print with corrected plans. Payment of a new plan check deposit may be required for all plans on which the applicant takes no action for a period of 180 days. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following date of submittal shall expire by limitation, and shall be discarded. SUBMITTALS, FEES, BOND, INSURANCE AND ISSUANCE • Provide three (3) complete sets of corrected plans. Provide minimum 40-scale plan for precise grading. The maximum size shall be 36" x 42". All sheets shall be uniform size. Plans will not be rechecked at the counter. Allow one week for recheck. • Plan check and inspection deposit amounts will be calculated by the plan checker based on earthwork quantities or drainage improvements, whichever is greater. The engineer shall provide this information. • Surety is required in the amount of $ _ Surety may be posted in one of the following forms: • Bond Certificate of Deposit •' Letter of Credit • Cash or Cashier s Check Personal/Company checks cannot be accepted. County approved forms for the various types of surety are available upon request at the Grading Counter, Station 4, Room 122. Please note all signatures must be notarized. • Provide verification of contractor's coverage for Workman's Compensation insurance. If owner is doing work and will not employ other workers, owner must sign exemption statement. • Owner or authorized agent and/or contractor must sign the permit at the time of issuance. • Authorized agent must have a notarized statement from the owner authorizing the agent to act on behalf of the owner. • The permittee and the entity providing the surety must be the same i.e., owner, developer or contractor. Page 2 of 4 11/1712003 3:28 PM Gg030176, 4 Grading Plan Check Corrections h 11 W) Additional comments may be made after field verification that the plans and soils report accurately reflects existing conditions. Drainage Instructions 12 E) Show typical detail for the 17 high by 4' wide berm, which is required at top of slopes. 13 J) Show plan and section details of typical lot drainage. Minimum 2%, maximum 21% away from a building pad to a swale is required. �rn 14 M) Show limits of roof gutters and location of downspouts (if discharged onto A.C. paving or onto a finished grade, a P.C.C. splash block is required). rr 15 Q) Show the approved non -erosive device where concentrated drainage exceeds 4% gradient. Use concrete, gunite, or other approved materials. 16 T) Show detail and locations of extra depth footings. h 17 V) Show flow line elevations of all swales and other drainage devices. 18 W) Show retaining wall subdrain details with disposal points, flow line elevations and pipe material. h 19 X) Show typical section of driveway and pavement section. Include type of surfacing material. h 20 Y) Show typical section of hardscape. Include type of surfacing material. Slopes h 21 H) Show top and toe of cut and fill slopes. Geofechnical �a 22 A) Obtain approval of soils and geology report by County Geotechnicai staff. Reports have been forwarded for their review. Page 4 of 11/17120033:28 PM f' = Indicates line item not Cleared. L ?C lq-5 Q�Yzo 3 M-Re RECEIVED NOY 10 2003 GRADING GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF PRECISE GRADING PLAN, LOTS 1 THROUGH 24 OF TRACT 16422 (LOTS 204 THROUGH 227 OF PARENT TENTATIVE TRACT 15586), CRYSTAL COVE, NEWPORT COAST, COUNTY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Taylor Woodrow Homes 15 Cushing Irvine, California 92618 Project No. 830019-041 November 7, 2003 Leighton and Associates, inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY _ . I :54 VW V...�..�r 9 PLANNING"AND DEMOPNENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ro GRADING SECTION 300 North Plower St. 9<�ron� p.0. Box 4048 Santa Aaa, CA 92702-4048 Pax Machine TeJeohone 834-4172 (714) 834-3378 GEOTECffiiZCAI. REPORT REVIEW SBEET REVIEW OF GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS INCLUDING TYPE OF REPORT REPORT DATE DATE RECEIVED ❑ ❑ Soil Report _ Preliminary (Initial) ❑ Ingrading or Interim a Geologic Report /��•? ° �2o°3 ❑ Roughgrade Compacting [q�Geotechnical ❑ Response ❑ Supplement or Addendum [}- ❑ Grading Plan Review ❑ Paving Design ❑ Final H9 the Consulta.na Firm �-o-��k�� It � -ssoez• 'Their Jab ; Tract No. �laK2:7- Lots) t 2�( Site Address: $ )-1 g "� �^ �«s 6" N Aoh S--Gradinq Plan Check No. 4S b0 _S 0 k-1 G precise Grad. Permit # ❑ Preliminary Grad. Permit # ❑ ----------------------------------- --- Developer/Owner: o' - - 24/e ID - Address: Soil Engineer: Engineering Geologist: R ober (^ � = r -�- --------------- ❑ Report Approved ❑ Report Approved Subject to Conditions Below: S-rrior to approval of report attend to items below: permits submit ❑ Prior to County Rough Grade approval and issuance of building p i Report Reviewed By: Date: I -L5-o3 NICK J. BEBEK (pc:32) ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST Up PLANNING ANM DEVELGPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -GRADING SECTION 300 North Flower St. U5 rL5 3 P.O. Box 4048 Santa Ana, 1 CA 92702-4048 �gleohone Fax Machine 834-4772 (714) 834-3328 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW SHEET REVIEW OF GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS INCLUDING REPORT DATE DATE RECEIVED TYPE OF REPORT ❑ Soil Report ❑ Preliminary (Initial) ❑ Geologic Report ❑ Ingrading or Interim a�-Ieotechnical No +• 7r 33 Lvo.+• to Z003 ❑ Roughgrade Compacting ❑ Response ou.:1� zou3 17u. �8T 33 l�upplement or Addendum ❑ wading Plan Review ❑ Paving Design ❑ Final 13 By the Consulting Firm L--%3 Their Job # B300 M -o`lt Tract No. Itei{Z-Z Lots) ^Z Site Address: $11$ WI" ke-rs (31v(-p N�+Dor Loo s Grading Plan Check No. Gbv30 t'l G ❑ Preliminary Grad. Permit # ❑ Precise Grad. Permit # r"'y 1 "r (,Jooar-o w -----o --.as _-------- _----------------- Developer/Owner: Address: Soil Engineer: Engineering GeOloeist Rob er L w. 0i B--9-eport Approved ❑ Report Approved Subject to Conditions Below: Q Prior to approval of report attend to items below: ermits submit ❑ Prior to County Rough Grade approval and issuance of building p Report Reviewed By: � Date: IZ 23'03 NICK J. BEBEK (PC:32) ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST N" RECEIVED NOV 13 2003 GRADING (CHECK APPLICABLE BOXES) I. SITE IDENTIFICATION COUNTY OF ORANGE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY REGULATION GRADING PRE -INSPECTION REPORT b3 pc ih-S SITE ADDRESS 'tMl& W�p1aus 13U.� GRADING PLAN CHECK NO.C�)O3t V7(p OWNERU1iS--�_1_-____1'r�'S _ __ BUILDING PLAN CHECK N0.—______ TRACT NO. Y2- --- LOT 140. 2 PARCEL MAP NO. - - ------------ ( ) SINGLE FAMILY ( ) TRACT ( �) �COMMERCIAL ( ) INDUSTRIAL ( ) STOCKPILE (, EXISTING PERMIT: TYPE & NO. =F1 ��6030_____ _____•_—_________—___--____ II. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS (INSPECTOR, PLOT MISSING FEATURES ON GRADING PLAN) ( ) STRUCTURES; TYPE-------------`------------------------------i--- ( ) VEGETATION; TYPE ( ) DRAINAGE DEVICES; TYPE ------- __________ ............_---_--,--- (�,�EROSION CONTROL DEVICES; TYPE ( ) WATER WELL ( ) IRRIGATION LINE ( ) SEPTIC TANK ( ) OTHER III. DRAINAGE CONDITIONS ( ) OFF -SITE FLOW CROSSES SITE: (J-).-ON-SITE DRAINAGE BY: ( ) SHEET (, () SHEET FLOW ( ) CONCENTRATED OTHER ( ) PROJECT GRADING WILL DIVERT OR CONCENTRATE FLOW TO ADJACENT PROPERTY ( ) CONVERT CONCENTRATED DRAINAGE TO SHEET FLOW ( ) ALL ROOF DRAINAGE MUST BE TAKEN TO THE STREET VIA ROOF GUTTERS IV. SOIL & GEOLOGY CONDITIONS ( ✓) GRADED PREVIOUSLY, DESCRIPTION -------------- __--_ ( ) HILLSIDE AREA ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDE AREA { ) POSSIBLE v'NCS-^R=T_ED FILL, ESTIMATED DEPTH ----------- (`Z},•SOIL EXPANSIVENESS: ( ) UNDETERMINED EXPANSIVE ( ) NON -EXPANSIVE REPORTS & LETTERS RE')UIRED FOR PLAN CHECK ( ) HYDROLOGY REPORT (IF SIGNIFICANT OFF -SITE FLOW CROSSES PROPERTY ( ) PRELIMiINARY SOIL REPORT (REASON: ( ) CUT OR FFILL SLOPES ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDE OR SITE STABILITY !L'-:ARD- EXISTS ( ) SUrDIV=S=ON, COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL OR MULTI- RES=DENTI AL PRO;,EC^-) ( z)a?ADING PPELIMINARY GEOLOGY REPORT (REASON: ( ) CUT SLOPES ( ) POSSIBLE LANDSLIDES EXIST GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS MAY AFFECT SITE STABILITY) PLAN REVIZI LETTER FROM SOIL ENGINEER ( ) SITS PEVIE4 LETTER FROM SOIL ENGINEER (IF SITE CONDITIONS HAYS CHANGED SINCE D?TC OF LAST REPORT) (See Other Side) VI. SITE UIREMENTS FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE ( ) VIOLATION: DOUBLE PERMIT FEE REQUIRED ( ) PRE -INSPECTION FEE REQUIRED; ( VNOT REQUIRED ( ) ROUGH GRADE RELEASE WAIVED AFTER PRECISE GRADING PERMIT ISSUED (4<lr GRADING PERMIT REQU D, BECAUSE OF: ( ,I YARDAGE ( IMPROVEMENTS �O') SITE DRAINAGE CQNDITIONS kyNq � _ ( �/) C VERT TO PRECISE PRELIMINARY PERMIT N0.6A��C1G�]_,_� �y===�=�----- BOND REQUIRED, BECAUSE OF: ( ) COMMERCIAL (2C-) TRACT ( ) HILLSIDE AREA ( ) POSSIBLE HAZARD ( R ION CONTROL PLANS ( ) HYDROLOGY STUDY (-%) TEMPORARY (OCT. 15 THRU APR. 15) ( ) PERHANENT ( ) OSHA INDUSTRIAL SAFETY PERMIT (IF TRENCH CONDITION>5 FT. DEEP) ( ) FISH AND GAME AGREE44ENT (IF ADJACENT TO CONTROLLED WATERCOURSE) ( ) ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY PERMIT SECTION (IF WORK IN PUBLIC R/t4) ( ) LETTER OF CONSENT FROM ADJACENT OWNERS ACCEPTING RUNOFF AND/OR OFF -SITE GRADING ( ) BRUSH LAND AREA; REQUIRE FIRE MARSHAL'S APPROVAL W-TJ RETAINING WALL PER141T REQUIRED CONCURRENTLY WITH GRADING PERMIT ( ) SILMOD CRITERIA VARIANCE REQUIRED BECAUSE: ( ) GRADED SLOPES > 45% ( ) GRADED SLOPES > 10 FT. VERTICAL HEIGHT ( ) VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC ROAD AND REQUIRES APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN , ( ) REMOVAL OF TREES > 5 IN. DIA. { ) COASTAL ZONE AREA (**PD04OLITION PE RECISE GRADING4 ERMTUMAY DBE ISSUED kl,-Y�FS () NO : SEE COMMENTS. VII. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ( ) EXISTING EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR PRELIMINARY PERMIT IS VALID FOR THIS PERMIT ( ) SEE NOTATIONS MADE ON COPY OF PLANS 11 INSPECTOR ��--- --------- DATE " \ — ---------- JM:jnRD12-27 1/20/84 4�1 TC.. �� \Z / •�. /�/ / / f ! Jr .i-�}-- � �!y� .�ui fit} "j T'us. / :9 .!c j�' / -; , LOT 1 1B• xrt 1 rF 3.` 48 �{ 1. P=344.6 rr-.- •�I' i'�' n5 3 l ,J a �y �t Jr I• i // / �\ F"'.=.�.-�-.r�--r _ o so boo _ �! ' FEET i49.. SCALE ///�' j'� /� i ,/ ��// %� r •' LIMITS OF REPQR,T = -- _------__ - b //A //% / / s 1._R.r-19 x ' / �Y/�!F. F Pa'40.< i v T 1 Y .'7 _ _.1�.1 1 t FF. 4,.33 t I Y, m �i a { rim u: / / % / i; /; / - / {;:•�-Z� I tAT 23 I L't'g R-1,0 4 9 b '' L 21 1�. e0T 20 / A��i: LOT 245 F s . - // 10+r LL_t • ti( f s_ _ e .� — c / / / \�/ / r7 /{a_ / �. J '{- ��� =•i t vaR�r� 1 • Ir'? s �• 3" I,,il I m LEGEND: 00, APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD DENSITY TEST 1-4 TEST OF RETAINING WALL BACKFILL i& i 1y >" _ --G=------ --- r= _ Figure 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP '�� Proj: 830019-041 Scale: 1"=50' Date: 8/04 LOTS 1, 2, 22, 23, AND 24, TRACT 16422 WHITE SAILS U AT CRYSTAL COVE Eng./Geol. VSK/ELB Drafted By: BQT CP By: BQT NEWPORT COAST, CALIFORNIA Leighton and Associates, Inc. n� wow mwcw P;\DRAFTING\830019\04110E-8-4-04\FIGUREI DWG 08-03-04 1 52 43PMj Plotted by btran i\' `�i\ • Y - �-• -. \ \ %Y �O\. a/..� - r\ 4 ? Y / \\\y�`� \ �.. �y -r % r ,,.0 w�5 �0 lS 25 f--<\ a''`� ,_ 't y--t- -�� —v C \ • 1� r - i" `fir A -`; \ \ \ \. \. \ ~ J}Y - �Fk g'4p i+A / a. 'f - k�Y\�.-4/ , • ^ \ \\i\ \ \ 'l \ °�,✓✓/ / \a r a m r )�,1.� ij ry E .�,� ;i ;\. .\ � \\\ \ / ' :� y JIS r 4 �� y t, JD d Y •. pw s`t: �� /: � � � �r '"+�,� f y� I `� 'rl ✓✓`j �/r SC, + t� • Lf-24 sr.`F ✓`/��'*" /a Y `eV A ♦ f 1 r J�, '`FOvi'� J- �l i/�' J�% : iR i �7" •"\ 'lLl "\ \\>< \ \ d 1 Y ( :O.A. 'm w` > . \ \ ✓\\� �\ Y i. �\ 5 1� '<`-#f �Oj ell se ++ 1 % , � ,�/. n � >. '>'= \� \ \'' j \ ''.y � � > / l� •ta8c �..� 8 l! �. / c \ j+6 •✓ l Z'. �\,•'�`\ b.'IS'✓E'r \ � � �� �J- �.� �_ _ L J� i � ,��-ya '.f� � � ��'ii/(//yF 6'41 — 4 ON A� i /..yt mp \-.1.-6 ✓, rd rt'`� \� \`�\ �_.- -> ``_ l ; 1`Tf Y.`Z•T`r� \J / ' , / /i /I Jjl� y 1� zz n.r. ..`�`•>`J.R - �'c, YRa,17s 'yt ` f. y .�; t 4'�.=EZr _—J �� tart r + 1 •� " r——=_`rLIMLS -OF REPORT \\\ Y�j f/�/�. �r`� ijr �//XEL/T.+/�{ • CS,��# -/_. ' �\ �� � �� -�. a+�j�. .;� LJ � . ``�.. ^.\ �eL, i � � r I R�18 „l.i��:P1 ' .r� ''' •'�C���r_—_ � `� \ � \ � ;. SvV\ .— / �-i—s F .�7 Y :•` - yi ' M j �' /rr� f,�e:+.y 4Q� �y/,.�( J 4 _%�7 C�r' a+� (=ii `tiY�.1� \ �J \ A �s ;r-.• / /t, e li 7' \ \ m/�\y J�yYF�Oe, / ,.: /�// �/ y J: �• \� s '. {J n•-�s �- ;t`/ a, ; J'. �` .>r 17 ✓X,ri` `'_ '`� \ i y/ / /.': / •J ' v`2r t ..d `'-'°5 __ - 1 `} a C ii �'1 ,c � S'\. T / C LEGEND:— 11 _'�t\\�\\'' • '� ` f APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD DENSITY TEST { • RETAINING WALL BACKFILL _,x , USJOINT UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL o 60 120 k •`en/�/ SCALE FEET Figure FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP • Proj: 830019-041 Scale: 1"=60' Date: 11/04 LOTS 7 THROUGH 19, TRACT 16422 WHITE SAILS II AT CRYSTAL COVE Eng./Geol. VSK/ELB Drafted By: BQT CP By: BQT NEWPORT COAST, CALIFORNIA Leighton i and Associates, Inc. PD \DRAFTING\830019\041\OF_11-10-04\FIGUREI WG(11-11-044:1323PM) Rottedby btran on and Ass P. 7�-ems DISTRICT OFFICE: MAILING ADDRESS: 13001 GARDEN GROVE BOULEVARD t"- y v d. P.O. BOX 87 GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA 92843 SANTA ANA, CA 92702 PHONE: (714) 971-2421 DEC 2 3 2003 FAX: (714) 9713940 _ E-MAIL: ocvcd@ocvcd.org BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 2003 PRESIDENT: JEAN D. JAMISON VICE-PRESIDENT: DR. PETER GREEN SECRETARY: MARL W. WINER ALSO VIEJO KARLP. WARKOMSKI ANAHEIM DR. JOHN J. BAtRD BREA ROY MOORE BUENA PARK JIM DOW COSTA MESA CHARLES GLEASON CYPRESS SANDRAMONTEZ DANA POINT WAYNE RAYFIELD FOUNTAIN VALLEY LAURANN COOK FULLERTON FLORENCE CAVILEER GARDEN GROVE DR. SHELDON S. SINGER HUNTINGTON BEACH OR. PETER GREEN IRVINE ROSEMARY DUGARD LAGUNA BEACH GRANTMcCOMBS LAGUNA HILLS NATALIE 'LEE'KLEIN LAGUNA NIGUEL MARC W. WINER LAGUNAWOODS DR. ROBERT SOLER LA HABRA ROSE ESPINOZA LAKE FOREST JEAN D. JAMBON LA PALMA LARRYA.HERMAN LOS ALAMITOS AUCEJEMPSA MISSION VIEJO SYDNEY H. GORDON NEWPORTSEACH DR. VIRGINIA L BARRETT ORANGE CAROLYN CAVECCHE PLACENTIA CONSTANCE UNDERHILL RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA MICHAELGOULD SAN CLEMENTE JOEANDERSON SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO DAVID M. SWERDLIN SANTA ANA WILLAM L. BOYNTON SEALSEACH FRANK LASZLO STANTON AL MANS TUSTIN DOUG DAVERT VILLA PARK WILLIAM OLIVA WESTMINSTER FRANK FRY, JR. YORBA LINDA JIMWINDER COUNTYOFORANGE R. PAUL WEBB INTERIM DISTRICT MANAGER DONALD F. McINTYRE December 18, 2003 Mrs. Elaine Krepp Hunsaker & Associates Three Hughes . Irvine, CA 92618 RE: Vector Control Evaluation for T16422, lots 1-24 in Crystal Cove Dear Mrs. Krepp: I have 'reviewed the'above project site and do not anticipate any significant vector problems. Hantavirus and arenavirus associated illnesses have been confirmed in California and it has been determined that most of the human cases have been linked to exposure to virus -infected rodents such as deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus, and wood rats Neotoma spp., species found throughout the state. Deer mice and wood rats are prevalent in foothills, canyons, and coastal bluffs of Orange County. They are most common in open sage and scrub/chaparral habitats mixed with grasses or weeds and have been found in homes adjacent to these habitats. State and local agencies have developed protocols for dealing with rodents, arenavirus and hantavirus. Risk of infection with these viruses is low for persons who do not have direct rodent contact or do not live in dwellings heavily contaminated with rodent droppings. Information -on hantavirus is enclosed. During the landscape phase of the project, plants such as Algerian ivy, bougainvillea, oleander, yucca, Italian cypress, and dense shrubbery plantings, which attract rats or serve as rodent -nesting areas, should be avoided. A list of A vector is any insect or other arthropod, rodent or other animal of public health significance capable of causing human discomfort, injury, or capable of harboring or transmitting the causative agents of human disease. r� plants known to harbor roof rats and alternative ground cover less attractive to rats is enclosed. Mrs. Krepp December 18, 2003 Page — 2 After the landscape phase is completed, rats or ground squirrels that reestablish themselves in berms or slopes should be eradicated. These animals can cause erosion, damage property, and carry disease agents such as plague. All project sites should be graded for proper runoff to avoid standing water that could breed mosquitoes, including Culex tarsalis mosquito which can transmit encephalitis virus to man. However, other mosquito species are also important as disease, pest, or nuisance factors. Furthermore, off-street drains should be designed to carry runoff water into catch basins or silt retention basins prior to being directed toward existing natural drainage. These silt basins should be maintained free of aquatic vegetation and generally become the responsibility of the Homeowner's Association upon completion of the project by the developer. On -site drainage ditches should be kept free of cattails and willows that can reduce water flow and cause mosquito breeding. Thank you for allowing our comments on this project. This letter will serve as a vector control clearance on the above project for vegetation removal and grading. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact me. GR/eg Eno. Sincerely, AV4� 4 � Gary'Reydolds Biologist Received: 12/ 8/03 3:54PM; 714 708 1919 -- P & DS; Page 3 12/08/03 15:17 FAX 714 708 1919 CDFA/RIFA 3 JOHN EARNEST e003/009 DEC-02-2003 17;01 LIP-550 P.02/04 cooperat-hre'Red imported Yire .A:.nt YrOJeci Notification 0Intent to Move.Soil j: oQ i or within Quarantined Areas of grange, Riverside, and Los A ndeles Counties RIE'A CotnpCl� 9.grrement ll,, � � Issuing Ci County Fgaency M FAX D1ms81'�3: f 708- County of Orance_ Name of Coatpany Requesew$ Approval' A&fJAW:.- j44 a�" Contact persan: Paine Xrepp W/H,insaker & Associates Address: 3 1i hes . Ci._=rGiT'e, Zip:_9261a-2021 Telephone: fax -(949� 465-1261 Excavadon Location: s r► Esdtn:lted Quantity of Soil (r-& fr Cubic Anticipated gate of Wveitteut: �_L G ---: Low Urgestc77Level for Inimedlate laspecti a an Release: [t irde One Atrn x.asoM — ��vlovepzeat of Sctil, is Permitted. Hold lNIovement Until Site Checked - WE W'd.L CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE T'O SCHMUt.E INSPECTION DATE AND T'IIa- pate TYapptd R of Traps: Trapped by:_r____,+.._ AcreS:�,._ Date Picked Up: _ Co=ents:�_.^�. kDli m: ElSoil Movement is Strictly Prohibited for the FoUowing Reason($): Name ofRi] ti jest R isegulatory Offi _ Date Si�attsre_ 1 � � `�•' R7FwFamC.L•1 �:nft9r99 • TB Ziw3 Hmtherm yrsge and Csi gnati �l Received Time Dec. 2• 5:17PM rc�a4a Devo�o�3 R County of Orange P+CID PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ' t ��•ttrdaQ`' Zoning Plan Check List Building Permit Number: GB030176 Applicant: Applicant Phone: Job Address: Additional Address: Parcel Number(s): Zoning: PC/SP: Description: 8178 Whalers Bluff , Newport Coss 16422 21 TR NPTC/IRVC precise for production single family detached product School District(s) Elementary or Unified Main Office 300 N. Flower Street Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Date: Nov 10, 2003 Owner: Taylor Woodrow Homes Owner Phone: 949-341-1200 APN: 477-031-27 CAA: CT: .: Fj u ,<a-. ..... .0 Zoning Plan Check List J. Swank MII 1. owner -Contractor: Prior to Issuance of Permit J. Swanek - 1.1. Signature of owner or conkactorwilh Worker's Compensation; If contractor Intends to file exempt, a J. Swanek valid pocket license must be presented.lf an agent represents owner, the agent must have a notarized letter of authorization and an owner verilicatlon form must be on file with the County of Orange. �4 Z Tract Zoning/Land Use Clearance J. Swanek 2.1. Zoning and land use clearance by Terri Sergeant (714-834.5149) and/or At Gordon (714-834-5128) J. Swanek Double to Sign Name: Jim S k Reason: Notific n Location: 300 North Flower, Santa Ana, Ca Double Click to Sign Reason: Notification Location: 300 North Flower, Santa Ana, Ca Page 1 14 = Indicates line item not Cleared. Conn 'of Orange Planning and Development Services Department Grading Section -Grading Plan Check Unit Grading Plans for Zoning Clearance Tract # ���/�c� �. Lot, Bldg. # �`� Plan Check # Applicant's Name: Phone # z Grading Plan Checker's Signature Phone # Zoning Plan Checker's. Signature �CJ� Phone # CoR-;» b S Note: If this is a revision, please check here: Revisions must be clearly highlighted on the grading plans. ' COUNTY OF ORANGEIPLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPLICANT'S INFORMATION SHEET FOR A BUILDINGIGRADING PERMIT /-, `/ �J Applicant must legibly PRINT in all of the known indicated information. PERMIT NUMBER: 66bsvv� BUILDING ADDRESS OF PROJECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECI (e metes 6 bounds then you must provide a recorded copy of the Grant Deed.) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL (AP) NO.'� NEAREST CROSS STREETS: OWNERIBUSINESS NAME: OWNER'S PRESENT ADDRESS: " L - ✓ Number SPECIAL PERMIT NUMBER: use PermiUSlle Planivarlance PROPOSED USE OF STRUCTURE: This must be clearly spelled out in detail as to exactly what is the intended use. The terms "OFFICE' or "COMMERCIAL BUILDING" are NOT sufficient to determine if the proposed use meets the Zoning District Regulations, Occupancy Group, or if the TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION will permit the proposed use. BE SPECIFIC: STRUCTURE SIZE SQUARE FEET: Total tat Floor 2ntl Floor 3rd Floor GARAGE SIZE SQUARE FEET: SIZE SQUARE FEET (other) CONTRACTOR: / / Name License Number Classification Number Street Area/City Phone No. Workers Camp Cartier Policy Number Date of Expiration ARCHITECT: / / / / Name Lic. No. Number Street ArealClly Phone No. ENGINEER: Name - Lltl. No. Number Street ArealCity Phone No. CONT FAX # APPLICABLE TO GRADING ONLY SOIL ENGR: 45=/�/ m ENGR. GEOL: n 14, / i? CAUOSHA REQUIREMENTS/CHECK APPLICABLE BOX: 0 1 am the owner -builder and exempt from state permit requirements/0 I acknowledge that I must submit proof of issuance of CAUOSHA permit for the project/ ❑ The project does not require a CAUOSHA permit, based upon the criteria on the reverse side of this sheet. I hereby certify tha kh''ebest of��my knowledge the information supplied on this information sheet is true and correct. SIGNATURE: (?� C"7�� �.�� DATE �—= Pmu Own or honed Avant SFF nTMFR CInF CRITERIA TO DETERMINE NEED FOR CAIJOSHA PERMIT FROM STATE DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY i HEALTH Applicant must comply with Section 17992.5 of the Health 6 Safety Code and Section SSW of the State Labor Code. A, Applicant IS required to obtain a permit for: Construction or demolition of any building, structure, scaffolding or faisework more than three (3) storks high or equivalent height (36 ft.). 2. Construction of trenches or excavations which art five feet or deeper and into which a person is required to descent. B. Applicant 18 NOT required to obtain a permit when: 1. All work is to be performed by the owner builder and no employee(s) will be hired to perform work, or 2. The criteria spec)Md in Paragraph A are not exceeded. C. APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY 1. If a CALIOSHA permit is required, it is applicant's responsibility to submit proof that a permit has been Issued for the project. 2. Failure of the applicant to comply with above safety criteria may result in Issuanoe of a Stop Work Notice and an order to the applicant to obtain a CAIJOSHA permit before work is resumed. If you are required to obtain a CAIJOSHA permit, you are requested by the CAIJOSHA Office to please call (714) 93"145 for an appointment time BEFORE you go to the Division of Occupational Safety a Health Administration, Suits 140, 21 Do East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 928M. COUNTY OF ORANGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CENTRAL OFFICE 300 N. FLOWER P.O. BOX 400 SANTAANA.CA 92702-4046 (114)934.2e29 DA,Jb 0111100) REGIONAL OFFICE 22921 TRRKIN WAY LAGUNA HILLS, CA 929W (949)412.79nI CAUOSHA PERMIT REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION SHEET 0 ,a �' County of Orange kAro Resources & Development Management Department January 4, 2005 Taylor Woodrow Homes 15 Cushing Irvine, CA. 92618 Subject: Grading Permit Bond Release Letter; GB030176 Dear Owner: BRYANSPEEGLE DIRECTOR MAIN OFFICE 300 N. FLOWER STREET THIRD FLOOR SANTA ANA. CALIFORNIA GRADING INSPECTION SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL BRANCH 22941 TRITON WAY, SUITE 142 LAGUNA HILLS, CA 9203 This is to advise you that the terms and conditions set forth by the referenced grading permit have been complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official of the County of Orange. The excavation/grading work has been accomplished in accordance with Section 7-1-829 of Article 8, Division 1, Title 7 of the Codified Ordinances of the County of Orange. Bondine Reference Data Owner: Taylor Woodrow Homes Surety Bond: TC3184 Date of Bond: December 9, 2003 Amount of Bond: $57,000.00 Grading Permit No.: GB030176 Address/Tract No.: 8178 Whalers Bluff, Newport Coast / Tract 16422, Lots 1-24 The above referenced bond is released herewith. Very truly yours, Mahrooz Ilkhanipour, P.E. Sr. Civil Engineer/Chief Grading Inspection Unit Attachments SB01.O1 Bond No.' TC3184 COUNTY OF OsiANG9 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGRMENT AGENCY REGULATION GRADING PERMIT $URETY BOND KNOW ALL MEN By THESE PRESENTS: That Taylor Woodrow Homes, - Inc. as Principal, and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company a corporation organized and existing under the law$ of the State of Minnesota and duly authorized to rranart.a surrtv,hudneas in the.State of f alifnfnla, as Surety, a held and firmly bound unto.tt+e CoLnty•ofOrenge•:n the Nil and ••• full sum Of ****************7k*57, 0� 0 • p0 DOLLARS, for the payment of which, wall and truly to be made, said Principal and Surety bind themselves, thelr heirs, administratbra, aucaz ors and aesi9ns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presenes- THE CONDITION OF THE ABOVE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT, WHEREAS, the said Principal above named it applicant under" Grading Permit No.933030176 of the County of Orange. California, for grading, on the following described property: Tr. 16422, hots 1-24 — White Sails 21 Crystal Cove NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED that if the Principal shall: A. Cofnply with all the provisions of the Orange County Grading and Excavation Code and other applicable laws and ordinances; and b. Comply with ail the term$ and conditions of the permit to the satisfaction of the Building Official; and e. Complete all of the work contemplated under the said permit within the time limit specified in the permit, and any vitanslon or axtanttons thereof; and d. Reimburse the County for any work required by the permit thst the Building Official deems necessary to complete, correct or otherwise undertake for the public safety, because of failure on the part of Principal, then this obligation shall be null and void: otherwise it shall remain In full force and effect. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the said Surety, for Wlus received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of tiros. alteration or modification of the permit or of the work to be performed thereunder shall in any way sffspt its obligation on this bond and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or modification of the permit or of work to be Performed thereunder, and PROVIDED FURTHER, that in case suit is brought upon the bond by tha County or any other parson who may bring an action on this bond, a reasonable attorey's fee, to be fixed by the Court, shall be paid by the Principal or Surety. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said principal &'00 sold Surety have caused these presents to be duly signed and sealed this 9th day of December n 2003. iAttsch acknowledgement) Woodrow Homes, Inc. Donald D. Steffensen St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company urety (Attach ecknewledesmant) �— 1, .-. /CRojo, Askornay -Fa t 586 California St., /SarVFrancisco, CA 94104 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of San Francisco December 9, 2003 before me, Betty L. Tolentino, Notary Public appeared********JanetC.Rojo****************** Opersonally known to me - OR - ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her authorized capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS .�qiy hand and official seal. BETTY L. TOLENTINO COMM. #1300478 z NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIAE i nature of Notary " SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY y lily Comm. Expires *.12, 20t S�y,St Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company ftl ftrdy St Paul Guardian insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company St Paut Mercury Insuronm Company Fidelity and Guaranty Ilmuranee Underurlten,Inc. seaboard surety Company St Paul Medical Liability Immmuce Company Bond No. TC3184 RIDER CONTAINING DISCLOSURE NOTICE OF TERRORISM COVERAGE This disclosure notice is required by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (the "Act'). No action is required on your part. This Disclosure Notice is incorporated in and a part of the attached bond, and is effective the date of the bond. You should know that, effective November 26, 2002, any losses covered by the attached bond that are caused by certified acts of terrorism would be partially reimbursed by the United States under a formula established by the Act. Under this formula, the United States reimburses 90% of covered terrorism losses exceeding the statutorily established deductible paid by the Insurance company providing the coverage. Under the Act, there is a cap on our liability to pay for covered terrorism losses if the aggregate amount of insured losses under the Act exceeds $100,000,000,000 during the applicable period for all insureds and all insurers combined. In that case, we will not be liable for the payment of any amount which exceeds that aggregate amount of $100,000,000,000. The portion of your premium that is attributable to coverage for acts of terrorism Is o.ao. IMPORTANT NOTE: THE COST OF TERRORISM COVERAGE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE ON ANY BONDS THAT PREMIUM IS CHARGED ANNUALLY. POWER OF ATTORNEY 7hegtPdUl Power of Attorney No. Seaboard Surety Company St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company 23563 United Stales Fidelity and Guaranty Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. Certificate No. 1901356 KNOW ALL MEN BY TIIESE PRESENTS: That Seaboard Surety Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of New York, and that St. Paul Fire and Marline Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company and St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Maryland, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Wisconsin (heicor collectively called the "Companies"). and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint Susan Hecker, Janet C. Rojo, Swan Lee, Cynthia L. Lewis, Maureen O'Connell, Steven N. Passerine, Laura L. Plaisant, Betty L. Tolentino, Antoinette D. Mitchell, M. Moody, and Peter D. Holley of the City of San Francisco , Slate California , their true and lawful At mincy(s)-in-Fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to sign its name as surety to, and to execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, undertakings, contracts and other written instruments in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instmrnentAo be signed and sealed this 20's day of March 2003 Seaboard Surety Company - St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company . United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. suz" Q., 0Y/ �\SEA� ��SSAL�: ' '� N[tltlginfa / i. NJY MI ANi ! Ns' State of Maryland City of Baltimore Pin ER�W. CARMAN, Vice President THOMAS E HUIBREGTSE, Assistant Secretary On this 7— & day of March 2003 , before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeared Peter W. Carman and Thomas E. Huibregise, who acknowledged themselves to be the Vice President and Assistant Secretary, respectively, of Seaboard Surety Company, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St, Paul Guardian Insurance Company, St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, and Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc.; and that the seals affixed to the foregoing instrument are the corporate seals of said Companies: and that they, as such, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained by signing the names of the corporations by themselves as duly authorized officers. In Witness Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and official seal m P BVCV y (� My Commission expires the 1st day of July. 2006. +y �o REBL•CCA�EASLEY-ONOKALA, Notary Publicee cur 86203 Rev. 7-2002 Printed in U.S.A. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Orange December 17, 2003 . before me, Erika Rdot, Notary pub is Mike Forsurri and Donald, D, Sfeffensen-- --7----- ---.- --- --� — personally known to me — OR - to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signature on the instrument the persons, or the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. p F ERItSARW 7 Commission i 1365103 Signature of Notary i Notary Public - California Oran County My Comm. E�Ires Jul 15, 2006 PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. December 18, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South Comity Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Project: Grading Permit No: GB 03-0176 Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Tract No: 164 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lots: & 2 RICHARD HUNSAKER TOM R.McGANNON I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G.SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY, PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618.2021 (949) 583.1010 PH (949) 583-0759 FX www.hunsaker•com All structures constructed on property comers or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. u R.C.E. / Registration Expires (�a a W.O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Graylee:m No. 49118 Exp. 9/30/06 c HUNSAKER �►;' &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO December 3, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification ing Project: Grading Permit No GB 03-0176 Address: ers Eluff Tract No: 16422 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lots: 13-16 RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. M<GANNON responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading JOHN A. MICHLER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which DOUGLAS G. SNYDER includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618-2021 (949) 583.1010 PH (949) 583-0759 FX www.hunsaker.com All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. R.C.E. q Registration Expires W O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Gmylee:m No. 4_ • Tf1 Exp. 9/30/06 MHUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOSANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO November 18, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Project: Grading Permit No: GB 03-0176 Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Tract No: 16422 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lot: 10 RICHARD HUNSAKER TOM R.McGANNON I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. f'liJLIGE a\JFi DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618.2021 (949) 583-1010 PH (949) 583.0759 FX "w.hunsaker.com All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. R.C.E.62(`Z% Registration Expires _. 3-01J& W.O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Gmylee:ra No.62622 c &a.6/30/4 . HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES 1 R V I N E, 1 N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO November 12, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification ofnaersBluff ing Project: Grading Permit No. 03 Address: 8178 Tract No: 16422 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lots: 17-19 RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. McGANNON JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92G18-2021 (949) 583-1010 PH (949) 583-0759 FX www.hunsaker.com All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. R.C.E. 6%622 Registration Expires W.o.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Grayleesa Finals Set: 11/12/04 W 62622 6V.4130146 M HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES i R V I N E, I N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO November 9, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Project: Grading Permit No: GB 03-0176 Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Tract No: 16422 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lots: 7-9 RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. McGANNON JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPAL$: DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618.2021 (949) 583.1010 PH (949) 583-0759 FX www.hunsaker.com All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. t R.C.E.r'/ Registration Expires W.O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Graylee:ra Finals Set: 11/9104 N ✓ No. 49118 <r Exp. 9/30/06 IV X PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. October 18, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Project: Grading Permit No: GB 03-0176 Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Tract No: 16422 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Lots: 20 & 21 RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. McCANNON JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR NN 11 I (n 1�.� ri' _ _ Q,�oFESSroh KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN �y0 O �pygAglF R.C.E. Registration Expires a-w No. 62622 6/30/s A Three Hughes W.O.42-225 Irvine, California Taylor Woodrow Homes FGraylee:ra 92518.202J Finals Set: 10/18/04 (949) 583-1010 PH (949) 583.0759 FX www.hunsaker.com r PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. September 27, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: Subject: Project: District Grading Inspector Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Grading Permit No: Address: Tract No: Lots: GB 03-0176 8178 Whalers Bluff 16422 3-6 FOUNDING PARTNERS: RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. McGANNON responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading JOHN A. MICHLER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which DOUGLAS G. SNYDER includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. All structures constructed on property corners or property lines, and where monumentation PRINCIPALS: is not requires(, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. DAVID FRATTONE FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618.2021 (949) 583-1010 PH (949) 583.0759 FX www.hunsaker.com HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. R.C.E. Registration Expires W.O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Gmylee.m Finals Set: 9/27/04 ' HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, 1 N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS August 2, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 SAN DIEGO Attention: Subject: Project: FOUNDING PARTNERS: District Grading Inspector Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Grading Permit No: Address: Tract No: Lots: GB 03-0176 8178 Whalers Bluff 16422 1, 2 & 22-24 RICHARD HUNSAKER I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my TOM R. McGANNON JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: All structures constructed on property comers or property lines, and where monumentation DAVID FRATTONE is not required, have been located in compliance with the approved plot plan. FRED GRAYLEE BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. KAMAL H. KARAM DOUGLAS L. STALEY _ i`" DEESSiG, JACK R KRIS WEBER JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN R.C.E. Registration Expires b b CJ " No. 49116 Exp. 9/30/04 Three Hughes Irvine, California 92618.2021 (949) 503-1010 PH (949) 583.0759 FX www.hunsaker.com W.O.42-225 Taylor Woodrow Homes F.Graylee:m Finals Set: 8/2/04 ,1K 0HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES 1 R V I N E, I N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LOS ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO January 7, 2004 COUNTY OF ORANGE South County Regional Office 22921 Triton Way Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attention: District Grading Inspector Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grading Project: Grading Permit No: GB 03-0176 Address: 8178 Whalers Bluff Tract No: Lo 1-24 FOUNDING PARTNERS: Permitted Yardage: cubic yards mat. Fill _cubic yards. RICHARD HUNSAKER TOM R. McGANNON I hereby approve the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my JOHN A. MICHLER responsibilities under the Orange County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough grading DOUGLAS G. SNYDER has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: Line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction) staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. PRINCIPALS: The volume of earth materials moved by cut and/or fill grading (agrees) with the permitted yardage stated on the approved grading plan. The revised volumes of earth material moved DAVID FRATTONE are: cut cubic yards natural fill cubic yards, borrow cubic FRED GRAYLEE yards. The final quantity of subdrain pipe placed was linear feet at a cost of BRADLEY HAY approximately $ PAUL HUDDLESTON KAMAL H. KARAM HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. DOUGLAS L. STALEY JACK TARR Y— . Q�pMsloNq KRIS WEBER /• JOSEPH E. WIGHTMAN MOHgM��c1 No.62622 C m Registration Expires 61 Exp. 6/30/&If C1V1\- a��Q Three Hughes W.O. 42-225 Taylor Woodrow Irvine, California F. Graylmra 92618.2021 (949) 583.1010 PH (949) 583.0759 FX www.hunsaker.com COUNTY OF ORANGEIPLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPLICANT'S INFORMATION SHEET FOR A BUILDING/GRADING PERMIT / Applicant must legibly PRINT in all of the known indicated information. PERMIT NUMBER: 68bso` BUILDING ADDRESS OF PROJECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT (If metes a bounds then you must provide a recorded copy of the Grant Deed ) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL (AP) NO. NEAREST CROSS STREETS: -4 - OWNER/BUSINESS NAME: OWNER'S PRESENT ADDRESS: I _ _ Number SPECIAL PERMIT NUMBER: Use Pernh/She PlantVarianee PROPOSED USE OF STRUCTURE: This must be clearly spelled out in detail as to exactly what is the intended use. The terms "OFFICE' or "COMMERCIAL BUILDING" are NOT sufficient to determine if the proposed use meets the Zoning District Regulations, Occupancy Group, or if the TYPE, OF CONSTRUCTION will permit the proposed use. BE SPECIFIC: _' STRUCTURE SIZE SQUARE FEET: Total 1st Floor 2nd Floor 3rd Floor GARAGE SIZE SQUARE FEET: SIZE SQUARE FEET CONTRACTOR: Name Llcense.Number Classification Number Street AreafChy Phone No. Workers Camp Camer Policy Number Date of Ezpiratlon ARCHITECT: Name Lie. No. Number Street Area/City Phone No. ENGINEER: / / ! / Name Lie. No. Number Sheet Area/City Phone No CON FAX APPLICABLE TO GRADING ONLY SOIL ENGR: Z4--7;9V-12 Name ENGR. GEOL: M 11,2 Lie. NoNumber /� Name Lie. No. Number Street Area/CRY Phone No. CAUOSHA REQUIREMENTS/CHECK APPLICABLE BOX: O 1 am the owner -builder and exempt from state permit requirements/CI I acknowledge that I must submit proof of issuance of CAUOSHA permit for the projecU ❑ The project does not require a CAUOSHA permit, based upon the criteria on the reverse side of this sheet. I hereby certify that he best of knowledge the information supplied on this information sheet is true and correct. SIGNATURE: DATE 0MPefi'0WnJY0r #Ohorized AWt SEE OTHER SIDE COUNTY OF ORANGEIPLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPLICANT'S INFORMATION SHEET FOR A BUILDINGIGRADING PERMIT Applicant must legibly PRINT in all of the known indicated information. BUILDING ADDRESS OF PROJECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECI PERMIT NUMBER: 68nso` /- (h metes d bounds then you must proNde a recorded copy of the Grant Deed ) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL (AP) NO., NEAREST CROSS STREETS: OWNER/BUSINESS NAME: OWNER'S PRESENT ADDRESS: `.s; 411_U151W6- SPECIAL PERMIT NUMBER: Use Permh/She Plan/Variance PROPOSED USE OF STRUCTURE: This must be clearly spelled out in detail as to exactly what is the intended use. The terms "OFFICE" or "COMMERCIAL BUILDING" are NOT sufficient to determine if the proposed use meets the Zoning District Regulations, Occupancy Group, or if the TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION will permit the proposed use. BE SPECIFIC: STRUCTURE SIZE SQUARE FEET: / Total 1st Floor 2nd Floor 3rd Floor GARAGE SIZE SQUARE FEET: SIZE SQUARE FEET CONTRACTOR: Number Street Area/Clty Phone No. Workers Comp Carrier Policy Number Date of Expiration ARCHITECT: Name Lie. No. Number Street Area/City Phone No. ENGINEER: Name Lie. No. Number Street Area/City Phone No. CON FAX APPLICABLE TO GRADING ONLY f 17 01 SOIL ENGR:/611Tr7GU ✓N&1 /nsd� Name Lie. No /,a�. Number Street Area/City Phon o. ENGR. GEOL: /9 /CeG. o0tr�- / �/ / Name Lie. No. Number Street Area/city, Phone No. CAUOSHA REQUIREMENTS/CHECK APPLICABLE BOX: U I am the owner -builder and exempt from state permit requirements/0 I acknowledge that I must submit proof of issuance of CAUOSHA permit for the project! ❑ The project does not require a CAUOSHA permit, based upon the criteria on the reverse side of this sheet. I hereby certify that he best of knowledge the information supplied on this information sheet is true and correct. SIGNATURE: DATE _/G� rope wn er orized.!,yt 17. SEE OTHER SIDE CRITERIA TO DETERMINE NEED FOR CALJOS14A PERMIT FROM STATE DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY 6 HEALTH Applicant must comply with Section 17992.6 of the Health & Safety Code and Section 6600 of the State Labor Code. A. Applicant IS required to obtain a permit for: 1. Construction or demolition of any building, structure, scaffolding or falsework more than three (3) stories high or equivalent height (36 ft.). 2. Construction of trenches or excavations which are five feet or deeper and Into which a person is required to descent. B. Applicant IS NOT required to obtain a permit when: 1. All work is to be performed by the owner builder and no employee(s) will be hired to perform work, or 2. The criteria specified in Paragraph A are not exceeded. C. APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY 1. If a CAIJOSHA permit is required, it is applicant's responsibility to submit proof that a permit has been Issued for the project. 2. Failure of the applicant to comply with above safety criteria may result in issuance of a Stop Work Notice and an order to the applicant to obtain a CAL/OSHA permit before work is resumed. If you are required to obtain a CAUOSHA permit, you are requested by the CAUOSHA Office to please call (714) 939.0145 for an appointment time BEFORE you go to the Division of Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Suite 140, 2100 East Katells Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92605. COUNTY OF ORANGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CENTRAL OFFICE 300 N. FLOWER P.O. Sox 4044 SANTAMA. CA 92702d09 (114) $34-2026 DA:Jb (1111W) REGIONAL OFFICE 22021 TRrrxlk WAY LAGUNA HILLS. CA 92903 1944)472.7979 CAL/OSHA.PERMIT REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION SHEET • &SAKM TES I R V 1 N E, I NC . Date — / LZ / Attention: Certification Field Memo , GFadifl8Inspector Reference Project: Tract No.: b¢22 Address: Permit No.: The above mentioned project has been checked and found to be completed substantially in coformance with the approved fta A./ U / U (, ►,l1 AL ( plan, for the area described below. ❑ Rough Grade HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Signature ALA Ct Title ❑ Precise Grade ' e & Grade No. 49118 Exp.9/30/04 LTJ H&A F-02 9/5/97 HUNSAEER & ASSOCIATES I ft VI N E I NC Certification Field Memo Date Attention: Reference Project: Tract No.: Address: Permit No.: 5 a Gradinglnspector 1 c6NArj&:L C=vwif CA. The above mentiohed project has been checked and found to be completed substantially in coformance with the approved ft e�M A n/ an/G GV 4-1. L plan, for the area described below. 11 r ❑ Rough Grade ❑ Precise Grade [jr`.' P-One Trade Description: Il (-'YLt Ft -r I tJ c% 6 x CAVPT"1 OA/ ;Y 4 (. 14 1�7 f ra HUNSAKEERR^&A"SSOCIATES IRVI ,J C By: 1 . Signature -Title H&A F-02 9/5/97 HUNSAiKEu &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. Certification Field Memo Date 4 l Feb- / ?-off l f — Attention: Grading Inspector Reference Project: Tract No.: Address: Permit No.: / (PLO-?- -) 8 w HAf G2s 131, u ff e,ws�r c r.CUL C�4 Cs� o--�o 1-7 b The above mentioned project has been checked and found to be completed substantially in coformance with the approved {145MIO tN G W A-L L- plan, for the area described below. ❑ Rough Grade ❑ Precise Grade 8 <'ine & Grade Description: vettF Y '-O lAf& eV-Q XJ1�k0AJ gOQ- f'j WA-LUj .. _; • i ": /-1 t /G /1C$,4cZ77 0FLLI HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. signature I H&A F-02 9/5/97 HUNSAKER &ti ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. Certification Field Memo Date Z 1 / JAAI / ?,CVcL Attention: , Grading Inspector Reference Project: Tract No.: t 6 4-�-2-?, Address: 6178 w041c-;zS s3LvC'c G'o!/e 4 4.4ve-c 00 Cam, Permit No.: G'b 03o 11 (o The above mentioned project has been checked and found to be completed substantially in coformance with the approved plan, for the area described below. ❑ Rough Grade ❑ Precise Grade Line & Grade Description: (/6421 /-^� /--cJOT/il%6 CX C*W-]ZO/�/ Ad=7 I/Vi/VG � oglz.L �& GoT 1 q HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. By: Signature Title .., No.62622 c Exp. 6130106 H&A F-02 9/5/97 HUNSAKER ` & ASSOCIATES I R V 1 N E, I NC . Certification Field Memo Date 19 / Jbnl / 200q- Attention: , Grading Inspector Reference Project: Tract No.: (o42Z Address: L76 W1ALM& ilk-07+f /� QUSTAL- C bU� Ortaa� Covty N Ga Permit No.: Gr 6 O 3o 17 (o The above mentioned project has been checked and found to be completed substantially in coformance with the approved j2B0wifJ b W ALt_ plan, for the area described below. ❑ Rough Grade Description: V Cr' HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. d , %nature ❑ Precise Grade Line & Grade wALLs _A„k C" Title No.62622 ♦ Exp.6/30/ IV1 H&A F-02 9/5/97 1 V Ic Lrp COUNTY OF ORANGE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT GRADING SECTION GRAnING INSPECTION SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL OFFICE 22921 TRITON WAY, SUITE 125 LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653 Tel. (949) 472.7979; Fat (494) S"140 PRECISE GRADING PERMJT PREGRADE MEETING Date: (O.O� Inspector itZ —_ Tel: ��`1 f1 Supervisor. , f Tel: 6- l I Officellrs,Mon-Fri 'I^ Public Works Inspector: crvz uAL twt trc a GRADING PERMIT NO 611 U3o l '16' TRACT # L ` >,)— LOT #' JOB OWNER `Md+R s.+oDt.h/ PERMIT EXPIRES ON L General Requirements: A. An approved set of grading plans, preliminary, soil report, and a copy of the grading permit shall be on the job at all times; working hours are Monday thru Saturday, 7 am. to 8 p.m. Work other than this time requires prior authorization and may involve approval by Board of Supervisors. B. CALLING FOR INSPECTION: Grading Section must be called for PRIOR to the requested day of inspection. Inspection requests made the day of the inspection can not be made. To set up inspection, use the automated inspection line by calling (714) 796-0407. *Requests can be made up to 11:00 PM for next day or subsequent day inspection requests. For specific instructions on using the automated system, a handout is available from County offices noted above or from your inspector, or by going to the County of Orange's web site at http://pdsd.oc.ca.gov/ where inspections can be made and general inspection information relating to this project can be obtained. Use the inspection item numbers identified during this meeting today to set up the required inspections on the automated system. If a specific time is needed to set up the inspection, contact the inspector on the morning of the inspection during the office hours noted above. Inspections are provided on that day if the workload and logistics allow. You must recall your inspection if an inspection you called for was not made. C. State Water Resources Control Board requirements: This project must comply with State of California water quality laws. If this project is North of El Toro Road, refer to htto'//swrcb.ca. og v_rwgcb8 (Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board); if South of El Toro Road, refer to hgp1/swrcb.ca.eov.rwgcb9 (San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board). Study the respective laws for their applications to this site. D. Work covered by this permit should conform with the approved soil reports and P.D.S.D. stamped approved grading plans. Talk to your grading inspector before making any changes. E. If the inspector finds geotechnical or design conditions not as previously approved, related work may be stopped until revised plans and/or soil reports are approved. All grading work can not extend beyond the approved grading limits shown on the plan. F. Before excavation for any underground utilities or other trenching, approval must be obtained from the grading inspector. INSPECTION II. REQUIRED GRADING INSPECTION: ITEMNO. Tlie following are required grading inspections, specific to this project. If any work requiring inspection is covered or concealed by additional work without inspection, the grading inspector may require that the covered work be exposed for inspection. 801 A. START OF WORK: At time of brushing, clearing, or demolition. Limits of grading must be staked; adequate water, erosion control, and toilet facilities must be on site. B. EXCAVATION AND FILL INSPECTION 802 1. CANYON CLEANOUT: After all brush and unsuitable material has been removed and an acceptable base has been exposed, and prior to fill placement. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer/geologist approving area for fill. 803 2. FILL OR BUTTRESS KEYWAY: After suitable natural ground or bedrock is exposed; the bench or key must be excavated to design specifications; survey stakes are required to locate the toe of slope. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer/geologist approving bench/key. 804 3. OVER -EXCAVATION: After an area has been excavated to remove unsuitable material, and prior to any fill placement. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer/geologist approving area for fill. 805 4. ROUTINE CUT & FILL: Each working day of routine cut and/or fill; field memos for cut slopes and fill placement must be made available by the geotechnical firm, along with adequate engineered staking for limits of grading. Note: Importing or exporting of soil may require traffic control and a haul route clearance. 806 5. CANYON/BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN: a. After excavation of trench and prior to placement of filter material and pipe. Subdrain and pipe shall be on -site for inspection. b. After subdrain and bedding have been placed, prior to covering pipe with filter material. The soil engineer must provide a memo approving subdrain pipe placement. c. After all filter material has been placed; soil engineer must provide a field memo approving completion of the subdrain installation. C. EARTHWALL (i.e., Keystone, Loffel, crib, etc.): Basic Inspections: 820 1. FOUNDATION EXCAVATION: Prior to placing any wall material. Wall materials (concrete members, fabric, gravel, geogrid) shall be on site for inspection and excavation must be located with engineered stakes. Required Paperwork -- Line & Grade from design engineer*; Memo from geotechnical engineer approving excavation and materials on site* *Must be wet signed by registered engineers/geologist. .2- r, 821 822 823 830 832 2. SUBDRAIN: Prior to covering with rock and fabric. Required Paperwork -- Memo from geotechnical engineer. 3. GEOGRID: At initial placement, and thereafter during placement. 4. FILL AND WALL MEMBER PLACEMENT: Daily inspection calls must be made during routine construction of wall once initial work above is completed memos from both design and geotechnical engineers may be required if work warrants clarification. NOTE: The design engineer must incorporate geotechnical and manufacturer specifications on plans; full time inspection by geotechnical,engineer may be required during placement of wall materials and fill. D. ROUGH GRADE RELEASE INSPECTION Rough grade release is the inspection required to verify that the overall grading work meets the plans and geotechnical reports. The inspection is required prior to any construction activities taking place. After the inspection is made, the inspector may allow'some aspects of the work to initiate, such as trenching for foundations and utilities. However, the inspection is a necessary requirement for the ultimate issuance of the building permits, retaining wall permits, and street release to Public Works. This inspection may be called for all at once, or as a partial release when portions of the grading work is being accomplished in stages. 1. PADS (for release of building permits): Field requirements - witness stake and blue -top for each pad elevation shown on plan, property comers, building corttefs (condos•and single lot only), and top & toe of slope in accordance with inspector's requirements; terrace/down drains on slopes must be completed. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer - memo/letter from soil engineer * - statement of compliance from grading contractor Geotechnical report - a formal compaction- report for the completed.grading work must be submitted for review and approval prior to granting formal rough grade release of pads. * must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist. 2. RETAINING WALLS (for release to building inspector): Field requirements - off -set stakes set by surveyor locating face of wall or foundation; the backcut for the wall and the foundation excavation must be made. The building inspector will not inspect and approve the steel in the footing until the grading inspector signs off on the excavation. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer - memo/letter from soil engineer * *must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist, as applicable; memo from soil engineer must list referenced reports, and state if recommendations remain unchanged. -3- r 8311 3. STREETS/STORM DRAIN (for release to public works inspector): Field requirements - off -set staking is required by surveyor locating key points for the street or storm drain alignment; contact the inspector just prior to staking for these requirements. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer —memo/letter from soil engineer * *must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist. 833 4. FOUNDATION/CAISSON EXCAVATION INSPECTION: If conditions warrant, excavation work may be needed to extend foundations of planned structures into specific geologic strata or unusual soil criteria, as required in the geotechnical reports. This is not an inspection of any structural steel, which is a requirement under the building permit. At the time of this inspection, the excavations must be made and survey control stakes must be provided along with the following required paperwork. Required field paperwork - memo from the soil engineer/geologist* - line & grade from the civil engineer* *must be wet signed by registered engineer/geologist, as applicable. Geotechnical memo must state if foundation recommendations are unchanged from previously recommended and the referenced reports must be listed on memo. NOTE: THE GEOTECHNICAL MEMOILETTER NOTED ABOVE MAY BE SUPERCEEDED AT ANY TIME BY A FORMAL REPORT IF CONDITIONS (ie. settlement, slope stability concerns) DURING GRADING WARRANT THAT SUCH A REPORT BE SUBMITTED TO COUNTY ENGINEERING STAFF PRIOR TO ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF ANY OF THE ITEMS MENTIONED. 8401 E. CONCRETE V-DTTCH - TERRACE DRAINS, DOWN DRAINS, BROW DITCHES, AND RIBBON GUTTERS. 1. Forms: Required reinforcement and thickness -control wires must be in place at the time of inspection; Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer approving area to receive concrete and if type 5 concrete is needed; line & grade from design engineer. Minimum 2500 P.S.I. load tickets will be collected. 2. Concrete or Gunite Placement F. STORM / AREA DRAIN AND INLET / JUNCTION STRUCTURES These drainage devices ones that are covered by approved grading plans, not by improvement plans approved with the public works department. 8431 1. RCP delivery; provide certificate of"D" load from manufacture. 844 I 2. Pine Placement - prior to covering with backfill. Required Paperwork- line & grade from the design engineer. -4- 845 3. Pipe Collar/Anchor Forms -with required reinforcement in place. 846 4. Inlet/Junction Structure Forms - with required reinforcement in place. Required Paperwork- line & grade from design' engineer. 847 5. Outlet Structure/Rin Rap -prior to placing required concrete. NOTE: All pipe bells shall be glued and face upstream. 842 G. CURB & GUTTER 1. Forms: Required reinforcement (if any) must be in place with forth work set. Off -set staking must be set by the surveyor for location of curb face. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer approving area to receive concrete; line & grade letter or memo from design engineer. 2. Concrete placement H. PAVING INSPECTION (commercial sites only): A prepaving meeting shall be held prior to the establishment of subgrade. The project coordinator must contact the inspector at least (4) working days in advance and must also contact the following principals to be represented at the meeting: paving contractor, civil engineer, owner, and soil engineer. The required inspections for paving shall be discussed at that meeting. I. EROSION CONTROL and STATE. WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS: The official wet season is Oct. 1 thru April 30. -During this time, all projects must have erosion control devices in place and functional and be subject to regular inspection for sediment control measures affecting water quality exiting the project into storm drains, streams, creeks, and the ocean. In addition, these requirements are enforceable throughout the entire year, including the dry season, especially if rain is imminent or practices on the project are cause for damage to water quality. The design and placement of devices on site that control water quality (called BMP's or Best Management Practices) must be designed by the project civil engineer. Erosion control plans, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (S WPPP) and a suitable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) must be current with the grading operation, available on site at all times, and be updated on a regular basis. If, in the opinion of the grading inspector, a lack of preparedness on the site is present for a possible rain event, or if housekeeping practices on the site impact requirements set forth within the SWPPP or NPDES, a stop work order my be given on construction activities until readiness is met. Further involvement by the County Is authorized Water Quality Ordinance Inspector, or even the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board inspector could result in severe fines for issues violating the Clean Water Act. Required iuspections for typical erosion control work: 849 1. PRE-BUILD/SANDBAG PLACEMENT: Prior to starting erosion control work, contact grading inspector to review erosion control program being planned and the required sand bag placement. 2. DESILTING BASIN INSTALLATION: 850 a. Basin risers and outlet pipes -prior to backfilling. Required Paperwork - line & grade from design engineer 5- 851 b. Anti. -seep collar forms - prior to concrete pour. 852 c. Spillways - prior to gunite; required reinforcement and guide wires must be in place. Required Paperwork - line & grade from design engineer; memo from soil engineer for 90% compaction of the subgrade and the desilt basin embankment fill. 8941 3. COMPLETION OF EROSION CONTROL: When erosion control work is complete and readiness for the threat of rain is intact Required Paperwork line & grade from the design engineer may be required. 870 J. FINAL GRADING INSPECTION (to obtain certificate of occupancy) AND GRADING BOND RELEASE: Field requirements - When all work shown on approved grading plan is complete, including drainage device installation, swales, driveways, monumentation, and slope planting is established. In no case will a final be considered if safety is an issue. Final requirements: 1. Final line and grade from civil engineer/architect 2 Final geotechnical report from soil engineer; this report must include all work after the rough grade compaction report. Final reports must include interior & exterior utility trench backfill, retaining wall backfiil, subgrade/base/asphalt testing and inspection, a slope stability statement, and any other geotechnical condition that may have arisen. Report must be reviewed and approved before any final can be given. 3. Final as -built plan from civil engineer/architect - if site deviates from last approved grading plan 4. Slope Planting and Irrigation - slopes must be fully established with plant material and irrigated in accordance with the grading code. A certification from the landscape architect may be required. 5. Recorded Tract Map (tracts only) - to check monumentation during final; monumentation bonds will not be released until all monuments required of the tract map are set and checked by inspector. 6 Fire Marshal Clearance (if required) - contact fire marshal's office to meet any fuel modification requiiements and have them notify the grading inspector when clearance is met. 7. Public Works Clearance - the public works inspector must notify the grading inspector when a clearance can be given for occupancy and bond release. 8 Tract/site "Conditions of Approval" - grading issues relating to those planning conditions set forth in the initial stages of the project must be met; review any planning documents to insure they are met. K-2 871 MONUMENTATION INSPECTION: Lot and Tract corner monuments must be inspected as a condition of fmalling this permit, releasing the grading bond, and releasing monumentation bonds. Prior to calling for this inspection, the monuments that are required "to be set" of the recorded tract map must be located and flagged for inspection. A copy of the recorded tract map and a letter from the engineer, certifying the setting of the monuments, is required at time of inspection. Note: A grading permit and grading bond will not be released until all outstanding issues on the grading permit are complete including monumentation. It is responsibility of the permittee to maintain an active permit until this requirement is met. Permits that lapse and expire may have to be processed into new grading permits by the permittee. K. OTHER CONCERNS / NOTES -7- Y Owner '-�irnrz By jc44a 1Z 72 I wuk-r-z Address 145 tww6 Telephone StclS/14t-42an Soil Engineer < e t4/l� , By '-Feu r.. ' l 71a r•,g r Address 6'770 4 C04J-Iet.n- Telephone Grading Contractor By Address Telephone Others By Address Telephone Civil Engrr./Arch. %�i>h!S!¢JG t1JL d�" +5 oG • _ By d!Al �J„rpGla Address em 3 jft�vJtl:SlZV!/V Telephone 541% as +Y-3 '%O/O Geologist By Address Telephone Coordinator/Superintendent By Address Telephone Others By Address Telephone %I EETING - PRECISE PERMIT PREGRADE -8- COUNTY OF ORANGE RESOURCES & DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Page 1 of 1 GRADING SECTION ❑ Main Office ® Regional Office P. O. Box 4048 22921 Triton Way Santa Ana, CA 927024048 Laguna Hills, CA 92553 (714)834-2626 (949)472-7979 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW SHEET REVIEW OF GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS INCLUDING Report Date Date Received Tyne of Report ❑ Preliminary (Initial) ® Final Soil Report 8/4/04 8/5/04 ❑ Ingrading or Interim ❑ RG Compaction ❑ Rough Grade Compaction ❑ RG Recertification ❑ Rough Grade Recertification ❑ Response #1 ❑ Supplement or Addendum ❑ Response 92 ❑ Grading Plan Review/Revision ❑ ❑ Paving Design ® Final GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT: LEIGHTON & ASSOC., INC. Job # 830019-041 Tract # 16422 Site Address 8179 Whaler's Bluff, IRVC Lot/Bldg#s1,2,22,23,24 ® Precise/Preliminary Grading Permit # GB030176 Distribution Developer/Owner Taylor Woodrow Homes, Inc. Address 15 Cushing, Irvine, CA 92618 General Contractor Address Soil Engineer Vikram Kulkarni Engineering Geologist ❑ ACTION ® Report (a) Approved ❑ Report (s) Approved Subject to Condition Below: ❑ Prior to approval of report (s) attend to the following and resubmit response: Report reviewed/approved by: Date: August 5, 2004 Jeff Fe rier (949) 587-581 I CONSTRUCTION SITE INVENTORY PERMIT NO.: SITE ADDRESS INCLUDING ZIP: PROJECT SIZE -ACRES: STATE WDID NO.; DEVELOPER CONTACT NAME: DEVELOPER MAILING ADDRESS INCLUDING ZIP CODE; DEVELOPER PHONE NUMBER: r/ ` 6!641IQC2:7 �9y9� Syr- /men DEVELOPER ON -SITE CONTACT NAME: DEVELOPER ON -SITE PHONE NUMBER:G���j� 24 HR EMERGENCY CONTACT NAME: 24 HR EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBER: e� 7-' r JQ Pelican Hill p r/ `` Q — ' -r ,v' � n 1,��� i I "` r PROJECT ,y SITE C stal Cove Y�; - / �f¢ 1,.1' ✓'�/I 1 ` + rq Reef Pointe` - • �/ Z El Morro B m N 70m). IM".."N'4w...m ".ii i:�.r it 'er J o�,.n. cxL�bnra]s Mnum pwanngie.�. r/'.`_ •'� .�< a k t _N. '•\ SITE LOCATION MAP LOTS 1 THROUGH 24, TRACT 16422 CRYSTAL COVE NEWPORT COAST, CALIFORNIA Project No. 830019-041 Scale (approx) 1:18,000 Engr./Geol. DJUREL Drafted By BQT Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGMM axour corevAY Date 11/03 Figure No. 1 Project Name: Project No.: Date: 1 Report No.: Taylor Woodrow— White Sails 830019.041 9116104 Location: Tract 16422, Newport Coast Day (check one): ❑M ❑T ❑W ®T ❑F ❑S ❑S Client: Taylor Woodrow Superintendent: John Weather (check one): ®Sunny ❑Overcast ❑Rainy Other: Contractor: Foreman: Author: JTB Soll Engineer: Geologist: Project Manager: Field Supervisor: DJC RHM Observationrresting of: Retaining Wall Footings for lot 21, Tr.16422 []Mass Grading ❑Precise Grading ZPostgrading Other: Equipment Working: Technician JTB Hours 2,0 Today's Estimated Yardage: Summary of operations: On site to observe the footing excavations for retaining walls on lot 21, tract 16422. Probing of the footings found them to bottom into suitable bearing materials. Any loose materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. Compliance with line and grade, size and reinforcement are not apart of our scope of work. This area is now considered suitable for its intended use from a geotechnical viewpoint. Compaction tests, where and when tested, Indicated adequate compaction. If not adequately compacted the area is to be reworked and retested to confirm adequate compaction. Received by: ® Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY Print: DAILY FIELD REPORT Date: Page 1 of 1 A Project " 4 t t' Pro et NoUJ l J — ©V I Date:/ Locati n/� Author: —T To: / Subject: m �� �v�-5 J, rQ6iIn In wlq( vx- T1 IP l Wr4 c r ha 5 cou6 r s nci s tnt kA- ('1411 be4liL l s G h. >, bvtlno, AL*;:6(2,t I s ga' .Cl(?j In 0rq?VILjr5t r -ed C 25 14e^ei"e /IC1f5 can tP s Sa,1S _ �Ja lr���nG9 tCt/t�Jr� X r P i 4;1L 5,��� C`UC I /)e Cln-� rCrr / a // l aisue se>, / ' v 1`/ er f +' s�, sGtv,`{ ' h r r ehl e7 cGYneftl conCGcf�. tSa )�fvt r je)i S lrk cva/l �J=�cvr�N 11As hie ti'l Q We Iti CAN rY•t 1! 4—C4- Cf e Cl v J e 40- c Sol/ 5- r l.— Page of � & ���=_ LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FIELD MEMORANDUM RAelved Ely: Print 39601098 White — File Copy Yellow— Client Copy Pink — Field Copy Gold — Client(Agency Copy ilk Project NameP'I 'a'7 ^ -rig 190 a/ aA , -ile"r i �S Project NameP'I 'a'7 ^ -rig 190 a/ aA , -ile"r i �S «Project No.: 0,3 av - O q l Date: f< i 6 Gy Location >- . ' '- "' ± (a, - Author: To: Subject: �n V q IIJr` bo 4v'-ns r IL7 walls cl t (CYO S f'q AJ Col Zo 2,.- l GT � CQUot Un r �F , n t 1 wq S b/d Mean 16^ 1 ZOi Qk -Ze22 . 5a v{iP1s C 6 'e �I id ' e /tJhe e< �d v-�4sV 04t/l �e� min, ��t 0 f-e : " / oa-s sa d , s n c9 - + c ci s ti a lr v r�� l'1 f C1Yt 5 ee I ,t r Page _of _ _- LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FIELD MEMORANDUM ec iv d'' y 142- ��/ - Pri ~� 39601098 White - File Copy Yellow -Client Copy Pink - Field Copy Gold - Client/Agency Copy f Project Name: ' ' ' "'Pfoj ct No.: Date: LQratlbn, T rock l6c12�._ Author:r J. - / \ bymG57 To: J-ok ., L Subject: '--� roo7LL / lauCrl�n U� S 1,� 604ci 1 AIrl (dCF C,� is / l Co n ± ( q cAl r rhaIt cava�iun r-IG,�,� i� j �In On i f /8. 777 IS vaAe)�', 15 4010(ear _gryii etAcA in eered I! G n ! Sctf , ac -vr u Qo0eiAv rv{c ra. Gj e ' / ( 10o6v .SOr / iS �tY�Ci & er rks k Cil uV M 0L/ PT: l a c e, d C. //'' et,�tv(cl ✓t S'C X Page _of LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FIELD MEMORANDUM, 116cetve1d e�: 4, 3960 1098 White - File Copy Yellow- Client Copy Pink - Field Copy Gold - CllentrAgency Copy r- L, Project Name: _li (_ `dr t� 'boo �'. Vikj b; .� Project No.: - " 83aolct - 0 \ Date: y.� o1k , Report No, Location: 1 { tl oz lJ� Author:: .paw -- `" M T ®T F S S Client(Contractor: SupoForemt n: J. t *9 Weather: Stn.we�. Field Supervisor: Geologist: Soil Engineer: Observationrresting of: 4 Tech Equipment Working: Hours n ' Today's Yardage: Yardage to Date: Summary of Operations: O��s o ve A >✓i env r n o.�% 9 I. :h 4 @., a, %O�- Qi Page _ of Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY Daily Field Report C� Received by: Print CLIENT COPY 3910 0902 ,b 1 Project Name: Project No.: Date: Report No.: Taylor Woodrow —White Sails 830019.041 9116104 Location: Day (check one): Tract 16422, Newport Coast [M i]T i]W ®T i]F [IS EIS. Client: Taylor Woodrow Contractor: Superintendent: John Foreman: Weather (check one): ®Sunny j]Overcast E]Rainy Other. Author: JTB Soil Engineer: DJC Geologist: Project Manager: I Field Supervisor: RHM Observationrresting of: Retaining Wall Footings for lot 22, Tr. 16422 []Mass Grading ilPreclse Grading ®Postgrading Other: Equipment Working: Technician JTB Hours 2.0 Today's Estimated Yardage: Summary of operations: On site to observe the footing excavations for retaining walls on lot 22, tract 16422. Probing of the footings found them to bottom into suitable bearing materials. Any loose materials should be removed prior to concrete placement, Compliance with line and grade, size and reinforcement are not apart of our scope of work. This area is now considered suitable for its intended use from a geotechnical viewpoint. Compaction tests, where and when tested, Indicated adequate compaction. If not adequately compacted the area is to be reworked and retested to confirm adequate compaction. Received by: Leighton and Associates. Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY Print: lf�L L! DAILY FIELD REPORT I Date: Page 1 of 1 Project Name: Taylor Woodrow — White Sails Location: Tract 16422, Newport Coast Client: Contractor: Soil Engineer: DJC Superintendent: John Foreman: of: Retaining Wall Footings for lot 21, Tr. Project No.: Date: 830019.041 1 9116104 Day (check one): Weather (check Author: JTB Manager: Other: Technician JTB Hours 1 2.0 Today's Estimated Yardage: Summary of operations: On site to observe the footing excavations for retaining walls on lot 21, tract 16422. Probing of the footings found them to bottom into suitable bearing materials. Any loose materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. Compliance with line and grade, size and reinforcement are not apart of our scope of work. This area is now considered suitable for its intended use from a geotechnical viewpoint. Compaction tests, where and when tested, indicated adequate compaction. If not adeq area is to be reworked and retested to confirm adequate compaction. Received by: I" Leighton and ``�ssociateS, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPAM Print: DAILY FIELD REPORT 4 Date: Report No.: Other: compacted Page 1 of 1 Project Name: Taylor Woodrow — White Solis Location: Tract 16422, Newport Coast Contractor: $011 DJC of: Project No.: 830019.041 Day (check one): Superintendent: John Foreman: Footing for lot 22, Tract (check one): Author: JTB Project Manager: Date: 719104 Field Supervisor: RHM Other. Technician JTB Hours 1 1.5 Summary of operations: On site to observe the retaining wall footing for lots 22, Tract 16422 front of lot. Probing of the footing bottom found it to bottom into suitable bearing materials. Any loose materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. Compliance with line and grade, size and reinforcement are not apart of our scope of work. Compaction tests, where and when tested, indicated adequate compaction. If not adeq area Is to be reworked and retested to confirm adequate compaction. Received by: Lo Leighton and Associates. Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY Print: .. DAILY FIELD REPORT Date: Report No.: Other: Page 1 of 1 Ou COUNl'Y OF ORANGE nPLANNING do DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT GRADING SECTION PRECISE GRADING PERMIT PREGRADE MEETING 01APRIG rN4PFCf[ON . SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL OFFICE 22921 TRITON WAY. SUITE 125 LAGUNA HILLS, CA 9269 TeL (949) 472.7979; Fat (494) 5"740 Date: l Inspector ZZ— Tel: Supervisor. TeL OfficeHrs, Mon-Fn 7- 3 Public Works Inspector. 5-AvzyAemx -y,-A 4'-1.1 g w GRADING PERMIT NO 69 * -71 1 [7 TRACT #SLOT # e S '",7L JOBADDRE5 OWNER `Dktt +,R Ie a G. v,/ PERMIT EXPIRES I. General Requirements: A. An approved set of grading plans, preliminary soil report, and a copy of the grading permit shall be on the job at all times; working hours are Monday thm Saturday, 7 am. to 8 P.M. Work other than this time requires prior authorization and may involve approval by Board of Supervisors. B. CALLING FOR INSPECTION: Grading Section must be called for PRIOR to the requested day of inspection. Inspection requests made the day of the inspection can not be made. To set up inspection, use the automated inspection line by calling (714) 796-0407. - Requests can be made up to 11:00 PM for next day or subsequent day inspection requests. For specific instructions on using the automated system, a handout is available from County offices noted above or from your inspector, or by going to the County'of Orange's web site at httn•//odsd oc.ca.eov/ where inspections can be made and general inspection information relating to this project can be obtained. Use the inspection item numbers identified during this meeting today to set up the required inspections on the automated system. If a specific time is needed to set up the inspection, contact the inspector on the morning of the inspection during the office hours noted above. inspections are provided on that day if the workload and logistics allow. You must recall your inspection if an inspection you called for was not made. C. State Water Resources Control Board requirements: This project must comply with State of California water quality laws. If this project is North of El Toro Road, refer to httn•//swrcb ca.Qov.rwocb8 (Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board); if South of El Toro Road, refer to httD1/swrcb.ca.eov.rwocb9 (San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board). Study the respective laws for their applications to this site. D. Work covered by this permit should conform with the approved soil reports and P.D.S.D. stamped approved grading plans. Talk to your grading inspector before making any changes; E. If the inspector finds geotechnical or design conditions not as previously approved, related work may be stopped until revised plans and/or soil reports are approved. All grading work can not extend beyond the approved grading limits shown on the plan. F. Before excavation for any underground utilities or other trenching, approval must be obtained from the grading inspector. INSPECTION II. REQUIRED GRADING INSPECTION: ITEMNO. Tile following are required grading inspections, specific to this project. If any work requiring inspection is covered or concealed by additional work without inspection, the grading inspector may require that the covered work be exposed for inspection. 801 A, START OF WORK: At time of brushing, clearing, or demolition. Limits of grading mustbe staked; adequate water, erosion control, and toilet facilities must be on site. B. EXCAVATION AND FILL INSPECTION 802 1. CANTON CLEANOUT: After all 'brush and unsuitable material has been removed and an acceptable base has been exposed, and prior to fill placement. Required Paperwork- memo from soil engineer/geologist approving area for fill. 803 2. FILL OR BUTTRESS KEYWAY: After suitable natural ground or bedrock is exposed; the bench or key must be excavated to design specifications; survey stakes are required to locate the toe of slope. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer/geologist approving bench/key. 804 3. OVER -EXCAVATION: After an area has been excavated to remove unsuitable material, and prior to any fill placement. Required Paperwork- memo from soil engineer/geologist approving area for fill. 805 4. ROUTINE CUT & FILL: Each working day of routine cut and/or fill; field memos for cut slopes and fill placement must be made available by the geotechnical firm, along with adequate engineered staking for limits of grading. Note: importing or exporting of soil may requiretraffic control and a haul route clearance. 806 5. CANYON/BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN: a. After excavation of trench and prior to placement of filter material and pipe. Subdrain and pipe shall be on -site for inspection. b. After subdrain and bedding have been placed, prior to covering pipe with filter material. The soil engineer must provide a memo approving subdrain pipe placement. c. After all filter material has been placed; soil engineer must provide a field memo approving completion of the subdrain installation. C. EARTHWALL (i.e., Keystone, Loffel, crib, etc.): Basic Inspections: 820 1. FOUNDATION EXCAVATION: Prior to placing any wall material. Wall materials (concrete 'members, fabric, gravel, geogrid) shall be on site for inspection and excavation must be located with engineered stakes. Required Paperwork-- Line & Grade from design engineer*; Memo from geotechnical engineer approving excavation and materials on site* *Must be wet signed by registered engineers/geologist. 2- 821 822 823 830 832 2. SUBDRAIN: Prior to covering with rock and fabric. Required Paperwork —'Memo from geotechnical engineer. 3. GEOGRID: At initial placement, and thereafter during placement. 4. FILL AND WALL MEMBER PLACEMENT: Daily inspection calls must be made during routine construction of wall once initial work above is completed memos from both design and geotechnical engineers may be required if work warrants clarification. NOTE: Tne design engineer must incorporate geotechnical and manufacturer specifications on plans; full time inspection by geotechnical engineer may be required during placement of wall materials and fill. D. ROUGH GRADE RELEASE INSPECTION Rough grade release is the inspection required to verify that the overall grading work meets the plans and geotechnical reports. The inspection is required prior to any construction activities taking place. After the inspection is made, the inspector may allow some aspects of the work to initiate, such as trenching for foundations and utilities. However, the inspection is a necessary requirement for the ultimate issuance of the building permits, retaining wall permits, and street release to Public Works. This inspection may be called for all at once, or as a partial release when portions of the grading work is being accomplished in stages. 1. PADS (for release of building permits): Field requirements - witness stake and blue -top for each pad elevation shown on plan, property corners, building corner's (condbs'and'single lot only), and top & toe of slope in accordance with inspector's requirements; terrace/down drains on slopes must be completed. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer - memo/letter from soil engineer * - statement of compliance from grading contractor Geotechnical report - a formal compac'tiori report for the completed grading work must be submitted for review and approval prior to granting formal rough grade release of pads. * must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist. 2. RETAINING WALLS (for release to building inspector): Field 'requirements - off -set stakes set by surveyor locating face of wall or foundation; the backcut for the wall and the foundation excavation must be made. The building inspector will not inspect and approve the steel in the footing until the grading inspector signs off on the excavation. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer - memo/letter from soil engineer * *must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist, as applicable; memo from soil engineer must list referenced reports, and state if recommendations remain unchanged.' -3- 831 833 840 843 844 3. STREETS/STORM DRAIN (for release to public works inspector): Field requirements - off -set staking is required by surveyor locating key points for the street or storm drain alignment; contact the inspector just prior to staking for these requirements. Required field paperwork - line & grade from civil engineer - memo/letter from soil engineer * *must be wet signed by registered engineer or geologist. 4. FOUNDATION/CAISSON EXCAVATION INSPECTION: If conditions warrant, excavation work may be needed to extend foundations of planned structures into specific geologic strata or unusual soil criteria, as required in the geotechnical reports. This is not an inspection of any structural steel, which is a requirement under the building permit. At the time of this inspection, the excavations must be made and survey control stakes must be provided along with the following required paperwork. Required field paperwork - memo from the soil engineer/geologist* - line & grade from the civil engineer* *must be wet signed by registered engineer/geologist, as applicable. Geotechnical memo must state if foundation recommendations are unchanged from previously recommended and the referenced reports must be listed on memo. NOTE: THE GEOTECHNICAL MEMO/LETTER NOTED ABOVE MAY BE SUPERCEEDED AT ANY TIME BY A FORMAL REPORT IF CONDITIONS (ie. settlement, slope stability concerns) DURING GRADING WARRANT THAT SUCH A REPORT BE SUBMITTED TO COUNTY ENGINEERING STAFF PRIOR TO ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF ANY OF THE ITEMS MENTIONED- E. CONCRETE V-DITCH - TERRACE DRAINS, DOWN DRAINS, BROW DITCHES, AND RIBBON GUTTERS. 1. Forms: Required reinforcement and thickness -control wires must be in place at the time of inspection; Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer approving area to receive concrete and if type 5 concrete is needed; line & grade from design engineer. Minimum 2500 P.S.I. load tickets will be collected. 2. Concrete or Gunite Placement F. STORM / AREA DRAIN AND INLET / JUNCTION STRUCTURES These drainage devices ones that are covered by approved grading plans, not by improvement plans approved with the public works department. 1. RCP delivery; provide certificate of "D" load from manufacture. 2. Pipe Placement -prior to covering with backfill. Required Paperwork- line & grade from the design engineer. -4- 845 846 847 842 845 85f 3. Pipe Collar/Anchor Forms - with required reinforcement in place. 4. InleUJunction Structure Forms - with required reinforcement in place. Required Paperwork- line &grade from design engineer. 5. Outlet Structure/Rip Rap -prior to placing required concrete. NOTE: All pipe bells shall be glued and face upstream. G. CURB & GUTTER 1. Forms: Required reinforcement (if any) must be in place with form work 'set. Off -set staking must be set by the surveyor for location of curb face. Required Paperwork - memo from soil engineer approving area to receive concrete; line & grade letter or memo from design engineer. 2. Concrete placement H. PAVING INSPECTION (commercial sites only): A prepaying meeting shall be held prior to the establishment of subgrade. Theproject coordinator must contact the inspector at least (4) working days in advance and must also contact thefollowing principals to be represented at the meeting: paying contractor, civil engineer, owner, and soil engineer. The required inspections for paving shall be discussed at that meeting. I. EROSION CONTROL and STATE, WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS: The official wet season is Oct. 1 thru April 3b'. During this time, all projects must have erosion control devices in place and functional and be subject to regular inspection for sediment control measures affecting water quality exiting the project into storm drains, streams, creeks, and the ocean. especially addition, these requirements are enforceable throughout the'entire year, including the dry P Y is imminent or -practices on the project are cause for damage to water quality. The design and placement of devices on site that control water quality (called BMP's or Best Management Practices) must be designed by the project civil engineer. Erosion control plans, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (sWPPP) and a suitable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) must be current with the grading operation, available on site at all times, and be updated on a regular basis. If, in the opinion of the grading inspector, a lack of preparedness on the site is present for a possible rain event, or if housekeeping practices on the site impact requirements set forth within the sWPPP or NPDES, a stop work order my be given on construction activities until readiness is met. Further involvement by the County's authorized Water Quality Ordinance Inspector, or even the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board inspector could result in severe fines for issues violating the Clean Water Act. Required inspections for typical erosion control work: 1, pRE-BUILD/SANDBAG PLACEMENT: Prior to starting erosion control work, contact grading inspector to review erosion control program being planned and the required sand bag placement. 2. DESILTING BASIN INSTALLATION: a. Basin risers and outlet pipes -prior to backfilling. Required Paperwork - line & grade from -design engineer -5. t 851 852 854 870 b. Anti -seen collar forms - prior to concrete pour. c. Spillways -prior to'gunite; required reinforcement and guide wires must be in place. Required Paperwork - line & grade from design engineer; memo from soil engineer for 90% compaction of the subgrade and the desilt basin embankment fill. 3. COMPLETION OF EROSION CONTROL: When erosion control work is complete and readiness for the threat of rain is intact Required Paperwork line & grade from the design engineer may be required- J. FINAL GRADING INSPECTION (to obtain certificate of occupancy) AND GRADING BOND RELEASE: Field requirements - When all work shown on approved grading plan is complete, including drainage device installation, swales, driveways, monumentation, and slope planting is established. In no case will a final be considered if safety is an issue. » Final requirements: 1. Final line and grade from civil engineer/architect 2 Final geotechnical report from soil engineer; this report must include all work after the rough grade compaction report. Final reports must include interior & exterior utility trench backfill, retaining wall backfill, subgrade/base/asphalt testing and inspection, a slope stability statement, and any other geotechnical condition that may have arisen. Report must be reviewed and approved before any final can be given. 3. Final as -built plan from civil engineer/architect - if site deviates from last approved grading plan 4. Slope Planting and Irrigation - slopes must be fully established with plant material and irrigated in accordance with the grading code. A certification from the landscape architect may be required. 5. Recorded Tract Map (tracts only) - to check monumentation during final; monumentation bonds will not be released until all monuments required of the tract map are set and checked by inspector. 6 Fire Marshal Clearance (if required) - contact fire marshal's office to meet any fuel modification requirements and have them notify the grading inspector when clearance is met. 7. Public Works Clearance - the public works inspector must notify the grading inspector when a clearance can be given for occupancy and bond release. 8 Tract/site "Conditions of Approval" - grading issues relating to those planning conditions set forth in the initial stages of the project must be met: review any planning documents to insure they are met. 12 ' 871 MONUMENTATION INSPECTION: Lot and Tract corner monuments must be inspected as a condition of fmalling this permit, releasing the grading bond, and releasing monumentation bonds. Prior to calling for this inspection, -the monuments that are required "to be set" of the recorded tract map must be located and flagged for inspection. A copy of the recorded tract map and a letter from the engineer, certifying the setting of the monuments, is require& at time of inspection. Note: A grading permit and grading bond will not be released until all outstanding issues on the grading permit are complete including monumentation. It is responsibility of the permittee to maintain an active permit until this requirement is met. Permits that lapse and expire may have to be processed into new grading permits by the permittee. K OTHER CONCERNS / NOTES r,* -7- Owner By Jbl 1� 2 Address Telephone Soil Engineer t '�°< By SFeu u, Address 127$4 C92-M-et 1 V Telephone (9 %,91 2 50 -14 21 Grading Contractor By Address Telephone Others By Address Telephone Civil EngrJArch. j�yNSJPIL LitSS o G . By d'f'ot!l T �,ryGiz Address 0 3 /}�G—/�l'S � �-dL�/�•�•k' Telephone 5-7!P`/-529-3'ZO/42 Geologist _ By Address Telephone _ Coordinator/Superintendent By Address _ Telephone Others _ By Address _ Telephone VEI:TING— PRECISE PERMIT PREGRADE - 8 -