716, For grading and construction o, Studies & ReportsDist. Office 12.02
Sheet 1 of 1
County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works
GEOTECHNiCAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING DIVISION
GEOLOGIC REVIEW SHEET
Sop So. irrernont Ave., Alhambra, CA 91803
TEL. (626) 458-4925
Tract / Parcel Map
Parent Tract
Site Addrece 40 Eastfiele Drive
Geologist Irvine Geotechnical
Soils Engineer Same as above
Grading P.G. No. N/A
Building P.C. No. 0412170031 & 32
Geologic Report(e) Dated
Soils Engineering Report(s) Dated
Geology and Soils Engineering Report Dated 5/27/05, 8/07/04 (IC 04101-11
Additional Reports Reviewed Western Laboratories: 8/01/03 (02-35181
Lot(s)
Location City of Rolling Hills
APN 7576-003-050
Developer/Owner Tonsich
Engineer/Arch. Rodin Associates
Processing Center Date an Building Plan 2/09105
For Guest House, Addition to SFR, 3-car garage, and retaining walls
DISTRIBUTION
1 Dist Office
Inspector
1 Geologist
Sells Engineer
1 WED File
Grading Section
ArchlEngineer
Action: _Plan is recommended for approval from a geologic standpoint, subject to conditions below.
',X_Plan is not recommended for approval for reasons below.
Remarks/Conditions:
1. Show the location of the existing on-alte sewage disposal system servicing the primary residence on the plans and show the
proposed location of the on -site sewage disposal system that will service the proposed guesthouse.
2, All recommendations of the consulting geologist must be incorporated into the design or shown as notes on the plans.
3, The plan must be specifically approved by the consultant geologist by manual, original signature and date on each Sheet
prior to approval by the Geology Seolion. Submit two (2) sets for review.
4, Add the following as notes to the plan:
pile and wall excavations must be inspected and approved by the consulting geologist and soils engineer prior to the placing
of steel or concrete. A final geology report verifying total depth, approved embedment material, and embedment depth must
be provided.
5. All proposed corrective measures must be shown on the plan (pile -supported retaining walls, removals, etc.) on the plan.
8. The Solis Engineering review dated R f' f °S is attached.
Prepared by
P:1Gmopub\Geolagy Ro1iowWormalFormO8.doc
1ar9oras
Reviewed by
/ / oats July 27, 2005
d
EEEO-2E13-13TE utpod •0 R.a.aaE
dSO:e0 SO ET doS
•
•
Address:
Telephone:
Fax:
Review No. 2
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
GEOTECHNICALAND MATERIALS ENGINEERING DIVISION
SOILS ENGINEERING REVIEW SHEET
900 S. Fremont Ave., Alhambra, CA 91803
(626) 458-4925
(626)451-4913
Guest House, Additions, 3-car Garage, and Retaining Walls
Location
Developer/Owner
Engineer/Architect
Soils Engineer
Geologist
District Office 12.02
Job Number B372001
Sheet 1 of 1
DISTRIBUTION:
Drainage
Grading
40 Eastfield Drive, City of Rolling Hills 1 Geo/Soils Central File
Tonsich 2 District Engineer
Rodin Associates 1 Geologist
Irvine Geotechnical (iC 04101-1) 1 Soils Engineer
Same as above 1 Englnoer(Architeot
Building Plan Check Nos. 041270031 and 041270032
Review of:
Building Plan Dated By Processing Canter 2/0/05
Soils Engineering and Geologic Reports Dated _547105 and 6/7/04,
Soils Engineering and Geologic Report By Western Laboratories Dated 8/1 /03
Previous review sheet dated 3/16/05
ACTION:
Building plan is not recommended for approval.
REMARKS:
1. As previously requested, provide additional information to clarify the following design details shown or not shown on
the submitted plans:
a. The set of plans has 2 sheets numbered as S-6.1 with "Detached Garage" In the title blocks. It appears that
one of these 2 sheets is for the proposed guest house, based on the different foundation plan layouts shown
on these 2 sheets. Verify and revise the plans as necessary.
b. On one of the Sheet No. S-6.1, one of the proposed caissons for the proposed garage is not numbered (likely
Caisson No. 14?). Provide the missing information on the piens as necessary.
c. Caisson Nos. 9 and 10 and associated caisson details (embedment depths. etc.) are not included In the
Caisson Schedule provided an Sheet No. S-2.5 of the plans. However. Caisson Nos. 9 and 10 are shown on
the Foundation Plan on Sheet No. S-4.1 of the plans. Provide the missing information on the Caisson
Schedule aS necessary.
d. Caisson Schedule provided on Sheet No. 8-2.5 of the plans shows 15 locations for Caisson No. 23 (i.e., 15
caissons with Caisson No, 23). However, the Retaining Wall Layout Plan on Sheet No. S-7.1 of the plane
shows 6 caissons for Caisson No. 23, Verify and revise the plans as necessary.
e. "H" Is denoted as height of slope as well as retained height of wall In the Caisson Schedule provided on Sheet
No. S-2.5, on the Top of Slope Caisson Detail on Sheet No. S-2,6, and on the Rear of Guest House Caisson
Detail an Sheet No. S-2.7 en the plans. Clarity and revise the plans as necessary.
f. Top of Slope Caisson Detail an Sheet No. S-2.6 shows 2 different pile embedment depths that are denoted as
"D (embedment into bcdroek)" and "depth into bedrock". Clarify and revise the plans as necessary.
2. Page 6 of the 8/1/03 report by Western Laboratories states that the descending slope immediately below the existing
residence has a surficlal factor of safety of less than 1.5; and hence recommends that this slope be graded to a flatter
2:1 (H:V) slope gradient. The Soils Engineer of record must Indicate whether thls remedial grading is required. If so,
then show the required grading on the plans. If not, then recommend alternative mltlgellon measures to bring the
surficlal factor of safety to at least 1,5.
2'd EEE0-2EB-0TE
uteoJ •0 F',..7.ese
dSo:E0 SO ET daS
• •
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING DIVISION
SOILS ENGINEERING REVIEW SHEET
Building Plan Check Nos. 041270031 and 041270032 Sheet2 of 2
REMARKS (CONT'):
3. Show the following on the building plans:
a. Revised andlor additional design details as Indicated in Remark 1 of this review sheet.
b. Locations, details, and notes of the proposed underpinnings (corbels) at portions of the existing residence
where it abuts the proposed additions, per the sobs engineer.
c. Location of new retaining wall that will provide the Code required 15-foot setback between the proposed
additions and the elope, per the soils engineer.
d. Location of private sewage disposal system(s).
e. Details and notes for the 1:1 (H:V) beckcut required for the construction of the proposed retaining walls,
per the soils engineer.
f. Materiel specifications for the proposed wall backflll materials, Per the sobs engineer, "approved fill"
consisting of a blend that does not exceed a 50/50 ratio of on -site expansive soils end non -expansive
soils shall be used for wall backiiit.
g. Re -grading of the existing descending slope, as necessary.
h. All recommended mitigation measures
4. The Soils Engineer of record must review the building plans and sign and stamp the plans In verification of his
recommendations. Original manual signature and wet stamp are required.
5. Submit two sets of building plans to the Soils Section for verification of compliance with County codes end policies.
6. Include a copy of this review sheet with your response.
NO TEES) TO THE PLAN 9HECI(ER1BUILDINc AND SAFETY ENpINEER;
A. ON -SITE SOILS HAVE A MEDIUM TO HIGH EXPANSION POTENTIAL AND ARE CORROSIVE TO FERROUS
METALS.
B. PER THE SOILS ENGINEER, THE EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURES (EFP'S) STATED IN THE 5/27/05 REPORT
ARE RECOMMENDED, PROVIDED THAT APPROVED FiLL IS USED TO BACKFILL THE ZONE BETWEEN THE
1:1 (H:V) BACKCUT AND THE WALLS.
f'3tpared by
4' or ca4`ks
Gan Lem
Date 8/3f05
)4OT api public safety, relative to aootochnical subsurface exploration, shall he provided In accordance with current codas for excavations,
Indusive of the Las Angeles cowry Code, clutter 11.48, and the State of California, Titta 8, Construction Safety orders.
G t aasttield-40
E'd EEED-ZEB-DTE utpo? •D R.i.ua1 dSDIED 20 ET daS
f
t
REV1&Ed SITE PLAN....`.....____,.._._.r...._...._ •••• 4.1••_1m10,M10040._ .._..�._�_.__.__...,...__�
Mum •11. WNW allalW
13 OM MIN WOW
� .- rA,ac.nrn i-va.,.yv.c
art 14DT MUM,
you wwW11011WA
� y +.leer wrw
LW M
k
RADIUS MAP
S s�
1
rd. •Ema,mrwimirso.
4111.
ram.. tiraW
_.r..» Ink
'a�r�ar :+^
�'[.�fIi1 gra.b meow wea
F ▪ .ww... MIMIC
r..
r▪ r.c .rx
rw..
•
EEEO-2E8-0TE
•
▪ wm imam lug mom mama
fa eapm Y US r7�..ralllr �wose�
® wwwre-o[++wo a+w+GL-cC#vap*r.r leo tr-e. fYAM
w mamummaNd mama
mr..0 d.,..r.r rrr.w.MUEa.w. • '
'wow....,y.
E
9
REVISED SITE PLAN
RADIUS MAP
r
S .-.. +. .......ter. r••...sue.. . ,...0r+...r...SminI....atnm.••••••••••w•••..s.aw....w.w.,eim,••••at.����.••..mn•n^. tl•. ••••••••..• ono ...••.rr..._ r .r4.gfsr ••1
•
L
REVISED SITE PLAN
WIT PI IawW WM/MII sn.
Ea 4mrurxMM
mert.RLL or[ rrMr4rcwm oSEME
® 09o1`w L. at rs.+ras] r soeo
MOM=-eeua.MP'M '-I+7U.Gore+rrrroMAIOgotTAM
i wor+o
Ma . R.er aw.
I~�
ZEREWMPLIFRa
— • w.t OUMAIPPM nwr MIMI a MOO a •.ate aa..
masa :.ate .w� .•• •
RADIUS MAP
MAIM rildd
2/0
�•r - a•
.wWO.MeME.
.I....wwnaa
MeY._ was
1.•.•..av_a.�a. om.
.aa
�Rk
Via_. solidi •
.... 11011.- R.Mr -_ra
it ▪ .ate
...nw
j4 ��
OMII0 Wail.
gmssilL
.tea
wa_.._ R
_ _ _aR
r.fA aaaR .tea A.I.M.
1.4.111461. b aaR iMIMIC. 0...GM
•
11
0
ct
cn
c1
CO
-13
'7
t7
0
0
0_
3
EEEO-2E13-OIE
❑