2019-10-12 - Stockstill, Ray - Request for honest servicesFrom: Ray Stockstill <scnbeach@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 11:22 AM
To: Amy Yu
Cc: AJ Ortega
Subject: request for honest services
EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information.
This is not a threat or a warning. It is a request. I would like honest government services from you and your
department and I'm not sure that I'm getting them consistently. I am legally entitled to honest government
services. I'm not looking for a fight but I want honest services and I don't feel that refusing to answer permitting
questions where there is no specific code and/or to give misleading statements isn't very honest. Who can a
consumer turn to in La Quinta other than your department to get answers to permitting questions? As I
mentioned, I'm in mediation and want to get this situation settled. Without knowing the City's position, well
likely end up in arbitration and both sides will likely want to depose you to get the answers from the permitting
authority to our questions in order to settle our dispute. This isn't a threat. It's just the reality of the situation.
There is no specific code for the courtyard drainage found on some page in some regulation.
I hired a senior PE, QSD/P in 2016 who is not a professional industry expert (IE) to review the as -designed as -
built drainage in the courtyard. I intentionally hired someone who would tell me the truth and not tell me what I
wanted to hear. If there was nothing wrong with the drainage system, I didn't want to spend 5 years chasing a
claim that I'd likely end up losing. I wanted to make sure I had an honest evaluation so that I would know how
to proceed. Here are some extracts from his report.
"I spoke with Mr. Brian Kinney, an Engineer in the Public Works Department for the City of La Quinta. Mr.
Kinney stated that reasonable engineering practices should be followed for single family residences. Mr.
Kinney continued to state that NOAA data is used in the City, and Rational Method Hydrology preformed using
Riverside County Standards is acceptable to the City. Mr. Kinney's phone number is 760-777-7045.
Industry Standards and the Riverside County Flood Control requires a sump inlet be sized to convey the 100-
Year Storm Event.
As previously stated, the Stockstill Residence has a Courtyard at the center of the house that is closed off. A
typical residential courtyard has one side open as that rainwater that cannot be intercepted by a drain will flow
overland to the street before ponding high enough to damage the residence.
Since the courtyard of the residence is closed off on all sides, water seeks to travel to the lowest point
possible, which is referred to as a sump. The sump, or low point of the courtyard is the grate near the center of
the courtyard. Rainwater will travel through the grate, into an underground pipe, and then into the street, but
when rainwater runoff exceeds the capacity of the grate, rainwater runoff ponds in the courtyard until enough
pressure builds over the inlet to push the water through the inlet opening.
A sump condition requires a secondary outlet for the rainwater to travel. This secondary outlet is sometimes
referred to as a secondary overflow, or a redundant system. The secondary overflow is sized to convey the
minimum rainwater runoff flow, and is used when the primary system does not properly function. In my
professional opinion, design of the redundant system for a closed off courtyard is a minimum standard of
practice. The City of La Quinta Public Works Storm Drain Plan Review Checklist states a secondary path of
travel is needed in a sump condition. Secondary overflow is required by the Riverside County Transportation
Department and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, as well.
Based on the Orifice Equation, the grate does not meet the minimum industry standards and is a negligent
design. Water would have to pond 7.33 feet to generate sufficient pressure to drain the minimum design storm
flows of 1.43 inches per hour.
There is no freeboard between minimum design storm water and finished floor, in fact, the minimum design
storm water is above the finished floor elevation. This does not meet the minimum standards for the As -Built or
As -Design Conditions.
a. There are no calculations supporting the sizing of the drain system, either on the plans or provided as a
separate report.
b. Any time it rains more than 0.355 inches per hour, water will flood the residence.
c. Design of the Stockstill Residence does not comply with the City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin 06-
16. The City Bulletin states the Designer is to meet all criteria on the Storm Drain Plan Review
Checklist, specifically to provide 1 foot of freeboard above the 100-year surface elevation to the building
pads and to provide calculations and sections to show freeboard is met. The pad is the elevation of the
ground the concrete slab foundation of the house sits on."
The PE, QSD/P report is 83 pages. I took a small portion above from a thorough report done by a senior PE,
QSD/P who doesn't do residential work and who isn't a paid IE. Ultimately though it isn't up to my engineer or
the other side's engineer to decide what gets approved by the City. My engineer viewed your checklists as the
industry standards for the City of La Quinta presumably based on his conversation with Mr. Kinney. The other
engineer felt that freeboard only applies to the 100-year flood elevation in front of the home as it relates to the
pad in the front of the home. The ultimate long term objective is to make sure we pick the correct criteria per
your standards (so that will stand-up to an insurance adjuster's review) that the City agrees with and that the
City will approve. From a near term mediation perspective, the issue is the cost of the scope of work for the
agreed upon drainage remedy. Accounting for a freeboard is a more expensive remedy. Not accounting for it is
less expensive remedy.
I would like a clear statement from you/the City on whether freeboard should be a design criteria or not. My
arguments that I've made with you are based on the 83 page report I had done in 2016 before I filed suit. If the
PE, QSD/P had said everything was fine, I wouldn't have filed suit. They countered my suit with a motion to
compel arbitration. We agreed to try to resolve this in mediation before going to arbitration. I understand both
engineers position regarding freeboard. We'd all like to understand the City's position so that we can move
forward and settle this in mediation.
I would also like answers about horizontal drilling questions.
Lastly, answering these questions isn't going to drag you into the dispute. You're input is needed to settle a
difference of opinion so that we can settle the dispute in mediation without having to go to arbitration.
Ray
From: Ray Stockstill [mailto:scnbeach@earthlink.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 10:35 AM
To: 'Amy Yu'
Cc: 'AJ Ortega'
Subject: RE: pooling rainwater to create pressure
You are wrong with respects to the freeboard requirement from the flood elevation from the street to the pad.
The question I have is did you lie to me? You said below that the flood elevation was 457.4. The water surface
elevation (W.S.E.) in the retention basin is 457.4.
From: Amy Yu [mailto:AyuCa)laquintaca.gov]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 8:03 PM
To: Ray Stockstill
Cc: A] Ortega
Subject: RE: pooling rainwater to create pressure
Hi Ray,
There's a 6 feet difference.
— CALIFORNIA —
Amy Yu I Associate Engineer
Design and Development
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico - La
Ph. 760.777.7047
www.laquintaca.gov
www. playinlaquinta.com
From: Ray Stockstill <scnbeach @earth link.net>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 1:22 PM
Quinta, CA 92253
To: Amy Yu <Avu@laguintaca.gov>
Cc: AJ Ortega <Aortega@laguintaca.gov>
Subject: RE: pooling rainwater to create pressure
Importance: High
One other question, shouldn't there be at least a 12" freeboard between the flood elevation at 457.4 and the
pad at 463.4? That's a 6" freeboard isn't it as -designed isn't it?
From: Amy Yu [mailto:Ayu laquintaca.gov]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 7:10 PM
To: Ray Stockstill
Cc: AJ Ortega
Subject: RE: pooling rainwater to create pressure
Hi Ray,
The pad for your lot (Lot 13) is at 463.4 which is above the 100yr flood elevation of 457.4 as shown on the
rough grading plan (Plan Set No. 05209).
As AJ mentioned, the Building Code doesn't specifically address your concerns in the courtyard, so I would rely
on your engineers recommendation for adequate drainage of the courtyard area. I do want to inform you of
the Building Code (Section 1010.1 Doors) states "the landing at an exterior doorway shall not be more than 7%
inches below the top of the threshold, provided the door, other than an exterior storm or screen door, does
not swing over the landing."
Sincerely,
a cla Qui�a
=4112.T111I116129WW
Amy Yu Associate Engineer
Design and Development
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico - La
Ph. 760.777.7047
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
From: Ray Stockstill <scnbeach@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 3:16 AM
To: Amy Yu <Avu@laquintaca.gov>
Cc: AJ Ortega <Aortega@laquintaca.gov>
Subject: pooling rainwater to create pressure
Quinta, CA 92253
You have the approved precise grading plan for my home that includes a 4" NDS inlet drain grate that has a
max flow rate of 6.88 GPM per the manufacturer's spec sheet. The City's standard is to assume 50% blockage
of the inlet grate in a storm. To get the inlet drain grate to perform at the rate to remove rainwater from a 100
year storm while 50% blocked, rainwater has to pool in the courtyard to over 7' (feet) deep to create the
needed pressure. Potting soil created a debris line on the courtyard furniture. There is a slope to the center of
the courtyard to the sump drain and the furniture was closer to the center than the perimeter so the debris line
is greater on the furniture than on the wall and fireplace. The picture in Figure 2 was taken upon arriving at the
house the following day. Same with Figures 4 & 5. The ER contractor moved the furniture into the garage. The
picture in Figure 3 was taken a month or two later. The debris line was still evident. There was some debris on
the wall and fireplace but not much. The potting soil seemed to stick better to the furniture. The debris on the
wall in Figure 5 was gone when I took the picture in Figure 6 but it gives you a sense of the flood elevation in
the courtyard. It would have been higher if the doors were watertight but I assume the resulting damage would
have been less if there had been a freeboard as part of the design. Additionally, if Shaw had done the math
using the approved precise grading plan to figure out where the courtyard elevation needed to be relative to
the elevation of the pad to create 1' of freeboard, he would have caught his mistake. The freeboard would have
been above the over 7' (feet) of pooled rainwater needed to make his drainage design work.
My undergraduate degree is in architecture and I'm a former CA licensed insurance broker. I was a VP with
Aon Risk Services, Construction Services Division. https://www.aon.com/risk-services/professional-
services/default.isp We provided insurance brokerage services for heavy construction projects and construction
companies (not residential construction).
�s
D
N
C:-
Figure 1
Figure 2
or
n
F
4,0
qpa r F a
Figure 3
6
k
ml,
t
Figure 4
Figure 5
h
t
Figure 6
From: Ray Stockstill [mailto:scnbeach@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 3:41 PM
To: 'ayu@laquintaca.gov'
Cc: 'aortega@laquintaca.gov'
Subject: RE: Model Home Precise Grading Plan
There were 16 homes built before the builder decided to mothball the development. Of the 16, 4 are Plan 1
floor plans. 4 of the 16 homes had water enter them on September 8, 2014 that caused damage. All 4 were the
Plan 1 floorplans. Three of those have a revised precise grading plan on file with the City showing a second
drainage system but none of the 4 homes have a second drainage system. Myself and an owner of one of the
other Plan 1 homes had the same insurance company. I have been with them for around 25 years. They
denied coverage to both of us. I have been at this now for more than 5 years because they denied coverage
and it will likely be 2 more years before this is resolved and the home is finally restored. Their denial letter
stated "Please complete the necessary repairs to prevent further damage, as failure to do so may jeopardize
future coverage." I don't want to "fix" the courtyard drainage, have another event, have the claim denied and go
through this again. I need a written record for my files showing that this subject (freeboard) was discussed in
detail and that the City said what standards apply to the design of the courtyard since there are no codes. I
also need it in case I ever sell the house. If we sell the house, I'll have to disclose all this. Discussing this on
the phone won't work because I need a written record that says 1.) freeboard does make sense and is
consistent with the City's standards that are on your precise grading plan checklist or 2.) 1 need a written
statement that freeboard isn't necessary.
From my insurer's September 12, 2014 denial letter. "Your interior courtyard and patio is exposed to exterior
elements, and unfortunately rain water was unable to drain through the courtyard drainage system which
caused the resulting water damage to your home. Enclosed is a copy of the inspection report for your records.
After careful investigation and review of the facts of this claim, we must regrettably advise that your policy does
not provide coverage for this type of loss."
From: Ray Stockstill [maiIto: rstockstill@dc.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 11:43 AM
To: ayu@Iaquintaca.gov
Cc: aortegaWaquintaca.gov; scnbeach@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: Model Home Precise Grading Plan
I believe that there is only one precise grading plan checklist. It references Engineering Bulletin #06-16
Engineering Bulletin #06-16
Bottom of page 4
"One (1) foot of freeboard above 100 year water surface elevation to the basin rim and the adjacent building
pads........." A street isn't mention as a condition. It also doesn't suggest it has to be in front of the building
pad. It simply needs to be adjacent to the pad. That could be front, sides and/or back, right?
Page 13 #18
Retention Basin Freeboard Requirement
A street is not mentioned as a condition.
Page 17
The freeboard in this illustration is measured from the 100 year flood elevation to the dwelling unit pad.
If there wasn't a street in front of the house, wouldn't there still be a freeboard requirement because of the
open channel?
If there was an open channel in the backyard, wouldn't there be a freeboard requirement for the backyard?
If there were channels on the side yards, wouldn't there be a freeboard requirement for the side yards?
Wouldn't you agree that a freeboard requirement when a dwelling unit pad is involved isn't exclusively for the
front yard and a street?
GEP would seem to suggest that it would make sense to include a freeboard requirement anytime there is a
100 year water elevation adjacent to a dwelling pad, wouldn't you agree? Wouldn't you agree that my
courtyard is adjacent to the pad? It is actually surrounded by the pad on all 4 sides.
Since rainwater has to pool in the courtyard to create the pressure needed for the drainage system to work at a
100 year storm rate, there will be a water elevation in the courtyard that is literally contained by the pad
surrounding the courtyard. Would GEP include freeboard as a design criteria or is it not necessary?
I'm in La Quinta meeting with contractors today so I'm not going t be able to call. Please give all this some
thought. This is about the City's standards since there are no specific codes. Plumbing Concepts new to
include a primary drainage system and an OVERFLOW drainage system since there was nowhere for the
rainwater to go if the primary drain was blocked in a storm. There wasn't a safe secondary overland route so
Plumbing Concepts with an OVERFLOW drainage system and even labeled it on their drawing as
OVERFLOW. That isn't in the plumbing codes. A secondary route of travel is on the City's checklist. It is a
standard of the City's that Plumbing Concepts included in their design criteria. Wouldn't it make sense to
include freeboard as a criteria as well given the circumstances/risks of property damage in the courtyard? This
is a yes or no question that is a reasonable question to ask.
My writing style is aggressive. I'm not mad. Everyone I have dealt with from the City has been extremely
helpful and I sincerely appreciate the input. I've been at this over 5 years and it shows ............ but the end is
close.
Thanks.
Ray Stockstill
949-622-0232
From: Ray Stockstill[maiIto: rstocksti11Ca)dc.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2019 5:40 PM
To: 'ayu@laquintaca.gov'
Cc: 'aortega@laquintaca.gov'; 'scnbeach@earthlink.net'
Subject: Model Home Precise Grading Plan
Amy,
I received your voicemail and will give you a call tomorrow. You asked if I had seen the precise grading plan for
my home. I have. It is on the model home precise grading plan. I'm in a tract development. The tract number is
on the model home precise grading plan. It says in the last sentence on the below quote that "checklists for
grading plans are available on the City's website Plan Check Checklist page." Which checklists are for tract
development model home precise grading plans?
Also, if you go to the last page of Engineering Bulletin #06-16, it shows a freeboard from the flood elevation to
the pad of a home. It is not from the street to the pad. It is from the flood elevation. The retention basins (also
in Engineering Bulleting #06-16) in our community have a freeboard requirement that is measured from the
surface water elevation to the overflow spillway. Freeboard is measured from a water elevation to another
object. ""Street" street doesn't appear to be a requirement. In order for there to be a freeboard requirement. It
happens that the street is conveying runoff from the lots to the retention basins. It could be a bayou/storm
channel in the front. Regardless of how the runoff is being conveyed, the freeboard is measured from the flood
elevation to the pad. There is a flood elevation or surface water elevation in the courtyard (that is a sump
condition) during a 100 year storm. Based on the applicable City checklists (standards), is there a freeboard
requirement? Or are you saying that since there are no applicable codes for the courtyard, no drainage is
required of any kind? One engineer was told by the city to use good engineering practices (GEP) for the
courtyard. I have the contact's name but not with me. My question was whether or not including freeboard in
the design of the courtyard was GEP or unnecessary? I know there aren't any codes. There is no code
requiring one drain or two drains but an engineer would be liable if they chose not to include any since there
isn't a code for one or two. All the plumbing code says if you can't use a gravity system for a sump condition,
use a sump pump system. The engineer said it should be included and the other engineer said it wasn't
necessary. The City's checklists are the City's industry standards for situation like this. GEP would be based
on the City's standards. The City has a standard design requirement when there is a flood elevation or a
surface water elevation and a pad, don't you? There's no mention of a street, is there?
Thanks.
Ray Stockstill
949-622-0232
The La Quinta Building Department's website provides the following: "Precise Grading improvement plans for
tract developments and single family custom homes are the primary responsibility of the Building Department.
Model Home Precise Grading improvement plans are also the primary responsibility of the Building Department.
The Public Works Department assists the Building Department in reviewing precise grading plans that are the
primary responsibility of the Building Department. Checklists for grading plans are available on the City's
website Plan Check Checklist page.[']"
10
M See Exhibit 4; see also hgps://www.laquintaca.govibusiness/design-and-develgpment/development-services/process-flow-charts.
11