The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-6853 G/TE . A city Of Encinitas COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT STANDARD AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS BEA CH ENCR OA CHMENT PERMIT 6853TE 1. Permittee's Construction Contractor shall provide a Certificate of Public Liability Insurance, naming the City of Encinitas as an additional insured, in the amount of $1,000,000. 2. Permittee shall post a Financial Deposit Instrument from a Financial Institution approved by the City, in the amount of $2,500.00, prior to Permittee's Construction Contractor entering upon City Property, to ensure all terms and conditions of the Permit are fully met. The Security Deposit is refundable minus any outstanding charges due for plan review and field inspection. 3. Permittee shall pay to the City the sum of $700.00, subject to full cost recovery, for the use of City Property. The Inspection Deposit will be charged against to help recover the actual costs of inspecting the City Property. 4. Construction Contractor shall provide a detailed plan, which must be approved by the City prior to the Contractor entering upon City Property. The plan shall include times the City Property will be used, types of vehicles which will be used, and the number of trips vehicles will make. Work Schedule deferred. Equipment List received January 18, 2001. Beach Access Plan received January 18, 2001. 5. A Notarized Letter shall be provided, indicating the Construction Contractor will be liable for any costs to correct damages to the Public Beach or adjacent areas resulting from the Contractor's work. Also included in the letter shall be a statement of understanding that debris washing onto the Beaches within one mile north or south of the job site is assumed to be construction debris and shall be removed by the Contractor at no expense to the City. Construction debris is defined as lumber, piling, poles, crates, boxes, containers, and other objects, all of which could be used for construction similar to that being used on the site. Debris also includes any pre - existing items excavated at the site such as re -bar, concrete, and bricks. Document received January 18, 2001. 6. Contractor shall present a Beach Barrier Plan to protect the public from equipment movement, construction activity, and the construction site. Document received January 18, 2001. The Engineering Inspector may request changes to the Plan on as- needed basis. 7. An approved copy of the Coastal Commission Permit, other appropriate City permits, and letter authorizing the Contractor to proceed on the project shall be provided. California Coastal Commission Emergency Permit 6 -01- 005 -G. CS /ES /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853s.doci I Li 7r o t, -'foo ; I SAX , ou -r, ;; 'o_'- �0, \ ul ..�. .,rnur. I i (alil� llia N) '(.n 6 i; ''?)u oc} paper 8. The storage status of Contractor equipment within the City limits shall be determined and the location mutually agreed upon prior to access to the Public Beach. Use of Corporation Yards for storage shall be negotiated directly with the Director of Public Works separately from any Permit processing; compensation will be due the City. 9. A solid waste container of sufficient size shall be made available and conveniently accessible to Lifeguard Services so that debris removed from the Public Beach may be immediately and safely stored. This container shall be lockable with a duplicate key given to the Lifeguard Supervisor. Contractor shall be responsible for regular monitoring, maintenance, and cleaning of this facility. 10. Contractor shall obtain special permission from the City Council for access and use of the Public Beach on City - recognized Holidays, Sundays, between the hours of 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M., Mondays through Saturdays, per Chapter 9.32 of the Municipal Code, and between Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends. 11. Advance notifications shall be provided to the Office of the Lifeguard Supervisor (760) 633- 2748, a minimum of 48 hours prior to each access period through Moonlight Beach State Park. Notification shall include date(s), time(s), equipment types, and duration of work. A single notification shall not include more than one week of work at any given time. 12. The access and use of any Contractor vehicle(1 12) on the Public Beach shall be approved by the Engineering Inspector and Lifeguard Supervisor immediately prior to such access. Only vehicles (112) with placards or stickers indicating official approval will enter the Public Beach. 13. Contractor shall delineate the access way through Moonlight Beach State Park to the satisfaction of the Engineering Inspector and Lifeguard Supervisor. When children are present, flagmen will be required to route Contractor traffic. Special consideration will be given when crowds are present, including prohibition of access. 14. Contractor shall not block at any time access to the Public Beach for emergency personnel or vehicles. 15. The operation of Contractor vehicles (212) while on the Public Beach shall be conducted in a reasonable, safe and prudent manner. 16. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any proposed construction site to which access is authorized by this Permit, the Contractor shall apply to the Traffic Engineering Division and receive approval for the proposed haul route. The Contractor shall comply with all conditions and requirements the Traffic Engineering Division may impose with regards to the hauling operation. 17. Prior to placement of any concrete product at the base of the coastal bluff, the Contractor shall indicate to the Engineering Inspector what methods are to be used to de -water the job site. CS /ES /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853s.doc2 18. Staging or repairs of equipment or supplies is prohibited on City Property or right -of -ways. Parking of personal vehicles on the Public Beach will not be allowed. Offending vehicles will be cited and towed. 19. Any entrance gates used to gain access through the Public Beach area shall be immediately locked after access. Any ruts or berm damage to sand areas shall be immediately and repeatedly repaired to remove any public safety hazards. 20. Contractor shall restore or replace on a daily basis any signage regulating handicap person's access, or any other signage, disrupted, damaged or destroyed by Contractor's operations. Contractor shall repaint and restripe pavement markings as needed. 21. The winter season berm and drainage system, when present, of Moonlight Beach State Park shall be maintained in good working order on a continuous basis, and any breach to the berm due to the operations of the Contractor shall be properly filled or sandbagged before the end of the current low tide period. Any sand loss or damage resulting from the failure to maintain the winter berm will be at the expense of the Contractor to restore or repair, respectively. 22. Contractor shall remove debris from the Public Beach on a daily basis or within the maximum period of twenty -four hours from when requested to do so by the Lifeguard Supervisor or Engineering Inspector, whichever occurs first. 23. On Fridays preceding weekends when Special Activities are scheduled at Moonlight Beach State Park, Contractor shall cease operations and remove all equipment and personnel from the Public Beach by 5:00 A.M. All roadways, ramps and walkways shall be swept clean. 24. Prior to final inspection approval of this Permit by the Superintendent of Parks and Beaches, Contractor shall regrade the Public Beach to the contours existing prior to issuance of this Permit. Contractor shall also repair damage to and thoroughly clean the asphalt pavement along the access route. 25. Prior to final inspection approval of this Permit by the Superintendent of Parks and Beaches, Contractor shall either replenish all Public Beach sand lost due to Permittee's operations or compensate the Parks and Beaches Division by contributing to future sand replenishment projects. 26. Contractor shall direct all communications regarding this Permit through the Engineering Inspector, except as otherwise stated in these Conditions. City shall assume no responsibility for instructions received or given outside this "chain of command ". 27. Violations of any Standard or Special Condition will result in notification of the Sheriffs Department for appropriate action. A Stop Work Order on the Permit will be immediately issued by the Engineering Inspector or Lifeguard Supervisor. CS /ES /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853s.doc3 28. These Conditions do not exempt the Contractor or Agency of any future fees or charges for access through the Beach area. 29. Permittee or Permittee's Contractor, on behalf of Permittee, has read, understands and agrees to comply with all Beach Encroachment Permit Standard and Special Conditions and guarantees to save, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Encinitas and all its agents, officers, employees, and officials against all liabilities, judgements, costs, and expenses, which may in any manner or form arise in consequent of the issue of this Permit or any work performed in consequence thereof. 'Q L - � / - z6/0 � Si nature of Permittee /Contractor) (Date) N) z�x � o') (Name of Permittee /Contractor Printed) (Position/Title) CS /ES /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853s.doc4 JAN -23-2001 TUE 17:2S ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 ;2584 P:02 r ' STATE OF CAUFORNIA -THE RESOURCES AGIWV GPAV DAVIS, Sid CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAM OK130 AREA 7978 USTROPOLMAN DRIVE, SUITE IN SAN 01000. OA 93705 -104 (519) 797.3870 EMERGENCY PERMIT Emergency Permit No. W - 0 Date: dangarv,_1 Applicants: Dr. Leonard Okun 828 Neptune Avenue Encinitas, CA 82024 LOCATION OF EMERGENCY WORK: On the beach fronting 828 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas (San Diego County) WORK PROPOSED: Construction of an approximately 100 ft. long seawall. The seawall will range In height from 20 ft, at Its southern end to 27 ft. at the north and will be comprised of 38 Inch steel reinforced soldier plies spaced 8 ft. on center with one row of tiebacks approximately 80 ft, to 70 ft. In length with a reinforced shotorete wail between the calssons. The seawall will be located along the pre- existing toe of the bluff, approximately 20 ft. to 30 R. landward of the to* of the existing debris pile. The face of the seawall will be colored and textured to closely resemble, the surrounding natural bluff. (ref. repair plans by Solt Engineering Construction Inc., dated 12/17!00). This letter constitutes approval of the emergency work you or your representative has requested to be done at the location listed above. 1 understand from your Information and our site inspection that an unexpected occurrence In the form of ongoing erosion and slouahaae of the upper bluff at the site of an existing landslide requires immediate action to prevent or mitigate loss or damage to life, health, property or essential public services. 14 Cal. Admin. Code Section 13009. The Executive Director of the Coastal Commission hereby finds that: (a) An emergency exists which requires action more quickly than permitted by the procedures for administrative or ordinary permits and the development can and will be completed within 30 days unless otherwise specified by the terms of this permit; (b) Public comment on the proposed emergency action has been reviewed if time allows; (c) As conditioned, the work proposed would be consistent with they requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1878. The work is hereby approved, subject to the conditions listed on the attached page. Sincerely, PETER M. DOUGLAS Executive Director By: DEBORAH LEE Deputy Director JAN -2'S -2001 TUE 17:23 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2994 P:03 6 -01 -005 -G January 23, 2001 Page 2 CONDITIONS OE APPROVAL: 1. The enclosed Emergency Permit Acceptance form must be signed by each PROPERTY OWNER and returned to our office within 15 days. 2. Only that work specifically described In this permit and for the specific properties listed above Is authorized. Any modifications to the described work or additional work requires separate authorization from the Executive director. 3. The work authorized by this permit must be completed within 60 days of the date of this permit (i.e., by March 24, 2001). This emergency permit Is only for the above described seawall. No other work is approved by this emergency permit. The construction or placement of any accessory or protective structure, including but not limited to, stairways or other access structures, decks, drainage structures or pipes, walls, fences, eta, are not authorized by this permit. If during construction, stns conditions warrant changes to the approved plans, the San Diego District office of the Coastal Commission shall be contacted Immediately prior to any changes to the project In the field. 4. The emergency work carried out under this permit is considered to be TEMPORARY work done In an emergency situation. In order to have the emergency work become a permanent development, a regular coastal development permit must be obtained. An application for regular Coastal Permit to have the emergency work remain as permanent shall be submitted within 60 days of the date of this permit (I.e., by March 24, 2001). if a regular coastal development permit Is not received from the City of Encinitas and/or the Coastal Commission, the emergency work shall be removed In Its entirety within 150 days of the above date (i.e.. by June 22, 2001) unless waived by the Executive Director. 5. The subject emergency permit Is being issued In response to a documented emergency condition where action needs to be taken faster than the normal coastal development permit process would allow. By approving the proposed emergency measures, the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission is not certifying or suggesting that the structures constructed under this emergency permit will provide necessary protection for the blufftop residential structures. Thus, In exercising this permit, the applicant agrees to hold the California Coastal Commission harmless from any liabilities for damage to public or private properties or personal injury that may result from the project. 6. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain necessary authorizations and/or permits from other agencies. PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for review and written approval, copies of all other required local, state or federal (i.e., State Lands Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Parks and Recreation) discretionary permitstauthorizatlons for the development herein approved, or provide evidence that none Is required. JAN -23 -2001 TUE 17:24 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:615767 2584 P:04 January 23, 2001 Page 3 7. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director, for review and written approval, final plans for the seawall that have been reviewed and approved by the City of Encinitas Engineering Department. Said plans shall be In conformance with the plans dated 12/17100 by Soll Engineering Construction, Inc. and include the following: a. No local sand, cobbles or shoreline rocks shall be used for backfill or for any other purpose as construction material. During both the construction and removal stages of the project, the permlttee shall not store any construction materials or waste where it will be or potentially be subject to wave erosion and dispersion. Within 6 days of completion of construction, the permittee shall remove from the bluff face and beach area any and all debris that results from construction of the approved development. b. All drainage Improvements, including surface swales, hydroaugers, keyways and bench drains shall be directed such that they exit the property perpendicular to the shore and shall not be allowed to cross laterally onto adjacent properties. c.. Said plans shall confirm, and be of sufficient detail to verify, that the seawall color and texture closely matches the adjacent natural bluffs. d. Pre - construction site conditions shall be documented through photographs of the area at the time of construction. 8. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, the applicant shall submit for review and written approval of the Executive Director, evidence that CAL OSHA has reviewed the project plans approved by the City of Encinitas and the proposed construction methods and sequence and found them acceptable with regard to worker safety. 9. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, the applicant shall submit for the review and approval of the Executive Director, evidence that a performance bond, in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, has been accepted by the City of Encinitas for an amount sufficient to cover the removal of any materials associated with construction of the seawall and/or any materials or debris associated with the failure of any of the proposed structures. The bond shall remain In effect until the protective measures have received approval by the City of Encinitas and/or the California Coastal Commission under a regular coastal development permit for permanent retention. If you have any questions about the provisions of this emergency permit, please call JALO McEaghe at the Commission's San Diego Coast Area Office at the address and telephone number listed on the first page. JAN -2S -2001 TUE 17:2S ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2984 P:05 January 23, 2001 Page 4 EMERGENCY PERMIT ACCEPTANCE FORM TO: CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO COAST AREA 7875 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 (819) 767 -2370 ICE: Emergency Permit No. 6.01 SITE HISTORY In May of 1996, in response to an upper bluff failure and appearance of a substantial tension crack on blufftop, the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission Issued an emergency permit to construct a shotcrste wall with soil nails on the face of the upper bluff to protect the existing residence at 828 Neptune Avenue. Subsequently, In June of 1996, a substantial landslide occurred just south of Beacon's Beach in the City of Encinitas, affecting several residential properties, Including the property subject to this omorgonay permit (and doetrayed the emergency upper bluff r*pnlrn thAt ware lvwnp constructed pursuant to the above described emergency permit). In response to the landslide, and the property owner$' requests, the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission Issued a number of emergency permits to several property owners for various types of structures to address the emergency situation. Five emergency permits were issued to Dr. Leonard Okun. These emergency permits Included spray of an Acrylic Polymer on the bluff face and removal of debris (the debris was removed but the spray was never applied), excavation of two observation trenches on the beach utilizing mechalloal equipment (no follow -up permit required), underpinning of the existing blufftop residence (which were constructed and remain In piece today), construction of a shotcrete wall with soil nails on the lace of the upper bluff (was never Implemented), and the placement of 100 lineal ft. of riprap on the beach at the toe of the landslide (was never implemented). To date, the property owner has not obtained a follow -up regular permit for the underpinning of the home, In violation of the terms of the emergency permit. JAN -25 -2001 TUE 17:25 IM COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2984 P:06 6 - 01 -005 -0 ,January 23, 2001 Page S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I hereby understand all of the oondltions of the emergency permit being Issued to me and agree to abide by them. I also understand that any work authorized under an emergency permit is temporary and subject to removal If a regular Coastal Permit is not obtained to permanently authorize the emergency work. I agree to apply for a regular Coastal Permit within 60 days of the date of the emergency permit (i.e., by March 24, 2001). 1 also acknowledge and understand that a regular coastal development permit would be subject to all of the provisions of the City of Encinitas Local Coastal Program and/or the Coastal Act and may be conditioned accordingly. These conditions may Include, but not be limited to, provisions for long term maintenance and monitoring of the bluff face, a sand mitigation fee, a requirement that s deed restriction be placed on the property assuming liability for damages Incurred from bluff failures, and restrictions on future construction of additional shore or bluff protection. INSTRUCTIONS: After reading the attached Emergency Permit, please sign this form and return to the San Diego Coast Area Office within 15 working days from the permit's date. Leonard Okun Name (print) Addr Date of Signing (��rz4aASw�x K►s.o uioEolB:ns:yeroy�6.o t Cas.0+01or:eP.ece) JAN -2S -2001 TUE 17 :2S ILD:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2984 P:07 "Me u3dan 'Vol `i YIn11RJIMl 'sY ,�N�7 'I wo w� ww w.w� wwl �_� 7fl„ 7AY 311,11d#, QL8 'NRNO ' W Yf . six HOU:rw+ d«a�xaao toe 1i 133HS MWO ONV �43MOl 0.1 Sa{Vd3b 3 1 II � z w � ..d W i D r '7 (N t h e Z 0 z co ;�� I t t'lit�1t"` co fill LU L H ( ^a li ll i�hl��ill a1, gtNNl .�m��ipliiNYi[711111FI�tlitil� 1! f fiet� ltt�..ilNrM�td9�ellitltsat3Y1[ NISI IIrhJ:l'�Wlli�rlYe1ado, Iffmakad I r..L..J t!1�t:ill�'�ti i�y �arrt�lou93Ts .,�atr��ct+srewl�art�� :��t.n.rr�al +l�.�tit+1� <n `�3 . JAN -28 -2001 TUE 17:26 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2884 P:08 3,W3AV 3W10" Nf.1 'W00 'Y0 AAme a3ddn L x. r �w' 1n+ i� "a NYId 31IS ONV 213M0'1 dl sarod3a �y m� yl ^,B .' N WOW AVLNUI r5 l.._ '.'� t ^a I .� � � I '' y y rte .. .,. `• `4 � �` u� �� I M "l r h �1 n1n 1 I i .i. I r y k , ' (, � -y'31• � °� - r, p'`' �� 1 ,�4_. �(, �, �il I t . . I r yYk� o=t— � c f 1 C�d) _ s � �, f �.� " - { �a r� Fi .�„ FI. 1 j 1 i.. I 4 , r �., -. t y. I I ..• � •._ � 1 1 . I 1.. . -41� �� (,. r • -. ! � i I �4i 1 1 irr �' �. .j i l :. _ .`-{ � l I �' I _ � I f t j I i / NVJ�)U JIJIJVd JAN -2S -2001 TUE 17:27 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2964 P:09 MIgOxNJ 'SY111fJN3 c It NN � 3" tl -tl .� nlg 83ddn "�°° NOUMS WONd c)w a3M01 AL Stjfveolm u.. ono .wne m 1 F i \ X41' f� � fit. 1 1 I I I I ( I u L' 1 L 41 Y A JAN -23 -2001 TUE 17:28 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:619767 2384 P:10 awrojfw Wtito n 7WA% H3MOl 3nm3w :mnmdvi me 'Nnm nn i n :an 'M fyF91YLL:M UO 6 wFF ++ nm e FWl'l�Nylll3 ; yy!„� ° (INV SNOLMS ONY 113MOl Ql $Ntld3M � L l a .o- I I y 7 h 'fi, ' F, q _ y l -TIL b ZI � 1 y � P � •'; ?� i r. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICANT DEPOSIT ACTION FORM DATE D/ ' - r / APPLICANT NAME 41-4 � APPLICANT ADDRESS PERMIT COORDINATOR TO BE COMPLETED BY CASHIER RECEIPT NUMBER CHECK NUMBER ` CASHIER INITALS ENGINEERING DEPOSIT ENGINEERING SECURITY CASHIER CODE a ED CASHIER CODE = SY PROJECT NUMBER MUST BE ENTERED PROJECT NUMBER AND APPLICANT NAME MUST INTO PROJECT NUMBER FIELD BE ENTERED INTO THE DESCRIPTION FIELD (F10 ON LAST SCREEN) PROJECT # AMOUNT PROJECT # AMOUNT TOTAL �� Z9v TOTAL 2 & �v CITY OF ENCINITAS Engineering Services Department 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, Ca. 92024 -3633 Telephone (760) 633 -2780 Fascimile (760) 633 -2818 FASCIMILE TRANSMITTAL TO: attn: Gary Cannon Date: January 11, 2001 California Coastal Commission App. No. various TE W.O. Nos. various TE Telephone (619) 767 -2370 Fascimile (619) 767 -2384 RE: 816 -860 Neptune Avenue Posting of additional Damage Deposit related to placement of rip -rap on/near public beach Comment: Following this cover, please find copies of the personal checks submitted by the property owners at the named addresses, payment -in -full of the $6,000.00 damage deposit requested by the City. From: Jeffrey S. Garami Engineering Technician ADA /jsg /fax8.doc ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICANT DEPOSIT ACTION FORM + DATE APPLICANT NAME ©�vti ��wN 9 it1N�� Of APPLICANT ADDRESS PERMIT COORDINATOR TO BE COMPLETED BY CASHIER RECEIPT NUMBER ks CHECK NUMBER 7 1 4 - i i y CASHIER INITALS ENGINEERING DEPOSIT ENGINEERING SECURITY CASHIER CODE = ED CASHIER CODE = SY PROJECT NUMBER MUST BE ENTERED PROJECT NUMBER AND APPLICANT NAME MUST INTO PROJECT NUMBER FIELD BE ENTERED INTO THE DESCRIPTION FIELD (F10 ON LAST SCREEN) PROJECT # AMOUNT PROJECT # AMOUNT 53 S Y 0670 TOTAL TOTAL O�� h �!e+a 44 91011 y �a a [ 1 PAY 11, E- .� F 77 7 ,- Rqj '7. 9ti_4 x"a MAHE 7' .i LEONARD M OKUN TTEE 107 LEONARD M OKUN TRUST CL DTD 5 -21-87 (PWCL) 25 828 NEPTUNE AVENUE DAT /f LEUCADIA, C 42062 PAY TO THE ORDER F G * $ ,"O O 0. 0 6 z DOLLARS Mn Pry i ipr May Not Be Us o Purchase Or C Securities Bank One, N.A., Columbus, OH 43271 FOR O l yr� i' 1:0440008041:4 2 284000 L 2 28H' 0 L07 01/17/01 WED 15:43 FAX 619 557 4056 ASSESSORS OFFICE Linuul - r l GREGORY J. SMITH SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR /RECORDER /CLERK 1800 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 103 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 -2480 Telephone Number (619) 531 -5507 Facsimile Number (619) 557 -4056 To: (760) 633 -3472 Facsimile Transmittal To: Don Niven Company: SEConstruction From: Greg Smith Regarding: Grant Deed Number of pages being sent: (including this page) 3 Date: January 17, 2001 Time Sent: 3:35 p.m. By: June Rodriguez Comments: 01/17/01 WED 15:44 FAX 619 557 4056 ASSESSORS OFFICE Orob No. 712118-3 1619 75- IWOW NS• 2197 Lore No, gLwfAai b�ooft SICOMAs ANQU R OV n.,*T AMIRICIW TITLZ M WHIN RICONOEO MAIL TO JAN241975 &W AAC Dr. Leonard H. Okun u>.01� �a�aa u ..R 828 Nepptune Ave. "Altar ay tt 111604111, tie r, eju � Leucadia, Ca. 92024 �4 M we• AVACII A.O\N THIII 0044 FOR 011COt MIM V98 A MAIL TAX STATIMINIS TO: DOQIMIfURY TRAHM TAX S '2a same as above y c«. r. w« ot. ....a,.wl,«aimappownysewerat;oa �. .IY1. Ctflr>II..� M eM ./11HNIrIM MYMN Iat Ibtlt M .te1MM,�Mt ttltlM wtl e1wN. Parcels 256- 011 -1], 256- 011 -02 Great Western S • . .' nrww M Iiw. 25'- 0 11 -03 _ Iola= �i0 l9 GRANT 0110 TlaRfippf Tpx M+I LCY r, Koh afaxllmof fl• FOR A VALUASLI CONSIDERATION, poNNpl of whkh A hraby adnewNdii.If, JOHN F KING, JR. and CYNTHIA A. KING, huabsnd and wile, hereby GRANT(51 to y fit LEONARD K. OKVN, a single man, � the no p,epwty In fhe ONFIX unincorporated area in tho 0 County of San Diego Steel. of California, daalbed a tttsd Lots 16 and 19 in Block 11 of SOUTH COAST PARK NO. 2, in the County of San �Q Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1659, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County September 21, 1925, as fully described in Exhibit 'A' attached hereto, comprising one paqe. pop wig 0 .3 r "t ttt� A Dated January 6, 1975 _ a ; -x P o P . RtY1zj; 0 STATE Of CA61► N I _— -•— COUNTV or OR on •T an : n. �.b... ,1925 _. i0 WWII m,, nla abrrrMned• a N.WV Nblie in and ,or wl C j state. pa.anrtly .00ared _ JOHN P. KIN an __ __ wrrctar.ssA� O ktleN,lm th,paa0n S .dlo.a nrrla s a eilWtRttAnew ..I 1 IlorAftT Iuouc • cwtaolau Uo"I ed to th . e t, vmmn hntnoft It and a knewlrlq.0 H t OftAN"CoWn _.. `•' 'frY__ ..�."OW1,0 the um.. tl,01rYMaw F,dwaA„23. taT7 VnTNESS mV hand awl 0149140 A WN. ..� 1(103 t \O/aal MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE 01/17/01 WED 15:45 FAX 619 557 4056 ASSESSORS OFFICE 1 • ism MAL DESCRIMON EX}ZISIT W ORDER NO. 712618 -3 I f to 18 and 19 in slack 11 of SOUTH COAST PARR M. 2, in the County of Sea Diego. State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1839, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County September 21. 1925. ' ALSO that ^ portion of block D of SOUTH COAST PARK NO. 2. in the County of Sao Diego, state of California, according to Map thereat No. 1839. tiled in the office et the County Recorder of San Diego County September 21, 1923, described as follows$ Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of Lot 19 block 11. said South Coast Park No. 2i thence Westerly along the Westerly prolongation of Northerly line of said Lot 19, block 11 to its intersection with the Easterly line of that tract of land conveyed by South Coast Land Company to County of San Diego by dead dated January 10. 1930 and recorded on February 11. 1930, Document No. 72091 thence Southerly along said Ea ;terly line to its intersection with the Westerly prolongation of the Southerly line of Lot 18. block 11. thence Eestarly along said Westerly prolongation to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 18 block Ill thence Northerly along the Westerly lines of said Loco Is and 19 to the poLnt of beginning. q EXCEPTING therefrom any portion heretofore or now lying below tha mean high tide line of the Pacific Ocean. M1� :r i ti. tp � 4113J�6 THE TRETTIN COMPANY 9606 Laurentian Drive San Diego, California 92129 Ph: (858) 484 -0212 Fax: (858) 484 -6943 e -mail: btrettin cs.com January10, 2001 TO: Lee McEachern and Gary Cannon California Coastal Commission San Diego Office FROM: Bob Trettin, Representing Mr. Rick Sorich 816 Neptune Avenue; and Dr. Leonard Okun 828 Neptune Avenue RE: Request To Amend Pending Emergency Permit Applications Requests were recently provided to your office for emergency permits that would authorize the construction of lower bluff seawalls and upper bluff retaining wall systems at 816 Neptune and 828 Neptune Avenue. Preliminary geotechnical evaluations, slope stability analysis, engineering plans and alternative analyses were prepared for each property and submitted with the emergency requests. During the past 72 hours, strong wave activity has severely impacted the lower bluff at 816 Neptune and 828 Neptune (as well as the property located to the north of 828 Neptune). In the areas where SEC was proposing to retain portions of the already failed bluff to the west of the proposed seawall alignment, these materials are now being swept away at an accelerated rate. This requested amendment to the pending emergency permit applications requests your immediate approval for the temporary placement of riprap at the base of the existing lower coastal bluff at 816 Neptune and 828 Neptune. It is our understanding that the property owner to the north of 828 Neptune may also be pursuing this action. -2- The proposed riprap would consist of'/ - 2 ton sections of rock, placed to a height of approximately 5'— 7', and extending onto the beach a distance of approximately 8'. The accumulated mass would be approximately 10 tons per lineal foot. These estimates will be reviewed and revised, if necessary, after this morning's high tide. The subject property has experienced substantial sudden and unexpected failures of portions of the adjacent coastal bluff. Initial geotechnical review has determined that this failure is continuing at a rapid pace and, at present, the primary residential structure is imminently threatened by failure of portions of the mid / upper coastal bluff. The project engineer, Soils Engineering Construction, Inc., is not proposing that the riprap be placed as an alternative to the emergency construction of a lower coastal wall. To utilize riprap as even a temporary alternative to the planned lower coastal seawall, the proposed height of the riprap would have to be as great as the proposed height of the wall. This would result in an encroachment of 40' to 60' onto the public beach. The riprap is a temporary measure that will facilitate the emergency construction of a seawall by reducing wave - generated erosion / failure of the lower coastal bluff and protecting the ongoing, day -to -day emergency construction of the seawall. It is our intention, with your expedited assistance, to complete the placement this riprap along the lower coastal bluff by Thursday, January 11. Thanks you for your review and assistance. Respectfully submitted, BOB TRETTIN, Principal The Trettin Company SOIL Enaniaine consviucamn, January 10, 2001 Dr. Len Okun Mr. Rick Sorich 828 Neptune Avenue 816 Neptune Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 Encinitas, California 92024 Re: Recommendations for the Emergency Placement of Rip Rap 816 and 828 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California Dear Dr. Okun and Mr. Sorich: This letter has been prepared to provide limited recommendations for the emergency placement of rip rap along portions of the base of the landslide mass below your properties. Our recommendations are based upon our site visit yesterday, January 9, 2001. Due to the recent high waves and in conjunction with the high tides, the base of the landslide mass (on the beach) is being eroded to the point where the mass has accelerated movement downhill and appears to threaten existing portions of the bluff which support the primary residential structures on your properties. At this time it is recommended that rip rap be place along the toe of the landslide mass in order to provide some protection to the uphill materials. It is noted that the placement of the rip rap alone will not stop the slide mass from continuing to move however, it can provide some erosion protection from the waves and tidal actions. We recommend that rip rap be placed across approximately 60 to 80 lineal feet of your properties. The rip rap should consist of 1 /2 to 2 ton boulders and should be placed by end dumping and final placement with a front end loader. It is likely that some rip rap will be placed on portions of the 836 -838 (Brown property) but the majority will be placed below the subject properties. At this time we recommend the placement of up to 10 tons of rip rap per lineal foot. The rip rap will be considered temporary for erosion purposes and will be removed off the beach once the repairs to the bluff are completed. We recommend that this temporary work be carried out as soon as possible so that further damage to the properties is reduced. If you should have any questions, please call us at (760) 633 -3470. Regards, FESSIo SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, Inc. .17 i1 ' .12/�1 i'•t `J . Niven, P.E. C: Mr. Lee McEachern, California Coastal Commission Mr. Alan Archibald, Director of Engineering Mr. Greg Shields, Senior Engineer 927 Arguello Street, Redwood City, Californio 94063 -1310 (650) 367 -9595 • FAX (650) 367 -8139 LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES MARVIN III A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CARDIFF OFFICE IDYLLWILD OFFICE 120 BIRMINGHAM DRIVE, SUITE 200 54791 NORTH CIRCLE DRIVE CARDIFF-BY-THE -SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007-1744 IDYLLWILD, CALIFORNIA 92549 TELEPHONE (760) 944 -0123 TELEPHONE (909) 659-0142 FAX (760) 942 -6176 FAX (909) 659-0142 E -MAIL cm3 @sd.znet.com E -MAIL cm3 @sd.znet.com May 17, 2000 PLEASE REPLY TO CARDIFF OFFICE Ms. Marianne M. Buscemi Code Enforcement Officer City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633 Re: Case No. 00- 304(Okun) Dear Marianne: I wanted to drop you a quick note with a status report on the debris removal on Dr. Okun's bluff at 828 Neptune Avenue. As you and I agreed, I asked John Niven of SEC to make a direct contact with Larry Giles, the Encinitas Life Guard Supervisor. The purpose of that call was to find out exactly what Larry needed to have removed from Dr. Okun's bluff down at the toe adjacent to the beach. Mr. Niven reported that he and Mr. Giles got together on the beach and Mr. Giles told him what he would like to have SEC remove. Mr. Niver, related to nie that the work is now being completed. I personally inspected the bluff on Sunday, May 15, and it looked like all of the debris that could be removed without endangering the bluff in the area of the toe had been taken away. Marianne, there are still other items that have fallen down the bluff that are visible from the beach. We have all agreed that placing workers on the bluff would not only endanger the stability of the bluff, but also endanger their lives. Therefore, there will be no further efforts to go up on the bluff to remove any materials that are still in areas on the bluff that are unstable. As a further status report, please be advised that Dr. Okun and I are working with SEC in an effort to come up with a plan to install a seawall and upper bluff walls to stabilize Dr. LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES MARVIN III Ms. Buscemi May 17, 2000 Page 2 Okun's property and the property to the south. We understand that Messrs. Brown and Sonnie are working on a parallel plan with another contractor for the properties to the north of Dr. Okun. Marianne, thank you so much for your courtesy and cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, CHARLES MARVIN III, A.P.C. Charles Marvin III CM3 /nvn cc: Dr. Okun John Niven Bill Weedman, Planning Dept. Diane Langager, Community Development Dept. Greg Shields, Engineering Dept. Lee McEachern, California Coastal Commission • SOIL cnanialnc consviucoon., January 17, 2001 TO: Director of Community Services Department, City of Encinitas FROM: John W. Niven Soil Engineering Construction, Inc. SUBJECT: Contractor Responsibility This correspondence is provided to acknowledge that Soil Engineering Construction, Inc. (SEC), will be liable for any costs to correct damages to the beach or adjacent areas resulting from permit work undertaken by SEC for bluff repairs at 828 Neptune Avenue. In addition, SEC recognizes that construction debris washing onto the beaches (during the period of time that SEC is constructing this project) within one -mile north or south of the work site shall be the responsibility of SEC and shall be removed at no expense to the City of Encinitas. Construction debris is defined as any lumber, piling, crates, boxes, containers and other objects which, could be used for construction identical to that being used on the project site. Debris also includes any pre - existing items excavated at the site such as reinforcing steel, concrete and bricks. hn . Niven, P.E. Dat Soil Engineering Construction, Inc. 927 Arguello Street, Redwood City, California 94063 -1310 (650) 367 -9595 FAX (650) 367 -8139 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of CALIFORNIA County of SA N DIEGO > O JANUARY 1 8 , 2001 before me , LAURA LYNNE, NOTARY PUBLIC Date Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public ") personally appeared JOHN W. N I VEN , P . E Name(s) of Signer(s) personally known to me e00"@R�tl��IEAI(�s� whose name( @) is /** subscribed to the within instrument ?� and acknowledged to me that heAR"Ry executed the same in his /berdllilieir authorized capacity(im), and that by his /lawA hierr signature(* on the instrument the person(e), LAURA or the entity upon behalf of which the person( *) acted,' Cwr6d n012MI12 executed the instrument. Halal► Pubic - caft" o krDhWCW* WITNESS my hand and official seal. WC01rMa0wMcr10,2M C Signitofe of Nota LAURA LYNNE OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. ` Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer ❑ Corporate Officer ?� Title(s): Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General, ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee _ ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Guardian or Conservator, ❑ Other: Top of thumb here ❑ Other: Top of thumb here Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: �tCt?t NN tt4�CtCt�c�tt�t >c��t)cc�t�ttC © 1995 National Notary Association • 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184 • Canoga Park, CA 91309 -7184 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free 1 -800- 876 -6827 SOIL mane unc consnurlon. D \v D ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 828 NEPTUNE AVENUE ENCINITAS Prior to completion of the preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the coastal bluff at 828 Neptune Avenue, Soil Engineering Construction, Inc. (SEC) initiated a review of feasible alternative bluff stabilization solutions for this site. Each potential solution was subjected to a determination of engineering and construction feasibility, cost feasibility, and adherence to environmental standards (i.e., visual appearance, impact on public beach, etc.). The solutions recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation were determined to best satisfy these standards. Alternative 1: No Project A No Project alternative would acknowledge that the coastal bluff is experiencing an ongoing failure event wherein the normal process of erosion is highly accelerated. This alternative would then require that the primary residential structure be removed or allowed to fail, in stages, as mid and upper bluff failures continue unabated. i I A No Project alternative was deemed unacceptable because the Coastal Act allows homeowners the opportunity to protect their primary residential structures j from failing coastal bluffs. A No Project solution at this time will result in the imminent failure of the subject residential structure. This alternative would impose tremendous financial burden on the property's owner and, unless continued to both the north and south of the subject properties, would offer no environmental benefit to the coastline. This alternative could not be continued to the north and south because permits for the construction of coastal bluff seawalls and upper bluff walls (or retention systems) have already been issued immediately adjacent to the subject property. A No Project alternative would also acknowledge that the result bluff failure at 828 Neptune would extend laterally to neighboring properties to the north and south, thus undermining the upper bluff protection installed under coastal emergency permit at these locations. i i , J 927 Argueilo Srreer Redwood Ciry, Caiifornio 94063 -1310 (650) 367 -9595 FAX (650) 367 -8139 -2- Alternative 2: Placement of Rip -rap The placement of rip -rap adjacent to the failed lower coastal bluff will not protect the bluff from the continuing failure of the landslide, along the clay seam identified and addressed in the geotechnical evaluation report. Rip -rap could only be used to protect the bluff from erosion. Therefore, this alternative was not recommended. Alternative 3: Construction of a Lower - Height Coastal Bluff Seawall This alternative would provide a less visually imposing lower bluff seawall, as utilized at numerous Encinitas locations to the south of the subject property. The recommended heights for the seawall are the minimum required to protect the structures on the site. As noted in the geotechnical evaluation, the existing height of the failed lower bluff, the existence of a clay seam, and the approved emergency permit for construction of a seawall immediately to the north of this site are all factors that dictated the height (as well as other construction definitions) of the lower bluff seawall. Engineering evaluations could not support any height for the lower seawall other than that which has been recommended in the geotechnical evaluation. Alternative 4: Underpinning This alternative would utilize permanent underpinning of the primary residential structure instead of providing any repair treatment to the surface of the slope. Technically, such a solution might be feasible, although such underpinning would require caissons placed to a depth of 80' to 90'. The cost to the property owner to implement such a solution would be prohibitive. Another significant concern would be that the use of underpinning in one area of the bluff would also dictate a similar solution for neighboring properties. This has obviously not been the case in the Encinitas coastal bluff area. Seven (7) consecutive properties to the south of the subject site have already received approvals to provide upper bluff protection at, or near the top of bluff. Two (2) properties to the north of the subject site have received similar approvals. -3- The alternative of underpinning is deemed unacceptable based on the extraordinary cost, future visual impacts (as substantive elevations of caissons became exposed), and lateral impact on neighboring properties. This alternative could only be implemented as a comprehensive, contiguous solution along coastal properties, yet the subject properties are located in an area where other solutions have already been permitted. Alternative 5: Construction of Lower Bluff Seawall (as proposed); and Construction of Combination Upper Bluff Wall & Below - Grade System Coastal Commission staff expressed interest in whether the exposed upper bluff wall at the northern portion of the subject site could be brought back into the bluff and become part of a below -grade retention system at the southern portion of the subject site. We assume this interest stemmed from "visual considerations ". Having constructed more than 1,000 lineal feet of below -grade upper bluff retention systems in the Encinitas coastal area, we are obviously in strong agreement that such systems provide are more visually aesthetic — allowing a greater portion of the bluff to remain in a natural state (and to erode naturally into the underground piers). S.E.C. initially considered this a feasible alternative and performed preliminary engineered plans and calculations. However, as we conducted soils analysis necessary to completion of the preliminary geotechnical evaluation, it became evident that such a combined system could not be implemented at this site. The near - vertical upper terrace sands in this area are highly unstable. Any attempt to cut into the top of bluff, a requirement of tying the exposed wall to a below -grade system, would almost certainly result in the failure of a substantial portion of the materials we would be attempting to preserve. The loss of these materials would present a serious risk to construction crews and could result in a failure that would immediately extend into the northwest corner of the adjacent residential structure at 816 Neptune. The serious potential liability, to the homeowner and contractor, would likely preclude any such attempt. Based on our geotechnical reviews, S.E.C. conducted further site studies with engineers from our corporate office in northern California. There was unanimous concurrence that S.E.C., Inc. cannot endorse the viability of this alternative. -4- Alternative 6: Drainage Control and Planting Restrictions As an alternative to providing structural repairs to a bluff that is already experiencing substantive failure events, drainage control and planting restrictions are a case of too little — far too late. As noted in previous geotechnical studies of this section of coastline, and as highlighted in the Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation prepared for the subject property (and geotechnical reviews conducted on neighboring properties), the ongoing failures on this site (and in this area) were not caused by excessive water run -off or the presence of non - indigenous planting materials. The current failure was initiated at the lower coastal bluff and seemed to travel along a clay seam. The upper bluff failure is now ongoing and has already caused a failure of portions of the residential structure. It has now undermined a remaining portion of this structure. Although restrictive irrigation, proper drainage to street and appropriate planting materials are desirable and should be required to slow the inevitable erosion of the upper terrace sands to a more natural level of repose, by itself, this alternative would be similar to the No Project Alternative previously discussed. The ongoing failure event would continue and would be expedited by the lack of any repair response. The primary residential structure on the site would remain under imminent threat of failure. It has been recommended that elements of this alternative be made a conditioned element of the recommended repair project. Increased sensitivity to retaining and /or restoring natural bluff -face conditions will reduce erosion and enhance the life of remaining mid and upper bluff areas. SUMMARY: Our review and analysis of available alternatives was the basis for the final project recommendations included in the Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for this site. We believe that, to protect against further damage / loss to the existing residential structure, the project recommendations included in the Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation be initiated immediately. M g Construction, Inc. . Niven, P.E. SOIL. consciucrion,nc. R/ STRUCTURAL - CALC I ATIONS FOR PROPOSED LOWER AND UPPER BLUFF REPAIR FOR: DR. LEN OKUN PROPERTY, 828 NEPTUNE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. 560 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE 5, ENCINITAS, CA 92024 TEL. (760) 633 -3470, FAX (760) 633 -3472 DECEMBER 17, 2000 JOB NO. 01 -001 Revision: 91 - 12/29/2000 ,�nOf /O� c D W , GE 554 rn a= R 06/30/01 l T FC O F CA0I 3 927 Arquello Srreer, Redwood Cirv, Colifornio 94063 (415) 367 -9595 JOB �. SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. OF 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY DATE (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY E' L 7 DATE SCALE L �t�i � g >� ! u N ✓ p ti 'f cwt c - 7 S 1 C� N � ui C. b � SC :.. �•t..t r � i.� �./� + w -; " C.� !^+ C•`` mil/ ��' �,` ,' �,: ('' `.`_- � `: > fi.��F ,_ - L •� S�.G _ � cx-� , I � St's . I _ - _ off_ 5"� __�� !Z - i`7 -° , 2,) L� I : 1 `- -�"Cti ��( Pt" Lam! /'T"T r— Nl. . ✓ =� (' _ �-- � 1�E �v'c -E.r _ .� �Z�2� NAT �r�; �_ �- v � • � �Iv � c rte? ; �r� - � � 7 6 J f- � , � . � • _ j � �� c - r. � Grp - I Ls� C v't� tv c PROM pF1(S wlo Shea) 205-11PVW) Ow W-. &*r, Wu 01471, T001ft MME TOLL FREE 14ZZ!S4.T00 JOB — SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. OF 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY K 'F DATE — f - O �� (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE T�j1 (S T IC (�` o f 4 S I : f.! Wit-, _c t s -r _ Wi t-= � � �-� . ��- I _� -t�i� � 1 �- oi.` ��:�� . • � C � �*I tio�. kzz>'t�— Z-1 t-1 of S V c �' v �� -t, S+�oT `��T k 2 -7 UC.� l �'V � U C�'7L� t✓�/L� � � '� ! CJ} �, JTZ, � o V *� .� r ?. T - t'vV T' s �- •� "JL t Ca ti o Solid - t' I V�-s lkJ I w S T_T I CA S eRDWzw. 1( Sr OSM&i aW)® wW�.&01m. Lim 01471. ToOmer MG* TOLL FREE I -MZ54 o SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC JOB GZ1 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. OF REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 tZ - (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE j o FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE Z —' SCALE t'rs ��.� �f+s c� Rte;, =mss ) J Z—Z= S�S C _ 1 J - P—>� S '� >PDDDCT NM 11LnpltSWSi 20, x. PaMf: SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEE Sao. o= REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 - (650) 367 -9595 cALco_ArED BY — L -44 D rE FAX (650) 367 -8139 Cr - (— CHECKED BY DATE SCALE A - C am ._ O J , r N = �� ; I �► s A- I T ( A-c, o L.A 'E-'2_1 -N T O CAN _ Tt�- A A 1 S�T �Z -+41N C�NL !�N PROJCT N- Sne.e Snens120i 1 IPaC.e: SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. of REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 [� (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY T2�'�"� DATE SCALE PL-f F-�( U-t�, FLt, � elf _ 33 P P V 2- 1z ��P = � � �� / � � ~,o ILS / � /1 3 l 1 L J � L � � •O s'rT 5714 0 C = 14 ,r ( � a) 33 31.0,0 % .l aS I y = - 711 �. – r ( 12- 7o L) T— 7LI `T . � Q7 L. -t 'b A-S orZ �v,a t A--f-i ar- z =r' s -r-1-, Ar 4 - T - S C-t- Lf o N, 1,y ( Sa►fi L '_'DV. ^? N: "t ISrwle Stuets1205"1 PaOe Double Corrosion Protection DCP (Type C) in applications where the free stressing length will Corrosion protection for the anchor tendon can be remain ungrouted for an extended period of time. improved by extending the outer corrugated PE or The Dywidag wedge anchor for epoxy coated strand PVC duct over the free stressing length. In this bites through the coating into the strand, developing case, pregrouting of the anchor inside the plastic a minimum of 95% of its nominal ultimate tensile duct is not recommended because of difficulties strength. Corrosion protection provided by the which might be encountered during transportation epoxy is not compromised by the wedge. and placing. Although the cost of epoxy coated.strand is higher than bare strand, the total cost of the installed Double Corrosion Protection DCP (Type D) anchor is reduced by eliminating the outer corru- The ideal protection for strand anchors is one in gated plastic duct. This makes it possible to mini - which the strand is totally and permanently pro- mize the drill hole size, thereby reducing the cost of tected from the time of manufacture throughout its drilling and grouting. life. Such protection is provided by epoxy coating the individual strands both externally and internally. Double Corrosion Protection DCP (Type E) Flo -bond Flo -file is a rugged, thermally bonded For anchors in which single stage grouting is polymer coating that offers maximum corrosion desirable, the free stressing length of epoxy coat - protection, with a bond strength that exceeds that ed strand anchors can be coated with a lubricat- of bare strand. When two stage grouting is used, ing grease and encased in a seamless extruded no additional corrosion protection is required even PE sheath. e tc:)-7 *� = ( Multistrand Prestressing Steel Properties - ASTM A416 Nominal Nominal ultimate Prestressing Force Anchor Cross Section Weight Strength size Area (bare strand) (fvu Ape) 0.80 fw Ape 0.70 fvu Ara 0.60 f w Avs in' mm= plf kg /m kips kN kips kN kips kN kips kN 3 - 0.6 0.65 420 2.20 3.27 175.8 782 140.6 625 123.0 547 105.5 469 4 -0.6 0.87 560 3.00 4.46 234.4 1,043 187.5 834 164.1 730 140.6 626 5 -0.6 1.09 700 3.70 5.51 293.0 1,303 234.4 1,043 205.1 912 175.8 782 6 -0.6 1.30 840 4.40 6.55 351.6 1,564 281.3 1,251 246.1 1,095 211.0 938 7 -0.6 1.52 980 5.20 7.74 410.2 1,825 328.2 1,460 287.2 1,277 246.2 1,095 8 -0.6 1.74 1,120 5.90 8.78 468.8 2,085 375.0 1,668 328.1 1,460 281.3 1,251 9 -0.6 1.95 1,260 6.70 9.97 527.4 2,346 421.9 1,877 369.2 1,642 316.4 1,408 12 -0.6 2.60 1,680 8.90 13.24 703.2 3,128 562.6 2,503 492.3 2,190 422.0 1,877 15 -0.6 3.26 2,100 11.10 16.52 879.0 3,910 703.2 r3,962 ,128 615.3 2,737 527.4 2,346 19 -0.6 4.12 2,660 14.10 20.98 1,113.4 4,953 890.7 779.4 3,467 668.0 2,972 27 - 0.6 5.86 3,780 20.00 29.76 1,582.2 7,038 1,265.8 ,631 1,107.6 4,927 949.4 4,223 37 -0.6 8.03 5.180 27.40 40.78 2,168.2 9,645 1,734.6 ,716 1,517.8 6,751 1,301.0 5.787 48 - 0.6 10.41 6,720 1 35.50 52.83 2,812.8 12,512 2,250.2 10,009 1,968.9 8,758 1,687.7 7,507 54 -0.6 11.72 7,560 39.90 59.38 3,164.4 11,261 2,215.1 9,853 1,898.6 8,446 61 -0.6 13.24 8,540 45.10 67.12 3,574.6 12,721 2,502.2 11,131 21 31.5 SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO of Z� REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 2 -;'7- (650) 367.9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY r � - DATE SCALE 7 - C.k S -r r � t'��+- c.� I *! Z�.o S +4-N TI d�-C � ?.v ��'1 r,-� ,� 1 ^� %� i �h -c-t✓- T�'1'�-t, M`T �'t ✓�� l .t-� ,� - '�� 3s 4- L4 7S t � s tC �.�zPAS - vs tj T_ ; T 1 t-t F t�r-C--k- .Q I r! t-c- - i 1 LL- i N 1 F -T t t-;L R c--�t -S M£ T�V l l 1�>= S( ^. t 4 C .�o A I c-+4 u S I a S �-I-A. t 7Q ` 4 --,ate - F/ 7= A - "4�i� JOB SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. OF 2� 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY DATE (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 - 8139 CHECKED BY DATE — SCALE l Z- 6;1 � LL lam _.. ° n /( /'7 - `/ f �-•f O V � l N - s � c-� � °� �- � � _ • � LLB x 1 �7 _ > S k� ` ? � I . o • 1 �..� 3 _ I LA LA fe f . 12— 7.J PR0011CT 201., (S.ne R. 205.1(P+OAd) ®s w, &Mo. Mm 01 471. To Omn PHONE TOLL FREE j4*Z!5.jX JOB U Z2� t�l�� u r rQV� SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. OF 2� 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY DATE (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE U - � ►�+ 'rte la. _ _ 3� �, _ ' r� .{ - �- �. .S� 3� T �' Tj S 74' ,h- 6 L- I. t-+ A--l� 'tom A� I oY - P P ..__PV-;E-1r Cam? A S i 1 Wit' +T CA IS, A I'- 17---� +t- t �'' . +-' ' �" r LA, Z (? r S h C.E-S S I1'1 s 7 •oN s-r � . s PHWXT 101 -1 1� $NO) 20L1 (7&W) ®w W. WW. Nm ("471. To pdr MM WLL RU 14WM4W SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. b OF Z� REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY � DATE �— FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY � DATE 12— SCALE 7�' 1 4x`7 -f S '7 I Z �, o ' , S lro G� (i S S rL� - w- / 4 , So l..�l� p► � Z L� 1=S�) (o•��`�)�o -zt = 3 ''71 1 o 1� a--> / Z �1 4- c t iPa0a1 SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOE 927 Arguello Street SHEET NC. a= REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY r ' DATE SCALE l / of = / Z GPI �� • P A La AT LA L-1 S= U" �--- v s S= z �J4 I ° 1/1 n1 ! I n p u 1 oGnni ^ia^., cv. Cvw.)fl4l iPan ^e' ' JOB c--ZP 7a u SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. 2 OF 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY DATE (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 -8139 r CHECKED BY -u DATE SCALE ..... w (`7Z-. 7+s__`� rI�_ I N �'�£— _ C�� T _ � `� -�. _ _ . TCX�o _ �k. -�-� ��- (N � � �y _ 15� -► 4 _ 3 _ — 39 4( � pWMV 2a.1 (So* SMM) 205-1 ims oun. ro aar nom rou aEE »o 225-M SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. J OB Z 7- - J- , — 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO o- REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DAT _ FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY r � ± DATE SCALE Sal/( �� f1�_ �� s ��. � � ?'✓i =-` � �` `��,) , (C L7 c ,ors +� u Ly F �T c —T! Imo(�i4 I ty � SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOe 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. OF REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE �2 i i N 4 ' 1 zr=° PA- 6-A , /rte, �� _ �7� E,Sy (fit =� 76 .'7 t r f A Z t 2 2-)(--, Z _ - l�iS�.�'lL� ��Il.l��la f�ly�plTloN C;Ff Ate. C, E r SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NC o' Z� REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE � L SCALE �+ �- _ t / 3 (,(' r� Zvi • T A- eft v +4-L O L -T 2- IGfo o ?BSI ,N — T (3� c-� � � L 4-= UL- '1, 144, �� J 1 ( FAA- Gk. S ( 2( L-�, - c. — Tr-- - T Ems. T ( L--EA � -�: 04'�lLA, Lib ,q5 A- (rt S7 C�'t ST- 1114 -:PLA- =PCUULi 20 = - ISRIOe SrKeiv 2051 iPaoee_ SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. I� OF Z REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 T jL _ j'J _ o� (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY � DATE Z SCALE wo ol -_ T'A- v s u� s x � 1'7�. +� lLA_� S T I `r -f T�. 4�> L T O H 17 '�- , i c. o z t .r� = I o . LrZ C' •► ., p � L� � 1, T -�f'l� . ^ P i✓ -+ � _ � y m &2_ SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NC. I or 24 REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY oaT- 1 2- FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY DATE 1-2 SCALE r, r, Z9 . j h L t d ru '� � �� ! ✓1 u Z � N�l►L, = 1 ��a ��' t 29, � ��z (r�,� — B.4P�i J -'� �, �� r;��' �- r - LOP , C4-- � �-/�t� j E_ � v� l f-� U ! t E- � -L� � -� � l ��1E..t�t —�C S /''� �k . ✓ -_ = : . 6�' (L C_ 44 e-4_- - f::;°Z— �.$ LE_ C� e—T L---_L-s !E-- t__ S P E_ Cwt A-L.- I E_ C r o N r+-=:, T Tc_z I �`+ s Tn vim, P L J � k 6 x 7 1—I "T S.Ccs 2051 (PAM SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOB 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. OF REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DATE FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED BY- SCALE U w C.,ct1 G �.T,, S T I �' L l Z'17 14 -t7 e_ - : s s v �z) - 1 - 72 - A-�( — s <::> P-f (N IL CC, t�ttz Lk-- l S �L °•S A-s 7 Z 4 i LA -� -� ..., ua m.. ,c...,.ie Cn..tl X115.1 Ga• +•'.. SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. JOE 927 Arguello Street SHEET NC IG or REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 (650) 367 -9595 CALCULATED BY DAT 1 FAX (650) 367 -8139 CHECKED wit r DATE 1 Z — (r1 ° SCALE u L t C �E S ' �T '� N �r•� - coo (�I �4 �=T ��sP N ' S I W of Coo V c-ir� - T o - cy = Z ( PL F "j ` 1 �2- U Lf 17- T>F--z A- CZ r J SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. X06 927 Arguello Street SHEET NO. ZD OF REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY DATE ( - (650) 367 -9595 ( FAX (650) 367.8139 CHECKED BY DATE (2- SCALE Uo KC C 12- c.0 5 .�� Ca 3 `' �_ ��1 _ �= r► c-E �F S �.,• �� r.a" � f Fes_ oN �N .S 1� h Cam.. li S L{ - t F (Z C C- - r f� �. ,'4 i L JOB B l� ✓�' U' { \J�-7 SOIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC SHEET NO. Z� OF y � 927 Arguello Street REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA 94063 CALCULATED BY r DATE (415) 367 -9595 FAX (415) 367 -8139 I . 7 _ o CHECKED BY DATE SCALE .. ............................... ................... ............................... .............................. .................... ......................... M OOOLT M44 ( SIO SIMN 105- 1)PW* ®. Mc.. &aM M= OII71. To 0,* PFIM TOLL FREE I -Mns. ea AJE?Tv,-Jr 40 Sir 2 Z ✓' o N Q O - - ---- -- - . _ - w N � I V CL { w Q 00 N � O U ___-- _- _- __- - -____ T . ' lij N a°o � o r - - -- I eo V V' d tE N If E d I - - -- - ------ - - - - -- ----------------- - - -- T an In o V J 2 0 V - O Q ea cc d ._ mg- - - - - -- - ,� �— a — 3 V d ui o w- RON — -------------- ---------------- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- - ,ti- n - -- - - - - -- � cn U • V p�O OOO 3 j (Q V f0 C00 co Q N � LL L .M "cn NrN lL • tD m d� N O O O a) a000 CS o 'n � U - � ._00000 i0000ui CD 7 •— N N (h N O • 0 0 0 0 0 F = O j, Z � N Cl) LO I ° a ° W CD CD a 1 NEPTIJNE AVENUE � �. � ._ ,f ""rte. -mil. • iA sop �Z � N AT � �� . � } � ►� �- . Z l�- _ S 8 R 8 R S R 9 9 W mn q I LL- I I I q O-n � � I r � I I I a a I z 0 b (n J_ ~ 0 m �� p di DI IL aal Sl 1 t I 7 �I R THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS RECORDED ON AFR 02, 2DOl DOCUMENT NUMBER 1 - 0195883 Recording Requested By: ) GREGORY j. SMITH, COUNTY RECORDER City Engineer ) SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE TIME: 4:36 PM When Recorded Mail To: ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR BLUFF FAILURE Assessor's Parcel Case No. No. 256 -011- (02,03,13) Permit No. 6853TE W.O. No. 6853TE A. Leonard M. Okun ( "OWNER" hereinafter) is the owner of real property which is commonly known as 828 Neptune Avenue ( "PROPERTY" hereinafter) and which is described as follows: See Attachment A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. B. In consideration of a Beach Encroachment Permit and a future Major Use Permit by the City of Encinitas ( "CITY" hereinafter), OWNER hereby covenants and agrees for the benefit of CITY, to do the following: See Attachment B which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. OWNER agrees that OWNER's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the PROPERTY. Upon notice and ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc1 10e10a 1 JAN 90 opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the PROPERTY any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, from the other party. F. Failure of OWNER to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: / OW ER Dated Dated J (Notarization of OWNER signature is attached.) CITY OF ENCINITAS Dated 2 .� ' d� by Alan D. Archibald, P.E. (Notarization not required) Director of Engineering Services ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc2 10el0a 1 JAN 90 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of CALIFORNIA County of SAN DIEGO On JAN. 2 3 , 2001 before me , LAURA LYNNE, NOTARY PUBLIC Date Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Publid) personally appeared LEONARD M . OKUN, M D Name(s) of Signer(s) pllA/ Au te4t +�A♦ ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(0) whose name(9) is/sit subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /eleAMsy executed the same in his /*AI'~ authorized capacityi and that by his /NArAI!hek signature(91 on the instrument the person(e), LAURA LYNNE or the entity upon behalf of which the person(@) acted, Ca nd0on* 12NIM executed the instrument. Nol ny Fall - CGMWft 3M01"P* 41NESS my nd and official seal. "i Signature of Notary Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY Document Date: 1 1 Number of Pages: 6 Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: NONE Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: LEONARD M. OKUN, MD Signer's Name: IX Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer ❑ Corporate Officer Title(s): Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Trustee _ L1 Guardian or Conservator El Guardian or Conservator H. ❑ Other: Top of thumb here ❑ Other: Top of thumb here Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: SELF 0 1994 National Notary Association " 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184 " Canoga Park, CA 91309 -7184 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free 1- 800 -876 -6827 ATTACHMENT A TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR BLUFF FAILURE PERMIT NO. 6853TE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lots 18 and 19 in Block 11 of South Coast Park No. 2, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1859, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, September 21, 1925. Also that portion of Block "D" of South Coast Park No. 2, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1859, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, September 11, 1925, described as follows: Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Lot 19, Block 11, said South Coast Park No. 2; thence westerly along the westerly prolongation of the northerly line of said Lot 19, Block 11, to its intersection with the easterly line of that tract of land conveyed by the South Coast Land Company to the County of San Diego by Deed dated January 10, 1930, and recorded on February 11, 1930, Document No. 7209, in Book 1731, Page 258, of Deeds; thence southerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the westerly prolongation of the southerly line of said Lot 18, Block 11; thence easterly along the said westerly prolongation to the southwesterly corner of said Lot 18, Block 11; thence northerly along the westerly line of said Lots 18 and 19, Block 11, to the Point of Beginning. Excepting therefrom any portion thereof, heretofore or now, lying below the mean high tide line of the Pacific Ocean. ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc3 10e10a 1 JAN 90 ATTACHMENT B TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: HOLD CITY HARMLESS FOR BLUFF FAILURE PERMIT NO. 6853TE OWNER'S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS 1. For claims that are alleged to have arisen, directly or indirectly, from any bluff failure or erosion associated with the PROPERTY or the plans, design, construction or maintenance of OWNER's improvements, OWNER unconditionally waives all present and future claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents. This waiver does not apply to claims that are alleged to have arisen out of the sole, active negligence or deliberate, wrongful act of CITY. 2. It is further understood and agreed that all of OWNER'S rights under § 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California and any similar law of any state or territory of the United States are hereby expressly waived. § 1542 reads as follows: 1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. 3. OWNER agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of OWNER or OWNER's agents, ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc4 10el0a 1 JAN 90 employees, subcontractors, officials, officers or representatives. Upon demand, OWNER shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. OWNER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the improvements; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to the OWNER's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by OWNER, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. OWNER's obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged defects in the construction of the improvements; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the improvements; alleged injury to persons or property; and any alleged inverse condemnation of property as a consequence of the design, construction, or maintenance of the improvements. By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the improvements, CITY shall .not have waived the protections afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of OWNER who shall remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc5 10el0a 1 JAN 90 employees and agents, harmless as provided above. OWNER's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of the CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law, or CITY's sole active negligence. 4. OWNER hereby agrees not to develop in any manner the PROPERTY except as authorized by CITY's ordinances and then only in accordance with issued permits. Among other things, but without limitation, this shall prohibit the alteration of land forms, removal of vegetation and the erection of structures of any type, except as permitted or authorization by CITY. S. This Covenant does not preclude OWNER taking emergency, protective measures as approved by CITY. ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853h.doc6 10e10a 1 JAN 90 THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS RECORDED ON APR 0 '001 DOCUMENT NUMBER 2001 - 019E &� WORY J. SMITH, COUNTY RECORDER Recording Requested By: ) SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE City Engineer ) TIME: 4 :34 PM When Recorded Mail To: ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE COVENANT REGARDING GRANT OF BEACH ACCESS ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR ACCESS ACROSS PUBLIC BEACH TO SEAWALL CONSTRUCTION SITE [Leonard M. Okun] Assessor's Parcel Case No. No. 256 -011- (02,03,13) Permit No. 6853TE W.O. No. 6853TE WHEREAS, Leonard M. Okun ( "PERMITTEE" hereinafter) is the owner of bluff top, ocean front real property which is commonly known as 828 Neptune Avenue ( "DOMINANT ESTATE" hereinafter) and which is described as follows: See Attachment A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. WHEREAS, the City of Encinitas ( "CITY" hereinafter), a municipal corporation, holds an interest in beach property ( "PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA" hereinafter) located in the vicinity of the DOMINANT ESTATE and more fully described as follows: See Attachment B which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. WHEREAS, PERMITTEE desires to construct a seawall at a location immediately seaward of the DOMINANT ESTATE ( "PROJECT SITE" hereinafter) and must cross and otherwise use the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA during the construction of the seawall on the PROJECT SITE. WHEREAS, PERMITTEE desires an entitlement to use the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA during the construction of the seawall; NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows: A. CITY hereby grants to PERMITTEE an encroachment permit in respect to the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA in accordance with the following: ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc1 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 1 See Attachment C which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. B. PERMITTEE covenants and agrees to exercise the entitlements herein conveyed in accordance with the following: See Attachment C which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. C. This Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of the respective parties. D. PERMITTEE agrees that PERMITTEE's duties and obligations under this Covenant are a lien upon the DOMINANT ESTATE. Upon notice and opportunity to respond, CITY may add to the property tax bill of the DOMINANT ESTATE any past due financial obligation owing to CITY by way of this Covenant. E. By accepting the benefits of this Covenant, PERMITTEE acknowledges that PERMITTEE has no title to the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA and waives all right to that title. F. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this Covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, from the other party. G. Failure of PERMITTEE to comply with the terms of this Covenant shall constitute consent to the filing by CITY of a Notice of Violation of Covenant. H. PERMITTEE recognizes and understands that this Covenant may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that the PERMITTEE may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. I. As conditions precedent to PERMITTEE's right to go upon the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA: 1. This Covenant must first be signed by the PERMITTEE and notarized; and then executed by the CITY and recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego. Any recording fee shall be paid by PERMITTEE; 2. PERMITTEE must fully satisfy each and every condition precedent to the exercise of PERMITTEE's entitlement to go upon the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA; and 3. PERMITTEE must first comply with the State Coastal Act ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc2 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 2 by either obtaining the approval of the State Coastal Commission, obtaining a waiver thereof, or qualifying for an exemption therefrom, as needed to construct the seawall on public property and traverse the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA to construct the seawall. J. This Covenant does not preclude PERMITTEE from taking emergency, protective measures as approved by CITY. K. PERMITTEE agrees to provide written disclosures, and require written consent from, any and all future owners, partners, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees and assigns of PERMITTEE's interest in the PROPERTY to the effect that this Covenant is acceptable. Provided, however, if such consent is not rendered, it shall in no way affect the enforceability of this Covenant against such party. The consent shall expressly state that the party has received a copy of this Covenant and shall abide by the terms hereof. L. Upon PERMITTEE's transfer of the PROPERTY to a successor in interest, PERMITTEE may apply to the CITY for a release of PERMITTEE's personal obligations set forth in this Covenant. The CITY shall execute the requested release if it is demonstrated that the successor in interest has fully assumed the obligations herein. M. As delegated by the State Lands Commission, the City hereby conveys State Lands Commission permission to the PERMITTEE to traverse the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA to construct the seawall and to construct the seawall on public property. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: PER M � ITTEE Dated Dated (Notarization of PERMITTEE signature is attached.) I certify on behalf of the City Council of the City of Encinitas, pursuant to the authority conferred by said City Council, that the City is authorized to execute th's Covenant. r Dated � ^ ��. � By A an D. Archibald, P.E. Director of Engineering Services (Notarization not required) ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc3 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 3 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of CALIFORNIA County of SAN DIE On J AN. 23, x o o I before me , LAYRA LYNNE, NOTARY PUBLIC Date Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public ") personally appeared LEONARD M. OKUN , MD , Name(s) of Signers) }S�RRII��I�dOtR)�tSRit� -�7Fi – ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(!* is/ "subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /4c*" executed the same in his /R&~ authorized capacity"), and that by LAURA tYW* his**#M*#signature(e) on the instrument the person(Eq, onmom "*Uuw or the entity upon behalf of which the person( @) acted, �� •��ft executed the instrument. �� WITNES my hand and official seal. UC.' LAURA LYNNE SignatuAkbf Notary Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type Of Document: COVENANT REGARDING GRANT OF BEACH ACCESS Document Date: I -23 I Number of Pages: 4 Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: NONE Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: LE O NARD M. OKUN MD Signer's Name: E Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer ❑ Corporate Officer Title(s): Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee it ❑ Trustee : -- ❑ Guardian or Conservator i - - ❑ Guardian or Conservator - ❑ Other: Top of thumb here ❑ Other: Top of thumb here Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: SELF Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free 1 -800- 876 -6827 0 1994 National Notary Association - 8236 Remmel Ave., P.O. Box 7184 - Canoga Park, CA 91309 -7184 ATTACHMENT A TO COVENANT REGARDING GRANT OF BEACH ACCESS ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR ACCESS ACROSS PUBLIC BEACH TO SEAWALL CONSTRUCTION SITE [Leonard M. Okun] PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: DOMINANT ESTATE Lots 18 and 19 in Block 11 of South Coast Park No. 2, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1859, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, September 21, 1925. Also that portion of Block "D" of South Coast Park No. 2, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1859, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, September 11, 1925, described as follows: Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Lot 19, Block 11, said South Coast Park No. 2; thence westerly along the westerly prolongation of the northerly line of said Lot 19, Block 11, to its intersection with the easterly line of that tract of land conveyed by the South Coast Land Company to the County of San Diego by Deed dated January 10, 1930, and recorded on February 11, 1930, Document No. 7209, in Book 1731, Page 258, of Deeds; thence southerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the westerly prolongation of the southerly line of said Lot 18, Block 11; thence easterly along the said westerly prolongation to the southwesterly corner of said Lot 18, Block 11; thence northerly along the westerly line of said Lots 18 and 19, Block 11, to the Point of Beginning. Excepting therefrom any portion thereof, heretofore or now, lying below the mean high tide line of the Pacific Ocean. ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc4 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 4 I I to H cn < \ V H O o I ' ED 1 ` ' I BY O HERS U H Il i l ,: // 1✓ 1 1 tlIN R SCWRATE 1 �.•� r U 61 IT) / E O -4 f� it I z E U U � R P A N 3 1 Nj H W M V •;TES ` 1 HERLY NE — -+- �, _ .. — . �R — ...� H N O H p ' �4 E oil A 3C.. - H — Ln r 1 ^\ F M9 .B G 4 {SING{i • \ E W a ID W LL / \ C 'ON STEM may_ ��, p \ U n c ..1 \ QOte \ \ O M7 \ �t A r Tt p cc LI /v /4Tb2S R6 �r {' TI \ T1 L7CA'1 - 22 •,1 44 QI � I � I I l j i ( I ', � t in X rl O ,,�•�, % II t T— .., 1 w Id U �T Q) I / /�V L/ 1 I I I it7 1 g 9c4r TT W W 1 I ` (.�vi /�5 I I II RE \ S \ \ I, I I 1 11 IO X N 'r. U 77 4J �4 N U a � .I M T LY L v•I,� I t 0M \\ ! r I aa ba r bn Id F I N 4J N O � Q \\ / ) RPoE PPER r 'b U) 1 N n \`. `• \ J ` / — /— / — rAMtdG VA L � •''� •r'I C+— '(JD PPRPTE NEi U1 a \ 1. ° \ / \ d d OId / i N N Ul Id b .. p .ri t N 0] E•1 1 X. I PROPOSED SEAWALL In (UNDER SEPARATE U U V- PERMIT)I i� U �i Rf V A �V a s �T1 �1� 1 r. b Iq x \ I 1 ! i '. b= C I STATE THAT THIS DATA MPL BEEN PRODUCED LAND S THIS MAP WAS PREPARED USING NQTCGRAMMETRIC COMPUTER t/ AIDED DRAFTING TEOARWAS. Sy ME OR UNDER M DIRECTION IN `rS FORREST L �L B 4EMMARK COWORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF 1 IN OPEN. UNOBSTRUCTED AREAS THIS MAP COMPLIES WITH _ YOUNGS O The be h- NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR IIA►.ACLVIIACY. IN AREAS OF THE CALIFORNIA LAND SURVEYOR'S ACT : v 20 0 20 r DENSE VEGETATION WHERE TIE GROUND IS 0IStURED FROM VIEW. CO SECTI D IUSINESL AND PROFE2SIONS la ND. 5363 Count v DENSE SCCTtN BTOp El SEW. loco teD D� CONIOUK MY DEVIATE POW CORRECT ELEVATION. Em. 6 - JO - 00 south of �i P thr city c' ^, FIELD SURVEY CONTROL RY VALTERS LAND SURVEYING P OF' E AL \FO EI 63.913 H.G ATTACHMENT C TO COVENANT REGARDING GRANT OF BEACH ACCESS ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR ACCESS ACROSS PUBLIC BEACH TO SEAWALL CONSTRUCTION SITE [Leonard M. Okun] DESCRIPTION OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND PERMITTEE's DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS 1.0 LOCATION OF ENCROACHMENT AREA The location of the beach access encroachment area is depicted on the map which is contained in Attachment B to this Covenant. 2.0 PURPOSE OF ENCROACHMENT The purpose of the beach access encroachment permit is to entitle PERMITTEE to use the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA as required for the construction of the seawall at the PROJECT SITE. 3.0 USE OF PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA 3.1 PERMITTEE shall submit to the City Engineer a written proposal setting forth the day[s], hour[s] and safety conditions in accordance with which PERMITTEE proposes to use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA during the construction of the seawall. 3.2 The CITY's Engineer shall expeditiously issue written direction setting forth the day[s], hour[s] and safety conditions reasonably necessary to protect the public from PERMITTEE's use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA during the construction of the seawall. 3.3 PERMITTEE agrees not to go upon or use the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATIONAL AREA for any purpose involving the construction of the seawall at the PROJECT SITE on any day or at any hour, except in complete conformance with the terms and conditions of this Covenant which includes the written directions signed by the CITY's Engineer. 4.0 TERM OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT This COVENANT shall be effective upon its execution by the CITY and shall remain in effect until canceled by the CITY. ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc6 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 6 5.0 OTHER PROVISIONS In consideration of CITY's execution of this Covenant: 5.1 PERMITTEE waives the right to object to the formation of any geologic hazard abatement district, assessment district or maintenance district which includes within its boundaries the DOMINANT ESTATE and which concerns sand replenishment or the stabilization of the DOMINANT ESTATE property. 5.2 PERMITTEE agrees that if and when the CITY or a special district determines that it is necessary for the DOMINANT ESTATE to participate in a project which addresses the stabilization of the DOMINANT ESTATE property, the PERMITTEE shall either construct the project or pay PERMITTEE's fair share of the cost to construct such project. 5.3 PERMITTEE agrees not to develop in any manner the DOMINANT ESTATE except as authorized by CITY's ordinances and then only in accordance with issued permits. Among other things, but without limitation, this shall prohibit the alteration of land forms and the erection of structures of any type, except as permitted or authorized by CITY. 6.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF RISKS AND POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES: WAIVERS 6.1 ASSUMPTION ON RISKS BY PERMITTEE PERMITTEE acknowledges and assumes the risk that: a. the design, construction, maintenance, or functioning of the seawall may not result in the stabilization of the DOMINANT ESTATE and may result in the destabilization of the DOMINANT ESTATE and may otherwise cause damage to the DOMINANT ESTATE, the public beach, persons, adjacent public or private property, or other property; b. The use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA as set forth in Part 3.0 herein above, may result in the destabilization of the DOMINANT ESTATE and may otherwise cause damage to the DOMINANT ESTATE, the public beach, persons, adjacent public or private property, or property in the vicinity; and C. Aspects of the seawall project may be judicially challenged by third parties. 6.2 WAIVER OF CLAIMS AGAINST CITY For claims that are alleged to have arisen, directly or indirectly, from the plans, design, ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc7 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 7 construction, maintenance, functioning or failure of the seawall or from the use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA as set forth in Part 3.0 herein above, PERMITTEE unconditionally waives all present and future claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents. 6.3 PERMITTEE's waiver herein includes, but is not limited to, claims concerning PERMITTEE's use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA; alleged defects in the plan, design, construction, maintenance, or functioning of the seawall; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the seawall; alleged injury to persons or property allegedly caused by, or in any way related to, the seawall or PERMITTEE's use of the PUBLIC RECREATION AREA; or any alleged inverse condemnation of property as a consequence of the design, construction, maintenance or functioning of the seawall. This Section is expressly not intended to act as a limitation to the broad waiver set forth in Section 6.2. 6.4 PERMITTEE agrees that for claims that are alleged to have arisen, directly or indirectly, from the CITY's efforts to assist PERMITTEE in constructing a seawall or using the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA, PERMITTEE unconditionally waives all present and future claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents. 6.5 PERMITTEE's waiver set forth in Sections 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 does not apply to claims that are alleged to have arisen out of the sole, active negligence or deliberate, wrongful act of CITY. 6.6 It is further understood and agreed that all of PERMITTEE's rights under § 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California and any similar law of any state or territory of the United States are hereby expressly waived with respect to claims against CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees, and agents relating to the seawall or the use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA. Section 1542 reads as follows: 1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. 7.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF RISKS AND POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES: INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS 7.1 PERMITTEE TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD CITY HARMLESS. PERMITTEE agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc8 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 8 employees and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof including attorneys' fees, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, any acts or omissions of PERMITTEE or PERMITTEE's agents, employees, subcontractors, officials, officers or representatives in respect to the seawall or the use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA. Upon demand, PERMITTEE shall, at its own expense, defend CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, from and against any and all such liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs. 7.2 PERMITTEE agrees to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents harmless from, and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages and costs, including all costs of defense thereof including attorneys' fees, arising out of, or in any manner connected directly or indirectly with, the CITY's efforts or actions to assist PERMITTEE in the seawall construction. 7.3 PERMITTEE's indemnification and hold harmless obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, claims concerning alleged defects in the plans, specifications and design of the seawall; but does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of a defect in the plans, specifications or design that is a result of a change required by CITY to the PERMITTEE's proposed plans, specifications or design so long as such change is objected to, in writing, by PERMITTEE, and the writing is filed with the City Engineer more than ten days prior to the commencement of work. 7.4 PERMITTEE's indemnification and hold harmless obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, claims concerning PERMITTEE's use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA; alleged defects in the plan, design, construction, maintenance, or functioning of the seawall; alleged defects in the materials furnished in the construction of the seawall; alleged injury to persons or property allegedly caused by, or in any way related to the seawall or PERMITTEE's use of the PUBLIC RECREATION AREA; or any alleged inverse condemnation of property as a consequence of the design, construction, maintenance or functioning of the seawall. This Section is expressly not intended to act as a limitation to the broad indemnification and hold harmless provisions set forth in Sections 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3. 7.5 By approving the improvement plans, specifications and design or by inspecting or approving the seawall or the use of the PUBLIC BEACH RECREATION AREA, CITY shall not have waived the protection afforded herein to CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents or diminished the obligation of PERMITTEE who shall ADA /jk /jsg /f:rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doc9 Version: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 9 remain obligated in the same degree to indemnify and hold CITY and CITY's officers, officials, employees and agents, harmless as specifically provided above. 7.6 PERMITTEE's obligation herein does not extend to liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages or costs that arise out of CITY's intentional wrongful acts, CITY's violations of law, or CITY's sole active negligence. 7.7 The CITY herein expressly does not waive any defenses, immunities or other protections from liability afforded to the CITY by the laws of the United States or the State of California, to include without limitation, the California Government Code. ADA /jk /jsg /f: rowmisc /tevar /te6853e.doclOVersion: March 9, 1994 11:40 Page 10 JAN -11 - 2001 THU 16:16 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:61S767 2384 P:06 GRAY DAVIS. 00 STATE OF CAUFORNIA - TNI RESOURCaI AGENCY CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION i BAN DIEGO ARIA 7575 MUROPOLITAN DRNa, GUrM 108 YAN 0I500, CA 92108""01 ,,,o, 757.8870 EMERGENCY. PERMIT Applicants: Dr. Leonard Okun Date: =?nugrV 11.2001 Rick Sorich Agent: Bob Trettin Emergency Permit No. 2:01-11 I LOCATION OF eMERQeacY woRK: On the beach below 816 and 828 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, San Diego County. WORK PROPossos Temporary placement of approximately 60 to 80 lineal feet, 5 to 7 feet -high rip -rap on the public beach consisting of Wton to 2 -ton quarry stone. (reference attached site plan by Soil Engineering .Construction) This letter constitutes approval of the emergency work you or your representative has requested to be done at the location listed above. I understand from your Information and our site Inspection that an unexpected occurrence In the form of wave action eroding the lower bluff resulting bluff sioughening and creation of tension cracks below the subject properties which requires Immediate action to prevent or mitigate toss or damage to life, health, property or essential public services. 14 Cal, Admin. Code Section 13009. The Executive Director of the Coastal Commission hereby finds that: (a) An emergency exists which requires action more quickly than permitted by the procedures completed o l within 30 days unless otherwise specified can and will be by the terms of this permit; (b) Public comment on the proposed'smergency action has been reviewed 9 time allows; (c) As conditioned, the work proposed would be consistent with the requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1978. The work Is hereby approved, subject to the conditions listed on the attached page. Sincerely, PETER . DOUGLAS Execu o Director y : DEBORAH L E 'Deputy Director JAN -11 - 2001 THU 16:16 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:61S767 2284 P :07 Emergency Permit Number: 6-01 -11.0 Date: 1/11/01 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The enclosed Emergency Permit Acceptance form must be signed by the PROPERTY OWNER and returned to our office within 15 days. 2. Only that work specifically described in this permit and for the specific properties listed above is authorized. The construction, placement, or removal of any accessory or protective structure, Including but not limited to, stairways or other access structures, walls, fences, etc. not described herein, are not authorized by this permit. Any additional work requires separate authorization from the Executive Director. 3. The work authorized by t its permit must be completed within 30 days of the date of this permit (i.e., by ry 4. The emergency work carried out under this permit Is considered TEMPORARY work done In an emergency situation and shall be removed in Its entirely within 120 days of the Issuance of this permit (i.e., by May 11, 2001) unless a regular coastal development permit is approved to maintain the rip -rap fora longer period of time as an interim measure. 6. In exercising this permit, the applicant agrees to hold the Calif omia Coastal Commission harmless from any liabilities for damage to public or private properties or. personal Injury that may result from the project. I 7. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain necessary authorizations and/or permits from other agencies (e.g. State Parks and Recreation, Dept. of Fish & Game, U.S. Fish & Wildlife, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State Lands Commission, City of Encinitas). 8. Prior to the commencement of the construction, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director, evidence that the project has been reviewed and approved by the City of Encinitas. 9.' The temporary rip -rap shall be placed as far Inland as possible. No local sand, cobbles or shoreline rocks shall be used for backfill or for any other purpose as construction material. During both the construction and removal stages of the project, the permlttee shall not store any construction materials or waste where it will be or potentially be subject to wave erosion and dispersion. Within 5 days of completion of construction, the permittee shall remove from the bluff face.,and beach area any and all debris that results from construction of the apprgyed,development. 10. Within ten days of Issuance of this emergency permit, the applicant shall submit for review and written approval of the Executive Director, evidence that a performance bond or other bonding mechanism, in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, has been accepted by the City of Encinitas for an amount sufficient to cover the removal of the rip rap. The bond shall remain In effect until the rip -rap has been removed or alternative measures have been 'constructed with approval by the City of Encinitas and the Coastal Commission._. If you have any questions about the provistonai ofthis erherdency permit, please call the ugly Cannon at the Commlasion's San Dlggo Coast-Area Offips at the address and telephone number listed on the first page. ' JAN -11 -2001 THU 16:17 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:61S767 2384 P:08 GRAY pA11r, Oorrrna OTATI OF 0AUF0WAA -P ' M RK601JRCEO A82NCr CAL(FORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION BAN D800 AREA 7078 NCTROpoLirm DRIVE, BUrM 100 BAN 0IE00, CA 021004402 (010) 907.2870 I EMERGENCY PERMIT ACCEPTANCE FORM i TO: CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAN DIEGO COAST AREA 7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 -4402 (819) 787 -2370 RE: Emergency Permit No. - - - INSTRUCTIONS: After reading the attached Emergency Permit, please sign this form . and return to the San Diego Coast Area Office within 15 working days from the permit's date. I hereby understand all of the conditions of the emergency permit being Issued to me and agree to abide by them. i i Signature of property owner Name Address Date of Signing (aman Diee*%omArg*fwv 0 -410kUn,8orkh Rlprop !P -d00 f . r JAN -11 -2001 THU 16:17 ID:COASTAL COMMISSION TEL:61S767 2884 P:OS dl /iP /2401 14;25 FAX 7000333472 SEC �I O2 A 4 IA w CP COASTAL Co SAN p1EC0 COAL kin la i a I P, I ! I • I f i i SOIL Enclnrcrcitlnc consviucclon., 1 January 2, 2001 TO: Mr. Lee McEachern California Coastal Commission FROM: Mr. Bob Mahony & John Niven ' Soil Engineering Construction, Inc. RE: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Lower and Upper Bluff Repairs Okun Residence, 828 Neptune Avenue Encinitas, California Soil Engineering Construction (SEC) has prepared the following, preliminary geotechnical evaluation in response to the following urgent concerns: ** Ongoing landslide movement across the entire width of the subject property and on the adjoining properties to the north and south. ** Ongoing mid and upper bluff failures on the subject property as well as on the adjacent property to the south (816 Neptune Avenue) which are threatening the subject residential structure. ' As noted in the conclusions of this review, the ongoing landslide movement and the sudden and unexpected elements of failure occurring on the upper bluff on the subject property, as well as on the adjacent properties to the north and south, have promoted a level of bluff instability that places the residence on the subject property under imminent threat of failure. This review includes the results of our bluff stability analyses, conclusions and recommendations for the emergency repairs to the lower and upper bluff. January 2, 2001 1 927 Arguello Street, Redwood City, California 94063 -1310 (650) 367 -9595 • FAX (650) 367 -8139 I This review utilizes, as a base for substantiating our analyses, information presented in the following reports, which have been previously submitted, to the California Coastal Commission: 1. Geotechnical Report / Request for Emergency Processing, Proposed Lower Bluff Seawall, Johnson & Downing Properties, 788, 790 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas California ", prepared by SEC, dated July 29, 1996. 2. "ADDENDUM, Geotechnical Report / Request for Emergency Processing, Proposed Lower Bluff Seawall, Johnson & Downing Properties, 788, 790 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated August 19, 1996. 3. "Addendum to Geotechnical Report, Johnson & Downing Lower Seawall, 788 & 790 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated May 20, 1997. 4. "Addendum No. 2, Geotechnical Report, Johnson & Downing Lower Seawall, 788 & 790 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated September 11, 1997. 5. "Updated Geotechnical Review / Request for Emergency Processing, Proposed Upper Bluff Retention System, Downing Residence, 790 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated April 27, 1998. 6. "Updated Geotechnical Review / Request for Emergency Processing, Proposed Upper Bluff Retention System, Johnson Residence, 788 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated May 29, 1998. 7. "Prelimin Geotechnical Evaluation / Request for as3' q Emergency Processing, Proposed Lower Bluff Seawall & Upper Bluff Retention System, Mattingley Residence, 794 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated February 10, 1999. 8. "Supplemental Geotechnical Information, 794 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", b SEC dated F prepared y a ebruary 18, 1999. r 9. "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation / Request for Emergency Processing, Proposed Lower Bluff Seawall, Funke & Kimball Residences, 796 and 798 Neptune Avenue, ' Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated October 5, 1999. 10. "Supplemental Recommendations for Repairs to Upper Bluff, Funke & Kimball Residences, 796 and 798 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", prepared by SEC, dated February 10, 2000. ' January 2, 2001 2 11. "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed Lower and Upper Bluff Repairs, Brem Residence, 808 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", Prepared by SEC, dated August 7, 2000. 12. "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed Lower and Upper Bluff Repairs, Sorich Residence, 816 Neptune Avenue, Encinitas, California ", Prepared by SEC, dated August 7, 2000. SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located at 828 Neptune Avenue in Encinitas. The site consists of relatively level building pad areas (EL +92' + / -) and is occupied by a single story wood frame residential dwelling of standard construction with appurtenant improvements. The westernmost portion of the residence is supported by temporary underpinning piers. These piers were constructed under an emergency permit in 1996 after a landslide occurred below the subject property and adjacent properties to the north and south. This landslide resulted in the failure of two rooms across the rear of the subject residence. It appears that the remaining portions of the primary residential structure are founded on shallow foundations with raised wood floors. The temporary underpinning were laced to a limited depth an at re mrnng P P pt d, present, have become substantially exposed. The remainder of the primary residential structure has been undercut by bluff failure to a depth of approximately 10 feet. The base of the piers is subject to undercutting at any moment. At such time, if not before, a substantial portion of the residential structure will fail. The temporary piers were initially placed to protect the structure, and construction crews, through the balance of an emergency solution. They were not designed to indefinitely sustain the structure. The project site is bounded to the east by Neptune Avenue, single family residences to the north and south, and on the west, by an approximately 90 foot high, steeply sloping, westerly facing sea bluff which has been adversely affected by a landslide. The properties to the north have been granted emergency authorization to construct upper and lower bluff walls. The property to the immediate south has received an emergency coastal permit for a lower wall, and indications have been made that an emergency permit for an upper bluff retention system will be provided once a final alignment is agreed upon. Based on our observations of the subject site, and the results of this geotechnical evaluation, it is our ' opinion that the site conditions have degraded significantly during the past 120 days. January 2, 2001 3 As observed on the beach, landslide debris exists across the subject property as well as the two properties to the north and portions of the property to the south. Some large blocks of the lower claystone /siltstone formation still exist and front the two neighboring ro Pe properties on the north. Near P the base of the bluff on the southern neighboring properties, at approximately + g' M.S.L., a clay seam exists. Major landslides appear to have occurred on this clay seam on the subject property and on the properties to the north and south of the subject site. An ongoing landslide failure exists on portions of the subject site and on the neighboring properties to the north and portions of the property on the south PROJECT DESCRIPTION As more specifically defined in the "Recommendations" section of this report, the proposed project will consist of approximately 100 lineal feet of lower bluff seawall consisting of steel reinforced soldier piles with a reinforced shotcrete wall and one row of tiebacks approximately 60 to 70 feet in length. The proposed seawall will match the height and appearance of the neighboring seawalls located to the south and will extend to a height of +27' M.S.L. at the northern end of the wall. The heights of +20' and +27' M.S.L. were chosen so that it will blend into the walls proposed for the neighboring properties on the south and north. The exposed surfaces of the seawall will be textured and colored to resemble, to the extent possible, the surrounding bluff areas. A concrete cutoff wall for the proposed seawall will extend down to an elevation of approximately 0' M.S.L or lower. The bottom of the proposed soldier piles are expected to be founded at elevation —16' M.S.L. In addition, an exposed upper bluff retaining wall p pp g system will be constructed on a working bench located at elevation +70' M.S.L. and will consist of drilled piers to a depth of approximately 30 feet and an approximately 20 foot high exposed reinforced shotcrete wall with one row of tiebacks and will extend across the entire width of the property. The proposed upper wall is anticipated to be constructed approximately 10 westward from the existing westernmost residential structure. The drilled piers will be connected with a concrete grade beam and it is anticipated that the tiebacks will be approximately 45 feet in length. The exposed surfaces of the upper bluff retaining wall will be textured and colored to resemble, to the extent possible, the surrounding bluff areas. January 2, 2001 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS On August 1, 1996, SEC assisted Lockwood -Singh Associates advance four borings (B -1, B -2, B -4, & B -5) at 828 Neptune Avenue to depths ranging from approximately 56 to 85 feet. In addition, SEC advanced three test trenches, two on the beach and one within the mid bluff area below 828 Neptune. The approximate location of the borings and test pits are shown on Figure 1. The borings and test trenches were logged, and soil samples were both disturbed and relatively "undisturbed" were collected. The two borings located at the front of the residence were advanced with using a CME 75 High Torque truck mounted drilling rig, equipped with 8- inch hollow -stem augers and an automatic trip hammer for soil sampling. The two borings located within the slide debris were advanced with a limited access track mounted hollow stem drill rig. In these two borings slope inclinometer casings were installed. The inclinometers were monitored by Lockwood -Singh for a period of about one month and the results indicated that the slide plane at these locations were 0' M.S.L. and +20' M.S.L. for the borings B -4 and B -5, respectively. The depths of the movement are estimated on Cross - Section A -A' (Figure 2). The southern limits of the landslide are estimated on Figure 1. Subsurface soils were visually classified in the field in general accordance with the procedures of ASTM D2488 -84 and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The borings in the front yard area were equipped with well casings so the groundwater levels may be observed in the future. Logs of the borings and test pits are presented in Appendix A. Information regarding the well casings and slope inclinometer data are presented in Appendix B. As encountered in the borings, the site is underlain by Terrace deposits. Underlying the Terrace deposits is the Santiago formation, which consists of hard siltstone /claystone and dense silty fine sandstone. Underlying the Santiago is the Torrey sandstone consisting of very dense silty ' medium sandstone. For the purposes of our seawall design it is assumed that the Torrey formation exists at an elevation of —8' M.S.L. at the location of the proposed seawall. Recent caisson drilling on the neighboring property indicates that the sandstone may be encountered at elevation -5' M.S.L or higher on the subject property. No clay seams or shear zones were observed from the recovered samples in the borings advanced by Lockwood -Singh at the front of the residence. Groundwater was observed in some of the borings and the depths of the groundwater levels may be estimated from the boring logs. January 2, 2001 5 O � N O O p WO O O V 00 I O O O < r O v r' nn F Of P N� 2 m 0 z - o v v.. �u � r1 � N W LS -4 I o 0 � N G A I I I� LS B- N O Z 1 O U w O e X11 3 ° y 1 r++� r m m I N � � m u m� X O !c �� Z F Z � y c CIl 'O O 2 0 e omxo m N 0 0 N 7 ° .... O CD Z - mA z cl �N mm mO n �� D0 y; m m IE z �= m N IQ I LS -2 o z I m 0 0 o m 0 m v 0 N '1 V J LS -1 C TT� II IM N ° O O O0 0 c0 O p — NEPTUNE AVENUE SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES ' Presented herein are the results of our bluff slope stability analyses for the subject site. The purpose of the analyses was to estimate the soil strength parameters along the slide plane at the time of the 1996 landslide and then estimate the required resistance (tiebacks) to increase the factor of safety against sliding, along the defined failure surface (see Figure 2), to a 1.5 or greater for the proposed slope and wall configurations. The resistance force (tieback) then approximates the load on the new wall proposed along the toe of the original bluff. The analyses were performed for both static and seismic conditions utilizing the Simplified Janbu Method for a defined failure surface (GSTABL7 computer program) and the results are discussed herein. The location of the assumed most critical bluff cross - section A -A', shown on Figure 1 and the cross - section, is shown on Figure 2, generally depicts the bluff slope used in our analyses. The specified surface depicted on Figure 2 is based upon slope inclinometer data obtained in 1996 and on test trenches excavated at the toe of the slide and mapping of the original tension crack along the top of bluff also in 1996. The computer printouts are included in this review and are included in Appendix C. Assumed design soil parameters used for our analysis were based mainly on back calculations for factors of safety against sliding of near 1.0 for the various pre -slide and post repair bluff conditions, our past experience working in the area, and on laboratory testing (Appendix B). A piezometric surface at elevation of +24' M.S.L. (Neptune) to +20' M.S.L. at the bluff face or face of the proposed wall were assumed for the analyses. The soil strength parameters used in the various analyses are presented in the table below with the associated calculated factor of safeties. Seismic criteria are included in the slope stability analyses. ' The slope stability analysis uses a pseudo - static method with a Seismic Coefficient of 0.15 gravity. The calculated factor of safety with respect to sliding for each load case are presented on the following page: January 2, 2001 6 Bluff Condition Minimum X- Section A -A' Calculated Factor of Safety Back Calculate Slide Plane Soil Strength Parameters for 1996 Pre Slide Bluff Configuration Terrace Deposits - 0 = 38'& C = 0 0.95 Cross Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 26'& C = 500 Along Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 8.3'& C = 400 Back Calculate Slide Plane Soil Strength Parameters for Proposed Slope and Wall Configuration 0.96 Terrace Deposits - = 28'& C = 0 Cross Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 26'& C = 500 Along Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 8.3'& C = 400 Proposed Slope Configuration with Tieback Simulating Force On New Wall - Static Analysis Terrace Deposits - 0 = 28'& C = 0 1.57 Cross Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 26'& C = 500 Along Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 8.3 C = 400 1 Proposed Slope Configuration with Tieback Simulating Force On New Wall - Pseudo Static Analysis 1.08 ' Terrace Deposits - = 28'& C = 0 Cross Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 26'& C = 500 Along Bedding Clay /Siltstone - = 8.3 ° & C = 400 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions: Based on the findings presented in this geotechnical evaluation of 828 Neptune Avenue, it is clear that the primary residence at the subject site is imminently threatened, in part or whole, by the existing bluff conditions both on the subject property and on adjacent properties to the north and south. January 2, 2001 7 It is recommended that emergency repairs, consisting of the construction of a lower bluff seawall and an exposed upper bluff retaining wall, proceed immediately. It is our opinion that a primary threat to the subject residence consists of the imminent failure of ' the upper coastal bluff, further sliding along the defined failure surface and underminement of the temporary underpinning piers. The emergency construction of a lower coastal seawall and construction of an upper bluff retaining wall system is the only viable method of initiating ' mitigation for this urgent concern. The seawall will act to both counteract the slide and to prevent erosion from wave actions. It is our further opinion that the over - steepened upper bluff materials (caused, in part, by recent ' failures on the mid and upper areas of the bluff) and the continuing failure of the landslide debris are factors that must also be addressed on an emergency basis if the primary residence is to be ' protected from imminent damage / and further failure. The proposed upper bluff retaining wall system will mitigate these concerns. Recommendations; ' It is recommended, based on our slope stability analyses, that the proposed seawall be designed to resist a force of 48 kips per lineal foot. This force is based upon our slope stability analyses with a tieback force of 265 kips at five foot centers installed at an angle of 25 degrees from horizontal. The loading on the wall may be assumed to be rectangular. Tiebacks for the lower wall should be designed accordingly, using a minimum bond stress of approximately 20 pounds ' per square inch within the bonded zone. The bonded zone for the tiebacks should be considered that portion of the anchor, which is embedded into the underlying Torrey sandstone. A ' minimum embedment of 20 feet into the Torrey sandstone is recommended. We anticipate that the tiebacks will be installed in bore holes 70 feet in length. It is recommended that the diameter of the borehole for the tiebacks be a minimum of 6 inches in diameter and the tiebacks should be drilled at an approximate angle of 25 to 30 degrees from horizontal. ' Drilled soldier piles for the lower wall shall be installed at a minimum horizontal spacing of 8 feet on center. For the design of the drilled soldier pile, it is assumed that the passive pressure in the Torrey sandstone is 3,000 psf starting at the top of the Torrey formation. The lateral ' resistance may be applied over two shaft diameters. The wall may require temporary wood or steel plate lagging between the piers in order to facilitate the installation of the shotcrete wall. ' The use of lagging will be evaluated by the engineer in the field during construction. The minimum embedment length into the Torrey sandstone is recommended to be 8 feet. An allowable bearing capacity 15,000 pounds per square foot may also be used in the design of the January 2, 2001 8 ' drilled vertical piers. The drilled piers should be designed by a civil engineer familiar with this type of retaining structure. The concrete used should have a slump of five to six inches to promote the filling of ' voids in the shaft wall. Pier shafts should be dewatered and cleaned of loose sloughed material prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The shafts should contain no more than six inches of standing water unless a tremie extending to the shaft bottom is used to place the concrete. Unless shaft diameters are large enough that falling concrete will not hit the wall or reinforcing steel, free fall of concrete should not exceed about six feet. Any casing required for drilling should be pulled back as the concrete is being placed. At least a 4 foot head of concrete should be maintained in the casing while it is being pulled. We recommend that a sub -drain system be provided behind the earth - retaining walls to intercept and remove water from behind the wall. ' In order to protect the residential structures at the site from imminent damage or loss due to an upper bluff failure, it is recommended that an exposed upper bluff retaining wall system, consisting of caissons /soldier piles, grade beam and tiebacks, be constructed across the residential lot fronting the sea bluff. The purpose of the upper bluff retaining wall system is to protect the residential structure from failure. i It is recommended that an exposed upper bluff retaining wall system be constructed across the ' width of the subject lot, approximately 100 feet. At this time, it is anticipated that a temporary working bench approximately 15 feet wide will be constructed across the site in conjunction with ' the Brown property on the north. The bench width will be reduced upon completion of the construction of the upper bluff retaining wall by regarding. This working bench shall be constructed to an elevation of +70' M.S.L. At this time, an end return is not recommended because the property owner at 836 -838 Neptune will construct a wall in the same alignment as the one proposed for the subject property. The southern terminus of the proposed wall will abut a buried retention wall proposed on the southern adjacent property at 816 Neptune. At this time, it is our opinion that the transitioning an outer wall to an buried retention wall on the subject property is not practical. ' It is recommended that the caissons for the upper bluff retaining wall system be a minimum of ' 30 feet in depth, below an elevation of +70' M.S.L.. Caissons should not be spaced greater than 8 feet center to center. Minimum diameter of the caissons should not be less than 30 inches. It is recommended that drill spoils (sand) be deposited onto the landslide debris located below the subject property. It is our opinion that the deposition of these sand materials onto the landslide debris will not have an adverse affect on the bluff or on the debris pile. i The upper bluff retaining wall system should be restrained using tiebacks. It is recommended that tiebacks be drilled in a borehole of 8 inches and be a minimum of 45 feet in length. The said ' January 2, 2001 9 tiebacks should be designed assuming a minimum unbonded length of 15 feet and a minimum bonded length of 30 feet. Tiebacks for the upper bluff retaining wall system should be designed ' using a minimum bond stress of 15 pounds per square inch. The wall between the beams shall be constructed of reinforced shotcrete. The shotcrete shall be colored and textured to match, to the ' extent possible, adjacent bluff areas. It is recommended that up to four temporary tiebacks be installed at the base of the existing underpinning piers which support those portions of the residence which overhang the bluff. The purpose of these tiebacks is to provide the underpinning piers additional lateral support. It is ' recommended that the temporary tiebacks be install to a horizontal depth of 25 feet and grouted for their full length. The tiebacks should be attached to the exposed base of the underpinning piers using a metal strap. No performance or proof testing of these tiebacks is necessary. It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away form the top of bluff and drained to ' Neptune Avenue in non - eroding subsurface drainage pipes. All permanent irrigation systems should be removed and capped a minimum of 40 feet from the bluff face. ' It is also recommended that the owner of the property provide drought resistant vegetation on the re- graded bluff face materials in order to prevent future erosion. A landscape contractor or ' architect should be retained for specific recommendations on planting. It is recommended that foot traffic be kept to a minimum on the re- graded bluff face and, if possible, the planting should ' be performed by hydroseeding. Thank you, in advance, for providing your immediate attention, review and comments to this ' evaluation and its attendant recommendations. If the proposed project is delayed, we recommend that the California Coastal Commission provide SEC and the property owner assurance that these ' present site conditions will not adversely affect the subject property as well as the neighboring properties. If you have any questions, require additional materials, or would desire an on -site meeting, please call us at (760) 633 -3470. Sincerely, ' S IL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCITON, Inc. ' o iven, R. &f. . 57517 Robert D. Mahony, G.E. 554, C.E.G. 847 RpFESS/ QROFESS /p Q 0 r ��ONA(U�� C c�0r6 0. C57517 rn w No. GE 55 '' •te LIC. No. EG 847 XP. 12!31/01 � * EXP. CS /3U /, � '; EXP. 08/31/02 ,'•y /� January 2, 2001 l ClV11. a 10 ` s'I��CE� *t �T •. •. •`� (( ,, �dF Cr41 CA1-�F��`,� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � BORING APPENDIX ,x LOGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ON 0"N ProP6e.v�o, nrr-N� OePivnc f"-`Vrx4VL BORING LOG No. 1 DATE 71 DRI LING EQUIPMEN i hollowstern a uger REFERENCE 93.5 feet: Nail in street 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. ' VISUAL H CLASSIFICATION a VISUAL >_ U W M E d ' � DESCRIPTION o Uj ° o> o m O z o p m U p U Sand fine to medium grained, trace clay Reddish Dense Slightly brown moist A 5 10 1 92 ......................... Sand medium to fine grained, micaceous, clean Light ' 15 grayish 2 84 B brown 20 87 [No sample recovery] ' C PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE ' 1 of 4 BORING LOG No. 1 DATE 7/19/96 DRILLING EQUIPMENT i m er ho llowste m auaer REFERENCE 93.5 feet: Nail in street 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lb s. ' VISUAL o CLASSIFICATION z CD a o a VISUAL U w m �' ' M a DESCRIPTION o co o > o O o z o m U p U 25 100 [No sample recovery] Black Dense Slightly Sand medium to fine grained, clean and white moist speckled ' C 30 [No sample recovery] 76 35 [Used sample catcher] ' 6 83 Thin lenses of black sand (magnetite) ........................ Light 40 grayish D [Used sample catcher] brown 7 96 Thin lenses of black sand (magnetite) 45 [Used sample catcher] 8 90 E PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune ' PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE ' 2 of 4 BORIN LOG No. 1 DATE DRILLING EQUIPMENT 8"do ameter-hollowstem auger REFERENCE 93 feet@ Nail in 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 140 Ihs. ' VISUAL o CLASSIFICATION w a 0 w a VISUAL U W >_ ' a � a N DESCRIPTION o z of CJ > 0f J !n _ > O m O U O 0 D o m U g U 50 g 82 [Used sample catcher] Light Dense Slightly Sand, medium to fine grained, clean grey salt moist and ' peper ' F 55 10 g0 [Used sample catcher] ......................... Reddish brown 60-01,110 [Used sample catcher] ....................... Very dense 1 65 12 181 G [Used sample catcher] ' Greyish Moderate) Drilling became harder Gre Y Y Moist brown hard 70 Siltstone clayey, moderately well bedded 13 104 [Used sample catcher] I 14 18 . Some sand, fine grained, fossiliferous, thin shelled clams and B . . uish luish ........... turitellas grey [Sample catcher not used] PROJECT NAME FIN -N ' PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 3 of 4 BORING LOG No. DATE DRILLING EQUIP REFERENCE 93 feets Nail in 838 Nep tune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 14o lb VISUAL U, o CLASSIFICATION ° ' Z ° a VISUAL 0 a W m � o E of DESCRIPTION o U 0 0 m o 0 0 o ' U 75 Siltstone clayey Bluish Moderately Moist 15 87 grey hard 80 16 182 End of boring at 80%' Predrilled with hand auger upper 6' No ground vvater encountered Set well 1 i PROJECT NAME FIN - PROJECT NO. 4763.69 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -S I NGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE ' 4 of 4 BORING LOG No 2 DATE DRILLING EQUIP '\7- REFERENCE 9 4.o feet: Nail in 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 14o lb 1 VISUAL CLAS o SIFICATION Z ° m VISUAL >_ - a ID .� n U W Q. C 0 N a DESCRIPTION o C o N o 0 0 o m Z o m Surface Conditions: flat, cleared 00 Reddish Dense Slightly brown moist A 5 Sand fine to medium grained, trace clay 1 40 B ......................................................................................................................................... ............................... 1 and, medium to fine grained, trace clay Light greyish brown 10 1 2 42 1 ................................................................................................................................... ............................... Sand medium to fine, grained micaceous, clean Some 15 C mottling 3 45 (decaying roots) 20 4 70 Lost bottom 6" of sample 1 PROJECT NAME FIN PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE ' 1 of 4 BORING LOG No. 2 DATE DRILLING EQUIPME REFERENCE 94 feet& Nail in 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT VISUAL N d CLASSIFICATION Z ° m VISUAL } U W a DESCRIPTION o o > m m v o 0 0 0 U 25 Sand medium to fine grained, clean, magnetite grains in thin Dense Slightly 5 69 layers moist 1 D 30 Black and white 6 72 speckled 35 E 7 70 [Used sample catcher] 40 8 73 [Used sample catcher] F 45 9 51 [Used sample catcherl PROJECT NAME FIN - k - PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 2 of 4 BORING LOG No. 2 DATE DRILLING EQUIPM 'l REFERENCE 94 feet# Nail 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT 14o lb VISUAL N 6 CLASSIFICATION w a W a n VISUAL U w C a) a DESCRIPTION o o ; tu o U o O Q m a7 U OZ U 50 10 79 Sand fine to medium grained, trace clay Black [Used sample catcher] Dense Slightly and white moist speckled G 55 ......................... 1 11 67 [Used sample catcher] Reddish brown ....................... Light gray 60 12 66 [Used sample catcher] 65 H 13 86 Black and white ................ s cteled ...... ....................... 14 13 Siltstone. trace silt, trace sand Bluish Moderately Moist 15 1 grey hard 70 PROJECT NAME FIN PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 3of4 BORING LOG No. 2 DATE 7/2 DRILLING EQUIPMENT 8" diameter houowstem auger REFERENCE 94.0 feeta Nail in 838 Neptune Avenue DRIVING WEIGHT VISUAL o CLASSIFICATION Z m o ° a VISUAL U w w a a DESCRIPTION o co ca O z o D Q in m U p U 75 Siltstone fossiliferous Grey Dense Slightly 16 118 Rock in tip, some sand, medium grained, interbedded with moist sandstone 17 190 No fossils 80 ................................................................................................................. ............................... 18 130 Silstone. clay.. ey .................... ............................... 19 147 Claystone 20 170 Hard concretions ................................................................................................................. ............................... 21 171 Siltstone clayey, micaceous . ............................... 22 133 .S.andstnne ...clayey.. silty ................................................................ ............................... 85 Siltstone End of boring at 851/2 Predrilled with hand auger upper 5' Seepage /wet soil at 8'/' Set well PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 4 of 4 (This boring is located in Leucadia Park) BORING LOG No- 3 r } DATE 8/29/96 DRILL 8" diameter hollowstem auger REFERENCE Elevation: 51.1' ( top of pipe) Manhole cover in alle DRIVING WEIGHT 140lbs. VISUAL N d CLASSIFICATION °' VISUAL 0 W Z O � a DESCRIPTION o CL o _ 4) o o o ° m o m V Sand fine to medium grained, trace silt Dark Dense Slightly brown moist Sa nd, fine grained, trace silt Reddish brown 5 ....................... 1 17 Slightly moist 10 ....................... Dark 2 28 brown, black speckled ........................ ...................... Light brown Wet 15 3 80 ............................................................................................................................................................................. .......... ............................... 4 CC Claystone, silty trace sand Light bluish Firm Slightly grey/light moist brown mottled 20 5 75 D D Sandstone, silty trace clay few fragments caystone to 112 inch 6 angular End of boring at 25'/2', ground water at 12', set well PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE olv ��fl5u�� getow ovL.,,.► BORING LOG No 4 DATE 10/02/96 7 DRILLING EQUIPMENT s" diameter hollowstem au er REFERENCE 35.4 2 inch diameter pipe adjacent to Test Pit 3 elevation 45.46' DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. VISUAL y o CLASSIFICATION a VISUAL 0 W Z M N M a DESCRIPTION o CO ° ' 0 m z ° o m o Landslide Debris Light brown Loose Dry Sand, fine to medium grained, clean 5 1 3 10 2 8 15 3 10 ................ ............................... 20 Moderate) compact Light grey - --- -------------------------- - - - - -- - - - -- ----- - - - - -- 4 13 Siltstone, trace clay, few thin - shelled clam fossils Dark gray Stiff Slightly moist PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 1 of 3 BORING LOG No. 4 DATE 10/2 and 10/03/96 DRILLIN EQUIPMENT 8" diameter hollowstem auger i REFERENCE 35.4' Pipe adjacent to Test Pit 3, elevation 45.46' DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. VISUAL o CLASSIFICATION w a_ a VISUAL 0 W C W a DESCRIPTION o Ln CD m Q Z o 0 Landslide debris Grey Siltstone, slightly clayey few thin - shelled clam fossils, slightly brown fractured. Thinly bedded black and dark grey layers mottled Moist Stiff 5 61 ........ ...... 30 - Concretion at 30' Very hard Stiff Sandstone, very fine grained concretions, bedding dipping —30° to Hard ° i j .. °. °. °. 45° light grey and black layers, micaceous .................... 6 42 . 35 Stiff 7 117 Siltstone, micaceous, claystone polished edges, sheared ............................................................................................................... ..................... .......... .. Ardarth Shale 40 Siltstone - Concretion @ 40' Hard ....................... Torrey sandstone Grey to Moderate) (fine- medium grained) moderately indurated, occasional very hard light grey Hard 8 104 layer of silty sandstone, dark grey, 1/8" thick beds 45 PROJECT NAME FINE(USAA- Okun)- Neptune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 2of3 BORING LOG NO. 4 DATE 10/2 and 1/03/96 DRIL NT 8" diameter hollowstem auger REFERENCE 35.4' Pipe adjacent to Test Pit 3, elevation 45.46' DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. VISUAL N o CLASSIFICATION w a a a VISUAL 0 W E 0 CO CU 0. DESCRIPTION 0 �_ Q. d CO J N Q = > 0 m cc U Z O p Q m 0 50 9 110 Torrey Sandstone Grey Moderately Slightly Fine to medium grained Hard moist 55 10 960 Grantic cobble in tip End of boring at 56' Ground water @ 31' Install 577' slope inclinometer casing Bailed approximately 9 gallons water from casing Install monument well cover 60 PROJECT NAME FINE(USAA- Okun)- Neptune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 3of3 ON �_a 56 04. , f o f_vN t+wsC. BORING LOG No. 5 DATE 10/04196 DRILLING IP 8" diameterhollowstem auger j REFERENCE 51.6' 2 inch diameter pipe adjacent to Test Pit 3, elevation 45.46' DRIVING WEIGHT 140lbs. ' VISUAL o CLASSIFICATION T o °' VISUAL 0 W CL W a `° DESCRIPTION o o 0 m 0 0 � m U Landslide Debris Brown Firm to Slightly Sand, fine to medium grained, clean. loose moist Hole ravelled to 16 -inch diameter within upper 4 feet 5 1 5 ......................... •..................... Firm 10 2 25 t 15 Abundant Magnetite grains Light brown 3 28 20 PROJECT NAME FINE(USAA- Okun)- Neptune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 1 of 3 BORING LOG No. 5 DATE 10/04/96 DRILLING EQUIPMENT a• diameterhollowstem aug REFERENCE 51.6' 2 inch diameter pipe ad'acent to Test Pit 3 elevation 45.46' DRIVING WEIGHT 140 lbs. ' VISUAL c CLASSIFICATION VISUAL 0 W CL CO M cL a n DESCRIPTION o W (n Q > m m U 0 U 25 4 24 Landslide Debris Light Loose Slightly Sand, fine to medium grained, clean brown moist ..................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... 30 Siltstone contact based on drilling difficulty Grey to Firm to Mo;.;t 5 78 Freshly fractured clayey siltstone, edges of fractures not oxidized, dark grey stiff weathered to dark reddish brown on older fracture surfaces, modetately bedded. Thin shelled clam fossils 35 ......................................................................................................................................... ............................... Freshly fractured, no oxidation on bedding Blush 6 210 grey ................. ............................... Concretion at 39Y2' Dark, Hard ............ 40 light 7 Disturbed sample grey - Concretion at 41' ....................... 8 240 Grey - Contretion at 43' 45 ....................... Dark grey 9 150 Slightly micaceous, massive PROJECT NAME FINE USAA -Okun -Ne tune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE �' 2of3 BORING LOG No. 5 DATE 10/07/96 DRILLING EQUIPMENT 8 diameter hollowstem auger REFERENCE 51.6' DRIVING WEIGHT 140lbs. VISUAL N c CLASSIFICATION CL VISUAL w L a - z It U) M a `° DESCRIPTION o d N CO J co o m U z m O 50 iSiltstone Dark grey S tiff to Slightly Slightly micaceous, slightly fractured, fresh looking fractures hard moist ......................................................................................................................................... ............................... Torrey Sandstone Grey Sandstone, fine to medium grained, silty 010600 55 i 60- 011600 ........................ Olive brown 12 300 End of boring @ 64'/i 65 13 No ground water Install monument well cover Water added to facilitate drilling 70 75 PROJECT NAME FINE(USAA- Okun)- Neptune PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE 3 of 3 LOG OF TEST PIT 0-4' Active Landslide Debris Sandy siltstone, with a few stringers of medium grained sand; jumbled, loose, mottled dark grey -brown and light brown, very moist to wet. At base of landslide: Irregular layer of very soft, sticky, gooey clay, strikes approximately north, dips 5' east. 4 -4' /z' Beach Sand Fine to medium grained sand, loose, grey, very moist to wet. SKETCH West 1 t Slide Debris Beach Sand '---------------------------------- Not to scale - EOUIpMENT Backhoe TEST PIT No FINE (USAA - Okun) - Neptune Date logged 14 Jun 96 PROJECT NO, 4762 -66 Logged by RGH I LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE i ht' toe, o7z` 5-Aie e. LOG OF TEST PIT 0 -3' Active Landslide Debris Sandy siltstone with stringers of medium grained sand; jumbled, loose, mottled dark grey -brown and light brown, very moist to wet. Base of landslide strikes approximately north, dips 7' west (seaward). 3 -3 Beach Sand Fine to medium grained sand, loose, grey, very moist to wet. SKETCH west ► t Slide Debris � Beach Sand _ Not to scale - Backhoe TEST PIT No 2 FINE (USAA - Okun) -Neptune Date logged 14 Jun 96 PROJECT No 4762 -66 Logged by RGH LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES PLATE ■ OrQ L.N N4'SLIp'L f FELazi' QKv j �*wsL_ ■ LOG OF TEST PIT Landslide Debris Sand, fine to coarse grained, orange- brown, some rounded gravel to '/." near contact, gray and light gray sand layers above contact, bedding dips toward ocean, some beds abruptly truncated, moist, compact. Bedding N13'W 15'SE © Slide Plane Clay, gouged and slickensided, olive gray, abundant sitlstone pieces embedded within, '/i' to 1" thick, contact irregular. Attitude N40'W 41'SW of bed. © Ardath Shale /Landslide Debris ( ?) Siltstone, slightly sandy, with 2" mollusc fossils, dark gray, fractured below, very moist on fractured surfaces, blocks to 2' dimension. Elevation at top of lagging - 43.63 SKETCH S68'W lop 8 ' i y upMlNMdl4 N 3 "x10" Lagging dINNN NNiINII ialu'a .a I d�kNull . Mq'1 dN INN NINNWNr Boards h MMM I!i saah;Ir61NNN11NIr,N�iCMN - ININ dNININWNu l �� !UtlNIIhhIiN�N!iIIM II IMMIhIIIiIIliIN1111NIIhhNli i'eNihii I invidNM I ' .1111 Nhl NIIN'NINNIhliiiillNMh hnil! niu p!n Ilw uumiih!INNMflN. MMMM. ...Mlulq'IHIIIouiPglNNp , N 11 uu Depth 27 I . 6" 1'/' A ,� Depth 281/2' U ; , 0 2/2 Depth 29'/2' 10' Not to scale - EQUIPMENT Hand Tools TEST PIT No 3 PROJECT NAME FINE (USAA -OKUN) Neptune Ave. Date logged 7 Oct 96 PROJECT NO. 4763 -66 Logged by RK LOCKWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES 1 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING & SLOPE INCLINOMETER DATA i 1 FINE (USAA -Okun) Page 1 Project Ref. 4 - � 763 66 FIELD MOISTURE- DENSITY DETERMINATIONS OF RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED SAMPLES FROM BORINGS Sample Field Dry Density Field Moisture Content Remarks Location (pcfl ( %) B 1 @ 11' 105.9 5.3 California Sampler @ 15' 104.6 4.3 it It @ 36' 89.5 1.9 if @ 41 ' 90.6 2.3 of @ 4 6' 89.8 2.3 it @ 51' 89.1 2.3 it @ 56' 84.2 2.9 it @ 60%2 89.4 4.6 it @ 65Y2' 81.9 5.1 it @ 72 %2' 105.5 18.5 it 1 @ 76' 102.4 11.8 „ if @ 80 %2 ' 93.7 15.7 of B2 6%2' @ 113.4 8.6 California Sampler @ 11 %2' 89.6 6.1 of @ 16 Y2' 98.1 4.4 It @ 21 ' 89.1 3.6 it ' @ 26%2' 105.8 3.2 of @31 102.7 3.8 if @ 36%2' 99.8 3.0 it @ 41 %2' 99.0 2.3 is @ 46%2' 99.1 2.8 If @ 51 %2' 97.7 3.0 If @ 56'/2' 102.9 7.7 to @ 61 %2' 98.3 4.5 to @ 66%2' 105.5 5.5 If @ 68V2' 100.5 6.5 of ' @ 69' 110.4 16.7 if @ 76' 113.4 13.5 of @ 78'/2 110.3 16.8 it @ 80%2' 108.7 17.8 if @ 81 %2' 114.9 15.7 @ 82'/2' 107.9 16.6 @ 83'/2' 110.0 17.6 @ 84'/2' 111.3 15.5 1 @ 85'/2' 108.6 16.1 „ , FINE (USAA -Okun) Page 2 Project Ref: 4763 -66 FIELD MOISTURE - DENSITY DETERMINATIONS OF RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED SAMPLES FROM BORINGS Sample Field Dry Density Field Moisture Content Remarks Location (pcf) N B3 @ 6%2' 110.7 4.1 California Sampler @ 11 %2 115.7 11.3 if it @ 15' 108.2 20.5 it it @ 15V2' 104.8 21.9 it it @ 20%2' 93.2 22.9 it It @ 21' 104.8 22.5 it It @ 25V2 103.9 19.9 if it B4 5 %z' 91.4 2.1 @ California Sampler @ 11 %2 97.5 3.3 " of ' @ 16V2 100.3 6.4 " of @ 25%2' 97.1 18.6 " It @ 29%2' 106.2 17.1 " of @ 33V2 107.2 15.8 it @ 38!/2' 106.5 21.3 it @ 44V2 124.8 12.3 it @ 51' 119.1 14.0 it @ 56'/4 121.1 13.0 " B5 @ 5%2' 94.7 2.5 California Sampler @ 11 %2 98.2 2.8 It if @ 16!/2 101.1 2.1 if It @ 25'/2' 103.6 3.2 If " @ 31 %2 99.5 27.9 it " @ 36%2' 100.1 18.5 of @ 40'/2' 107.9 16.4 if " @ 42V2 104.5 16.6 11 " ' @ 46' 100.6 24.0 If if @ 48V2 108.7 22.0 " It @ 54%4 106.8 20.9 " If @ 60'/4' 122.4 12.4 if @ 64'/4' 117.4 13.9 if @ 64.75' 113.1 15.5 If it ' Lockwood -Singh & Associates ' FINE (USAA -Okun) Page 3 Project Ref. 4763 -66 RESULTS OF PERMEABILITY TESTS OF RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED SAMPLES FROM BORINGS Sample Location Depth (ft.) K Average (Soil Type) Boring 2 (Sand) 11 %2 1.16E -03 Boring 2 (Sand) 26%2 1.62E -03 Boring 2 (Sand) 46%2 1.57E -03 Boring 2 (Sand) 66%2 1.59E -02 Boring 3 11 %z' 3.73E -05 Boring 3 15' 7.32E -05 ! ! 1 i ! 1 Lockwood -Singh & Associates Direct Shear Test FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Test Pit on Beach ; Peak Ultimate Residual ' 7,000 - ----------- - - 1 - -- ---------- ;-------- - - - - -- -------------- ■ - -- — --------- — ,----- -------,--------------,--------------;-------------- 6,000 5,000 --- - - - - -- - - - - CL N 4,000 — ------------- -------------- '-------------- CO - ■ ' 3,000 = — i -------------;-------------- 2,000 -; -- -- f 1,000 A R ■ 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psfl Ickwood -Singh &Associates Direct Shear Test FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Clay bed on Beach - upper (3" thick) 7,000 _ Peak Ultimate Residual - 6,000 — ------------- ,-------------- I -------------- -------------- 5,000 ---- ---------- ' -------------- ; -------------- ; -------------- 1 -------------- y CL - ' N 4,000 -------------'--------------;-------------;---------------------------- N CO ; ca ; U) 3,000 = --------------------------- i-------------- ' ------- - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ' 2,000 1,000 - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - -- ----- - u 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 a ckwood -Singh &Associates Normal Stress (psfl Direct Shear Test cll&-a �- FINE (USAA-Okum) - Neptune Ave. Clay bed on Beach - lower (1/2" to 3/4" thick) Peak Ultimate Residual 7,000 ----------- - - - -- --------- ---------------- ----------------------------- ■ 6,000 --- - ---------------------------------------------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- -- - ---- ----- 5,000 --------------------- -------------- 4,000 -------------- --------------- ---------- -------------- Q ■ cc Cf) 3,000 ------------- --------------- -------------- I --------------- -------------- 2,000 - --- ----- --- ---- --- 1,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psf) ackwood-Singh & Associates Direct Shear Test FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Clay n Beach - Bottom undisturbed Y (undisturbed) 7,000 _ , _ _ _ _ Peak Ultimate Residual - - ■ 6,000 ---------------------------- I -------- - - - - -- -------------- ■ 5,000 - ----------------------------;------------------------------------------- N CL ' y 4,000 ----- ----------------------- I --------------;--------------,-------------- ' 3,000 — -- ------------------------:--------------;-------------- 1 -------------- ■ 2,000 - --- - - - - -- i- 1,000 0 1 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psfl a ckwood -Singh & Associates Direct Shear Test FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Boring g @ 26.5 Feet 7,000 ------ - - - - -- '----- - - - - -- - Peak - Ultimate- ----------,-------------- 6,000 -------------------------- 1 ------- - - - - -- ;- ;-------- - - - - -- 5,000 - i - - - - - -- -- i-------------- a . N 4,000 -------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- 4) ; Cl) I cc 0) 3,000 ------------ --------------- '-------------- ,------- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- ' 2,000 - - - - 1,000 — 0 I 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psfl ickwood -Singh & Associates Direct Shear Test FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Boring 2 @ 66.5 Feet 7,000 ------------ ,------ - - - - -- Peak - Ultimate ------------------------ 1 6,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -' -- - - - - - - - - - - - - f -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - i 5,000 - ---------------------------'--------------'--------------,-------------- CL 1 N 4,000 ------ - - - - -- ; Ll CO � _ • ' 3,000 — ,-------------- ;-------------- --- - - - - -- - - -- 0 2,000 - - - - 1,000 - A 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psfl Ickwood -Singh & Associates Direct Shear Test B n FINE (USAA -Okun) - Neptune Ave. Boring 2 @ 78.5 Feet 7,000 ----- - - - - -- ;----- - - - - -- - P e ak - Ultimate -------------- -------------- 6,000 ----------------------------,--------------,--------------,-------------- 5,000 ------------- --------------- i ----- - - - - -- -------------------- CL N 4,000 _ ------------- ,------- - - - - -- --------------:-------------,-------------- CU C ' ) 3,000 - - -- - - - - - -- ;--------------------------------------------------------- 2,000 1,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 Normal Stress (psfl ickwood -Singh & Associates Illlllllllllllllllll ' 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I I I I I I I I I 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIII 111111111111111111111111111111 � 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111t11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111t1111111111111111111111 - • - IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11111111 UP IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111111 1111111111111111111111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII= 111111111 1111111111111111111lIIIIIIIII 111111111 111111111111111111 111111111 111111111 11111111 111111111 1111111111111111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 111111111`111111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 1111111111111111111 111111111 Th • 111111111 1111111111111111 1111111111111111111 1111/1/11 1111111/1 1......111"" 111111111 111111..111111111111 /111111 111111.11 11111 /111 1 /11111 /1 1111 /11/1 1.11 /11.1 - IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII • '�"I"II I""�"I'��I�"III��'I""�I�"I�"'� "'�'��II II" II'�I�'I�I"'I�I'I'II"III"�I�I"I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 _ IIIIIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 - t2TCl7T.Ll77CCl7 ClS7" ClSTC2 37CCZ 77CCS77Cl3TCl37:[ l37C[ l77CCl7 7C[S ::ClS7CCZ2'CC22"CC27:CCl7 "C!!." 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111t�111111111111811 I1 /.I /. 11111 .II11.111111..�.111�111�1.11 1...1..I1�.111 ..1�...1 1111111 ..�11111.11�..IIIIIIIIIIINP • I I I I I I I I V I I I I I III 1 II I I - II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIlf1IIlIIIIIIII! lIIIlVIIIIIlII 'IIIf1IIIIlIIII I11`I��If1IIII1 ii` iii iiiiiriiiilililiiiniii •L 11CIII� [i '"'ii ' ' �liiiiliiilliiilliilliiiiliililiiiiiiiiiliiiliiiil 1= I111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU:: ii11111111111III1I11111111111111111111 =11111111111111111111111111111 1 1111111 Illlln ■; nlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 11111111111111111111111111111 _ 111111.x; ;i11111111� 11111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111 !11111111111111111111111111111 �' +.G225cL MUM 2 7.[177C[37CCL2YCt7 ' C1 37 C[23 7,:"N= Im "U23`C[l..C[2TC22..[2C227: 1 ��1111111 111111111 NN11011i•11111111/111111111 111111111 1111111111111111111111111 /111 111111111 n In IIIII I N III Igllllll IIIInIIIIIIII Iq IIII long IIIII 1 I IIIIIIIII IIIINNIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIIIt III Il I I IIIIIII IIIII 11111111111111111 IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII 1 Illlllp Ilul 111111111111111111 111111111 11111111111 u ui= �i= l ii� ui�� ii u "" ui Iiiutlul lull�v 11 11 t N N 11NN 1 1 N - • II IIIIIIII IIN lull III NN INII�N IIIN INIII III IIIII 111111111 IININI illNllll INIIIIII IIIIIIIN 11111 111111111111111111811 111841 IMMI 811WU 8W81 I IIIIIIIIII Illll IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII 1111111111IIIIIIIIII 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111! 11111111111111111111 � Irrrrrrl IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII Inrrnrrl IIIIIIIIII Irlrrrrrll Irrlrlrlrl IIIIIIIIII Illlrrrrll IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1 11 - ................. 1111111.. 111111.. 111.11 111.11..1 111111111111111 1111111111.111111111 1111111 1111 111111111 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII) IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII =IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111111 111111111111111111 HU11111 111111111111111111111111111111111111 HIM 1111111111111 NHIM 111111111 HIM IIIIIIIII 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111 WIIIIII 111111111 1111111 u lllllll 1111111111111111111 11101111 111111111111111111 111111 1111 111 111 111111111 111111111 11111111 11111111 111111111 111111111111111 =11 W1111111 111111111 1111 11 fill 11 W In11 111111111 111111111 1/1111111 111111111 IIIIIIIII 11111 111 • .111.11111 11.111111 11.1 1111 1111111.1 11 1..1111 1.11. 1111 1.1111111 .1111.111 .11.11.11 111.11111 - IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII fIIlllllll Illlllllll Illlllllll Illlllllll IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII 1111111111 H1f11111111111111III IIII IIIHI 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 • = l3�Gl77Gt 7. Gt i7. Gl�7 CGL7 7C'[ Ll7al7:[L l�. GllTG i7 Tti7. G[ lZ. GClT. GLl ::GLlY_[lT� ;:tl:G[!Z'.!lTGl27: W111111111II111111 IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111/ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIi1111111111111111 1111111 Iloilo ±.1 .111. 1111.1..11. 1111 .1.11.1111.1..1111.1.1.1.1 111!11':111.111111 ......... ..I will,llll I _ ��III'1I I1�lII11I 11111111II IN OR ' IIIIIIIIIIII�II. �II�I_ ��III�1��IIII�III11111111111111111111�111111111�111111111�IIIIIIIII iiiiili ii`wia:l;iiffil Iffl iiiiiliiiliiiiiii ii 'iiiiiiii iiiiii I i iiiiliiiifiiii IVu1 IIII 11111111!. r1111111111u11n�W11111111111111111111111111111111111� • IIIIU IIIIHWHH01111�111111111 11111111111111111111111111111 IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIH /Dw 11 111111/11 11111® WIIIIWIII�111111111 IIIIIIIII�IIIIIUII IUUU 11111111111 ss;[ 'C 7GCi77R Gcl7SI :�I 'CCfl:C<7 CCL77CCi7 Ccl7:GCl7 [i7>rCLi: ' CL7:Gti7" • 1 111111111 n lnW n1ii11111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 1111 11111111 II I I IIN I I� IIII I��III I IIINII III I I U 1� lu®111111111 =I 1111111 �I n 11 11 1 1111111 111111 1 l IIII IN 111111 1 111 1 1111 11111/11 I IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII 1111111 II I IIIIIIIIII Ellllllnl II I II 11111 IIIIIIIIII I�1111111 111111111 I II IIIII II 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111 1111111111 HIM 1111111111111 111111111111111111111 111111 /�1 1111111 /��In 1��/1///1/ 1111/ 11// II��n1111111�111111111�111/1/In 11111111111111 /1111111 /111111`111111111 111111 111111 111111111111111 /11 /111110 /111 /111111111 /11111111111 • 11111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111 / 1/1111/11 11/1111/1 111111111 IIIIIIII iiiiiiii iiiiiiiii Illlllln iiiiiiiii iiiiiiiii IIItI iiiiiiiii 1111111 =I 11= =1 =111 1 =111111 IIIIIIII= III =11111 111111111 Illlllln 111111 111111111 111 =1�1 11111 11111 INIII11111111 Illl 1111111111111 111111 u 111 111 1 111 =11111' 111111111 Illllnll 111111111 11111110 1111 IIII �11� 1 ► • (iiiiiiii () i i iiiii) niiiii iiiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiiii iiiiiiin iiiii iiiiiii) i i l uii l i �• iiiiiiiii iiiiiiiii�iiiiiiiii i�iiiimiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiii�iiiiiiiii�iiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiii�iiiii 11 HIM 111 1111 �Ilnlllll 111111111 111111111 1111111111111111111 1111111111111111111 ®Hill)) I (IIIIIIII 111111111 _ 11111111 111111111 1111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111 ®11111111111111111 111111111 s - � t�.cs�.Y ��c :�.:i�x� :r.�: ■c :� %�c =�.�tu � Yct� :Y� :r ■a�..c:�Y rr��n�■ 111111111 11 111111 111111111 1/111/1111111111111 1111111Il /1111®i %IIIIii11 /111111 1101111i 111 /111111 111111111 11111111 111111111 11 /II IIII1111111111�1lVdlll /11 111 11 1111 111111111 . I�a�IlB , VIII NUNN i �I'iIIIi��' ��l��i3�ill Illli�IIIIIIInnnill 1�ii iiiiiiiii ii )iiiiiiii iii i= i� ON III IIIiiIII 1 milli i i / ■ Th • 1 1 O N ol 0) IO O O — 00 � O + D O C I /1 1� I m ' a U) o U O N c I M to c0 }aa} u, u }daQ O I N - (0 (0 0) �,. 0) Cl) , O O ^� N 04 0 —a. v w-- Q i� � I o U O N 1n CI Ln o �i I c� ^rnJ� u v o o O ul l + o ❑ c t� I — �. ' N � U O O O I to O � }aa� ul U }dao O j > > cal U r U U O O 00 N m �.n � U 1- O J U O r7 MONITORING WELL. CONSTRUCTION DETAILS � Q 7 v UT1LfTY Box ( WATER- TIGHT) {. LOCKING CAP SURFACE 1 o 'b , o a QQ CONCRETBEENTONITc ELANK CASING C� ' t• (e/ ff• INTERVAL D PVC CASING 0 ft. to�ft. d 1 . BENTONITE SEAS INTERVAL Ap I ft. to ft. J PVC SCREEN 0.020 inch SLOTS NUMBER 3 MONTcnEY SAND IN i cnVAl SCREEN CASING _ ft. to _ f ;. INTERVAL `t. t ft. :j PROJECT ;j EGRING DIAMc i cR?:_ ir. BORING DE= i H: Z- ft. CASING D(AlME - - ER: : : CASING / SC?EEN DE.=7r4: O�•� FIGURE .4l'CWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES MONITORING WELL. CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 4, UTILITY BOX ( ATER- TIGHT) LOCKING CAP SURFACE T> . •d .O • CO �RETEBENTONITE ELANK CASING f+ t INTERVAL PVC CASING 0 ft. to ft. d :Q 4 8 NTONITEE SE4L INTERVAL ft. to •. - PVC SCREEN 0.020 inch SLOTS NUMEER 3 MONTEREY SAND IN TI EERVAL SCREEN CASING - (0 3 ft. toft. INTERVAL Ic ft. PROJECT. BORING DIA,MEi ER: �— in. I BORING DE"ri• r�L f• CASING DWME i ER in. : CASING / SCE E=N FIGURE t. & ASSOCIATES MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION - DETAILS �r ILI UTiL rTY BOX (PATER-TIGHT) LOCKING CAP SURFACE 7/ 70 . •a f A,!TEill NTg KTE BLANK CASING (7 ff. .. T INTERVAL, O PVC CASING 0 ft. to ft. • d BENTONITE SEAL INTERVAL to PVC SCREEN 0.020 indi SLOTS NUMEER 3 MONTEREY SAND INTERVAL SCREEN CASING to it. INTERVAL 1_ ft. tc _� ft. . PcCJECT EC-PING DIAME ER: e ) in. ECRING DE= � -1: Z fL C;StNG DL1 ME i ER: . C,"S ING / SCREEN DE.= 7,1: ? Lt�MtaK.• �UG'►piA lCo..ns�l� (�iri1K - �(Ztll�g� FIGURE *KWOOD -SINGH & ASSOCIATES i 1 APPENDIX C SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES (COMPUTER PRINTOUTS) r r O ! -- ---- - - - - -- - --- --- - - - - -- I { — N ------- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- N------------------------------------ ------------ I------- - - - - -- O N O , t (� Nltq O -------- - - - - -- ------- - - - --- -- -- ------ - - - - -- ---------- - - - - -- I------- - - - - -- - -- — coo LL) , ! m v O� N 00 N O> �. O) z :— ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- N --- - - - - - -- :� — —' O m Om .I CO) C4 m x O -- - ------- - -- - -- - - - - -- --- - — - - - -_- m r+ o m 9 cc I i LL LU N � I U) 0-= N' �, o co co C co U- ---------- ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----- ------ V C - O 0 01 -� M . y t�`�10 W m -00000 0 LO —CD 0 0 0 0 �jC C C C C . 2 , F aNN ChNO 00000, LO CD 0 N O r r 7 r N Z N Cl) v In l ; ~ ' 0 1 N w M 0 LU LU V r r c: \sted \Oleo6.OUT Page 1 * ** GSTABL7 * ** ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.15, April 2000 ** - -Slope Stability Analysis- - Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6 -1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 12/4/00 Time of Run: 8:52AM Run By: JWN Input Data Filename: C:Oleo6. Output Filename: C:Oleo6.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:Oleo6.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION Backcalculate for F.S. Approx 1 Orig 1996 Bluff Configuration BOUNDARY COORDINATES 10 Top Boundaries 25 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 26.00 32.00 60.00 33.00 1 2 60.00 33.00 71.00 39.00 1 3 71.00 39.00 73.00 50.00 1 4 73.00 50.00 80.00 58.00 2 5 80.00 58.00 115.00 90.00 2 6 115.00 90.00 151.00 119.00 2 7 151.00 119.00 151.10 123.00 2 8 151.10 123.00 164.60 123.00 2 9 164.60 123.00 174.00 123.00 2 10 174.00 123.00 251.00 123.00 2 11 120.00 51.00 140.00 71.00 4 12 140.00 71.00 156.00 89.00 4 13 156.00 89.00 164.50 102.00 4 14 164.50 102.00 167.00 106.00 4 15 167.00 106.00 173.00 116.00 4 16 173.00 116.00 174.00 123.00 4 17 73.00 50.00 120.00 51.00 1 18 120.00 51.00 251.00 54.00 1 19 26.00 32.00 35.00 30.00 5 20 35.00 30.00 60.00 29.00 5 21 60.00 29.00 94.00 33.00 5 22 94.00 33.00 120.00 51.00 1 23 26.00 26.00 85.00 26.00 3 24 85.00 26.00 120.00 29.00 3 25 120.00 29.00 251.00 28.00 3 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 5 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 115.0 120.0 500.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 110.0 120.0 0.0 38.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 125.0 130.0 1000.0 40.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 110.0 120.0 0.0 38.0 0.00 0.0 1 5 100.0 105.0 400.0 8.3 0.00 0.0 1 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 73.00 50.00 2 251.00 54.00 Trial Failure Surface Specified By 11 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) r c: \sted \Oleo6.OUT Page 2 1 26.00 32.00 2 35.00 29.00 3 60.00 28.00 4 94.00 32.00 5 120.00 50.00 6 140.00 70.00 7 156.00 88.00 8 164.50 101.00 9 167.00 105.00 10 173.00 115.00 11 174.00 123.00 * * Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 0.947 ** *Table 1 - Individual Data on the 20 Slices * ** Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hor Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.0 1695.4 9499.6 10975.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 25.0 12022.1 26202.7 32663.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 11.0 9540.9 10810.2 14637.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 2.0 3591.2 3817.8 2583.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 7.0 19829.6 0.0 8854.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 14.0 53632.9 0.0 16830.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 21.0 97413.6 0.0 18226.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 5.0 24196.1 0.0 1036.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 0.1 278.9 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 1.0 4672.2 0.0 45.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.1 274.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 18.9 87363.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 11.0 46442.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 0.1 424.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15 4.9 20350.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 8.5 26647.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17 0.1 241.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18 2.4 5258.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19 6.0 8580.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 1.0 440.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ** *Table 2 - Base Stress Data on the 20 Slices * ** Slice Alpha X- Coord. Base Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) 1 -18.43 30.50 9.49 458.48 - 422.65 2 -2.29 47.50 25.02 435.57 -91.88 3 6.71 65.50 11.08 454.53 - 265.22 4 6.71 72.00 2.01 518.81 - 1615.55 5 6.71 76.50 7.05 623.05 330.99 6 6.71 87.00 14.10 776.04 447.61 7 34.70 104.50 25.54 2164.73 2640.42 8 34.70 117.50 6.08 2489.95 2754.53 9 45.00 120.03 0.08 2646.88 3431.39 10 45.00 120.54 1.37 2653.82 3420.12 11 45.00 121.05 0.08 2917.62 3408.84 12 45.00 130.54 26.76 2795.63 3265.14 13 48.37 145.50 16.56 2575.07 3155.57 14 48.37 151.05 0.15 2587.60 3170.93 15 48.37 153.55 7.38 2533.09 3104.13 16 56.82 160.25 15.53 1978.86 2623.90 17 57.99 164.55 0.19 1532.08 2044.69 18 57.99 165.80 4.53 1392.29 1858.13 19 59.04 170.00 11.66 914.33 1226.21 20 82.87 173.50 8.06 364.68 436.60 Sum of the Resisting Forces (including Pier /Pile, Tieback, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 299179.28 (lbs) Average Available Shear Strength (including Tieback, Pier /Pile, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 1552.53(psf) Sum of the Driving Forces = 315917.75 (lbs) c: \sted \Oleo6.0UT Page 3 Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 1639.39(psf) Total length of the failure surface = 192.70(ft) i 1 1 r 0 N r------ - - - - -- ---------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- -- ---- - - - - -- r ,1-------- - - - - -� N O N _j - -------------------------- c0 a e NiM o H o ------ - - - - -- r - ------------------------- - - - - -- - - - - -� C O 0 �v o � N � , i i Ir;• ar *'' z V ° E a -------------- ----------------- -------- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -. o o •- L i a - --------------------------- - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- \ I Y ".f - --- - - - - -- W cc W a d - --- --- - - -- -- -- -- - O ca y d jZ9�� I Nj • g ^0000 't a j v LL QN l) ,T co col 'O.I LL V d � OI - -- O ------- ---------------- - -- - ----- --- ------ ----- -------- -- -- -- - - � o0o j Y o- 'n m3 00000 i0000,ri 3= N N M N O � rr, ------ --- --- r- ----- ---- ----- -------------- cn _• cn 00000 � NrO !A Z , Im I `+ co in N C O r- 4O M LN r y ,f` G3TABL7 C: \sted \orep5kk.OUT Page 1 * ** * ** ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.15, April 2000 ** - -Slope Stability Analysis- - Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices ' (Based on STABLE -1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 12/26/00 Time of Run: 1:04PM Run By: JWN Input Data Filename: C:orep5kk.dat Output Filename: C:orep5kk.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:orepSkk.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION Backcalculate Soil Parameters FS =1 +1- At Proposed Seawall Location BOUNDARY COORDINATES 8 Top Boundaries 24 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 26.00 32.00 60.00 33.00 1 2 60.00 33.00 71.00 39.00 1 3 71.00 39.00 71.10 50.00 1 4 71.10 50.00 71.20 57.00 4 5 71.20 57.00 164.50 101.00 4 6 164.50 101.00 164.60 123.00 4 7 164.60 123.00 174.00 123.00 4 8 174.00 123.00 251.00 123.00 2 9 120.00 51.00 140.00 71.00 4 10 140.00 71.00 156.00 89.00 4 11 156.00 89.00 164.50 102.00 4 12 164.50 102.00 167.00 106.00 4 13 167.00 106.00 173.00 116.00 4 14 173.00 116.00 174.00 123.00 4 15 60.15 50.00 120.00 51.00 1 16 120.00 51.00 251.00 54.00 1 17 26.00 32.00 35.00 30.00 5 18 35.00 30.00 60.00 29.00 5 19 60.00 29.00 70.90 30.00 5 20 70.90 30.00 94.00 33.00 5 21 94.00 33.00 120.00 51.00 1 22 26.00 26.00 85.00 26.00 3 23 85.00 26.00 120.00 29.00 3 24 120.00 29.00 251.00 28.00 3 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 5 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface ' No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 115.0 120.0 500.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 110.0 120.0 0.0 38.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 125.0 130.0 1000.0 40.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 110.0 120.0 0.0 28.0 0.00 0.0 1 5 100.0 105.0 400.0 8.3 0.00 0.0 1 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE SEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 71.10 50.00 2 251.00 54.00 Trial Failure Surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 26.00 32.00 C: \sted \orep5kk.OUT Page 2 2 35.00 29.00 3 60.00 28.00 ' 4 70.90 29.00 5 94.00 32.00 6 120.00 50.00 7 140.00 70.00 8 156.00 88.00 9 164.50 101.00 10 167.00 105.00 11 173.00 115.00 12 174.00 123.00 * * Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 0.960 ** *Table 1 - Individual Data on the 20 Slices * ** Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hor Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.0 1695.4 9529.0 11006.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 25.0 12022.1 26278.2 32739.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0.1 88.4 178.1 204.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 10.8 9510.7 10588.2 14391.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 0.1 118.0 78.3 132.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 0.1 184.2 3770.8 132.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 0.1 288.7 0.0 131.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 22.8 84067.6 0.0 28307.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 10.2 40420.9 0.0 11686.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 15.8 56173.5 0.0 7642.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.1 295.4 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 0.9 3059.1 0.0 44.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 0.1 286.9 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 18.9 50770.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15 16.0 25024.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 8.5 4203.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17 0.1 120.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18 2.4 5258.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19 6.0 8580.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 1.0 440.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ** *Table 2 - Base Stress Data on the 20 Slices * ** Slice Alpha X- Coord. Base Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng, Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) 1 -18.43 30.50 9.49 458.15 - 423.77 2 -2.29 47.50 25.02 435.53 -92.09 3 5.24 60.07 0.15 435.88 - 417.25 4 5.24 65.53 10.80 456.30 - 309.85 5 7.40 70.95 0.10 476.07 - 131.39 6 7.40 71.05 0.10 521.89 - 37111.22 7 7.40 71.15 0.10 623.32 371.81 8 7.40 82.60 22.99 749.85 474.87 9 34.70 99.10 12.42 1774.50 2254.00 10 34.70 112.10 19.21 1836.19 2024.68 11 45.00 120.04 0.13 1952.65 2340.08 12 45.00 120.56 1.32 1951.03 2315.51 13 45.00 121.07 0.13 1566.46 2290.96 14 45.00 130.56 26.71 1300.69 1900.68 15 48.37 148.00 24.08 771.16 1168.99 16 56.82 160.25 15.53 260.11 413.91 17 57.99 164.55 0.19 638.85 1018.62 18 57.99 165.80 4.53 1165.37 1858.13 19 59.04 170.00 11.66 768.40 1226.21 20 82.87 173.50 8.06 347.26 436.60 Sum of the Resisting Forces (including Pier /Pile, Tieback, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 172541.28 (lbs) Average Available Shear Strength (including Tieback, Pier /Pile, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 895.34(psf) Sum of the Driving Forces = 179760.88 (lbs) C: \sted \orep5kk.0UT Page 3 Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 932.80(psf) Total length of the failure surface = 192.71(ft) Y A X I S F T 0.00 31.38 62.75 94.13 125.50 156.88 X0.00 +---------+--------- +--------- +--------- +---- - - - - -+ 31.38 + S* A 62.75 + X 94.13 + S* I 125.50 + _ S* S 156.88 + _ ** S* 188.25 + F 219.63 + T 251.00 + 0 ti -------- - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ----------- - - - - -' -------- - - - - -- - -- ----------- J------- - - - - -- v N I I c N I o N I ------- -- - - -- ------- -- - - -- - --- - ---- - - - - -- ------ -- - - - - -- --- - - -- -- - - -- ------- - --- -- - N I I m �Ir N M o M a. ------- - - - - -- - r -------- - - - - -- — ---------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- Go o' T Z- -------- - - - - -- --- ------- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - -- -- - - ------- - - - -- ----------- ---- --- - ----- to if fA 3 m LL Y �) m (� _j = oi p Q O m $` - e N LO � h r H .Q v N N m W 0: N fA 3 I, ---- -------------- -- --------------�- ------------ ^ 7 7 --- ---- -.--- --------- 0 V C • a i I LL. LL ti ! NC �Qj.- ---- --;---�--------- ------ f -- -----------�-- -- -- - - - - ------ -� C� �i (AO�p M Uc I OOOOO to C N�MNO ��v� - ----- - - - - -- ------ -- ---- ----- ----- ---- - - - - -- p , ----- - - - - -- M • �� 00000� I c �o�(ioo 0 Z rN CV) rr l W N G3TABL7 C: \sted \orep3jj.OUT Page 1 * ** * ** ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.15, April 2000 ** - -Slope Stability Analysis- - Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6 -1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 12/26/00 Time of Run: 1:06PM Run By: JWN Input Data Filename: C:orep3jj.dat Output Filename: C:orep3jj.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:orep3jj.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION Repair Config With Tiedback Lower Seawall and Graded Slope BOUNDARY COORDINATES 8 Top Boundaries 24 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 26.00 32.00 60.00 33.00 1 2 60.00 33.00 71.00 39.00 1 3 71.00 39.00 71.10 50.00 1 4 71.10 50.00 71.20 57.00 4 5 71.20 57.00 164.50 101.00 4 6 164.50 101.00 164.60 123.00 4 7 164.60 123.00 174.00 123.00 4 8 174.00 123.00 251.00 123.00 2 9 120.00 51.00 140.00 71.00 4 10 140.00 71.00 156.00 89.00 4 11 156.00 89.00 164.50 102.00 4 12 164.50 102.00 167.00 106.00 4 13 167.00 106.00 173.00 116.00 4 14 173.00 116.00 174.00 123.00 4 15 60.15 50.00 120.00 51.00 1 16 120.00 51.00 251.00 54.00 1 ' 17 26.00 32.00 35.00 30.00 5 18 35.00 30.00 60.00 29.00 5 19 60.00 29.00 70.90 30.00 5 20 70.90 30.00 94.00 33.00 5 21 94.00 33.00 120.00 51.00 1 22 26.00 26.00 85.00 26.00 3 23 85.00 26.00 120.00 29.00 3 24 120.00 29.00 251.00 28.00 3 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 5 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 115.0 120.0 500.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 110.0 120.0 0.0 38.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 125.0 130.0 1000.0 40.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 110.0 120.0 0.0 28.0 0.00 0.0 1 5 100.0 105.0 400.0 8.3 0.00 0.0 1 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 71.10 50.00 2 251.00 54.00 TIEBACK LOAD(S) 1 Tieback Load(s) Specified Tieback X -Pos Y -Pos Load Spacing Inclination Length No. (ft) (ft) (lbs) (ft) (deg) (ft) C: \sted \orep3jj.OUT Page 2 1 71.13 52.00 265000.0 5.0 30.00 65.0 NOTE - An Equivalent Line Load Is Calculated For Each Row Of Tiebacks ' Assuming A Uniform Distribution Of Load Horizontally Between Individual Tiebacks. Trial Failure Surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 26.00 32.00 2 35.00 29.00 3 60.00 28.00 4 70.90 29.00 5 94.00 32.00 6 120.00 50.00 7 140.00 70.00 8 156.00 88.00 9 164.50 101.00 .10 167.00 105.00 11 173.00 115.00 12 174.00 123.00 * * Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.571 ** *Table 1 - Individual Data on the 20 Slices * ** Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge 1 Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hor Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.0 1695.4 9529.0 11006.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 25.0 12022.1 26278.2 32739.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0.1 88.4 178.1 204.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 10.8 9510.7 10588.2 14391.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 0.1 118.0 78.3 132.0 58.2 -8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 0.1 184.2 3770.8 132.0 58.7 -7.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 0.1 288.7 0.0 131.9 59.3 -7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 22.8 84067.6 0.0 28307.9 20374.5 7700.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 10.2 40420.9 0.0 11686.8 9431.8 4362.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 15.8 56173.5 0.0 7642.8 8346.9 8340.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.1 295.4 0.0 8.2 45.6 42.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' 12 0.9 3059.1 0.0 44.8 464.9 438.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 0.1 286.9 0.0 0.3 42.9 41.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 18.9 50710.4 0.0 0.0 5692.4 7607.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 15 16.0 25024.8 0.0 0.0 2537.6 4575.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 16 8.5 4203.5 0.0 0.0 1258.9 2068.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 17 0.1 120.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18 2.4 5258.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19 6.0 8580.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 1.0 440.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ** *Table 2 - Base Stress Data on the 20 Slices * ** Slice Alpha X- Coord. Base Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) 1 -18.43 30.50 9.49 448.84 - 423.77 2 -2.29 47.50 25.02 434.50 -92.09 3 5.24 60.07 0.15 438.23 - 417.25 4 5.24 65.53 10.80 458.76 - 309.85 5 7.40 70.95 0.10 563.61 -51.17 6 7.40 71.05 0.10 610.52 - 37032.88 7 7.40 71.15 0.10 713.46 448.20 8 7.40 82.60 22.99 884.35 137.12 9 34.70 99.10 12.42 2345.20 1826.60 10 34.70 112.10 19.21 2255.08 1496.55 11 45.00 120.04 0.13 2437.07 1868.71 12 45.00 120.56 1.32 2430.37 1846.13 13 45.00 121.07 0.13 2011.17 1823.80 14 45.00 130.56 26.71 1629.71 1497.93 15 48.37 148.00 24.08 967.56 883.02 16 56.82 160.25 15.53 368.45 170.56 C: \sted \orep3jj.OUT Page 3 17 57.99 164.55 0.19 781.66 1018.62 18 57.99 165.80 4.53 1425.88 1858.13 19 59.04 170.00 11.66 944.75 1226.21 20 82.87 173.50 8.06 508.62 436.60 NOTE: Tieback forces are included in the Available Shear Strength values in Table 2, as shown in Table 1. Sum of the Resisting Forces (including Pier /Pile, Tieback, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 211086.30 (lbs) Average Available Shear Strength (including Tieback, Pier /Pile, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 1095.36(psf) Sum of the Driving Forces = 134406.06 (lbs) ' Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 697.45(psf) Total length of the failure surface = 192.71(ft) 0 N 1 I 4, . t --- - - -- -- - - -- ------- - - - - - -- ---- ------ - - - - -- --- ----- -- - - -- - -- - --- - - -- -- - ------ - - - - - -- N -------------- - -- ---- -- -- -- -- -- --------- - - - - -- ------------ - -- - -- --- - -- o IL N � O CL blr N M i CL - - - - -- - ---- ---- --- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- -- - - -- -- ---- - -- - -- - - n 00 O CD O T� d z ------- - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- - \ - - - -- -- o c 41 LL ` AV J m! moo ;A m w 3 ' o - - -- v - N a Q� No - - r Nv Y W j N� Q V w; m O V OP W � O I \ NI cn ~ 1 --- '- - --- -- - - - --- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - ------ - --- - --- - -- --- --- --- V �� Qrrrrr ti r • I C rn ^ c g� (o ctio ao LL I �C�QvN CMwNco N'�I :. ----- ---- - - - - -- •-- - - - - -- ---- -- - - - - -� o O R ' g o �D o I � � ° 000 °� �zW) -, COD 'N 000�o j ---- -- � i- -- -- -- - --- - -- ---- --- - - -- -- --- -- ;-- -- ----- - - - - ---- --- -----� 00000i a i C•►rrr rr O �Orcmmv ° e o� ( Cl) ° W N C: \sted \orep4jj.OUT Page 1 t ** GSTA13L7 trt ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.15, April 2000 ** - -Slope Stability Analysis- - Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STAB16 -1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 12/26/00 Time of Run: 1:07PM Run By: JWN Input Data Filename: C:orep4jj.dat Output Filename: C:orep4jj.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:orep4jj.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION Repair Config With Tiedback Lower Seawall and Graded Slope Pseudo Static BOUNDARY COORDINATES 8 Top Boundaries 24 Total Boundaries ' Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 26.00 32.00 60.00 33.00 1 2 60.00 33.00 71.00 39.00 1 3 71.00 39.00 71.10 50.00 1 4 71.10 50.00 71.20 57.00 4 5 71.20 57.00 164.50 101.00 4 6 164.50 101.00 164.60 123.00 4 7 164.60 123.00 174.00 123.00 4 ' 8 174.00 123.00 251.00 123.00 2 9 120.00 51.00 140.00 71.00 4 10 140.00 71.00 156.00 89.00 4 11 156.00 89.00 164.50 102.00 4 12 164.50 102.00 167.00 106.00 4 13 167.00 106.00 173.00 116.00 4 14 173.00 116.00 174.00 123.00 4 15 60.15 50.00 120.00 51.00 1 16 120.00 51.00 251.00 54.00 1 17 26.00 32.00 35.00 30.00 5 18 35.00 30.00 60.00 29.00 5 19 60.00 29.00 70.90 30.00 5 20 70.90 30.00 94.00 33.00 5 ' 21 94.00 33.00 120.00 51.00 1 22 26.00 26.00 85.00 26.00 3 23 85.00 26.00 120.00 29.00 3 24 120.00 29.00 251.00 28.00 3 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 5 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface ' No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 115.0 120.0 500.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 110.0 120.0 0.0 38.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 125.0 130.0 1000.0 40.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 110.0 120.0 0.0 28.0 0.00 0.0 1 ' S 100.0 105.0 400.0 8.3 0.00 0.0 1 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points ' Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 71.10 50.00 2 251.00 54.00 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.150 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned ' C: \sted \orep4jj.OUT Page 2 Cavitation Pressure 0.0(psf) TIEBACK LOAD(S) 1 Tieback Load(s) Specified Tieback X -Pos Y -Pos Load Spacing Inclination Length No. (ft) (ft) (lbs) (ft) (deg) (ft) 1 71.13 52.00 265000.0 5.0 30.00 65.0 NOTE - An Equivalent Line Load Is Calculated For Each Row Of Tiebacks Assuming A Uniform Distribution Of Load Horizontally Between Individual Tiebacks. Trial Failure Surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf ' No. (ft) (ft) 1 26.00 32.00 2 35.00 29.00 3 60.00 28.00 4 70.90 29.00 5 94.00 32.00 6 120.00 50.00 7 140.00 70.00 8 156.00 88.00 ' 9 164.50 101.00 10 167.00 105.00 11 173.00 115.00 12 174.00 123.00 * * Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.080 ** *Table 1 - Individual Data on the 20 Slices * ** Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hor Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.0 1695.4 9529.0 11006.5 0.0 0.0 254.3 0.0 0.0 ' 2 25.0 12022.1 26278.2 32739.5 0.0 0.0 1803.3 0.0 0.0 3 0.1 88.4 178.1 204.4 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 4 10.8 9510.7 10588.2 14391.1 0.0 0.0 1426.6 0.0 0.0 5 0.1 118.0 78.3 132.0 58.2 -8.0 17.7 0.0 0.0 6 0.1 184.2 3770.8 132.0 58.7 -7.8 27.6 0.0 0.0 7 0.1 288.7 0.0 131.9 59.3 -7.6 43.3 0.0 0.0 8 22.8 84067.6 0.0 28307.9 20374.5 7700.6 12610.1 0.0 0.0 9 10.2 40420.9 0.0 11686.8 9431.8 4362.8 6063.1 0.0 0.0 10 15.8 56173.5 0.0 7642.8 8346.9 8340.4 8426.0 0.0 0.0 ' 11 0.1 295.4 0.0 8.2 45.6 42.1 44.3 0.0 0.0 12 0.9 3059.1 0.0 44.8 464.9 438.5 458.9 0.0 0.0 13 0.1 286.9 0.0 0.3 42.9 41.4 43.0 0.0 0.0 14 18.9 50770.4 0.0 0.0 5692.4 7607.2 7615.6 0.0 0.0 15 16.0 25024.8 0.0 0.0 2537.6 4575.4 3753.7 0.0 0.0 16 8.5 4203.5 0.0 0.0 1258.9 2068.4 630.5 0.0 0.0 17 0.1 120.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.0 0.0 0.0 18 2.4 5258.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 788.8 0.0 0.0 ' 19 6.0 8580.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1287.0 0.0 0.0 20 1.0 440.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.0 0.0 0.0 ** *Table 2 - Base Stress Data on the 20 Slices * ** Slice Alpha X- Coord. Base Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) 1 -18.43 30.50 9.49 455.45 - 396.97 2 -2.29 47.50 25.02 435.23 -20.02 3 5.24 60.07 0.15 436.55 - 329.26 4 5.24 65.53 10.80 457.00 - 177.70 5 7.40 70.95 0.10 560.58 124.36 6 7.40 71.05 0.10 607.24 - 36758.92 7 7.40 71.15 0.10 709.62 877.64 8 7.40 82.60 22.99 879.59 685.59 9 34.70 99.10 12.42 2170.76 2314.96 10 34.70 112.10 19.21 2087.35 1935.24 11 45.00 120.04 0.13 2200.30 2219.72 r C: \sted \orep4jj.OUT Page 3 ' 12 45.00 120.56 1.32 2194.25 2193.46 13 45.00 121.07 0.13 1803.97 2167.44 14 45.00 130.56 26.71 1461.82 1783.03 15 48.37 148.00 24.08 859.86 1038.89 16 56.82 160.25 15.53 319.03 211.16 17 57.99 164.55 0.19 674.10 1114.11 18 57.99 165.80 4.53 1229.68 2032.33 19 59.04 170.00 11.66 811.78 1336.57 20 82.87 173.50 8.06 381.94 444.79 NOTE: Tieback forces are included in the Available Shear Strength values in Table 2, as shown in Table 1. Sum of the Resisting Forces (including Pier/Pile, = Tieback, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) 194190.59 (lbs) Average Available Shear Strength (including Tieback, Pier /Pile, and Reinforcing Forces if applicable) = 1007.68(psf) Sum of the Driving Forces = 179797.34 (lbs) Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 932.99(psf) Total length of the failure surface = 192.71(ft) r r i �c PACIFIC OCEAN PERV OF i /1 � $ / -r •-• Aci � ,' = \ � `° i A z - p►GING m '� k 1 0 / a m I m I k D • a r I v X � . m • X t - t r ' o T I� J ty p �7l1Ap • zu cl - -- r m -• z —/� ; y c loo' -o'f / 1 OP RILL WIDTH OF PROPERTY c h� , acl -- � -_ __ -- - -- - -- -0..o _. to � tom _ i ' -, % % . m SPACI NG s - y ' Y r f • as — __— o y v m \ N CO c z C9 A. f • \ \� • c D .1 z — co I I I I �� I ( �fz =x ` f m m N =. z I' p A c I I I z o I I i� o �� (m m �� co o ED m z �� v c I o sa \ \ I c z z c m x �� '\ ' \ j oo z I I I _ � 0 I �� m � 0 uoM I ti i m O c Z --I zZ — —J Z C)Z7 c - N mmz M (n D m z v I I a X k o I = m i I I I X x - I 1i4�w k llo4dsv �— > m X 3nN3AV 3Nnld3N