The URL can be used to link to this page

2006-427 CN/G SH GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING - GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT- ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 15 March 2006 HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA Job No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS C/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Top-of-Slope Swale Observations and Recommendations Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: It is our understanding, based on a conversation with resident Mr. Curtis Englehorns, that concerns have been raised about the drainage Swale along the western side of Building 7. Specifically, the southern end of the drainage swale has been undermined by the continued erosion of the western slope. We visited the site on February 28, 2006, to observe the swale and to evaluate the possible relocation of the southern end of the swale. Based on our site observations, it is recommended that the southern end of the swale be re-routed as shown on the attached sketch. Because the existing southern portion of the swale is still providing some protection to the slope top, it is recommended that it be left in place until the bottom of the swale is exposed and no longer supported. If any significant cracks open in the undermined southern portion of the swale then it should be removed immediately. The swale does pose a danger if it were to break free due to a loss of support. LIMITATIONS The opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering within the County of San Diego. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. 7420 TRADE STREET - SAN DIEGO,CA 92121 0 (858)549-7222 - FAX:(858)549-1604 - E-MAIL:geotech@b pres.com Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 2 Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions, you may contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Jaime . Cerros, P.E. L e D. Reed, resident R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999rexp. 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 Senior Geotechnical Engineer o. 9F Z' � pFESS1pN9� a No. 999 Exp.3/31/ CfiQ� � '.�* CERTIFIED tJ� ENGINEERING P' rrn �� GEOLOGIST No_ 00 007 m gPO Q Exp. �O FpF CAL�FO °rEc"XA F or v o m Q 5 v N Q 3t CD o CL 3 � :5i g W i° a_ o v LL- 0 And a_ " O 0 F-- v _Z v7 oo 1 �J Q- 0 m x o m 3 o - 0 Z try .J H Q x u� ~ D r \ S ' \ i i ,J 3CU Z LL Z o0 d so�aa a�a`a z x c oon= ❑ a � a°ooE• an :iE.; �ouY� o Y z n E o m T Go for,I. GEOTECH NICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT• ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 15 March 2006 HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA 1Job No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Protection of Building Nos 7 and 8 Haciendas de la Playa SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: Geotechncca/ Exploration, Inc, issued a report dated July 14, 2005, and an addendum letter dated July 25, 2005, evaluating the Vulcan Avenue slope conditions and providing recommendations for stabilizing the significant erosion that has occurred to the slope along the western perimeter of the Haciendas de "la Playa residential development. We have recently been asked to address the option of protecting Building 7 (and any others requiring protection) if an agreement could not be reached with the City of Encinitas regarding construction of the recommended retaining walls to protect the slope and slope-top buildings. Following review of the March 6, 2006, letter from the City of Encinitas which demands the HOA take action, we suggest consideration be given to protecting Buildings 7 and 8 with retaining structures founded inside the HOA property line. Unretained and eroding portions of the slope would then be entirely on City property. The most northerly building, Building 7, is within several feet of the slope top, and erosion has resulted in some undermining of the top-of-slope fence and concrete swale near the southwest corner of this building. Based on a review of prior geotechnical reports for the site, it appears that the building is supported by a deepened footing. However, in our opinion, if retaining structures are not constructed, stability issues could, in the long term, become a concern for this building. It is our understanding that construction of walls as presented in the GEI July 14, 2005, report would require cooperation from the City of Encinitas since the lower portion of the slope is City property. 7420 TRADE STREET• SAN DIEGO,CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604• E-MAIL:geotech @Ixpres.com Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 2 Protection of the buildings could be provided by construction of a below-ground caisson wall along the slope top within the Haciendas property line. Shear pin caisson protection would not, however, address the issue of continuing slope face erosion. Construction of a tie-back system with shotcrete surfacing placed along the slope top on the Haciendas side of the property line or use of a system of retaining walls entirely within the HOA property could address both building stability and slope face protection. As an example of the potential retaining wall stabilization, we have provided two attached sketches based on cross sections P-P' and U-U'. If the lower bluff face continues to erode, it would not be due to surface water from HOA property. If you wish to consider the two potential methods of retention and bluff face protection, please contact our office for preparation of a proposal to provide the required geotechnical services. LIMITATIONS The opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering within the County of San Diego. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions, you may contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Jaim Le ie . Reed, Pre ident R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-073/R.G. 3391 Senior Geotechnical Engineer '��Ess/o 9l qL 4. CF °J, No. 999 0 No. 00 007 r Exp.3131! Exp.9/36#7 CERTIFIED ENGINEERING Q *`PI GFor6CNNIGP gEOLQGI$T_ P�1 9lF OF CAVN' V) Q f � � a Zc) OL o w � W a �. � N o' W 7C) 3 C " o a J 7 _.J � U ui a.J st t „ _ .. _ .. _ � L� 3 � N o U Q 0 m m in o v h 0 V N mf 1 O 79 q IL 0 IL lSW anogd uo (>AGB a^!� 21 o 8 8 -TTT- T --T----- o CD Y Vh Oa m cl v N � J O + J n`_ `c Q d f Z ED �f Z " ` w m w 7C) -v - . _ n a- h > m O m J � Q _. CL m w C) �. U z O U U - c �o °- o 0 � o g Ln ° o, $ ^ o d lSW QAOW UOWAGO©GA40PS 4 pri GEOT ECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT• ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 19 April 2006 I ' HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA 7 Illob No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS C/O Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Shotcrete and Soil Nail Recommendation Haciendas de la Playa Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, previously issued a report dated July 14, 2005, with recommendations to stabilize the Vulcan Avenue slope, and two addendum letters dated July 25, 2005, and March 15, 2006, with additional optional recommendations for stabilizing the significant erosion that has occurred to the slope along the western perimeter of the Haciendas de la Playa residential development. Subsequently, we have been asked to address the option of protecting the slope utilizing soil nails and a shotcrete (gunite) wall. Due to the steepened upper portion of the slope it is recommended that the upper 15 to 18-foot portion of the slope be retained utilizing soil nails and shotcrete. The lower slope extending down to the Haciendas property line, may be graded to a 2.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical) gradient and planted with erosion resistant vegetation. Upper slope retention and lower slope stabilization will stop at the Haciendas de la Playa-City of Encinitas property line. The gunite surface can be textured and colored to simulate other bluffs in near-by areas. 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549.7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL:geotech @Ixpres.com Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 2 SOIL NAILS AND SHOTCRETE (G NITE) WALL ALTERNATIVE The upper 15 to 18 feet of slope should be finish-graded to an approximate slope of 0.25:1.0 (horizontal to vertical) and should be retained utilizing soil nails and a shotcrete slope covering. The lower slope, extending from the base of the shotcrete wall to the toe of the slope, may then be cleared of erosional debris, finish-graded to an approximate slope of 2.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical) or less, and be replanted with erosion resistant vegetation. Refer to Figure No. I for a schematic cross section representation of the soil nails and shotcrete wall alternative. Refer to Appendix A for preliminary slope stability calculations and soil nail design. 1. Soil Removal: The erosional soils and debris should be removed downward and laterally to expose competent ground and to construct the upper portion of the slope at an approximate gradient of 0.25:1.0. It appears that such removal will result in removal of materials to depths ranging from 1 to 3 feet, with an average estimated depth of 2 feet (with some areas being less and others requiring deeper removal). Additional lateral removal may be necessary for construction access. 2. Stockpiled Soils: No stockpiled soils will be allowed within a distance of 15 feet of the edge of the existing top of slope. 3. Temporary Slopes: Except for the existing steepened upper slope area, we do not anticipate that temporary slopes of significant height will be required during grading and dressing of the lower slope. Should temporary slopes be required, they may not be cut at a slope ratio steeper than 0.25:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). Any plans for temporary slopes in excess of the 6- foot maximum must be presented to our office prior to grading to allow time r Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 3 for review and specific recommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation should be provided at all times. A representative of Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc, must observe any steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that soils comprising a slope are not as anticipated, any required slope design changes would be presented at that time. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report, trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the subject site should be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by Cal-OSHA. 4. Soil Nail Specifications: No. 10 steel dowels should be placed into the slope face at 20 degrees from horizontal and extend to at least a minimum 12 feet total length behind the new gunite surface. Bar reinforcement should be ASTM A-615, Grade 60, epoxy coated. The steel rods should be double- protected against corrosion, as indicated by the manufacturer. The steel dowels should be spaced approximately 6 feet apart horizontally and approximately 6 feet vertically. The location of the steel rods may vary up to 1 foot from the recommended location. Larger variations may require additional steel rods. 5. Slope Face Drainage: Miradrain 6200 drainage board should be placed on the slope face as chimney drains between the nails, and discharge through weep holes at the base of the shotcrete wall. The weep holes should consist of 3-inch-diameter PVC pipe rising at 15 degrees from horizontal into the wall and spaced no farther than 5 feet apart. APM-116 Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 4 6. Reinforcement: Steel mesh reinforcement or a steel rebar grid should be placed on the slope face and tied to the steel rods. The steel reinforcing should consist of two No. 4 bars spaced 1 foot apart and 1"x12"x12" at each nail location. Three percent of the soil nails should be proof-tested to 36,000 pounds. 7. Shotcrete (Gunite) Specifications: The following specifications apply to the gunite (shotcrete) surface: 7.1. Shotcrete work should conform to all requirements of ACI 506.2-90, "Specification for Materials, Proportioning, and Application of Shotcrete," except as modified by these notes. 7.2. Portland cement should conform to ASTM C-150, Type I, II, or V. 7.3. Use normal weight aggregate conforming to ASTM C-33. 7.4. Shotcrete should have a minimum compressive strength at 28 days of 4,000 psi. Accelerant admixtures may be used other than calcium chloride. 7.5. Shotcrete mix: Water/cementitious ratio: 0.40 lb/lb maximum Fly ash: Type F, 20% replacement Fibermesh fiber: 1.5 ply minimum, 3 ply if pump can handle it Aggregate: Course, 1/2-inch blended with 3/8-inch fine, none passing #100 The contractor should submit mix designs for review before installation. The final gunite (shotcrete) surface should be at least 8 inches in thickness. Haciendas de la Playa Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 5 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS The stability of the slope using soil nail reinforcing was verified for both static and seismic conditions using the computer program SNAILZ. The soil parameters utilized, including soil nail strength, spacing, etc., are attached in Appendix A. The calculated minimum factor of safety was 1.63 for static conditions, and 1.17 for seismic conditions. These results are considered acceptable (i.e., higher than 1.5 and 1.1, respectively). LIMITATIONS The opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering within the County of San Diego. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions, you may contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. A�� ECerros, P. . Leslie 4Reed, r ident R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 Senior G2.g1gphnical Engineer 'cO4��E �N901 e w No. 7 m No. 999 Exp.99, ' �� a Exp.31311 '0T&CN N N�GP � E CitNEE11N1O Am \'c OF C �fi OF C a o o O F--OI C; o 7 � V � D 70 7 c a - c O O Z 2 1 ry o 0 a isw eAogy UOwneg ,j � 8 0 APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY SLOPE STABILITY CALCULATIONS Iwo ■ Date: 04-18-2886 Snaf11K:hN9c.1PP&z EE La rLays mo SEISRI Minimum Factor of Safety = 1 . 63 14.2 ft Behind Wall Crest 8.0 ft Below Wall Toe 18.8 ft LEGEND: H= PS= 38.8 zips PV= 36.8 Hsi Bob- 6.8 ft Su- 6.8 ft GAM PHI ppCssOH ppSIG 125.8 dog 38 3U 7.0 Scale 10 ft Surcharge ■ Date: 84-18-M6 Snai 1 Vi n 3.191c= NACI MID48 DE LA PLAYA Minimum Factor of Safety = 1 . 17 17.8 ft Behind Wall Crest 0.0 ft Below Mall Toe LEGEND: Crit.Ac= 8.278 HOZ. XH- 0.208 Urt.PXH= 0. H= 18.8 ft PS= 38.0 Hips FY= 36.8 Ksi h= 6.0 ft Se= 6.0 ft GAM PHI COH SIG c iZf0 d3j 00 7$0 Scale 18 ft Surcharge File: HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA NO SEISMIC *************************************************** * CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION * ENGINEERING SERVICE CENTER * DIVISION OF MATERIALS AND FOUNDATIONS * Office of Roadway Geotechnical Engineering * Date: 04-18-2006 Time: 11:11:09 *************************************************** Project Identification - HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA --------- WALL GEOMETRY Vertical Wall Height = 18.0 ft Wall Batter = 14.0 degree Angle Length First Slope from Wallcrest. _ (Deg) (Feet) 100.0 Second Slope from 1st slope. = 0.0 Third Slope from 2nd slope. = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fourth Slope from 3rd slope. = 0.0 0.0 Fifth Slope from 3rd slope. = 0.0 Sixth Slope from 3rd slope. = 0.0 0.0 Seventh Slope Angle. = 0.0 --------- SLOPE BELOW THE WALL --------- First Slope Angle below Toe. = 26.6 degrees First Slope Distance from Toe. = 15.0 ft Second Slope Angle. = 0.0 degrees Second Slope Distance from Toe. = 0.0 ft Vertical Depth of Search. = 5.0 ft Number of Searches below wall Toe. = 2 --------- SURCHARGE --------- THE SURCHARGES IMPOSED ON THE SYSTEM ARE: Begin Surcharge - Distance from toe = 10.0 ft End Surcharge - Distance from toe = 40.0 ft Loading Intensity - Begin - 500.0 Loading Intensity - End = 500.0 psf/ft psf/ft --------- OPTION #1 --------- Factored Punching shear, Bond & Yield Stress are used. --------- SOIL PARAMETERS --------- Unit Friction Cohesion Bond* Coordinates of Boundary Soil Weight Angle Intercept Stress XSl YS1 XS2 YS2 Layer (Pcf) (Degree) (Psf ) (Psi (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 125.0 30.0 300.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * Bond Stress also depends on BSF Factor in Option #5 when enabled. File: HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA NO SEISMIC --------- WATER SURFACE --------- NO Water Table defined for this problem. --------- SEARCH LIMIT --------- The Search Limit is from 0.0 to 40.0 ft You have chosen NOT TO LIMIT the search of failure planes to specific nodes. --------- REINFORCEMENT PARAMETERS --------- Number of Reinforcement Levels = 3 Horizontal Spacing = 6.0 ft Yield Stress of Reinforcement = 36.0 ksi Diameter of Grouted Hole - 8.0 in Punching Shear = 30.0 kips ---------- (Varying Reinforcement Parameters) Vertical Bar Level Length Inclination Spacing Diameter Bond Stress (ft) (degrees) (ft) (in) Factor 1 12.0 20.0 3.0 1.13 1.00 2 12.0 20.0 6.0 1.13 1,00 3 12.0 20.0 6.0 1.13 1.00 File: HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA NO SEISMIC DEPTH MINIMUM DISTANCE LOWER FAILURE UPPER FAILURE BELOW SAFETY BEHIND PLANE PLANE WALL TOE FACTOR WALL TOE ANGLE LENGTH ANGLE LENGTH (ft) (ft) (deg) (ft) (deg) (ft) Toe 1. 63 18.7 25.7 4.1 47.3 22.0 Reinf. Stress at Level 1 = 4.850 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) 2 = 11.652 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) 3 = 18.455 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) DEPTH MINIMUM DISTANCE LOWER FAILURE UPPER FAILURE BELOW SAFETY BEHIND PLANE PLANE WALL TOE FACTOR WALL TOE ANGLE LENGTH ANGLE LENGTH (ft) (ft) (deg) (ft) (deg) (ft) 2.50 1.45 22.2 36.4 13.8 47.9 16.6 Reinf. Stress at Level 1 = 0.000 Ksi 2 = 5.289 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) 3 = 15.250 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) DEPTH MINIMUM DISTANCE LOWER FAILURE UPPER FAILURE BELOW SAFETY BEHIND PLANE PLANE WALL TOE FACTOR WALL TOE ANGLE LENGTH ANGLE LENGTH (ft) (ft) (deg) (ft) (deg) (ft) 5.00 1.38 22.2 39.6 14.4 51.1 17.7 Reinf. Stress at Level 1 = 0.000 Ksi 2 = 3.198 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) 3 = 11.422 Ksi (Pullout controls. . . ) * For Factor of Safety = 1.0 * Maximum Average Reinforcement Working Force: * 0.000 Kips/level rrf GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 28 July 2005 HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA .lob No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS C/O Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Addendum to Report of Sloue Face Evaluation and StabiIiTa "on Recommendations Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: Geotechnicai Exploration, Inc. recently issued a report evaluating the current slope conditions and providing recommendations for stabilizing the significant erosion that has occurred to the slope along the western perimeter of the Haciendas de la Playa residential development. The report was dated July 14, 2005. The intent of this addendum letter, provided at the request of resident Mr. Curtis Englehorns, is to address our geotechnical opinions regarding the necessity of implementing the stabilization recommendations presented in our report. In our opinion, based on our exploratory work conducted at the site, our stability calculations for various locations along the slope face, and our experience with similar slope conditions in the north San Diego County coastal area, the slope face condition is due to on-going erosion that was exacerbated by the heavy rainfall experienced in San Diego County during the winter months of 2004-05. Normal amounts of slope face erosion can be expected to continue to occur on a regular basis, with intermittent episodes of significant erosion and higher than normal amounts of slope face damage to be expected during periods of heavy rainfall. The recent erosion resulted in undercut slope areas and sand runoff covering portions of the sidewalk and street along the base of the slope. The most northerly building, Building No. 7, is within several feet of the slope top and the recent erosion has resulted in some undermining of a top-of-slope fence and concrete swale near the southwest corner of this building. Based on a review of prior geotechnical reports for the site, it appears that the building is supported by a 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX: (858)549-1604 • E-MAIL:geotech @ixpres.com Haciendas de la Playa Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 2 deepened footing. However, in our opinion, stability issues could eventually become a concern for this building. The concrete swale at the top of the slope does pose a danger if it were to break free due to a loss of support. In addition, intermittent erosion of the bluff face, especially during heavy rainfall events, causes an accumulation of sediment near the base that could result in a dangerous condition to pedestrians on the sidewalk (i.e., slip and fall, or worse) and, at times, to vehicle traffic along Vulcan Avenue. If the stabilization measure recommended in our July, 2005 report are not implemented in a reasonable amount of time, the continued erosion of the bluff face could result in instability issues for the top-of-slope buildings and improvements (i.e., concrete swales and fences) and public safety liability issues for the downslope sidewalk and street. LIMITAT ONS The opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering within the County of San Diego. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have an you may contact the undersigned. Reference to our .lob No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. me A. Cerros, P.E. Leslie D. Reed, Pre dent R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-073/R.G. 3391 Senior Geotechnical Engineer Q OFESS/,aY c;� Exp.313 11 J2; I Nu. CERTIFIED ENGINEERING 9C OS , 7 GEOLOGIST - q] a f .4 CA��F of t:lit�4:kj� . REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California 30B NO. 05-8870 14 July 2005 ;I WOES 1 71 1 Prepared for: Haciendas de is playa HOA Board of Directors r 4 "Dii GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATIO3:2 N, INC.„ SOIL& O ENGINEERING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING 9 GROUNDWATER GEOLOGY OGY 14 July 2005 HACIENDAS DE LA PLA yA HOA BOARD OF DIRECTORS Job No. 05-8870 C/O Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Report of tope Face Evalu i n and tabilization Recommendations Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: In accordance with your request and our proposal dated January 12, 2005, Geotechnicai EXPioration, Inc. has prepared this report of slope face evaluation and herein provides recommendations for the proposed slope face stabilization. The slope is located on the east side of S. Vulcan Avenue and along the northern portion of the west side of the Haciendas de la Playa residential development. Our field work was performed on February 10, 2005. It must be noted that this report is a limited investigation of the slope surface and geometry with respect to proposed stabilization recommendations and is not to be construed as a complete soil investigation or geologic report for the entire project project's slopes. The purpose of our investigation was toaluate theeexist existing the conditions and to provide recommendations, as warranted, for stabilization of the slope face. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely a concerning the following report, please contact oucoffe e You y questions . Reference to our Job No. 05- 8870 will help to expedite a response to your inquiry. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. ros, P. 4X::ide R.C.E. dente G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-071/R.G. 3391 Senior �eote ��er R 4, No. 0021.07 a No. 999 N * Exp. Q/3Cl�b$ °{' ,; * Exp. 3/31/ �gl�OT CERTIFIED '�CFIi��t%fjY-R 1� ENG NEER NO OGIST OF C A OFCA OFCA 7420 TRADE STREET • SA ulEG0, CA 92121 • OFCA (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL:geotech @ixpres.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I• PROJECT SUMMARY 1 II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE 3 III. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALYSIS 3 IV. SLOPE FACE GEOLOGY 4 V. SLOPE STABILIZATION MEASURES & RECOMMENDATIONS 5 VI. LIMITATIONS 15 FIGURES I. Vicinity Map II. Plot Plan with Cross-section Locations IIIa-d. Cross Sections with Proposed Retaining Wall Locations IV. Retaining Wall Schematic PLATES I• Repair Plan APPENDICES A. Retaining Wall Structural Calculations 64N REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California JOB NO. 05-8870 The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. for the subject project. I. PROTECT SUMMARY It is our understanding, based on communications with the property manager, Mr. Lowell Pembrooke, and various Board Members and homeowners, that concerns have been raised by the Homeowners Association, as well as the City of Encinitas regarding the stability and long-term performance of the slope face, as well as buildings located near the top of the slope face. Significant erosion of the upper portion of the slope at several locations occurred during the past winter of heavy rainfall in the San Diego area. The erosion resulted in undercut slope areas and sand runoff covering portions of the sidewalk and street along the base of the slope. The most northerly building, Building No. 7 at the Haciendas de la Playa site is within several feet of the slope top and recent erosion has resulted in some undermining of a concrete swale near the southwest corner of the no building. Additional upper slope fail northern failure following the winter rains has undermined the top-of-slope fence and gunite swale near the southwest corner of Building g No. With the above in mind, the scope of work is briefly outlined as follows: 1• Visual observation of top-of-slope and slope face conditions. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 2 2. Identification and classification of the slope face soils in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System. 3. Evaluation of the existing slope material. 4. Evaluation of the slope face geology. 5. Development of geotechnical criteria for design of slope face stabilization recommendations. 6. Meeting with various representatives of the City of Encinitas to determine the acceptability of the proposed slope face stabilization measures. 7. Preparation of this report with graphics documenting our geotechnical findings, opinions, and recommendations. 8. Preparation of a preliminary repair plan that can be utilized for preparation of final plans for submittal to the City of Encinitas. The conceptual plans provided herein are for estimating purposes only. Final wall placement and configuration should be determined by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. Based on the results of our field observations, subsequent analysis of the slope geometry and analysis of many cross sections of the slope, we herein provide recommendations for stabilization of the slope face. These recommendations include removal of the existing erosional debris and placement of split-face retaining walls at various locations along the slope face. Recommendations for drainage improvements have also been provided. AW Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 3 II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE The portion of the slope that is the subject of this report extends approximately 480 feet to the north from the entrance to the Haciendas de la Playa development. The slope is located on the east side of S. Vulcan Avenue and on the west side of the Haciendas de la Playa site. The slope varies in height from seven feet at the southern end of the slope near the driveway entrance to approximately 30 feet in height below the northern end of Building No. 7 and the Haciendas de la Playa site. The inclination of the slope varies from near-vertical at some locations to approximately 1.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). A concrete swale parallels the top of the northern end of the slope between the slope and the northernmost building. Currently the southwest corner of the northern building s approximately from the slope top and the northwest corner of the northern bu 10 feet approximately six feet from the slope top. Figure No. II includes the locating is buildings and property improvements relative to the slope. Figure Nos. II and IIIa f IIId depict the approximate location and cross-sectional geometry at various locations along the slope. III. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALY IS Our field investigation of the slope conditions included field mapping the plan view and cross section geometry of the slope; evaluation of slope face soils; and documenting to our satisfaction that the slope is comprised of soils suitable f bearing material for the proposed tiered retaining wall stabilization of the slope or face. ope Field observation of slope conditions should continue during the sloe fa stabilization process. Any previously ce y unknown slope conditions discovered during Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 4 the construction process should be documented in an as-built slope face stabilization report to be issued following completion of repair work. Laboratory testing conducted in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A revealed the Maximum Dry Density for representative slope face soils to be 127 pcf with an Optimum Moisture of 8 percent. The minus 200 fines content was determined by ASTM D1140 to be 16 percent. Based on our site observations of the soils comprising the slope, our laboratory analysis, and our experience with similar sandy soils, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned an angle of internal friction of 350 and a cohesion of 50 psf for the on-site natural formational material for use in slope stabilization design evaluations. IV, SLOPE FACE GEOLOGY Erosion and slope face failures reveal the entire height of the slope to be comprised of the Quaternary-age Bay oint Formation y (QbP). The formational materials exposed in the slope face consist of medium dense to dense, light brown to reddish brown, silty sands. Due to their high sand content, and only minor to moderate degree of cementation, the materials are highly erodible when not protected by vegetation or man-made coverings such as fiber mats or jute netting. Failed materials accumulated at the base of the slope will serve as high quality backfill during slope stabilization. Based on geologic exposures in the vicinity of the Haciendas de la Playa project, the Bay Point Formation is believed to be underlain by the Eocene-age Torrey Formation (Tt). Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 5 V SLOPE S ASMR-ES AND RECOMMFivnwrr.�..... Based on the information obtained during our investigation of the slope conditions, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience in the Encinitas area, we offer the following recommendations for remediation and stabilization of the existing slope face erosion conditions at Haciendas de la Playa. A review of document provided to us in the course of this investigation revealed that the northernmost building is supported by a deepened foundation system. Therefore, additional foundation recommendations for the building have not been included in this since the deepened foundations are, in our opinion, adequate for support report p q pport of the structure. It is recommended that the soil debris on the slope be removed and masonry retaining walls, as shown in plan view on Figure No. II and Plate I, be constructed on the slope face. Following wall construction, the areas between and above the new masonry retaining walls should be cleaned and dressed to produce approximately 2.0:1.0 slope faces followed by installation of erosion control devices and vegetation. Refer to Plate I and Figure Nos. IIIa-IIId for cross sections D-D', J_ Y, P-P' and U-U' at various slope locations of the proposed repair configuration. The remaining cross-sections depicted on Figure No. II and Plate I were used for analysis and have not been included as figures in this report. Figure No. IIId is representative of the first approximately 250 feet of slope north of the Haciendas de la Playa driveway, which will only require a toe-of-slope debris wall. No slope face walls will be required along this portion of the slope due to the low height of the slope, the vegetative cover, and the distance between the sloe top and the top-of-slope structures. p AIM—h.AOL Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 6 Refer to Figure No. IV for a retaining wall schematic including recommended backfill drainage systems behind the proposed retaining walls. In addition, a surface drainage system and improvements to the current irrigation plan are recommended for the top-of-slope area. Following their review of this report, bidding repair contractors are encouraged to contact our office with any questions they may have. It will be the responsibility of the contractors to develop, based on their experience and available resources, access and construction strategies for working on the slope face. The conceptual plans provided herein are for estimating purposes only. Final wall placement and configuration should be determined by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. A. Sl _oae Face Reconstruction 1. Soi/ Removal: The loose erosional soils and debris on the slope face shall removed downward and laterally to expose competent ground. be 2. Excavation Observation: The bottom of the excavation shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before retaining wall construction and/or fill placement. Wall construction and/or fill placement shall not start until the base is approved by our representative. 3. Stocko/led Soi/s: If the excavated soils are stockpiled on site, no stockpiled soils will be allowed within 10 feet of the top of the slope. Due to access limitations, we assume most contractors would elect to stockpile soils off-site. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 7 . 4• Temporary S/ones: We anticipate that temporary back slopes of approximately 10 to 15 feet in height may be required. Based on the results of our limited field investigation, it is our opinion that 10- to 15-foot-high temporary slopes may be considered stable for reconstruction purposes. The temporary slopes should not be steeper than 0.5:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. must observe any steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that soils and formational material comprising the slope are not as anticipated, any required design changes would be presented at that time. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in'this report, trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the site shall be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by Cal-OSHA. 5. Compacted Fill Placement: Excavated materials to be replaced as compacted fill to reconstruct the slope areas between the proposed retaining walls (described in Section B of this report), shall be "cleaned" of detrimental materials such as vegetation, large rocks, etc., and processed so as to reduce the size of"clumps" to no greater than 6 inches in diameter or 3 inches if the compaction equipment consists of mechanical hand tampers. These materials shall then be dried or watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. The fill materials shall be placed in layers not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness, or thinner thickness if compacted with hand tampers. Field density tests shall be taken periodically as the fill placement progresses. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 8 6. ImDOrt Soi/s: It may be necessary to utilize approved import soils. Imported soils, if needed, shall be evaluated and approved by our firm prior to importing them to the site. Imported soils used as fill shall possess a friction angle of 300 and a cohesion of 150 psf, or a combination of angle of internal friction and cohesion that produces equal or better slope stability characteristics. These materials shall be dried or watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. Import soils should have an expansion index equal to or lower than 50. 7. Observations and Testino: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill-compaction testing during slope reconstruction operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. All excavations resulting from the removal of loose, slope face soils shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before they are backfilled. 8. Gradina Requirements: Applicable portions of the City of Encinitas Grading Requirements shall be followed in reconstruction of the slope face. 9. Verification of Soils Conditions: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during slope excavation to be as anticipated in this "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations" for the project. In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site work must be tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the repair contractor to comply with the requirements on the plans and the local grading ordinance. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 9 B. Retaining Wall Design Criteria 10. Design Parameters Unrestrained: The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of any cantilever retaining walls, utilizing on-site sandy soils or imported very low- to low-expansive soils [EI less than 501 as backfill) should be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only). For 2.0:1.0 sloping backfill, the cantilever retaining walls should be designed with an equivalent fluid pressure of 52 pcf. 11. Design Parameters - Restrained• We do not anticipate that restrained walls will be utilized. Should they be constructed, however, they should be designed for a restrained condition utilizing a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil, considered in pounds per square foot) considered as acting everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid Weight. The soil pressure produced by any footings, improvements, or any other surcharge placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the retaining portion of the wall should be included in the wall design pressure. The recommended lateral soil pressures are based on the assumption that no loose soils or soil wedges will be retained by the retaining wall. Backfill soils should consist of low-expansive soils with EI less than 50, and should be placed from the heel of the foundation and back face of the wall to the ground surface formed by the 2.0:1.0 fill slope and the temporary back cut in firm natural soils. 12. Surcharge Loads: Any loads placed on the active wedge behind a cantilever wall should be included in the design by multiplying the load weight by a factor of 0.32. For a restrained wall, the lateral factor shall be 0.52. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 10 13. Foot We recommend that the proposed retaining walls be supported on continuous footing foundations bearing on undisturbed formational materials at the base of the slope and compacted fill soils on the face of the slope. Footings at the base of the slope should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Slope face footings should be deepened to provide at least 5 feet to daylight as measured from the top of the foundation. Retaining walls should be spaced apart at least 1.10 times the height of the immediately adjacent lower wall. At the recommended depths, footings may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for combined dead and live loads and 4,000 psf for all loads, including wind or seismic. The ultimate passive resistance is 440 pcf and the ultimate soil friction coefficient is 0.70. 14. Based on our field evaluation resulting in the cross sections presented in Figure Nos. IIIa-d and the topographic map provided by Barry Rockwell Surveying, up to three walls will be required to produce a terraced, stabilized slope face. Designs for four wall heights (up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet) are provided in Appendix A. This office can be contacted for additional design information wall heights exceed 10 feet. 15. WaH Drainage• Proper subdrains and free-draining backwall material or board drains (such as J-drain or Miradrain) should be installed behind all retaining walls (in addition to proper waterproofing) on the subject project (see Figure No. IV). Geotechnica/Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for cosmetic or structural damage to walls that is attributable to poor drainage. The subdrains should be placed such that rear-of-wall water collected behind upper walls is transmitted to solid pipe downdrains at 100- foot intervals. The downdrains should discharge to the swale behind the "Alt,Am Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 11. lowest wall. Base-of-wall weepholes or open head joints should be placed through the lowest wall. 16. Retainin4 Wa// Backfi//• All backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. Backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be installed as early as the retaining walls are capable of supporting lateral loads. C. T-R-of-Slove Drainage Recommendations 17. Dr21990: Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the top-of-slope yard surfaces after the slope reconstruction is in place. Drainage waters are to be directed away from both the building foundations and the slope top, and into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Currently, the California Building Code requires a minimum 2-percent surface gradient for proper drainage of building pads unless waived by the building official. Concrete pavement may have a minimum gradient of 0.5-percent. All lawn and planter areas should be graded as necessary to establish positive surface flow to a system of area drains. Minimum surface gradients of 2 percent should be established and maintained. In general, area drain inlets should be placed on no greater than 10-foot intervals. All drain systems must discharge into the existing collection system for the project. 18. Existing Drain Svstem: All existing drains and drain systems along the top- of-slope area should be located and evaluated. Upon evaluation, some of the lines or systems may require repair and/or replacement. rp Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 12 19. Irrigation• It is recommended that the upslope landscape irrigation be closely monitored and be kept to the minimum necessary to sustain the landscaping. 20. Erosion Control: In addition, appropriate erosion control measures shall be taken at all times to prevent surface runoff waters from running over the top of the slope. D. S/ove Face P/ant/ng and rrrioation 21. S/ooe Face P/antina: Following slope repair operations, the resulting exposed soil surfaces should be improved with erosion control materials and replanted with a lightweight, deep-rooted, low-water-use vegetation in compliance with the City of Encinitas guidelines. It is recommended that the use of fiber rolls, jute-netting or other comparable systems be considered to provide interim erosion control. A landscape architect or contractor should be contacted for final recommendations for slope face treatment and planting. In no case should heavy trees or plants be placed on the slope face. 22• S/ooe Face Irrigation: If an irrigation system is to be placed on the slope, we recommend that such trenches be located at least 5 feet away from the rim of the slope. Any existing irrigation system lines should be checked prior to use in an effort to identify any damage or joint separations that may have occurred due to the slope damage. It is imperative that irrigation systems, especially near reconstructed slope areas, be inspected on a frequent basis because one broken sprinkler head or a damaged irrigation pipe can result in the type of erosional damage currently present on the slope. Irrigation of the slope-face vegetation should be kept at the minimum required to sustain plant growth, in order to minimize moisture infiltration to slope face soils. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 13 Drip irrigation systems are recommended and preferable for the rebuilt slope and slope retaining wall areas. E. General Recommendations 23. Pre-Repair Site Meeting: We require that a pre-repair site meeting be scheduled, with representatives of this firm and all concerned parties in attendance. Any import soils shall be evaluated with laboratory soil tests and approved by our firm prior to importing to the site. 24. Adiacent Structure Monitoring: As is true for any earthwork operation in close proximity to residential structures, it would be prudent to document and monitor the existing conditions of the top-of-slope buildings prior, during, and after the slope face reconstruction. Pre-earthwork documentation is the only positive way to verify any structure effects due to the nearby slope reconstruction. 25. Contractor Performance: All repair work shall be performed in accordance with all local industry standards of good practice and building codes for the types of repairs to be performed. This includes the construction of any temporary shoring that may be needed for the purposes of safety and/or the protection of uphill improvements such as the residential buildings and/or patios. In addition, the contractor retained to perform the above- recommended repairs shall be qualified and experienced in slope reconstruction of the types of repairs to be done. 26. Own pons_ iby: It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that the recommendations summarized in this report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of this project are Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 14 incorporated in improvement plans. Our firm should review any project plans not prepared by our firm once they are available, to verify that our recommendations are adequately incorporated in the plans. Additional or alternate recommendations may be issued by our firm, as warranted, after this review. 27. Safety: This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considered any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. 28. New Slope Erosion: Should similar slope erosion occur in other slope areas in the future, we (or another qualified engineering firm) should be contacted to assess new slope damage conditions. The recommendations for slope reconstruction contained in this report are valid only for the investigated slope areas and may not be appropriate in other circumstances. 29. Construction Observations: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill compaction testing during remedial operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. 30. Off-site Grading: The project contractor should obtain off-site grading permission from the City of Encinitas prior to the beginning of grading. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 15 31. Draina a Control Durin S/o a Reconstruction: The provide proper drainage control at the to Project contractor should designed and maintained to direct water away fro a slope. Drainage must be Y m the slope. Our conclusions and recommendations have been base obtained from our work performed thus far, as well as our d on all available data experience with the soils and geology in this Part of Encinitas. It is necessary that all observations conclusions and recommendations be verified at the time Operations begin. In ' slope reconstruction the event discrepancies are recommendations may be issued (if required), noted, additional This limited investigation was performed to provide opinions the slope face. The observed conditions reasonably explain as to reconstruction of of damage related to the slope face. P �n the observed evidence slope or the P Investigation of the overall stability of the general vicinity, which could also contribute to current or f damage, is beyond the scope of our work. future Deeper excavations in the general vicinity of the site would any deep-seated geologic or other features that could affecs be required to identify of the site, and/or areas of adjacent properties. Our firm ability of larger areas extensive investigation because on-site conditions did not imply not perform such an such features as a mechanism contributing to the shallow slope the existence of the scope of our field observations included only Pe face condition, and slope face materials. Y those soils associated with the Our firm shall not be held responsible for any subsequent movement of deep-seated q nt geologic features that underlie the general vicinity or shallow slope face failures that may occur in the future. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 16 This report should be considered valid for a period of one 1 this report is subject to review b � ) Year. After such time, nature of planned site work, y °ur firm and possible revision depending on the The firm of Geotechnicai Exploration, Inc, should not changes to the physical condition of the property, be held responsible for measures or changed drainage P P y� such as inappropriate repair g 9 patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. If significant modifications are made to the investigated with respect to the reconstruction of the slope and an d area, especially conditions, this report must be presented to us for immediate changed drainage revision. review and possible This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a response to your i 9 Reference to our queries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. C thy K. G ze�Pro' ct oordinator � g No. an- o � Exp. 3/31/� . Reed, residentCEATIFIED NjA ENOINEERINd C.E.G. 999[ex a• 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 9�, GEO�OtiIS F CAI. J • oQRpFESS/0* erros, p,E. R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer �-+ No. 00 007 oc EXp �,�% I F OF _ VICINITY MAP tN FAN VirN FI.ORI�P r`- T�k S�17f0�fY 1N VUTAIVJLA lot I 1A GARDE ARROYO a z a Ln - SYt.VCA Sf i X10" P ti O d" V) S�A v DR CREST � ST •�: �-` A S�NNY WY z ENC I cc -k ° �1�; DR a -� B ST NI TAS , hI�NL 1 GH? -9 j a wIS" �� .�6 iT -_ C ST FS N. M b X94 1)V7Tdr 41$ _.._ ` n KT ,kRt�>" PA A ; �� s BLV o STS+; E ' p ST R�c>E r- W 0 • cIH1 r z CH -P-' a D n _ 1 w„ MCNEI L l A11 c rn `, � E z --n He M E F ST o CD y 1 W F ST v REQUEZA x _ y REOUEZA ST 3E li c + c o a M T N STREET 1 W G ST =t M M° � 0 ,— ' VIEWPOINT E G ST ° -- PAR)( PARK °t E H ST CD b GA1 Thomas Bros. Guide San Diego County pg. H 47 Haciendas de la Playa - Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, CA. Figure No. I Job No. 05-8870 or.� O C l 2° i > A Co 3 y O 0 � f m >1 L H J M 0 i CL o i v �. m OD ° 70 °` 3 3 N 1-- Go � H cn — LID a D Q? N U 7 c % v `n > .� c N 70 U . . C3 .N w _ LO a Q � to co LO c a � o \ o LO 0 0 LO oo U') o LO LO ol o1 coo coo ° I SW anogb uoI on9171 9AII0198 0 P O q D V Gpa L C V O p C•Ili 3 A Ecvm _6E� � N p f° C$O O O d T U 0 O E pc D p pa p O 2 dE Om lit a ISMNL= 1 2 am �O .1L V V) L LO � � m M � R oo 0 ac ;I m N ,U o • . o o W W co m \ L? U C o _ o O = r- LO o° L O a °' ono co � 1SW anogd uo� ona � .� 13 ani�qIa8 0 a b w p• d U b C bq:.OD no�gd b G ono.-o oe v o�GO• C E Gq„ C L O Q r bo$a� e•-Q ou 6 q�o v� E� c Fe�bS 3 E j z q om ti O 2 M N H -�• W M N N 3 M ca \ ♦— 0 V �� a) o � C . . N LO L c a W � � m 7 .� U A c N •N O O ._ _ V -- _ ' LO LT x U C i O CD 0 0 b ISW anogd uoi4oA913 9A14DIaN °s$a °ooa.a o. pEoam b C$b" Qoaoo J� _O b t w�ea 0 z a m z al am m AMMLMM Z C) N N .t 0 (� h N Q� LO U c L 0 to Aa Q � Z3 0 0 ce) o 4� o` U m _ a:-j LO 0 0 0 0 co lSW a^ogd UOIJDna an 13 I4ala8 0 a r �oga O�4 im c Eck a°moo. ro aog 0 a Ec :Eo�ea M z m AX2 O ° Z aE`om' A 4 I p O 1 CN h Z tglo _ R h K F tttt i yytt �- 0 n 3 w � �6 LJ J O O J tE• ��yAt � �� a' r I HIM' p a Q O .�.�y CL ,.,�+ •_`1'a lkp j� , > O o + l 00 U ohmic od h 111$4 °� cEm0 z o m m Lu c mZ a mWC CV map Ir OD/ � I UO a$i $ o r o (� Ail tz w O 'fie CD Q I • t , $ O rn i 1 I I O c $ 0 d � 1 W bb ►a a a 2m p 3 $v �y S U � yvw ; $ = H CL CL o3 � 0 � 0 0 _ c g.La--s va gyp ; -g E a >m z %. 3 ac ^ , o Q j 0 � 0 o cn 2 10 Tt i E V ` ,gym m U � � m U v 0 0 U Um L2 a � a m C 3 o JSW a^«1V uo4nneg en4W a C o� a`� W) APPENDIX A RETAINING WALL STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS I�rI GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 14 July 2005 Haciendas De La Playa HOA Board of Directors Job No. 05-8870 c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: As requested, we have performed calculations for the design of masonry retaining walls to be built at the property. Site specific data used in the calculations was derived from our soil report dated July 5, 2005. The approved, city-permitted retaining wall plans and soils report should remain a full part of this analysis and report. A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall be on-site during construction to assure that the soils and foundation aspects are in compliance with the report. A special materials inspection firm should be retained to verify construction and materials are as specified in this Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Report, as well as provide special inspections when required. Should the site conditions or design differ significantly from those proposed prior to construction of the wall, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. OQRO FESS; A. . Cerros, P.E. LU No. 34422 to m R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 * _CX jp�' I Senior Geotechnical Engineer sx crvi�_ 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO,CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX: (858)549-1604 • E-MAIL; geotech @Ixpres.com Retaining Wall Design Information for Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope Owner: Haciendas de La Playa Home Owners Association Project Address: SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas, California. Retaining Wall Design Engineer: Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Geotechnical Engineer: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Building Code: 2001 California Building Code Scope of Work: Construct masonry retaining walls to produce a gentler slope (maximum 2.0:1.0 slope ratio) on the west side of the property to help prevent or reduce the potential slope instability and reduce the soil erosion potential. The retaining walls will vary in height, depending on their location in the slope. Four different wall heights have been designed for the project: up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet in height. Reference: All walls are to be constructed in accordance with the retaining wall calculations and drawings, and per the geotechnical report: "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations, Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope, SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue an Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California", GEI Job No. 05-8870. orp RETAINING WALL DESIGN CRITERIA From soils report: Static Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity: 3,000 psf. If seismic load is included, Allowable soil bearing capacity: 4,000 psf. Soil Equivalent Fluid Weight (Active Pressure) =52 pcf for 2 to 1 slope backfill =38 pcf for level backfill Ultimate Soil Lateral Resistance: 700 pcf Ultimate Friction Coefficient=0.70 Soil Friction Angle=35 degrees Daylight Setback=5 feet from the top of foundation Weight of Soil=120 pcf Building Code= 2001 California Building Code Seismic Coefficient (Kh)=0.10 Minimum Distance Between Retaining Walls is at least 1.1 times the height of the immediate low wall. Oeotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: f /�� 7420 Trade Street Job# : 05.8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 ice•••• Phone 858 549 7222 8'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:cArplillhacienda de In playa 8. Plelai' n (`' Rep�trslion#� RP-1133415 Cantilevered Retaining Design Wall Desgn Code:COC 2001 0:• Criteria Soil Data I I Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height = 8.00 It Allow Soil Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width = 1.00 it Wall height above soil 0.50 it Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 6.50 Heel Active Pressure = 52.0 psf/it Total Footing Width = 7.50 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure = 38.0 psf/ft Footing Thickness 19.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120.00 pct Key Width = 15.00 in FootingIlSoll Friction = 0.650 Key = 20.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 3.00 It Wind on Stem = 20.0 psi Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in Pc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pcf Min.As% 0.0018 Cover C Top = 2.00 in Btm- 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psi Lateral Load = 0.0 Vft Adjacent Footing Load = Used To Resist Siding&Overhrning ...Height to Top 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe = 0.0 psi ..,Height to Bottom 0.00 it Eccentricity = 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 it Axial Load Applied to Stem 111 Footing Type Line Load Axial Dead Load = 0.0 The Base Above/Below Soil = 0.0 It Axial Live Load = 0.0 ks at Back of Wall Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load ` Kee for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 2,403.0 Ibs Design Kh g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Stem Weight Seismic Load Kh Weight Mutltipiler = 0.100 g Added seismic base force 98.1 be Design Summary i Stem Construction Top stem 2nd Wall Stability Ratios Des Seem OK stem 00 OK Design height ft= 3.75 0.00 Overturning 1.73 OK Wall Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Concrete Siding - 1.70 OK Thiclvness 12.00 12.00 Total Bearing Load 12,241 Ibs Reber Size #F 6 # 6 ...resultant ecc. 20.11 in Reber Spacing 8.00 8.00 Soil Pressure C Toe 3,934 psi OK Reber PDa Placed at Edge Edge Soil Pressure @ Heel 0 psi OK Design Allowable = 4,000 Psi fb/FB+fa/Fa 0.395 0.453 Sol Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force Q Section be- 806.8 3,754.1 ACI Factored C Toe 3,684 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 1,437.9 12,049.9 ACI Factored @ Heel = 0 psf Moment....Allowable ft-#= 3,659.9 26,658.7 Footing Shear Q Toe 0.0 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 8.2 22.9 Footing Shear a Heel = 67.1 psi OK Shear....Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 36.00 42.72 Sliding Caks (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in- 42.72 11.50 Lateral Silding Force = 6,339.2 Ibs Wail Weight psi= 124.0 150.0 less 100%Passive Force - - 2,985.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd in- 9.00 9.63 less 100%Friction Force = - 7,956.5 Masonry Data = 1,500 Added Force Req'd = 0.0 Ibs OK ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 Ibs OK Fs psi= 24,000 Solid Grouting Yes Special Inspection No Modular Ratio'n' = 25.78 Short Tenn Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. In- 11.60 CMMa Type= Medium Weight rc Psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotadmical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 2//(, 7420 Trade Street Job S : 064870 DqW.. JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... phone 868 549 7222 8'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 868 6491604 This Wall in File:c:1r1611hacienda de la playa 8.rp5 Rellain Pro 6.1d,&Ap14W lal1M6-20o4 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Rpt:traon�:RP-1�ss4�s 9 19 Footing Design Resul_ � To . tual Factored Pressure 3,684 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,743 0 ft-S Mu':Downward = 215 0 ft_* Mu: Design 1,529 12,050 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 67.14 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Speed Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Speed Heel:S4@ 6.75 In,S50 10.50 in,tra@ 15.00 in,S7Q 20.25 in,S8@ 26.75 in,490 33 Key Reinforcing = None Speed Key: S4Q 9.50 in,S5Q 14.50 in,S60 20.50 in,S70 28.00 in, Summary of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING_ Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item The ft f14 Ibs ft ft-S Heel Active Pressure = 3,954.9 4.11 16,259.0 Soil Over Heel = 5,280.0 4.75 25,080.0 Toe Active Pressure -126.8 0.86 -109.2 Sloped Soil Over Heel 907.5 5.67 5,142.5 Surcharge Over Toe Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Soil = 10.0 9.83 98.3 Soil Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load = 2,403.0 7.40 17,782.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Seismic Stem Self Wt = 98.1 5.27 516.9 Stem Weight(s) = 1,151.5 1.50 1,727.3 Earth C Stem Transitions= Total 6,437.2 O.T.M. - 34,547.3 Footing Weight 1, ResistinglOvertum 312.5 ing Ratio = 1.73 Key Weight 3.75 6,679.7 = 312.5 3.63 1,132.8 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 12,240.8 ibs Vert.Component = 2,688,0 7.50 20,160.1 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure Total= 12,240.8 be R.M.= 59,982.3 3//G 2. 12.in Mas w/#6 @&in o/c 6 Solid Grouts; 1� 3• 4'-9' 8'-6' 12.in Conc w/#6 @ 8.in o/c " 3'-9' 21/2• 0 46 1'-7" #0@18.in @Toe 1$� Designer select ►" 6 l #0@18.in all horiz,reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 3'-0' 1'-3' 3'-3' 1'-0' 6'-6' T-6- do 4/6 2. 20.psf- f z •a r 3954.9# Pp=2985.9# ---� 3934.psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title ; HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page; tp 7420 Trade Street Job# : 08.6870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone M S48 7222 V HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 888 6491604 This Wail M File:C:1RP61%h&cienda de M playa S. Retain Pro 6.1d, tai+ 4 Registration 0:RP-1133x15 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Criteria Soil Data I Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height = 6.00 It Allow Soil Bearing = 4,000.0 pal Toe Width 1.00 It Wall height above soli = 0.50 It Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 4.00 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Heel Active Pressure 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width 5.00 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psffft Footing Thickness 12.00 in Height of Sod over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psffft Key Width 12.00 in Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120.00 pcf Key Depth = 12.00 in FootingilSoil Friction = 0.650 Key Distance from Toe = 2.50 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in Pc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pcf Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover 4D Top - 2.00 in Btm.= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem VAda jacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 pal Lateral Load = 0.0#/ft 9 Load 0.0 lbs Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 It Footing Width = 0.00 It Surcharge Over Toe - 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom 0.00 It Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wait to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 It Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Axial Dead Load 0.0 The Base Above/Below Soil = 0.0 ft Abel Live Load = 0.0 be at Back of Wait A;dal Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure = 0.670 Added seismic base force 1,186.6 lbs esign = g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kae-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Construction Top stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 2.50 0.00 Overturning - 1.61 OK Wait Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Concrete Sliding = 1.65 OK Thickness 8.00 8.00 Total Bearing Load = 5,643 lbs Rebar Size = # 4 # 4 ...resultant ecc. = 14.62 in Rebar Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Soli Pressure a Toe 2,934 psf OK Rebar Placed at = Edge Edge Soli Pressure @ Heel = 0 psf OK Design Data Allowable = 4,000 psf 1b/FB+fa/Fa = 0.708 O.s3s Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force C Section Ibs= 522.0 2,048.9 ACI Factored Q Toe = 2,693 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 815.5 5,113.7 ACI Factored Q Heel 0 psf Moment....Allowable ft-#= 1,151.5 8,039.3 Footing Shear Q Toe = 6.3 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 9.5 19.8 Footing Shear a Heel 52.7 psi OK Shear.-Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable - 93.1 psi Lap Splice N Above in= 24.00 28.48 Sliding Calos (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 28.48 7.67 Lateral Sliding Force = 3,073.5 lbs Wall Weight psf= 78.0 100.0 less 100%Passive Force - - 1,400.0 lbs Rebar Depth 'd' in= 5.25 6.25 less 100%Friction Force = - 3,667.7 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd = 0.0 be OK Pm psi= 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 lbs OK Fs psi= 24,000 Solid Grouting = Yes Special inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 Ma s�Block Type= Medium Weight Data Pc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Tide HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: F Ito 7420 Trade Street Job# ; 05-870 Degnr: JAC Date: AL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Pam 858 b49 7222 6'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 8491604 This Wall in File:CMP61Uiaciends de Is playa 8.rp6 Ratoln wtO`'td' 3 (°)'tegistauons: tP413415 Candlevered Retaining Wail Design cde:CeC 2001 Footing Design Results saaaaaaa . TOO How Factored Pressure = 2,693 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,230 0 ft-# Mu':Downward 162 0 ft4 Mu: Design 1,068 5,114 ft-* Actual 1-Way Shear - 6.34 52.66 psi Allow 1-Way Shear 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Spec'd Heel:#40 11.75 in,#5Q 18.25 in,tra@ 25.75 in,#74D 3525 in,08C 46.25 in,*9Q 4 Key Reinforcing = None Specd Key: #4@ 12.50 in,05th 19.25 in,tl"27.25 in,#70 37.25 in, Surnrnary of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING.„.. .....RESISTWO..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs ft ft-# Ibs ft ft-# Heel Active Pressure = 1,952.9 2.89 5,641.7 Sal Over Heel = 2,400.0 3.33 8,000.0 Toe Active Pressure = -76.0 0.67 -50.7 Sloped Sop Over Heel 333.3 3.89 1,296.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel a Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Mal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Sop = 10.0 7.25 72.5 Sop Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load 1,186.6 5.20 6,170.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem WeW*s) 562.0 1.33 749.3 = Earth a Stem Transitions Total = 3,073.5 O.T.M. - 11,833.8 Footing Weight = 750,0 2.50 1,875.0 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.61 Key Weight = 150.0 3.00 450.0 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 5,642.6 Ibs Vert.Component = 1,327.3 5.00 6,636.6 Total= 5,642.6 [be R.M.= 19,067.2 Vertical component of active pressure used for sop pressure 7/AP 2. 8.in Mas w/#4 @ 8.in o/c k' 1 6• Solid Grout, 32 � nn /� 4-0' 2 3/4• &in Conc w/#4 @ 8.in o% 1,A• i2 Cx� k�r5; 2• �N-14 s �' a * 1'o 2 PI 4- 3. #0@18.in 1'A'If @Toe N.°4 Designer select #0@18.in all horiz reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 2'-6• r-a rte• 5'-0• �i>/ th 2. 2o.psf- hn;` 1952.9# Pp=1400.# 2934.5psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: CP 7420 Trade Street Job# : 058870 Dsgw. JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5481604 This Wall in File:C:1RP61114AC1ENDA DE LA PLAYA 6.RPS.R Retain Pro 6.1d, (0)1"9-nN Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design code:CBC 2001 Repistratlon N:RP-1133415 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions b Strengths Retained Height = 4.00 It Allow Sol Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width = 1.00 It Wall height above soil = 0.50 it Equivalent Fksd Pressure Method Heel Width = 2.50 = Heel Active Pressure 52.0 psftft Total Footing Width 3.50 Slope Behind Wall 2.00:1 Toe Active pressure 38.0 psf/ft Footing Thickness = 14.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120.00 pct Key�t 12.00 to In FoodngllSoil Friction = 0.650 12.00 Key Distance from Toe = 1.25 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore 12 tic = 3,000 psi Fy 60,000 psi for passive pressure = Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pcf Min.As% 0.0018 Cover C Top = 2.00 in Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Lateral Load 0.0 Vit Adjacent Footing Load Used To Resist Siding 8 Overturning ..Height to Top 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe V. 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Siding&Overturning Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 It Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Base Above/Below Soil 0.0 ft Axial Dead Load = 0.0 bs at Back of Wall = Axial Live Load = 0.0 Ibs Axel Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in GarM Pressure Selernic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 584.6 lbs Design Kn = 0 Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Sunwriairy Stem Constnlction Top Stem Stom OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 0.00 Overturning = 1.65 OK Wall Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Siding = 2.35 OK Thickness = 8.00 Total Bearing Load = 2,868 Ibs Reber Size = # 5 ...resultant ecc. = 9.95 in Reber Spacing 8.00 Soil Pressure 4D Toe = 2,077 psf OK Reber Placed at = Edge Soil Pressure @ Heel = 0 psf OK Design Data tb/FB+faAFa 0•� Al of = 4,000 psf Total Force(M Section Ibs- 659.8 Soli Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored Q Toe = 1,924 psf Moment....Actual ft-0= 1,197.5 ACI Factored a Heel = 0 psf Moment....Allowable = 1,3172 Footing Shear C Toe 9.3 psi OK Shear.....Actual psi= 12.3 Footing Shear a Heel = 18.9 psi OK Shear....Allowable psi= 19.4 Allowable z 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 25.00 Sliding Caks (Vertical Component Used) Lap Spice If Below in= 6.39 Lateral Siding Force 1,467.6 Ibs Wei Weight 78.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 1,579.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in= 5.25 less 100%Friction Force = - 1,864.4 Masonry Data psi= 1,500 Added Force Req'd = 0.0 Ibs OK Fe psi- 20,000 ....for 1.5:1 Stability = 0.0 Ibs OK Sold Grouting Yes Special inspection = No Modular Ratlo'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor 1.000 Equiv.Sold Thick. in= 7.60 CMaso to� Type= Medium Weight Pc psi= Fy psi= Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 1000- 7420 Trade Street Job* : 068870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL T,2008 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 548 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:CARP811HACIENDA DE LA PLAYA 8.RP5.R Rela"'Pro 6'1d,6'AW"s004'(c)1 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CeC 2001 1UgW rat1on r:RP-1133415 Footing Design Results _n_ Heel._ Factored Pressure 1,924 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,125 0 ft-8 Mu':Downward 241 0 ft-# Mu: Design = 884 1,916 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 9.31 18.90 psi Allow 1-Way Shear - 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing - None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S`Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Spec'd Heel:Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd Key: Not req'd,Mu<S`Fr Summary of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment them lbs ft ft-# Ibs ft ft4 Heel Active Pressure = 9622 2.03 1,951.1 Sol Over Heel 880.0 2.58 2,273.3 Toe Active Pressure = -89.2 0.72 -64.4 Sloped Soil Over Heel 100.8 2.89 291.3 Surcharge Over Toe Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Mal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Sol = 10.0 5.42 542 Sol Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load = 584.6 3.65 2,133.9 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weight(s) = 351.0 1.33 468.0 Earth Q Stem Transitions= Total 1,467.6 O.T.M. = 4,074.7 Fig Weight = 612.5 1.75 1,071.9 Resisting/Overturning Ratio 1.65 Key Weight = 150.0 1.75 262.5 Vertical Loads used for Sol Pressure= 2,868.3 Ibs Vert.Component = 654.0 3.50 2,288.9 Total= 2,868.3 be R.M.= 6,715.9 Vertical component of active pressure used for soh pressure 2. 8.in Mas w/#5 @ 8.in o/c Solid Grout li 4'-6' 2 3/4' 4'-0' If Q . v . 1,-2. ZU 3 #0@18.in 1,-0, @Toe Designer select #0@18.in all horiz.reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 3'-6' .,,2. 20.psf yq �S S, 962.18# Pp=1579.99 pppppp- 2076.7psf Geoteahnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 13116? 7420 Trade Street Job 8 : 05.8870 Dsgnr. JAC Date: JUL 14,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 888 549 7222 100 HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wallin File:c:Irplillhacisirida de M playa 6. PAtalln Pro 6.1d,5AVdl4UK tei+ Cantilevered Retainin Wall Design code:CBC 2001 Registration 0:RP-1133415 9 'a Criteria no Dimensions b Strengths Retained Height = 10.00 ft Allow Sod Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width = 1.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fkdd Pressure Method Heel Width = 925 = Heel Active Pressure = 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width = 10.75 Slope Behind Wall 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psfHt Footing Thickness = 25.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120,00 pef Key Width = 12.00 in Key Depth 14.00 in FootinglISoil Friction = 0.650 _ Key Distance from Toe 4.00 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psi Sod height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in fc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pcf Min.As% 0.0018 Cover C Top - 2.00 in Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem I Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 pef Lateral Load = 0.0 Vft Jacent ootng a Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 ft Footing Width = 0.00 It NOT d for Sliding&Overturning �f Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Wall to Fig CL Dist 0.00 it Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type tine Load Axial Dead Load 0.0 des Base Above/Below Sod 0.0 ft Axial Live Load = 0.0 be at Back of Wad = Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure = 0.670 Added seismic base force 4,107.7 Ibs g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Construction Top Stan, 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 6.25 0.00 Overturning = 2.01 OK Wad Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Concrete Slicing = 1.59 OK Thickness = 8.00 14.00 Total Bearing Load 21,620 be Reber Size = # 8 # 7 ...resultant ecc. = 21.96 in Reber Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Sod Pressure Q Toe = 4,065 psf NG Rebar Placed at = Edge Edge Sod Pressure C Heel = 0 psf OK sign Data Allowable = 4,000 pef ib/FB+fa/Fa 0.5" 0."3 Sod Pressure Exceeds Allowablel Total Force Q Section Ibs= 597.8 5,722.4 ACI Factored Q Toe = 3,791 psf MomenL..Actual ft-#= 996.9 23,468.4 ACI Factored Q Heel = 0 psf Moment.....Allowable ft-#= 1,6632 43,243.9 Footing Shear Q Toe 0.0 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 11.8 29.9 Footing Shear Q Heel a 90.3 psi OK Shear....Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Aikxwable W 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 48.00 62.30 Sliding Calas (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 71.20 13.42 Lateral Slicing Force = 10,697.4 Ibs Wad Weight psi= 78.0 175.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 2,985.9 lbs Reber Depth 'd' in= 5.25 11.56 less 100%Friction Force = - 14,052.8 Masonry Data = 1,500 Added Force Req'd 0.0 Ibs OK I'm psi ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 be OK S psi= 24,000 Solid Grouting = Yea Special Inspection No Modular Ration' = 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 Conga nr BDock Type= Medium Weight rc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Gealsechnicai Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 7420 Trade Street Job 055870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 14,X006 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 10.0'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall In File:c:1rp611hacienda de Is playa 8.rp5.rp5 Pro 6.1d, car's Cantilevered Retaining all Design code:CBC tool Rpl:tratlon#:RP-1133415 9 9 Footing Design Results TOO !How Factored Pressure 3,791 0 psf M&:Upward = 4,064 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 584 0 ft-0 Mu: Design = 3,480 23,468 ft-5 Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 9028 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = #6 Q 13.25 in Heel: 5.00 in,#0 7.75 in,#64D 11.00 in,#70 15.00 in,AtM 19.75 in,094D 24. Key Reinforcing = #6 a 16.00 in Key: #4@ 12.50 in,SM 19.25 in,ASQ 27.25 in,#7Q 3725 in, SuMnury of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .-OVERTURNING .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Mornent Force Distance Mornent Itern lbs ft ft4 be ft ft-# Heel Active Pressure = 6,760.4 5.38 36,337.2 Sol Over Heel = 9,700.0 6.71 65,070.8 Toe Active Pressure = -180.6 1.03 -185.6 Sloped Sol Over Heel = 1,960.2 8.06 15,790.6 Surcharge Over Toe Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = A)dal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load a Stem Above Sol = 10.0 12.33 123.3 Sol Over Toe 180.0 0.75 135.0 Seismic Earth Load 4,107.7 9.68 39,741.7 Surcharge Over Toe Stem Weight(e) = 1,425.3 2.03 2,886.4 Total = 10,697.4 O.T.M. 76,016.5 Earth Stem Transitions= 225.0 2.42 543.8 Footing Weight 3,359.4 5.38 18,056.6 Resisting/Overturning Ratio 2.01 Key Weigh = 175.0 4.50 787.5 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 21,619.7 Ibs Vert.Component = 4,594.8 10.75 49,394.4 Total= 21,619.7 be R.M= 152,665.1 Vertical component of active pressure used for soN pressure 2. Q ? �x 8.in Maas w/#8 @ Wn 0% 4' Solid Grout, n 4._3. 2 3/4' 14.in Conc w/#7 @ 8.in o/c 10'-6' 21/2' 6'3• Ob rr G 1'0' 4, M 4 2• #0@18in 1 2. Toe ttm Designer select #6@13.25in all horiz reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 4'-0' 1'-0' 5'-9' 1'-6 9'-3' 10'-9' s. EY 20.psf 6760.4# Pp=2965.9# 4065.4psf Ir�IE"II GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 28 July 2005 HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA �{ Job No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS �! c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 1-.. i Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Addendum to Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recently issued a report evaluating the current slope conditions and providing recommendations for stabilizing the significant erosion that has occurred to the slope along the western perimeter of the Haciendas de la Playa residential development. The report was dated July 14, 2005. The intent of this addendum letter, provided at the request of resident Mr. Curtis Englehorns, is to address our geotechnical opinions regarding the necessity of implementing the stabilization recommendations presented in our report. In our opinion, based on our exploratory work conducted at the site, our stability calculations for various locations along the slope face, and our experience with similar slope conditions in the north San Diego County coastal area, the slope face condition is due to on-going erosion that was exacerbated by the heavy rainfall experienced in San Diego County during the winter months of 2004-05. Normal amounts of slope face erosion can be expected to continue to occur on a regular basis, with intermittent episodes of significant erosion and higher than normal amounts of slope face damage to be expected during periods of heavy rainfall. The recent erosion resulted in undercut slope areas and sand runoff covering portions of the sidewalk and street along the base of the slope. The most northerly building, Building No. 7, is within several feet of the slope top and the recent erosion has resulted in some undermining of a top-of-slope fence and concrete swale near the southwest corner of this building. Based on a review of prior geotechnical reports for the site, it appears that the building is supported by a 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX: (858)549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech @ixpres,com Haciendas de la playa Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 2 deepened footing.g• However, in our me a concern for this building Pinion Pose a danger if it g• The r stability issues intermittent erosion were to break Concrete swale at the to could eventually Of the bluff face free due to a loss p °f the slo an accumulation of sedi � eSPeciall °f support. Pe does condition to pedestrians ment near the y during heavy rainfall events,louses to vehicle traffic aloe on the sidewalk base that could , causes 9 Vulcan �•e•, slip and fall result in a dangerous Avenue. , or worse If the stabilization ) and, at times, implemented in measure recommended in our could result in instability able amount of time, the continued 20 erosion ��•e•r concrete swales issues for the to erosion repo are not sidewalk and and fences P-°f slope buildings °f the bluff face street. ) and Public safety liability s and i Y issues for mprOVements the downslope The �rMITq TjONS ace °pmpr's presented herein have pted principles and a been made County of San pie Practice in the field of in accordance 9o• No warrant geotechnical engineering with generally YOU Thank this opPortun. y� either expressed or implied, s mad within the you for may contact the ity to be of service. expedite a reply your undersigned Reference to our Job have any questions p Pyto Respectfully ob 05 8870 will help to pectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. A me A. Cerros, P.E. R.C•E. 34422/G.E. Senior Ge otechnica?E07 Lslie D. Reed, Pre 9ineer C•E.G. 999[ex dent p• 3-31-o7-1/R.G. 3391 pR0 FESS/oy9 � ,`�c, ��E 4• CF �, gv�E , q(� No. 899 No. X- 0 >7 " �, # EXP.3131/9 CEpT1f1E0 CPq FoT� oafs �� CNLW�`" CAI�FO NoText REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boul Encinitas, California evard JOB NO. 05-8870 14 July 2005 Prepared for: Haciendas de is Playa ypA Board of Directors I F „ 1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT• ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 14 July 2005 HACIENDAS DE LA PLA yA HOA BOARD OF DIRECTORS C/O Curtis Property Management Job No. 05-8870 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Re ort of lilto,iDe Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recom Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope mendations SE Corner'of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: In accordance with your request and our proposal dated January Exp loration, Inc, has prepared this report of slope face evaluation and recommendations for the proposed slope face stabilization. The 12, 2005, Geotechnica/ side of S. Vulcan Avenue and along the northern portion of the west s• herein provides de la Playa residential development. Our field work was performed lope is located on the east of the Haciendas It must be noted that this report is a limited investigation orme on February 10, 2005. with respect to proposed stabilization recommendations and esslnot to be and geometry complete soil investigation or geologic report for the entire Project's slopes. The p construed as a Purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the eexist existing of slope conditions and to provide recommendations, as warranted, for stabilization of th This opportunity to be of service is sincere) a e slope face. concerning the following report, please contact appreciated. Should Should you have an 8870 will help to expedite a response to your inquiry. y questions Reference to our ]ob No. 05- Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. ros, P. . R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Le • Reed, P Ide r Senior deote C.E.G. 999[eXp• 3-31-073/R,G, 3391 E °C 7 No. 999 Exp. q1130l ♦c G �✓ ii �.:� �� * Exp.3/31/, - �� FO , CERTIFIED 9l TFCNNZ�� C 1� ENGINEERINf3 y GEOLOGIST CAL�F •4 .�. oP2 7420 TRADE STREET • SA`--- OF CALF O, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL;geotech @ixpres.com TABLE OF CONTENTS I PROJECT SUMMARY PAGE II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE 1 III• FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALYSIS 3 IV. SLOPE FACE GEOLOGY 3 V. SLOPE STABILIZATION MEASURES & RECOMMENDATIONS 4 VI. LIMITATIONS 5 15 FIGURES I Vicinity Map II. Plot Plan with Cross-section Locations IIIa-d. Cross Sections with Proposed Retaining Wall Locations IV. Retaining Wall Schematic PLATES I Repair Plan APPENDICES _ A. Retaining Wall Structural Calculations REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California 308 NO. 05-8870 The following report presents the findings and recommen Exploration, Inc, for the subject project. dations of Geotechnica/ I. PROJECT SUMMARY It is our understanding, based on communications with th Lowell Pembrooke, and various Board Members and ho a property manager, Mr.m have been raised by the Homeowners Association, as we homeowners, that concerns regarding the stability and long-term perform II as the City of Encinitas, performance of the slope face, as well as buildings located near the top of the slope face. Significant Portion of the slope at several locations occurred during the erosion of the upper rainfall in the San Diego area. g Past winter of heavy g The erosion resulted in undercut slope areas and sand runoff covering portions of the sidewalk and street along The most northerly building, the base of the slope. 9 Building No. 7 at the Haciendas de la Playa site, is within several feet of the slope top and recent erosion undermining of a concrete swale near the southwest has resulted in some building. Additional u corner of the northern upper slope failure following the winter rains has undermined the top-of-slope fence and gunite swale near the south 7. west corner of Building No. With the above in mind, the scope of work is briefly Outlined as follows: 1• Visual observation of top-of-slope and slope face conditions. VP Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 2 2. Identification and classification of the slope face soils in conf Unified Soil Classification System. ormance with the 3. Evaluation of the existing slope material. 4. Evaluation of the slope face geology. 5• Development of geotechnical criteria for design of slope face stabilization recommendations. 6. Meeting with various representatives of the City of Encinitas acceptability of the proposed slope face stabilization measureso determine the 7. Preparation of this report with graphics documenting findings, opinions, and recommendations. our geotechnical 8. Preparation of a preliminary repair plan that can be utilized for final plans for submittal to the City of Encinitas. The conceptual ion s provided herein are for estimating conceptual plans configuration should be determined rpb Purposes only. Final wall placement and by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. Based on the results of our field observations, subsequent analysis geometry and analysis of man of the slope y y cross sections of the slope, we herein provide recommendations for stabilization of the slope face. These recommendations include removal of the existing erosional debris and placement of walls at various locations along he slope face. split-face retaining g p Recommendations for drainage improvements have also been provided. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 3 II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE The portion of the slope that is the subject of this report e feet to the north from the entrance to the Haciendas de la extends approximately 480 slope is located on the east side of S. Vulcan Avenue an Playa development. The Haciendas de la Playa site. The slope varies in hei h d on the west side of the southern end of the slope near the driveway t from seven feet at the y entrance to a pproximately 30 feet in height below the northern end of Building No. 7 and the Haciendas de la Playa site. The inclination of the slope varies from near-vertical approximately 1.0:1.0 at some locations to (horizontal to vertical). A concrete swale parallels the t the northern end of the slope between the slope and op of Currently the southwest corner of the northern building northernmost building. from the slope to g is approximately 10 feet p and the northwest corner of _. approximately six feet from the slope to the northern building is buildings and Property p• Figure No. II includes the location of P P y improvements relative to the slope. IIId depict the approximate Figure Nos. II and IIIa- pproximate location and cross-sectional geometry at vari ous locations along the slope. III. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALYSIS Our field investigation of the slope conditions included and cross section field mapping the plan view geometry of the slope; documentin evaluation of slope face soils; and g to our satisfaction that the slope is comprised of soil bearing material for the proposed tiered retainin g wall stabilization suitable for face. abilization of the slope Field observation of slope conditions sho stabilization uld continue during the slope face process. Any previously unknown slope conditions discovered during Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 4 the construction process should be documented in an as-built slope face stabilization report to be issued following completion of repair work. Laboratory testing conducted in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A revealed the Maximum Dry Density for representative slope face soils to be 127 pcf with an Optimum Moisture of 8 percent. The minus 200 fines content was determined by ASTM D1140 to be 16 percent. Based on our site observations of the soils comprising the slope, our laboratory analysis, and our experience with similar sandy soils, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned an angle of internal friction of 350 and a cohesion of 50 psf for the on-site natural formational material for use in slope stabilization design evaluations. - IV. SLOPE PACE GEOLOGY Erosion and slope face failures reveal the entire height of the slope to be com rised of the Quaternary-age Bay Point Formation p �. exposed in the slope face consist of medium dense p) The formational materials to se, light brown to reddish brown, silty sands. Due to their high sand content, and _ degree of cementation, the materials are highly erodible when minor to moderate not vegetation or man-made coverings such as fiber mats or jute nettin . Fa d by materials accumulated at the base of the slope will serve as high quality backfill during slope stabilization. Based on geologic exposures in the vicinity of the Haciendas de la Playa project, the Bay Point Formation is believed to be underlai by the Eocene-age Torrey Formation (Tt). n Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 5 V SLOPE STABILIZATION MEA ORES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information obtained during our investigation of the slope conditions, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience in the Encinitas area, we offer the following recommendations for remediation and stabilization of the existing slope face erosion conditions at Haciendas de la Playa. A review of documents provided to us in the course of this investigation revealed that the northernmost building is supported by a deepened foundation system. Therefore, additional foundation recommendations for the building have not been included in this report since the deepened foundations are, in our opinion, adequate for support of the structure. It is recommended that the soil debris on the slope be removed and masonry retaining walls, as shown in plan view on Figure No. II and Plate I, be constructed on the slope face. Following wall construction, the areas between and above the new masonry retaining walls should be cleaned and dressed to produce approximately 2.0:1.0 slope faces followed by installation of erosion control devices and vegetation. Refer to Plate I and Figure Nos. IIIa-IIId for cross sections D-D', 3- Y, P-P' and U-U' at various slope locations of the proposed repair configuration. The remaining cross-sections depicted on Figure No. II and Plate I were used for analysis and have not been included as figures in this report. Figure No. IIId is representative of the first approximately 250 feet of slope north of the Haciendas de la Playa driveway, which will only require a toe-of-slope debris wall. No slope face walls will be required along this portion of the slope due to the low height of the slope, the vegetative cover, and the distance between the slope top and the top-of-slope structures. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 6 Refer to Figure No. IV for a retaining wall schematic including recommended backfill drainage systems behind the proposed retaining walls. In addition, a surface drainage system and improvements to the current irrigation plan are recommended for the top-of-slope area. Following their review of this report, bidding repair contractors are encouraged to contact our office with any questions they may have. It will be the responsibility of the contractors to develop, based on their experience and available resources, access and construction strategies for working on the slope face. The conceptual plans provided herein are for estimating purposes only. Final wall placement and configuration should be determined by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. A. Siove Face Reconstruction 1. Soil Removal: The loose erosional soils and debris on the slope face shall be removed downward and laterally to expose competent ground. 2. Excavation Observation: The bottom of the excavation shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before retaining wall construction and/or fill placement. Wall construction and/or fill placement shall not start until the base is approved by our representative. 3. Stockpiled Soils: If the excavated soils are stockpiled on site, no stockpiled soils will be allowed within 10 feet of the top of the slope. Due to access limitations, we assume most contractors would elect to stockpile soils off-site. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 7 . 4. Temporary S/oyes: We anticipate that temporary back slopes of approximately 10 to 15 feet in height may be required. Based on the results of our limited field investigation, it is our opinion that 10- to 15-foot-high temporary slopes may be considered stable for reconstruction purposes. The temporary slopes should not be steeper than 0.5:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). A representative of Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc, must observe any steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that soils and formational material comprising the slope are not as anticipated, any required design changes would be presented at that time. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in'this report, trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the site shall be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by Cal-OSHA. 5. Comgacted Fill Placement: Excavated materials to be replaced as compacted fill to reconstruct the slope areas between the proposed retaining walls (described in Section B of this report), shall be "cleaned" of detrimental materials such as vegetation, large rocks, etc., and processed so as to reduce the size of "clumps" to no greater than 6 inches in diameter or 3 inches if the compaction equipment consists of mechanical hand tampers. These materials shall then be dried or watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. The fill materials shall be placed in layers not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness, or thinner thickness if compacted with hand tampers. Field density tests shall be taken periodically as the fill placement progresses. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 8 6. Import Soils: It may be necessary to utilize approved import soils. Imported soils, if needed, shall be evaluated and approved by our firm prior to importing them to the site. Imported soils used as fill shall possess a friction angle of 300 and a cohesion of 150 psf, or a combination of angle of internal friction and cohesion that produces equal or better slope stability characteristics. These materials shall be dried or watered to approximately Optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. Import soils should have an expansion index equal to or lower than 50. 7. Observations and Testing: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill-compaction testing during slope reconstruction operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. All excavations resulting from the removal of loose, slope face soils shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before they are backfilled. 8. Grading Reouirements: Applicable portions of the City of Encinitas Grading Requirements shall be followed in reconstruction of the slope face. 9. Verification of Soils Conditions: Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during slope excavation to be as anticipated in this "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations" for the project. In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site work must be tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the repair contractor to comply with _. the requirements on the plans and the local grading ordinance. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 9 B. Retaining Wall Design Criteria 10. Desion Parameters Unrestrained: The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of any cantilever retaining walls, utilizing on-site sandy soils or imported very low- to low-expansive soils [EI less than 50] as backfill) should be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only). For 2.0:1.0 sloping backfill, the cantilever retaining walls should be designed with an equivalent fluid pressure of 52 pcf. 11. Design Parameters - Restrained• We do not anticipate that restrained walls will be utilized. Should they be constructed, however, they should be designed for a restrained condition utilizing a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil, considered in pounds per square foot) considered as acting everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid Weight. The soil pressure produced by any footings, improvements, or any other surcharge placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the retaining portion of the wall should be included in the wall design pressure. The recommended lateral soil pressures are based on the assumption that no loose soils or soil wedges will be retained by the retaining wall. Backfill soils should consist of low-expansive soils with EI less than 50, and should be placed from the heel of the foundation and back face of the wall to the ground surface formed by the 2.0:1.0 fill slope and the temporary back cut in firm natural soils. 12. Surcharge Loads: Any loads placed on the active wedge behind a cantilever wall should be included in the design by multiplying the load weight by a factor of 0.32. For a restrained wall, the lateral factor shall be 0.52. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 10 13. Footings: We recommend that the proposed retaining walls be supported on continuous footing foundations bearing on undisturbed formational materials at the base of the slope and compacted fill soils on the face of the slope. Footings at the base of the slope should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Slope face footings should be deepened to provide at least 5 feet to daylight as measured from the top of the foundation. Retaining walls should be spaced apart at least 1.10 times the height of the immediately adjacent lower wall. At the recommended depths, footings may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for combined dead and live loads and 4,000 psf for all loads, including wind or seismic. The ultimate passive resistance is 440 pcf and the ultimate soil friction coefficient is 0.70. 14. Based on our field evaluation resulting in the cross sections presented in Figure Nos. IIIa-d and the topographic map provided by Barry Rockwell Surveying, up to three walls will be required to produce a terraced, stabilized slope face. Designs for four wall heights (up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet) are provided in Appendix A. This office can be contacted for additional design information wall heights exceed 10 feet. 15. WaH Drainage: Proper subdrains and free-draining backwall material or board drains (such as J-drain or Miradrain) should be installed behind all retaining walls (in addition to proper waterproofing) on the subject project (see Figure No. IV). Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, will assume no liability for cosmetic or structural damage to walls that is attributable to poor drainage. The subdrains should be placed such that rear-of-wall water collected behind upper walls is transmitted to solid pipe downdrains at 100- foot intervals. The downdrains should discharge to the swale behind the Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 11. lowest wall. Base-of-wall weepholes or open head joints should be placed through the lowest wall. 16. Retaining wail Backfiu_ All backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. Backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be installed as early as the retaining walls are capable of supporting lateral loads. C. Tov-of-Slope Drainage Recommendations 17. Drainage: Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the top-of-slope yard surfaces after the slope reconstruction is in place. Drainage waters are to be directed away from both the building foundations and the slope top, and into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Currently, the California Building Code requires a minimum 2-percent surface gradient for proper drainage of building pads unless waived by the building official. Concrete pavement may have a minimum gradient of 0.5-percent. All lawn and planter areas should be graded as necessary to establish positive surface flow to a system of area drains. Minimum surface gradients of 2 percent should be established and maintained. In general, area drain inlets should be placed, on no greater than 10-foot intervals. All drain systems must discharge into the existing collection system for the project. 18. Existing Drain System: All existing drains and drain systems along the top- of-slope area should be located and evaluated. Upon evaluation, some of the lines or systems may require repair and/or replacement. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Encinitas, California Job No. 05-8870 Page 12 19. Irrigation• It is recommended that the upslope landscape irrigation be closely monitored and be kept to the minimum necessary to sustain the landscaping. 20. Erosion Control: In addition, appropriate erosion control measures shall be taken at all times to prevent surface runoff waters from running over the top of the slope. D. Slope Face Planting and XEC6y&gqa 21. Slope Face Planting: Following slope repair operations, the resulting exposed soil surfaces should be improved with erosion control materials and replanted with a lightweight, deep-rooted, low-water-use vegetation in compliance with the City of Encinitas guidelines. It is recommended that the use of fiber rolls, jute-netting or other comparable systems be considered to provide interim erosion control. A landscape architect or contractor should be contacted for final recommendations for slope face treatment and planting. In no case should heavy trees or plants be placed on the slope face. 22. Slone Face Irrigation: If an irrigation system is to be placed on the slope, we recommend that such trenches be located at least 5 feet away from the rim of the slope. Any existing irrigation system lines should be checked prior to use in an effort to identify any damage or joint separations that may have occurred due to the slope damage. It is imperative that irrigation systems, especially near reconstructed slope areas, be inspected on a frequent basis ,- because one broken sprinkler head or a damaged irrigation pipe can result in the type of erosional damage currently present on the slope. Irrigation of the slope-face vegetation should be kept at the minimum required to sustain plant growth, in order to minimize moisture infiltration to slope face soils. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 13 Drip irrigation systems are recommended and preferable for the rebuilt slope and slope retaining wall areas. E. Genera/Recommendations 23. Pre-Repair Site Meeting: We require that a pre-repair site meeting be scheduled, with representatives of this firm and all concerned parties in attendance. Any import soils shall be evaluated with laboratory soil tests and approved by our firm prior to importing to the site. 24. Adjacent Structure Monitoring: As is true for any earthwork operation in close proximity to residential structures, it would be prudent to document and monitor the existing conditions of the top-of-slope buildings prior, during, and after the slope face reconstruction. Pre-earthwork documentation is the only positive way to verify any structure effects due to the nearby slope reconstruction. 25. Contractor Performance: All repair work shall be performed in accordance with all local industry standards of good practice and building codes for the types of repairs to be performed. This includes the construction of any temporary shoring that may be needed for the purposes of safety and/or the protection of uphill improvements such as the residential buildings and/or patios. In addition, the contractor retained to perform the above- recommended repairs shall be qualified and experienced in slope reconstruction of the types of repairs to be done. 26. Owner Responsibility: It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that the recommendations summarized in this report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of this project are Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 14 incorporated in improvement plans. Our firm should review any project plans not prepared by our firm once they are available, to verify that our recommendations are adequately incorporated in the plans. Additional or alternate recommendations may be issued by our firm, as warranted, after this review. 27. Safety: This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considered any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. 28. New Slope Erosion: Should similar slope erosion occur in other slope areas in the future, we (or another qualified engineering firm) should be contacted to assess new slope damage conditions. The recommendations for slope reconstruction contained in this report are valid only for the investigated slope areas and may not be appropriate in other circumstances. 29. Construction Observations: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill compaction testing during remedial operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. 30. Off-site Grading: The project contractor should obtain off-site grading permission from the City of Encinitas prior to the beginning of grading. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 15 31. Drainage Control During Slope Reconstruction• The project contractor should provide proper drainage control at the top of the slope. Drainage must be designed and maintained to direct water away from the slope. VI. LIMITATIONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data obtained from our work performed thus far, as well as our experience with the soils and geology in this part of Encinitas. It is necessary that all observations, conclusions and recommendations be verified at the time slope reconstruction operations begin. In the event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued (if required). This limited investigation was performed to provide opinions as to reconstruction of the slope face. The observed conditions reasonably explain the observed evidence of damage related to the slope face. Investigation of the overall stability of the slope or the general vicinity, which could also contribute to current or future damage, is beyond the scope of our work. Deeper excavations in the general vicinity of the site would be required to identify any deep-seated geologic or other features that could affect stability of larger areas of the site, and/or areas of adjacent properties. Our firm did not perform such an extensive investigation ,because on-site conditions did not imply the existence of such features as a mechanism contributing to the shallow slope face condition, and the scope of our field observations included only those soils associated with the slope face materials. Our firm shall not be held responsible for any subsequent movement of deep-seated geologic features that underlie the general vicinity or shallow slope face failures that may occur in the future. VP Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 16 This report should be considered valid for a period of one (1) year. After such time, this report is subject to review by our firm and possible revision depending on the nature of planned site work. The firm of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. should not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as inappropriate repair measures or changed drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. If significant modifications are made to the investigated area, especially with respect to the reconstruction of the slope and any changed drainage conditions, this report must be presented to us for immediate review and possible revision. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. �t C thy K. G ze Pro' ct toordinator a No. 989 Exp. 31st/ CERTIFIED N ENGINEERING L . Reed, President A GEOlOO!>s C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-073/R.G. 3391 FOF CA�.� o��pFESS/pNYl J erros, P.E. �� E 4. CF\�1 , R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer W No. 00 007 f Exp. g"1 1, Pv �� l�oTECNA d��\Q F OF CKX r VICINITY MAP C:) AVtNM14R. `f+ CT :OCEAN VIEW S►XONY LN ZP < TER CAM FLORID a J a S� wL1TA a ARROY6 Q o ST 400 SYLVIA, j g a L ST.' S CREST f DR ��SS w o � NNY ry 3� a � c . sT 418 , ..; A �t DR a �y ST ENC I NI TAS cc R 3l►(�`, MZJNLIfiFlT o �v' it RADISSGMM IM/ pp ' 410 D L� IT C ST FS S w J°: �� TRITON s ` > ' � PAW �' C� Sp0 v D ST R I; r g'W 1 r- y'` 170;w r C u Z,. n Z 9 .-, v >= ER 4(10 200 C l E F ST CD REQUEZA _ REjQU --_ - - n W F i ST v c, EZ4 ST 300 M :r ;y o± o p € p ARK_ H STREET E G' ST pM VIEWPOINT,^ PARK WEST o E H}ST v Thomas Bros. Guide San Diego County pg. 1 147 Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, CA. Figure No. I Job No. 05-8870 GH I. S w cn LU r � � m MIN Z . Jill 1b m LLJ O W J t O ZS > 0 c ddb a 3 ', -p OO� U = ss 0' % Lho vus �- � 00 CZ, I v u 0 60 EEC .- . J V U -0 5 p w C c v) O = 3 � vw U- —► I I 04 tz I i •off � �\ �--- �o cl- OQ n 0 ,`� 3� rim 8 • I 'M I N I rn to U j O O O 1 � V O J 1 � — I a� 3 v x x O o a CL o Q a g I .b4 f , a� a G+ _ co co 0 I Y C C O coo W t6 Mx� 2 O � 2 Z Lo Q N 3 ^ v C) o N -� o M v ii 03 LO v C W J Q i5 U cry p c) O 7C) O LO LlU C N Z O LO 0 O O LO O LO �- r- Ol 0.1 W lSW anogy UOI jDAGj� GAIJOIaa 0 0 .X �n0>L i7 a no�aa ac_ rn v o'v�- p�oyP pn U' p C O P= C o•„�•7 A Y Q m —vE� I oa�'o0 QQpa� ?2S asc a �aEp m 'ma F�o� p, 3 La i L S.E`pm' O d O O O Y C � C t � 0 'Cloo L7 W 2 O Az - O M a� Q- 0 a� u .o LO N a a C v E ON co o ) o 3 m CL N v CD ° N �— o E a_ ; 7C) o cn a � LLI o Q 3 -4— +— 3 U LL .N U o M: U LO C L Q LO 0 O O r— r— � 0 M 0 w 'o rn 0 lSW anogy uoijonGj� eA11019a ao>c a o o�o�ca y�c v o � �E O•C O L= c°E°c ' a° °O. aO Voc £: o v x`507� Oy 70 z 3n0. Eom 7 O O O Y C V 0 t v Q O O. t7 W OD u� O O Z O ILL � Z L 0 Y v a3i LO _ M U') Lq rlz v � U � � 3 m D I-- - N Q Q M 0 cn m >� a ^ LO N U �'IT LO ,� N CX 0 \ L o ' 0 > H o 0 0 CE a� N C: LUV . . 0 LO LO U c:"NO .� �, o L •� o 0 •� U Z U � 0 o ° "' ° o � coo r- o LO lSW anoq`d UOIIDAGID GAIJO19d 0 V OX•IV w 6O>C o�2. V V t!.2 C v-.E r-.2 m°Ecm C v'o,•� O 41 C V V.rJ a Q$avm vEo 'Ea s I f a ooj° • f� i nE om' O O O V C .V C4 t = 4 O 4 7" g W o Y v CD N o N m \ p a N ILO a� M n U Q p V � nl E LO W O p a� K O Gp 00 O 0 co a a _ . . � . . _ . . _ i ~ C N o _ii � _ LO N • •a w 0 a Lo a� m U c U c/) O LT L O LO 'Lo O O L O 0 co 00 LO lSW anogy u04ana a � 13 ni�gla8 a u p ° �aaoo ao�ca ;o u $e�"� .�eE oc2 .W 5 gEo°m N 4 ow pO�iO� V 4aQ0 „s,Ec Goo z aE`om' O H Z7� } C 2 N O O 4- ] — d (n N co to U Q vim O NLL z° 0 cb 5 ° N Lz c0 L a) 0 503 C,p p O 0 } w 0 O C. ou jr p 3 C g U C tn r LL ` L � vra 3C > > u, Qo O p rn3 0 � 'n O M— U } +- �n / 0 c C) -a W > % U — / v U 6 � U 3 — 0 .s / z , N O S[ O � 0 a O •C) ° O Og o - - s L. 2 10 r- c 70 00 c .c a- 03 c°) — Q c N / / E -8 2 , nn11 , W N a U- O G Q- 0 N cn , N ,� i� N O O ,� �� LO c o L d U {= I to o N � � o c O O U U N 0 2'c a-U •5 N Co 3 o LO Z d d ISW anogy U014DA913 9A14D19N o 0 0 LO LO 0 LO APPENDIX A RETAINING WALL STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS 454 1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. �1 SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 14 July 2005 Haciendas De La Playa HOA Board of Directors Job No. 05-8870 c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: As requested, we have performed calculations for the design of masonry retaining walls to be built at the property. Site specific data used in the calculations was derived from our soil report dated July 5, 2005. The approved, city-permitted retaining wall plans and soils report should remain a full part of this analysis and report. A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall be on-site during construction to assure that the soils and foundation aspects are in compliance with the report. A special materials inspection firm should be retained to verify construction and materials are as specified in this Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Report, as well as provide special inspections when required. Should the site conditions or design differ significantly from those proposed prior to construction of the wall, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted,, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. OQRO FESS;p� �1110E A. CF�� o 1 UJ No. 34422 M . Cerros, P.E. , R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 * EX Senior Geotechnical Engineer 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL:geotech @ixpres,com Retaining Wall Design Information for Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope Owner: Haciendas de La Playa Home Owners Association Project Address: SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas, California. Retaining Wall Design Engineer: Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Geotechnical Engineer: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Building Code: 2001 California Building Code Scope of Work: Construct masonry retaining walls to produce a gentler slope (maximum 2.0:1.0 slope ratio) on the west side of the property to help prevent or reduce the potential slope instability and reduce the soil erosion potential. The retaining walls will vary in height, depending on their location in the slope. Four different wall heights have been designed for the project: up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet in height. Reference: All walls are to be constructed in accordance with the retaining wall calculations and drawings, and per the geotechnical report: "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations, Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope, SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue an Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California", GEI Job No. 05-8870. RETAINING WALL DESIGN CRITERIA From soils report: Static Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity: 3,000 psf. If seismic load is included, Allowable soil bearing capacity: 4,000 psf. Soil Equivalent Fluid Weight (Active Pressure) =52 pcf for 2 to 1 slope backfill =38 pcf for level backfill Ultimate Soil Lateral Resistance: 700 pcf Ultimate Friction Coefficient=0.70 Soil Friction Angle=35 degrees Daylight Setback=5 feet from the top of foundation Weight of Soil=120 pcf Building Code= 2001 California Building Code Seismic Coefficient (Kh)=0.10 Minimum Distance Between Retaining Walls is at least 1.1 times the height of the immediate low wall. Oeotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page:I/ft, 7420 Trade Street Job# 05-8870 Dsgnr. JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 548 7422 8'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 6481604 This Wall in File:cArpS11haclenda de la playa 8.rp5 Robin Pro Md' Ic)IM41004 Cantilevered Retainin Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Registration 0:RP4133415 9 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height = 8.00 ft Allow Sal Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width 1.00 ft Wail height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width 6.50 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Heel Active Pressure = 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width = 7.50 Toe Active Pressure - 38.0 psftft Footing Thickness 19.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density - 120.00 pcf Key Width 15.00 in FootingIlSoii Friction = 0.650 Key Depth = 20.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 3.00 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore pc = 3,000 psi F 60,000 for passive pressure = 12.00 in Footing Concrete Density Y 150.00 psi Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover C Top = 2.00 in Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads FLateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 psf Lateral Load = 0.0 fm Adjacent Footing Load - s Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 It Footing Width = 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ..Height to Bottom = NOT Used for Sliding Overturning 0.00 ft Eccentricity 0.00 ft ng 9 Wali to ftg CL Dist 0.00 ft Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Axial Dead Load = 0.0 Ibs Base Above/Below Soil at Back of Wall = 0.0 ft Axial Live Load 0.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 2,403.0 Ibs Design Kh = U.100 g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Stem Weight Seismic Load Kh Weight Multiplier = 0.100 g Added seismic base force 98.1 ibs Desi n Sumirnary Stem Construction Top Stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK - Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 3.75 0.00 Overturning = 1.73 OK Wall Material Above"Ht" Masonry Concrete Sliding = 1.70 OK Thickness 12.00 12.00 Total Bearing Load = 12,241 be Reber Size # 6 # 6 ...resultant ecc. = 20.11 in Rebar Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Soil Pressure Q Toe 3,934 psf OK Reber Placed at Edge Edge Soil Pressure C Heel = 0 psf OK Design Data Allowable 4,000 psf fb/FB+fa/Fa 0.3" 0.433 Sol Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force C Section Ibs= 806.8 3,754.1 ACI Factored Q Toe = 3,684 psf Moment....Actual ft-#= 1,437.9 12,049.9 ACI Factored @ Heel 0 psf Moment.....Allowable ft-#= 3,659.9 26,658.7 Footing Shear Q Toe 0.0 psi OK Shear.....Actual psi= 8.2 22.9 Footing Shear Q Heel 67.1 psi OK Shear....AJIowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 36.00 42.72 Sliding Cakes (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 42.72 11.50 Lateral Sliding Force = 6,339.2 Ibs Wall Weight psf- 124.0 150.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 2,985.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in= 9.00 9.63 less 100%Friction Force = - 7,956.5 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd = 0.0 Ibs OK fm psi- 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 Ibs OK S psi_ 24,000 Solid Grouting Yes Special inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. in= 11.60 Masonry Block Type= Medium Weight Concrete Data rc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 2/�(, 7420 Trade Street Job# : 054870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 548 7222 V HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:cArp011hacienda de la playa 8.rp5 Astitin Pro .6: s'"133415 (Q1989-M4 Cantilevered Retaining all Design Code:CeC 2001 tRagtstrattono:RP-11s341s 9 9 Footing Design Results Tom !_ Factored Pressure = 3,684 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,743 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 215 0 ft-# Mu: Design 1,529 12,050 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 67.14 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing - None Speed Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Speed Heel:#4@ 6.75 in,#5Q 10.50 in,#6@ 15.00 in,#70 20.25 in,#8@ 26.75 in,#9@ 33 Key Reinforcing = None Speed Key: #4@ 9.50 in,#5Q 14.50 in,#6@ 20.50 in,#7@ 28.00 in, Summary of Overturning S Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs It ft-# Ibs It ft-# Heel Active Pressure = 3,954.9 4.11 16,259.0 Soil Over Heel = 5,280.0 4.75 25,080.0 Toe Active Pressure = -126.8 0.86 -109.2 Sloped Sol Over Heel 907.5 5.67 5,142.5 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load @ Stem Above Soil = 10.0 9.83 98.3 Soil Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load 2,403.0 7.40 17,782.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Seismic Stem Self Wt 98.1 5.27 516.9 Stem Weight(s) = 1,151.5 1.50 1,727.3 Earth C Stem Transitions= Total = 6,437.2 O.T.M. = 34,547.3 Footing Weight 1,781.3 3.75 6,679.7 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.73 Key Weight a 312.5 3.63 1,132.8 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 12,240.8 Ibs Vert.Component = 2,688.0 7.50 20,160.1 Total= 12,240.8 Ibs R.M.= 59,982.3 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure t . 2. 12.in Mas wl#6 @&in o/c „:. 6 Solid Grout, g . tl ` 3' 4'-9' 8'-6' 12.in Conc w/#6 @&in o/c I� r� 39' z 112 2. , r 3' #0@1&in JL @Toe V-8' IF Qr Designer select N 6 #-0@18.in all horiz reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 3'-0' 1'-3' 3'-3' 1'-0' 6'-6' 7'-6' 4/]! 2. .�,' t 20.psf= PG 3;a,v lj• Gam} Ty 3954.9# Pp=2985.9# 3934.psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: C(D 7420 Trade Street Job# : 08-8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 6'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:C:1RP61%hacienda de la playa 8.rp5 R t Pro (a)la944 Rag strtlon 9:RP-113UIS Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height = 6.00 ft Allow Soil Bearing 4,000.0 psf Toe Width 1.00 It Wail height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 4.00 Heel Active Pressure = 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width = 5.00 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psf/ft Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = Footing Thickness 12.00 in g 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120.00 pcf Key Width 12.00 in Key Depth 12.00 in FootingliSoil Friction = 0.650 _ Key Distance from Toe 2.50 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in Pc = 3,000 psi Fy 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pcf Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover @ Top - 2.00 in Stm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Lateral Load 0.0 Vft Adjacent Foottrig Load 0.0 Ibs Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ,..Height to Bottom 0.00 ft Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 It Axial Load Applied to Stem 111 Footing Type Line Load Axial Dead Load = 0.0 ibs Base Above/Below Soil at Back of Wall = 0.0 ft Axial Live Load = 0.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure = 0.670 Added seismic base force 1,186.6 Ibs esign Kh 0.100 g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe!Seed-Whitman procedure Deal n Summary Stem Construction J Top Stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 2.50 0.00 Overturning = 1.61 OK Wall Material Above'W' = Masonry Concrete Sliding = 1.65 OK Thickness 8.00 8.00 Total Bearing Load = 5,643 Ibs Reber Size = # 4 # 4 ...resultant eoc. = 14.62 in Reber Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Soil Pressure Q Toe = 2,934 psf OK Reber Placed at = Edge Edge Soil Pressure @ Heel = 0 psf OK Design Data - Allowable 4,000 psf fb/FB+fa/Fa - 0.708 0.636 Sod Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force Q Section Ibs= 522.0 2,048.9 ACI Factored @ Toe = 2,693 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 815.5 5,113.7 ACI Factored Q Heel = 0 psf Moment.....Allowable ft#- 1,151.5 8,039.3 Footing Shear Q Toe = 6.3 psi OK Shear.....Actual psi= 9.5 19.8 Footing Shear C Heel 52.7 psi OK Shear.-Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 24.00 28.48 Sliding Cates (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 28.48 7.67 Lateral Sliding Force 3,073.5lbs Wad Weight psf= 78.0 100.0 less 100%Passive Force - - 1,400.0 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in= 5.25 6.25 less 100%Friction Force = - 3,667.7 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd - 0.0 Ibs OK I'm psi= 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 Ibs OK Fs psi= 24,000 Solid Grouting = Yes Special Inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 Masonry Block Type= Medium Weight Concrete Data rc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: P //(P 7420 Trade Street Job# : 08-8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 bog 7222 6'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:C:1RP61Uracienda de la playa 8.rp5 Relkla Pro 81d'SAPS-2066,(c)lfe94M Cantilevered Retainin Wall Design coat:CeC 2001 Registratlon 0:RP-113341 a 9 Footing Design Results . M Heel_ Factored Pressure = 2,693 0 psi Mu':Upward = 1,230 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 162 0 ft-# Mu: Design = 1,068 5,114 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 6.34 52.66 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing - None Spec'd Heel:#4@ 11.75 in,#5@ 18.25 in,#6@ 25.75 in,#7Q 35.25 in,#8@ 46.25 in,#9Q 4 Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd Key: #4@ 12.50 in,#5th 19.25 in,#6@ 27.25 in,#70 37.25 in, Summary of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Momenta .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs ft ft-# Ibs it ft-# Heel Active Pressure 1,952.9 2.89 5,641.7 Soil Over Heel = 2,400.0 3.33 8,000.0 Toe Active Pressure -76.0 0.67 -50.7 Sloped Soil Over Heel 333.3 3.89 1,296.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load Added Lateral Load = A)dal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load C Stem Above Soil = 10.0 7.25 72.5 Soil Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load = 1,186.6 5.20 6,170.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weight(s) = 562.0 1.33 749.3 Earth C Stem Transitions = Total 3,073.5 O.T.M. 11,833.8 Footing Weight = 750.0 2.50 1,875.0 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.61 Key Weigh = 150.0 3.00 450.0 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 5,642.6 Ibs Vert.Component = 1,327.3 5.00 6,636.6 Total= 5,642.6 ibs R.M.= 19,067.2 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure 7/AP 2. .,i'° 8.in Mas w/94 @ 8.in o/c '.Y u a•� /'� s Solid Grout, 4 �JZ 4'-0' 2 3/4' Wn Conc w/#4 @ 8.in o/c 13/4' e 4 n �C 2'-6' F. f. (j 7 2. � . ,,o. 2 P 4 3. #0@18.in 1'-0' Ir @Toe 4 C!.2 Designer select #0@18.in all horiz.reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 2'-6' 1'-0' 1'-6' 1'-0' 4'-0" No 5'-0' th 20.psf Li fzs,'�pC4 . "C 1952.9# Pp=1400.# ppppppo- 2934.5psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page:�//Ca 7420 Trade Street Job# : 05-8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:C:1RP611HACIENDA DE LA PLAYA 6.RP5.R ter+Pro n9: a,nPr6,sao4,icyl9tw,:oo4 Cantilevered Retaining all Design Code:CBC 2001 Registration#:RP-1133415 9 9 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height 4.00 ft Allow Sob Bearing = 4,000.0 psi Toe Width = 1.00 it Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width 2.50 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Heel Active Pressure 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width = 3.50 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psftft Footing Thickness = 14.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psftft Water height over heel 0.0 ft Sob Density 120.00 pcf Key Width = 12.00 in FootingllSob Friction = 0.650 Key Depth = 12.00 in Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore Key Distance from Toe 1.25 it for passive pressure 12.00 In Pc = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pcf Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover C Top = 2.00 in (gZ Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads - ` Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load -� Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 psf Lateral Load = 0.0#/ft Adjacent Footing Load 0.0 be Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 ft Fong Width = 0.00 it Surcharge Over Toe = 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 it Eccentricity = 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Well to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 it Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Base Above/Below Sal Axial Dead Load = 0.0 Ibs at Back of Wall 0.0 ft Axial Live Load 0.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure = 0.670 Added seismic base force 584.6 Ibs Design Kh = I u.1UU g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Using Mononobe-0kabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Design Summary Stem Construction A Top Stem Stem OK Wall stability Ratios Design height it= 0.00 Overturning ° 1.65 OK Wall Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Sliding 2.35 OK Thickness 8.00 Total Bearing Load = 2,868 Ibs Reber Size = # 5 ...resultant a=. = 9.95 in Reber Spacing = 8.00 Soil Pressure C Toe = 2,077 psf OK Reber Placed at Edge Soil Pressure @ Heel = 0 psf OK Design Data Allowable = 4,000 psf fb/FB+fa/Fa 0.908 Sol Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force @ Section be= 659.8 ACI Factored @ Toe = 1,924 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 1,197.5 ACI Factored @ Heel = 0 psf Moment.....Allowable = 1,317.2 Footing Shear @ Toe = 9.3 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 12.3 Footing Shear Q Heel = 18.9 psi OK Shear.....Allowable psi= 19.4 Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Splice If Above in= 25.00 Sliding Calcs (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice If Below in= 6.39 Lateral Sliding Force = 1,467.6 lbs Wall Weight 78.0 less 100%Passive Force = . 1,579.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in- 5.25 less 100%Friction Force = . 1,864.4 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd 0.0 Ibs OK I'm psi= 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability - 0.0 Ibs OK Fs psi- 20,000 Solid Grouting Yes Special Inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor 1.000 Equiv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 CoMa orete nry�k Type= Medium Weight t'c psi= Fy psi= Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: to I/& 7420 Trade Street Job# : 05-8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 548 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 856 5491604 This Wall in File:C:1RP811HACIENDA DE LA PLAYA 8.RP5.R Reldn Pro 6.+d,SAWN-20K I6I+ Cantilevered Retaining Wail Design Code:CBC 2001 "Istratlon 9:RP-1135415 F ting Design Results T_ . Heel Factored Pressure 1,924 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,125 0 ft-* Mu':Downward = 241 0 ft-# Mu: Design = 884 1,916 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 9.31 18.90 psi able Sizes&Spacings Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable D 9 s Toe Reinforcing - None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S*Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Spec'd Heel:Not req'd,Mu<S*Fr Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd Key: Not req'd,Mu<S*Fr Summry of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs ft ft# Ibs ft ft-# Heel Active Pressure = 962.2 2.03 1,951.1 Soil Over Heel = 880.0 2.58 2,273.3 Toe Active Pressure = -89.2 0.72 -64.4 Sloped Soil Over Heel = 100.8 2.89 291.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load C Stem Above Sol = 10.0 5.42 54.2 Soil Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load - 584.6 3.65 2,133.9 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weight(s) = 351.0 1.33 468.0 Earth Q Stem Transitions= Total = 1,467.6 O.T.M. = 4,074.7 Footing Weigh = 612.5 1.75 1,071.9 ResistingfOvertuming Ratio = 1.65 Key Weigh = 150.0 1.75 262.5 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 2,868.3 Ibs Vert Component = 654.0 3.50 2,288.9 Total= 2,868.3 Ibs R.M.= 6,715.9 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure <<ho 2. 8.in Mas w/95 @ Wn o/c }�. 6' Solid Grout, n !f 2 314' 4'-0' 2' or V-2" 40@18.in 1,A. @Toe Designer select #0@18.in all horiz.reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 1'-3' 1'-0' 1'-3' 3'-6' 20.psf %2.18# Pp=1579.9# pppppp- 2076.7psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 1 311& 7420 Trade Street Job : 05-8870 Dsgnr. JAC Date: JUL 14,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 10.0'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:c:1rp611hwkmda de la playa 6.rpb.rp5 Raisin Pro&1d' .(`)1 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design coat:CBC 2001 "Istration 0:RP4133415 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions&Strengths Retained Height 10.00 ft Allow Soil Bearing 4,000.0 psf Toe Width 1.50 It Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 925 Heel Active Pressure - 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width 10.75 Slope Behind Well = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psfHt Footing Thickness = 25.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psVIt Water height ver heel = 0.0 ft Sol Density = 120.00 pcf Key Width 12.00 in 9ht Key Depth = 14.00 in FootingilSoil Friction = 0.650 Key Distance from Toe = 4.00 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Sol height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in F t 3,000 psi Fy 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pcf Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover @ Top = 2.00 in @ Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load - Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 psf Lateral Load = 0.0#!ft Adjacent Fo oting Load 0.0 Itis Used To Resist Siding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 ft Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Base Above/Below Sol = 0.0 ft A)dal Dead Load = 0.0 be at Back of Wall A)dal Live Load 0.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 4,107.7 Ibs gn = g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Construction Top Stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 6.25 0.00 Overturning = 2.01 OK Wall Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Concrete Sliding - 1.59 OK Thickness 8.00 14.00 Total Bearing Load = 21,620 Ibs Reber Size = # 8 # 7 ...resultant ecc. = 21.96 in Reber Spacing 8.00 8.00 Sol Pressure Q Toe = 4,065 psf NG Reber Placed at Edge Edge Sol Pressure a Heel = 0 psf OK Design Date , 4000 fb/FB+fa/Fa 0.599 0.543 Allowable = psf Sol Pressure Exceeds Aloweblel Total Force C Section Ibs= 597.8 5,722.4 ACI Factored @ Toe 3,791 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 996.9 23,468.4 ACI Factored Q Heel 0 psf Moment....Allowable ft-#= 1,6632 43,243.9 Footing Shear Q Toe = 0.0 psi OK Shear.....Actual psi= 11.8 29.9 Footing Shear Q Heel z 90.3 psi OK Shear.....Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in- 48.00 62.30 Sliding Caks (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 71.20 13.42 Lateral Sliding Force = 10,697.4 Ibs Wall Weight psf= 78.0 175.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 2,985.9 lbs Reber Depth 'd' in- 5.25 11.56 less 100%Friction Force = - 14,052.8 Merry Data = 1,500 Added Force Req'd = 0.0 Ibs OK Fs psi= 24,000 ....for 1.5:1 Stability = 0.0 Ibs OK Solid Grouting Yes Special Inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Sold Thick. in= 7.60 Masonry Block Type= Medium Weight Concrete Data t'c psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 11111 7420 Trade Street Job# : 054870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 14,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 856 548 7222 10.0'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 649 1604 This Wall in File:c:1rp611haciends de la playa 6.rp5.rp5 ftWn Pro Md, -20K(C)IM-M4 Cantilevered Retaining all Design Code:CBC 2001 Registration 0:RP4133415 9 9 Footing Design Results _Too .ew Factored Pressure = 3,791 0 psf Mu':Upward 4,064 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 584 0 ft-# Mu: Design - 3,480 23,468 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 90.28 psi - Allow 1-Way Shear 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = #6 C 13.25 in Heel:#4Q 5.00 in,#50 7.75 in,#6@ 11.00 in,#70 15.00 in,#80 19.75 in,#9@ 24. Key Reinforcing = #6 Q 18.00 in Key: #4@ 12.50 in,*5Q 19.25 in,#6@ 27.25 in,#7@ 37.25 in, Summary of Overturnina&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs ft ft4 lbs ft fR# Heel Active Pressure = 6,760.4 5.38 36,337.2 Soil Over Heel = 9,700.0 6.71 65,070.8 Toe Active Pressure = -180.6 1.03 -185.6 Sloped Soil Over Heel = 1,960.2 8.06 15,790.6 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load a Stem Above Soil = 10.0 12.33 123.3 Soil Over Toe = 180.0 0.75 135.0 Seismic Earth Load 4,107.7 9.68 39,741.7 Surcharge Over Toe _ Stem Weights) = 1,425.3 2.03 2,886.4 Earth C Stem Transitions = 225.0 2.42 543.8 Total = 10,697.4 O.T.M. 76,016.5 Footing Weight = 3,359.4 5.38 18,056.6 Resisting/Overturning Ratio 2.01 Key Weight = 175.0 4.50 787.5 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 21,619.7 [be Vert.Component = 4,594.8 10.75 49,394.4 Total= 21,619.7 Ibs R.M= 152,665.1 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure 2. 8.in Mas w/#8 @ 8.in o/c Solid Grout, i� tt A C 4--3' 2 3/4' 14.in Conc w/#7 @&in o/c s 10'-0' ti � hL� 1j r. 2 112' 6-3. It N 2' 7N�� _ 2._1. #0@1 8.in 1'-2. @roe Designer select #6@13.25in all horiz reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 4'-0' 1'-0' 5'-9' 1'-' 9'-3' 10'-9' I 2. ZO.psf 6760.4# Pp=2985.9# 4065.4psi REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California JOB NO. 05-8870 14 July 2005 Prepared for: Haciendas de la Playa HOA Board of Directors GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 14 July 2005 HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA HOA Job No. 05-8870 BOARD OF DIRECTORS c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: In accordance with your request and our proposal dated January 12, 2005, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, has prepared this report of slope face evaluation and herein provides recommendations for the proposed slope face stabilization. The slope is located on the east side of S. Vulcan Avenue and along the northern portion of the west side of the Haciendas de la Playa residential development. Our field work was performed on February 10, 2005. It must be noted that this report is a limited investigation of the slope surface and geometry with respect to proposed stabilization recommendations and is not to be construed as a complete soil investigation or geologic report for the entire project or other areas of the project's slopes. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing slope conditions and to provide recommendations, as warranted, for stabilization of the slope face. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions concerning the following report, please contact our office. Reference to our Job No. 05- 8870 will help to expedite a response to your inquiry. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. ros, P. L . Reed, Ore<deA R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 Senior deote r AXE D. q No. 999 w No. 0 07 020 cc i * Exp.3/31/ * Exp. Q/3Q1b5 �% p CERTIFIED W ENGINEERING e y� GEOLOGIST Ql� OF CAL��O 7420 TRADE STREET • SA 0, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL:geotech @ixpres.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. PROJECT SUMMARY 1 II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE 3 III. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALYSIS 3 IV. SLOPE FACE GEOLOGY 4 V. SLOPE STABILIZATION MEASURES & RECOMMENDATIONS 5 VI. LIMITATIONS 15 FIGURES I. Vicinity Map II. Plot Plan with Cross-section Locations IIIa-d. Cross Sections with Proposed Retaining Wall Locations IV. Retaining Wall Schematic PLATES I. Repair Plan APPENDICES A. Retaining Wall Structural Calculations REPORT OF SLOPE FACE EVALUATION AND STABILIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California JOB NO. 05-8870 The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, for the subject project. I. PROJECT SUMMARY It is our understanding, based on communications with the property manager, Mr. Lowell Pembrooke, and various Board Members and homeowners, that concerns have been raised by the Homeowners Association, as well as the City of Encinitas, regarding the stability and long-term performance of the slope face, as well as buildings located near the top of the slope face. Significant erosion of the upper portion of the slope at several locations occurred during the past winter of heavy rainfall in the San Diego area. The erosion resulted in undercut slope areas and sand runoff covering portions of the sidewalk and street along the base of the slope. The most northerly building, Building No. 7 at the Haciendas de la Playa site, is within several feet of the slope top and recent erosion has resulted in some undermining of a concrete swale near the southwest corner of the northern building. Additional upper slope failure following the winter rains has undermined the top-of-slope fence and gunite swale near the southwest corner of Building No. 7. With the above in mind, the scope of work is briefly outlined as follows: 1. Visual observation of top-of-slope and slope face conditions. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 2 2. Identification and classification of the slope face soils in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System. 3. Evaluation of the existing slope material. 4. Evaluation of the slope face geology. 5. Development of geotechnical criteria for design of slope face stabilization recommendations. 6. Meeting with various representatives of the City of Encinitas to determine the acceptability of the proposed slope face stabilization measures. 7. Preparation of this report with graphics documenting our geotechnical findings, opinions, and recommendations. 8. Preparation of a preliminary repair plan that can be utilized for preparation of final plans for submittal to the City of Encinitas. The conceptual plans provided herein are for estimating purposes only. Final wall placement and configuration should be determined by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. Based on- the results of our field observations, subsequent analysis of the slope geometry and analysis of many cross sections of the slope, we herein provide recommendations for stabilization of the slope face. These recommendations include removal of the existing erosional debris and placement of split-face retaining walls at various locations along the slope face. Recommendations for drainage improvements have also been provided. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 3 II. SLOPE DESCRIPTION AND DAMAGE The portion of the slope that is the subject of this report extends approximately 480 feet to the north from the entrance to the Haciendas de la Playa development. The slope is located on the east side of S. Vulcan Avenue and on the west side of the Haciendas de la Playa site. The slope varies in height from seven feet at the southern end of the slope near the driveway entrance to approximately 30 feet in height below the northern end of Building No. 7 and the Haciendas de la Playa site. The inclination of the slope varies from near-vertical at some locations to approximately 1.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). A concrete swale parallels the top of the northern end of the slope between the slope and the northernmost building. Currently the southwest corner of the northern building is approximately 10 feet from the slope top and the northwest corner of the northern building is approximately six feet from the slope top. Figure No. II includes the location of buildings and property improvements relative to the slope. Figure Nos. II and IIIa- IIId depict the approximate location and cross-sectional geometry at various locations along the slope. III. FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SOIL ANALYSIS Our field investigation of the slope conditions included field mapping the plan view and cross section geometry of the slope; evaluation of slope face soils; and documenting to our satisfaction that the slope is comprised of soils suitable for bearing material for the proposed tiered retaining wall stabilization of the slope face. Field observation of slope conditions should continue during the slope face stabilization process. Any previously unknown slope conditions discovered during Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 4 the construction process should be documented in an as-built slope face stabilization report to be issued following completion of repair work. Laboratory testing conducted in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A revealed the Maximum Dry Density for representative slope face soils to be 127 pcf with an Optimum Moisture of 8 percent. The minus 200 fines content was determined by ASTM D1140 to be 16 percent. Based on our site observations of the soils comprising the slope, our laboratory analysis, and our experience with similar sandy soils, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned an angle of internal friction of 350 and a cohesion of 50 psf for the on-site natural formational material for use in slope stabilization design evaluations. IV. SLOPE FACE GEOLOGY Erosion and slope face failures reveal the entire height of the slope to be comprised of the Quaternary-age Bay Point Formation (Qbp). The formational materials exposed in the slope face consist of medium dense to dense, light brown to reddish brown, silty sands. Due to their high sand content, and only minor to moderate degree of cementation, the materials are highly erodible when not protected by vegetation or man-made coverings such as fiber mats or jute netting. Failed materials accumulated at the base of the slope will serve as high quality backfill during slope stabilization. Based on geologic exposures in the vicinity of the Haciendas de la Playa project, the Bay Point Formation is believed to be underlain by the Eocene-age Torrey Formation (Tt). Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 5 V. SLOPE STABILIZATION MEASURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information obtained during our investigation of the slope conditions, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience in the Encinitas area, we offer the following recommendations for remediation and stabilization of the existing slope face erosion conditions at Haciendas de la Playa. A review of documents provided to us in the course of this investigation revealed that the northernmost building is supported by a deepened foundation system. Therefore, additional foundation recommendations for the building have not been included in this report since the deepened foundations are, in our opinion, adequate for support of the structure. It is recommended that the soil debris on the slope be removed and masonry retaining walls, as shown in plan view on Figure No. II and Plate I, be constructed on the slope face. Following wall construction, the areas between and above the new masonry retaining walls should be cleaned and dressed to produce approximately 2.0:1.0 slope faces followed by installation of erosion control devices and vegetation. Refer to Plate I and Figure Nos. IIIa-IIId for cross sections D-D', J- J', P-P' and U-U' at various slope locations of the proposed repair configuration. The remaining cross-sections depicted on Figure No. II and Plate I were used for analysis and have not been included as figures in this report. Figure No. IIId is representative of the first approximately 250 feet of slope north of the Haciendas de la Playa driveway, which will only require a toe-of-slope debris wall. No slope face walls will be required along this portion of the slope due to the low height of the slope, the vegetative cover, and the distance between the slope top and the top-of-slope structures. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 6 Refer to Figure No. IV for a retaining wall schematic including recommended backfill drainage systems behind the proposed retaining walls. In addition, a surface drainage system and improvements to the current irrigation plan are recommended for the top-of-slope area. Following their review of this report, bidding repair contractors are encouraged to contact our office with any questions they may have. It will be the responsibility of the contractors to develop, based on their experience and available resources, access and construction strategies for working on the slope face. The conceptual plans provided herein are for estimating purposes only. Final wall placement and configuration should be determined by the project Civil Engineer and provided on Final Construction Drawings. A. Slope Face Reconstruction 1. Soil Removal: The loose erosional soils and debris on the slope face shall be removed downward and laterally to expose competent ground. 2. Excavation Observation: The bottom of the excavation shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before retaining wall construction and/or fill placement. Wall construction and/or fill placement shall not start until the base is approved by our representative. 3. Stockpiled Soils: If the excavated soils are stockpiled on site, no stockpiled soils will be allowed within 10 feet of the top of the slope. Due to access limitations, we assume most contractors would elect to stockpile soils off-site. At Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 7 4. Temporary Slopes: We anticipate that temporary back slopes of approximately 10 to 15 feet in height may be required. Based on the results of our limited field investigation, it is our opinion that 10- to 15-foot-high temporary slopes may be considered stable for reconstruction purposes. The temporary slopes should not be steeper than 0.5:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, must observe any steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that soils and formational material comprising the slope are not as anticipated, any required design changes would be presented at that time. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in'this report, trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the site shall be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by Cal-OSHA. 5. Compacted Fill Placement: Excavated materials to be replaced as compacted fill to reconstruct the slope areas between the proposed retaining walls (described in Section B of this report), shall be "cleaned" of detrimental materials such as vegetation, large rocks, etc., and processed so as to reduce the size of"clumps" to no greater than 6 inches in diameter or 3 inches if the compaction equipment consists of mechanical hand tampers. These materials shall then be dried or watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. The fill materials shall be placed in layers not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness, or thinner thickness if compacted with hand tampers. Field density tests shall be taken periodically as the fill placement progresses. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 8 6. Import Soils: It may be necessary to utilize approved import soils. Imported soils, if needed, shall be evaluated and approved by our firm prior to importing them to the site. Imported soils used as fill shall possess a friction angle of 300 and a cohesion of 150 psf, or a combination of angle of internal friction and cohesion that produces equal or better slope stability characteristics. These materials shall be dried or watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557-98, Method A. Import soils should have an expansion index equal to or lower than 50. 7. Observations and Testing: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill-compaction testing during slope reconstruction operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. All excavations resulting from the removal of loose, slope face soils shall be observed and evaluated by a representative of our firm before they are backfilled. 8. Grading Requirements: Applicable portions of the City of Encinitas Grading Requirements shall be followed in reconstruction of the slope face. 9. Verification of Soils Conditions: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during slope excavation to be as anticipated in this "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations" for the project. In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site work must be tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the repair contractor to comply with the requirements on the plans and the local grading ordinance. AfthAMA Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 9 B. Retaining Wall Design Criteria 10. Design Parameters Unrestrained: The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of any cantilever retaining walls, utilizing on-site sandy soils or imported very low- to low-expansive soils [EI less than 50] as backfill) should be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only). For 2.0:1.0 sloping backfill, the cantilever retaining walls should be designed with an equivalent fluid pressure of 52 pcf. 11. Design Parameters - Restrained: We do not anticipate that restrained walls will be utilized. Should they be constructed, however, they should be designed for a restrained condition utilizing a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil, considered in pounds per square foot) considered as acting everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid Weight. The soil pressure produced by any footings, improvements, or any other surcharge placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the retaining portion of the wall should be included in the wall design pressure. The recommended lateral soil pressures are based on the assumption that no loose soils or soil wedges will be retained by the retaining wall. Backfill soils should consist of low-expansive soils with EI less than 50, and should be placed from the heel of the foundation and back face of the wall to the ground surface formed by the 2.0:1.0 fill slope and the temporary back cut in firm natural soils. 12. Surcharge Loads: Any loads placed on the active wedge behind a cantilever wall should be included in the design by multiplying the load weight by a factor of 0.32. For a restrained wall, the lateral factor shall be 0.52. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 10 13. Footings: We recommend that the proposed retaining walls be supported on continuous footing foundations bearing on undisturbed formational materials at the base of the slope and compacted fill soils on the face of the slope. Footings at the base of the slope should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Slope face footings should be deepened to provide at least 5 feet to daylight as measured from the top of the foundation. Retaining walls should be spaced apart at least 1.10 times the height of the immediately adjacent lower wall. At the recommended depths, footings may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for combined dead and live loads and 4,000 psf for all loads, including wind or seismic. The ultimate passive resistance is 440 pcf and the ultimate soil friction coefficient is 0.70. 14. Based on our field evaluation resulting in the cross sections presented in Figure Nos. IIIa-d and the topographic map provided by Barry Rockwell Surveying, up to three walls will be required to produce a terraced, stabilized slope face. Designs for four wall heights (up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet) are provided in Appendix A. This office can be contacted for additional design information wall heights exceed 10 feet. 15. Wall Drainage: Proper subdrains and free-draining backwall material or board drains (such as ]-drain or Miradrain) should be installed behind all retaining walls (in addition to proper waterproofing) on the subject project (see Figure No. IV). Geotechnica/Exploration, Inc, will assume no liability for cosmetic or structural damage to walls that is attributable to poor drainage. The subdrains should be placed such that rear-of-wall water collected behind upper walls is transmitted to solid pipe downdrains at 100- foot intervals. The downdrains should discharge to the swale behind the rp Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 11 lowest wall. Base-of-wall weepholes or open head joints should be placed through the lowest wall. 16. Retaining WaH Backfill: All backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. Backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be installed as early as the retaining walls are capable of supporting lateral loads. C. Top-of-Slope Drainage Recommendations 17. Drainage: Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the top-of-slope yard surfaces after the slope reconstruction is in place. Drainage waters are to be directed away from both the building foundations and the slope top, and into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Currently, the California Building Code requires a minimum 2-percent surface gradient for proper drainage of building pads unless waived by the building official. Concrete pavement may have a minimum gradient of 0.5-percent. All lawn and planter areas should be graded as necessary to establish positive surface flow to a system of area drains. Minimum surface gradients of 2 percent should be established and maintained. In general, area drain inlets should be placed on no greater than 10-foot intervals. All drain systems must discharge into the existing collection system for the project. 18. Existing Drain System: All existing drains and drain systems along the top- of-slope area should be located and evaluated. Upon evaluation, some of the lines or systems may require repair and/or replacement. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 12 19. Irrigation: It is recommended that the upslope landscape irrigation be closely monitored and be kept to the minimum necessary to sustain the landscaping. 20. Erosion Control: In addition, appropriate erosion control measures shall be taken at all times to prevent surface runoff waters from running over the top of the slope. D. Slope Face Planting and Irrigation 21. Slope Face Planting: Following slope repair operations, the resulting exposed soil surfaces should be improved with erosion control materials and replanted with a lightweight, deep-rooted, low-water-use vegetation in compliance with the City of Encinitas guidelines. It is recommended that the use of fiber rolls, jute-netting or other comparable systems be considered to provide interim erosion control. A landscape architect or contractor should be contacted for final recommendations for slope face treatment and planting. In no case should heavy trees or plants be placed on the slope face. 22. Slope Face Irrigation: If an irrigation system is to be placed on the slope, we recommend that such trenches be located at least 5 feet away from the rim of the slope. Any existing irrigation system lines should be checked prior to use in an effort to identify any damage or joint separations that may have occurred due to the slope damage. It is imperative that irrigation systems, especially near reconstructed slope areas, be inspected on a frequent basis because one broken sprinkler head or a damaged irrigation pipe can result in the type of erosional damage currently present on the slope. Irrigation of the slope-face vegetation should be kept at the minimum required to sustain plant growth, in order to minimize moisture infiltration to slope face soils. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 13 Drip irrigation systems are recommended and preferable for the rebuilt slope and slope retaining wall areas. E. General Recommendations 23. Pre-Repair Site Meeting: We require that a pre-repair site meeting be scheduled, with representatives of this firm and all concerned parties in attendance. Any import soils shall be evaluated with laboratory soil tests and approved by our firm prior to importing to the site. 24. Adjacent Structure Monitoring: As is true for any earthwork operation in close proximity to residential structures, it would be prudent to document and monitor the existing conditions of the top-of-slope buildings prior, during, and after the slope face reconstruction. Pre-earthwork documentation is the only positive way to verify any structure effects due to the nearby slope reconstruction. 25. Contractor Performance: All repair work shall be performed in accordance with all local industry standards of good practice and building codes for the types of repairs to be performed. This includes the construction of any temporary shoring that may be needed for the purposes of safety and/or the protection of uphill improvements such as the residential buildings and/or patios. In addition, the contractor retained to perform the above- recommended repairs shall be qualified and experienced in slope reconstruction of the types of repairs to be done. 26. Owner Responsibility: It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that the recommendations summarized in this report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of this project are Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 14 incorporated in improvement plans. Our firm should review any project plans not prepared by our firm once they are available, to verify that our recommendations are adequately incorporated in the plans. Additional or alternate recommendations may be issued by our firm, as warranted, after this review. 27. Safety: This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considered any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. 28. New Slope Erosion: Should similar slope erosion occur in other slope areas in the future, we (or another qualified engineering firm) should be contacted to assess new slope damage conditions. The recommendations for slope reconstruction contained in this report are valid only for the investigated slope areas and may not be appropriate in other circumstances. 29. Construction Observations: It is mandatory that a representative of this firm perform observations and/or fill compaction testing during remedial operations to verify that the remedial operations are consistent with the recommendations presented in this report. 30. Off-site Grading: The project contractor should obtain off-site grading permission from the City of Encinitas prior to the beginning of grading. Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 15 31. Drainage Control During Slope Reconstruction: The project contractor should provide proper drainage control at the top of the slope. Drainage must be designed and maintained to direct water away from the slope. VI. LIMITATtONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data obtained from our work performed thus far, as well as our experience with the soils and geology in this part of Encinitas. It is necessary that all observations, conclusions and recommendations be verified at the time slope reconstruction operations begin. In the event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued (if required). This limited investigation was performed to provide opinions as to reconstruction of the slope face. The observed conditions reasonably explain the observed evidence of damage related to the slope face. Investigation of the overall stability of the slope or the general vicinity, which could also contribute to current or future damage, is beyond the scope of our work. Deeper excavations in the general vicinity of the site would be required to identify any deep-seated geologic or other features that could affect stability of larger areas of the site, and/or areas of adjacent properties. Our firm did not perform such an extensive investigation because on-site conditions did not imply the existence of such features as a mechanism contributing to the shallow slope face condition, and the scope of our field observations included only those soils associated with the slope face materials. Our firm shall not be held responsible for any subsequent movement of deep-seated geologic features that underlie the general vicinity or shallow slope face failures that may occur in the future. VP Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope Job No. 05-8870 Encinitas, California Page 16 This report should be considered valid for a period of one (1) year. After such time, this report is subject to review by our firm and possible revision depending on the nature of planned site work. The firm of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. should not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as inappropriate repair measures or changed drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. If significant modifications are made to the investigated area, especially with respect to the reconstruction of the slope and any changed drainage conditions, this report must be presented to us for immediate review and possible revision. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 05-8870 will help to expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Oft 0��, �E D. C thy K. G ze Pro' ct oordinator a � No. 999 Exp.3/311 CERTIFIED 0 ENGINEERINti L . Reed, resident 9T GEOLOGI C.E.G. 999rexp. 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 FOF CA�-� oQRpf ESS/0,V J 'jerros, P.E. �4� \�E 4. CF ��Ur\\ R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer W No. 0o 007 oc Exp. Mr F 0f CA�� VICINITY MAP a 1 s t7 a:fnr+ E+,€w S�XOI�Y' Ltd �P 7 s PARK �-n \ � Q Tt R p FL{)RI�P Q ;� z MR& -, F- got 3 1 A n '` ARROYO Q o 1 55 c ;;; •; � SYIVIA ST N o u S(ACREST DR ti'< r z at w ey•• 1lN WY :• �c i ST .• NY a a i OR Of f ENC I NI T,q cc ST J M"L I UKT o '`r 10 RBI SSOA' PLAZA o, t ,,. • 3c F'h'CINTTAS 41 B (1 �T C Sj FS SIA�� m "�� tRItQN �a�x '1 BD V -C» r " W y VIEI FN° , D ST RtLy Q W D o STi c rs o n m z C Z F,t R rT, Q �, E F ST o I� REQU EZA ti9 x W F ST REQUEZA ST m c � o PARK Ln H STREF.T\ W G S1 f E G ST CD VIEWPOINT PARK W '{ o E H ST , ST GA, Thomas Bros. Guide San Diego County pg. 1 147 Haciendas de la Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, CA. Figure No. I Job No. 05-8870 key - o �k, N a N r1�+ og Lai ° v, `r�P a ^� c CL byy d to O c U _ -- z � � � W C az° v HU o U � m z3H0 M ° tz � I � I � ro 1. .a � I d w -- l e l I � I r`4 Illy $ �# I Ali co 'b v I � �s O O 1 � v a CP `r cu S b ^b^`` W a a g �y o Jill U# 2 � Z Il LO o C) U > g N _ t N O � ; �..r Q,. N c I I O 70 U S3 L U J O Q� N Q •- U c � cn O t/1 O •` � O c CD LO U -------- .. = 0 0 LO g Lf) o U')o, o, Co lSW anogd UOIIDA913 GAIP19S P va��c ea DVO.D- � C aDrlo 0.p w D C (7 O e OCO�: D•'ti .E� _�E cm o o'oa b D T O• �S.. �xoE2 . O e�_ea M C 00.�5v 0 °zREom O 2 l2 Z m � � o � M N NY m U _�' LO N N EO °' 3 d. ca CO) o CO) N \ V V Co � -`y T N _ ii 70 - o �, V . . to C W � o Q � Z3 a .N V c o:-j _ _.._ _ _� - o .� v LO o o LO 0 0 P 0 lSW anogd UOI DAa13 ani 0198 oao�- .o��d o V pE NCO`= X 6 ._aE E cm .n ar oL nwOo�D O O D a> v�oEc O _C ui°mar v C> 0 3 z of-6m G ti C Z 2 H - LO M m 3 CID N O LO OD LO o °' N u CL O Cie co \ W o O 11 N = -C3 tll c uj � Q LO U c 70 °� a C/) 0 0 3 c ~ '0 0 LO 0 o ° a coo a°o LO r- o� JSW anogd uoi�on913 anl DIGS 0 P 0 ao> c v o0 OOpu pp pd 30�4P C_ O pr p r C �j C O p� oco°- na E Cm o�voa V p w O O IA M L c>o-6 p Ec J p ad /� H bQ CL Q.6 3-:g 0 z oEOm 0 Z � Z o d 0 all Q H O m ih LO N v M � m 00 p 'fit E � Q� H C _ v o ii N c LLI . . o u U c L ,a O LT LO ------------ LO O Lo O O to co O O p. 00 lSW a^oqb u°!4ona13 an14o.a� a°c d v npaV p 'm3�� o c t� '0�[�Y YmE 0 c 0 m�EECm o'DO? uO Y L a oonom v0oE. tE Y ma a p-.E r m< -o� a o � 1 o z aE om �a C � Y 2 c _ ~° 3 H Q� v JCL c Q � E a � _ l � c0 �,o �. m ° 03 'vQ 0 Cm 3: _ o ;;�7 m _ o = 3 C O w C /�'7 U _E Q UMZ , w O ^ , 2Cp2 � O \{ - •� 'c `�' v� y / N o � C4 N U ' v � � U N N ` 0 Lo v N 00 E •� r aLL- 30 Z ISW GAogV uo4DAGq an40pb Co LO LO o g APPENDIX A RETAINING WALL STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS 4rp4 �1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL&FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 14 July 2005 Haciendas De La Playa HOA Board of Directors Sob No. 05-8870 c/o Curtis Property Management 10455 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 Attn: Mr. Lowell Pembrooke Subject: Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Dear Board of Directors: As requested, we have performed calculations for the design of masonry retaining walls to be built at the property. Site specific data used in the calculations was derived from our soil report dated July 5, 2005. The approved, city-permitted retaining wall plans and soils report should remain a full part of this analysis and report. A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall be on-site during construction to assure that the soils and foundation aspects are in compliance with the report. A special materials inspection firm should be retained to verify construction and materials are as specified in this Retaining Wall Structural Calculations Report, as well as provide special inspections when required. Should the site conditions or design differ significantly from those proposed prior to construction of the wall, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. �OQROFESS, l �Q o CD LP . Cerros, P.E. LU No. 34422 m R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX:(858)549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech @ixpres.com Retaining Wall Design Information for Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope Owner: Haciendas de La Playa Home Owners Association Project Address: SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue and Encinitas Blvd. Encinitas, California. Retaining Wall Design Engineer: Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Geotechnical Engineer: Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. 7420 Trade Street San Diego, CA 92121 Building Code: 2001 California Building Code Scope of Work: Construct masonry retaining walls to produce a gentler slope (maximum 2.0:1.0 slope ratio) on the west side of the property to help prevent or reduce the potential slope instability and reduce the soil erosion potential. The retaining walls will vary in height, depending on their location in the slope. Four different wall heights have been designed for the project: up to 4 feet, up to 6 feet, up to 8 feet, and up to 10 feet in height. Reference: All walls are to be constructed in accordance with the retaining wall calculations and drawings, and per the geotechnical report: "Report of Slope Face Evaluation and Stabilization Recommendations, Haciendas de La Playa Western Slope, SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue an Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, California", GEI Job No. 05-8870. RETAINING WALL DESIGN CRITERIA From soils report: Static Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity: 3,000 psf. If seismic load is included, Allowable soil bearing capacity: 4,000 psf. Soil Equivalent Fluid Weight (Active Pressure) =52 pcf for 2 to 1 slope backfill =38 pcf for level backfill Ultimate Soil Lateral Resistance: 700 pcf Ultimate Friction Coefficient=0.70 Soil Friction Angle=35 degrees Daylight Setback=5 feet from the top of foundation Weight of Soil=120 pcf Building Code= 2001 California Building Code Seismic Coefficient (Kh)=0.10 Minimum Distance Between Retaining Walls is at least 1.1 times the height of the immediate low wall. Oeotedrnic:al Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page:I/yt•D 7420 Trade Street Job# 065870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 848 7222 r HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491804 This Wail in File:c: 1lhacienda de Is playa 8. ji-min Pro 6.1d, (0111909404 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Raglstratlon it:RP41&Ul5 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions&Strengths Allow Soil Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width 1.00 ft Retained Height = 8.00 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width 6.50 Wall height above soil 0.50 ft Heel Active Pressure = 52.0 pet/ft Total Footing Width = 7.50 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psf/ft Footing Thickness = 19.00 in Height of Sou over Toe 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Key Width = 15.00 in Water height over heel 0.0 ft Soil Density 120.00 pcf Key Depth = 20.00 in FootingIlSoil Friction 0.650 Key Distance from Toe 3.00 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil ea�ivto gnpno lire = 12.00 in rc - 3,�� Fy - 60,000 Psi Footing Concrete Density = 150.00 pd Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover C Top = 2.00 in Q Btm.- 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 9/ft Adjacent Footing Load 0.0 lief Lateral Load Footing yy� 0.00 ft s Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft Eccentricity = 0.00 in Ec:centr Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Ecc nt Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 ft NOT Used for Sliding&Overtuming Footing Type Line Load Axial Load AaWled to Stem Base Above/Below sou = 0.0 ft Axial Dead Load = 0.0 lbs at Back of WON Axial Live Load 0.0 be Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Earth Pressuro Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure 0.670 Added seismic base force 2,403.0 Ibs Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Design Kh _ g Difference: Kee-Ka 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Weight Multiplier 0.100 g Added seismic base force 98.1 Ibs Stem Weight Seismic Load Kh Desk n 8u Stem Construction Top Stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 3.75 0.00 Overduning = 1.73 OK WON Material Above"Ht" Masonry Concrete Sliding = 1.70 OK Thickness = 12.00 12.00 Total Bearing Load 12,241 be Reber Size 8 6 9 6 ...resultant ec c. 20.11 in Reber Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Reber Placed at Edge Edge Soil Pressure Q Toe 3,934 psf OK Design Data Soil Pressure 0 Heel = 0 psf OK fb/FB+fa/Fa = 0.385 OA53 Allowable = 4,000 Pd Total Force 0 Section Ibs= 806.8 3,754.1 Soil pressure Less Than Allowable Moment-Actual ft-#= 1,437.9 12,049.9 ACI Factored Q Toe = 3,684 psf Moment....AUowabie ft#= 3,659.9 26,658.7 ACI Factored Q heel = 0� Shear.....Actual Psi= 8.2 22.9 Footing Shear�Toe = 0.0 psi OK Footing Shear a Heel 67.1 psi OK Shear.....Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 = Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 36.00 42.72 Sliding Cake (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 42.72 11.50 Lateral Sliding Force = 6,3392 Ibs Wag Weir psf= 124.0 150.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 2,985.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in- 9.00 9.63 less 100%Friction Force = - 7,956.5 M s my Data psi- 1,500 Added Force Req'd = 0.0 be OK Fs psi= 24,000 ....for 1.5:1 Stability = 0.0 be OK Sold Grouting z Yes Special Inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' = 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Solid Tuck. in= 11.60 Masonry Block Type- Medium Weight Concrete Data Tc Psi 3,000.0 = Fy PSI 60,000.0 Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 2 r /(, 7420 Trade S real ratan'Inc. Job# : 05.8870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2008 7420 Trade Street pesrxiption.... San Diego,CA 92121 Phone 868 848 7222 81 HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5481604 This Wall in File:c: 1Vmienda de Is playa Bxpli PAUdn Pro 6.1d, Q1ft9-2W Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design code:CBC 2001 RegIsuation#:RP41=15 _Footing Design Results Factored Pressure -3,84 Mu':Upward 1,743 0 ft-* Mu':Downward = 215 0 ft-# Mu: Design 1,529 12,050 ft-0 Actual 1-Way Shear 0.00 67.14 psi ether Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Allow 1 Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Toe Reinforcing - None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S"Fr Heel Reinforcing a None Spedd Heel:#4@ 6.75 in,#5Q 10.50 in,#60 15.00 in,#7Q 20.25 in,98@ 26.75 In,06 33 Key Reinforcing = None Speed Key: #40 9.50 in,#50 14.50 in,#60 20.50 in,#7Q 28.00 in, Summa of Overturning 8 Resistina Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RE8 Distay..... Force Distance ftnv nt Force Distance Moment 16ern � g ft-# be ft ft-# Heel Active Pressure - 3,954.9 4.11 16,259.0 Soil Over Heel = 5,280.0 4.75 25,080.0 Toe Active Pressure -126.8 0.86 -109.2 Sloped Sol Over Heel 907.5 5.67 5,142.5 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Sal = 10.0 9.83 98.3 Sal Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load 2,403.0 7.40 17,782.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Seismic Stem Self Wt 98.1 5.27 516.9 Stem Weight(s) = 1,151.5 1.50 1,727.3 Earth Q Stem Transitions= Total 6,437.2 O.T.M. = 34,547.3 Footing Weight = 1,781.3 3.75 6,679.7 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.73 Key Weight 312.5 3.63 1,132.8 Vert.Component = 2,688.0 7.50 20,160.1 Vertical Loads used for Sal Pressure= 12,240.8 be Total= 12,240.8 be R.M.= 59,982.3 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure 3// 2 / J/ 12.in Mas w/#6 @ 8.in o/c -- Solid Grout, i ------ --- — f• 4'-9' ;j 3' 8'-6' i 12.in Conc w/#6 @ 8-in o/c % -- — — -- • 3'-9' 2 112' 3 V p° 3' #0(.18.in Fir�@Toe — Designer select -- #0@18.in all horiz.reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A i 3-0. 1'-3` 3'-3" 1'-0" 6'-6' 4j1& 2. > 20.psf� / / 3954.9# Pp=2985.9# �- 3934.psf Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: t� 7420 Trade Street Job# : 084870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 888 548 7222 6'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5481604 This Wall In File:CARP611hacienda de la playa 8.rp5 Retain Pro 6. d,a."prl'10K(°)1°°°'2004 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:Ci3C 2WI R.ylstranons:RP-1133415 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions 8 Strengths Retained Height 6.00 ft = Allow SON Bearing = 4,000.0 pal Toe Width = 1.00 It Wag height above soil 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 4.00 Heel Active Pressure - 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width 5.00 Slope Behind Wall = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psf/ft Footing Thickness 12.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft - Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Soil Density = 120.00 pcf Key Width - 12.00 in Key Depth 12.00 in FootingIlSoil Friction = 0.650 = Key Distance from Toe 2.50 ft Wind on Stem 20.0 psf Soil height to Ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in rc = 3,000 Psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pof Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover @ Top = 2.00 in Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel 0.0 psf Lateral Load 0.0#/ft Adjacent Footing Load - s Used To Resist Siding&Overturning ...Height to Top 0.00 ft Footing Width z 0.00 It Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wall to Ftg CL Dist 0.00 It Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Base Axial Dead Load = 0.0 Its at Back of We Soil ft C Axial Live Load 0.0 Nis Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kae for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 1,186.6 lbs sign Kh 0.1009 Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Construction j Top Stern 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 2.50 0.00 Overtumng = 1.61 OK Wag Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Concrete Sliding 1.65 OK Thickness 8.00 8.00 Total Bearing Load 5,643 lbs Reber Size = # 4 # 4 ...resultant em. = 14.62 in Rebar Spacing 8.00 8.00 Soil Pressure Q Toe 2,934 psf OK Reber Placed at = Edge Edge Sol Pressure a Heel 0 psf OK Design Data - Allowable 4,000 psf fb/FB+fa/Fa - 0.708 0.636 Sol Pressure Less Than Allowable Total Force Q Section lbs= 522.0 2,048.9 ACI Factored C Toe = 2,693 psf MomenL...Actual ft-#= 815.5 5,113.7 ACI Factored Q Heel = 0 psf Moment.....Allowable ft-#= 1,151.5 8,039.3 Footing Shear Q Toe = 6.3 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 9.5 19.8 Footing Shear 41 Heel = 52.7 psi OK Shear.....ANowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Allowable 93.1 psi Lap Splice if Above in= 24.00 28.48 Sliding Coles (Vertical Component Used) Lap Splice if Below in= 28.48 7.67 Lateral Siding Force = 3,073.5 be Wag Weight psf= 78.0 100.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 1,400.0 lbs Reber Depth 'd' in= 525 6.25 less 100%Friction Force - - 3,667.7 Masonry Data 1,500 Added Force Req'd = 0.0 Ibs OK Fs psi= 24,000 ....for 1.5:1 Stability 0.0 lbs OK Solid Grouting = Yes Special inspection = No Modular Ratio'n' 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equlv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 Concrete Block Type= Medium Weight Pc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title ; HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: P //0 7420 Trade Street Job# : 064870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 6'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 868 5491604' This Wall in File:C:UtP6lVumk rda de la playa 8. Retain Pro 6.1d,SAW1140M,lai+ Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Code:CBC 2001 Rapistra+lon 0:RP-1 133415 Footing Design Results TEL_ Factored Pressure = 2,693 0 psf Mu':Upward 1,230 0 ft-# Mu':Downward 162 0 ft-# Mu, Design = 1,068 5,114 ft-* Actual 1-Way Shear 6.34 52.66 psi Allow 1 Way Shear 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Speed Toe: Not reld,Mu<S'Fr Heel Reinforcing = None Speed Heel:#4@ 11.75 in, 18.25 in,"25.75 in,#7C 3525 in,#8@ 46.25 in,#9�4 Key Reinforcing = None Speed Key: #I4@ 12.50 in,#50 19.25 in,#6(M 2725 in,#7@ 37.25 in, Summa of ovsrtuming&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTMIG..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item be ft ft# be ft ft-* Heel Active Pressure = 1,952.9 2.89 5,641.7 Sot Over Heel = 2,400.0 3.33 8,000.0 Toe Active Pressure -76.0 0.67 -50.7 Sloped Soil Over Heel 333.3 3.89 1,296.3 Surcharge Over Toe Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = A)dal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load a Stem Above Sol - 10.0 7.25 72.5 Sal Over Toe 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load 1,186.6 5.20 6,170.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weights) _ 562,0 1.33 749.3 Earth Q Stem Transitions = Total 3,073.5 O.T.M. - 11,833.8 Footing Weight = 750.0 2.50 1,875.0 ResistinglOvertuming Ratio 1.81 Key Weight 150.0 3.00 450.0 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure= 5,642.6 Ibs Vert Component = 1,327.3 5.00 6,636.6 Total= 5,642.6 ibs R.M= 19,067.2 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure 7/iu 2. 8.in Mas w/#4 @ 8.in o/c 6 Solid Grout, -- 4'-0' M i , 2 3/4" 6'-6. U-0- 8.in Conc w/44 @ 8.in o/c % - — i i 2" #0@18.in 1'0" @Toe I � Designer select #0 @18.in all horiz.reinf. @ Heel See Appendix A 2'-6' 1'-0' 1'-6' i 5-0' �-� 2. w 1952.9# — Pp=1400.# -_ 2934.5psf Geoteahniaal Exploration,Inc. Tide HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page:5l'/I G 7420 Trole Street Job 05-8870 Dsgnr. JAC Date: JUL 8,2008 San Diego,CA 82121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5481604 This Wall in Fib:C:1RP611HACIENDA DE LA PLAYA 6.RP5.R Retsin Pro Cid,$4004004, °r° 00'` Candlevered Retaining Wail Design Code:cec 2001 Raglstratbn#F:RP-113341E Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions b Strengths Retained Height 4.00 ft = Allow Sol Bearing = 4,000.0 psf Toe Width = 1.00 It Wag height above soil 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 2.50 Heel Active Pressure 52.0 psf/ft Total Footing Width 3.50 Slope Behind Wall 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure = 38.0 psftft Footing Thickness 14.00 in Height of Sol over Toe 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Key Width = 12.00 in Water height over heel = 0.0 It Sol Density = 120.00 pcf Key Depth 12.00 in FootingllSol Friction = 0.650 Key Distance from Toe 125 It Wind on Stem 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in F = 3,000 psi Fy = 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pct Mk.As% 0.0018 Cover C Top - 2.00 in @ Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Lateral Load = 0.0 WIt Jam oo ng 0a = s Used To Resist Slog&Overturning ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 it Surcharge Over Toe = 0.0 psf -Height to Bottom = 0.00 It Eccentricity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wal to Ftg CL Dist z 0.00 ft Axial Load Applied t0 Stem Footing Type Line Load Base Above/Below Soil = 0.0 It Andal Dead Load 0.0 lbs at Back of Wall Axial Live Load 0.0 be Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kee for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 584.6 lbs Design Kh = 0.100 g Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kee-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe!Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Conshuctlon � Top Stern Scam OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 0.00 Overturning 1.65 OK Wag Material Above"Ht" = Masonry Siding = 2.35 OK Thickness 8.00 Total Bearing Load = 2,868 be Reber Size = # 5 ...resultant am. = 9.95 in Reber Spacing 8.00 Sol Pressure C Toe = 2,077 psf OK Reber Placed at Edge Sol Pressure a Heel 0 psf OK Design Daft Allowable 4,000 pef fb/FB+fa/Fa = 0.909 Sol Pressure Less Then Allowable Total Force Q Section lbs- 659.8 ACI Factored Q Toe 1,924 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 1,197.5 ACI Factored @ Heel 0 psf Moment....Allowable a 1,317.2 Footing Shear C Toe 9.3 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 12.3 Footing Shear C Heel = 18.9 psi OK Shear.....Allowable psi= 19.4 Allowable = 93.1 psi Lap Spike if Above in= 25.00 Sliding Calcs (Vertical Component Used) Lap Spice If Below in= 6.39 Lateral Siding Force = 1,467.6 ft Wag Weigh 78.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 1,579.9 Ibs Reber Depth 'd' in= 5.25 less 10096 Friction Force = . 1,864.4 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd 0.0 lbs OK fm psi- 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability = 0.0 lbs OK Sold Grouting = 20 Yes Speciallnspection No Modular Ratio'n' = 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equiv.Sold Thick. in= 7.60 CMasonr Block Type= Medium Weight fc psi= Fy psi= Geotdchnical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 101/0 7420 Trade Street Job# 054870 Dsgrw: JAC Date: JUL 8,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 4'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:C:1RP61U1ACIENDA DE LA PLAYA 6.RP5.R ReeMn Pro 6.1d'54Wl1'200''(0)19694004 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design code:CM 2001 Rmistratlon 0.RP4133415 Footing Design Results Tin Factored Pressure = 1,924 0 psf Mu':Upward Z 1,125 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 241 0 ft-# Mu: Design = 884 1,916 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 9.31 18.90 Psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing - None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S`Fr Heel Reinforcing - None Spec'd Heel:Not req'd,Mu<S`Fr Key Reinforcing - None Spec'd Key: Not req'd,Mu<S`Fr Su of Overturrilnu&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Morrrerrt Item Ibs It ft-# Ibs It ft-# Heel Active Pressure 962.2 2.03 1,951.1 Soil Over Heel 880.0 2.58 2,273.3 Toe Alive Pressure = -89.2 0.72 •64.4 Sloped Soil Over Heel = 100.8 2.89 291.3 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load - Added Lateral Load = Mal Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Sol = 10.0 5.42 54.2 Sol Over Toe = 120.0 0.50 60.0 Seismic Earth Load = 584.6 3.65 2,133.9 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weights) 351.0 1.33 468.0 Earth Q Stem Transitions= Total = 1,467.6 O.T.M. - 4,074.7 Footing Weight 612.5 1.75 1,071.9 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.65 Key Weight = 150.0 1.75 262.5 Vertical Loads used for Sol Pressure= 2,868.3 Ibs Vert Component = 654.0 3.50 2,288.9 Total= 2,868.3 Ibs R.M.= 6,715.9 Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure 2. 8.in Mas w/#5 @ 8.in o/c Solid Grout, — — 4'-6' /�. 2 314' 4'-0' r-0• 2' _ ZTr 6� -- - - 3. #r0@18.in C 1'-0. @Toe —___-- Designer select #0@18.in all horiz.reinf. - @ Heel See Appendix A 1'-3' 1'-0' 1'-3' 1'-0' 2'-6' 3'-6' � ( .� 20.R� iƒ �« - �\ %} �\ - '\ emu+ R=,s7 + pppppp z7o &7R Geotechnical Exploration,Inc. Title : HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: 13116, 7420 Trade Street Job# : 05.6870 Dsgnr. JAC Date: JUL 14,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 100 HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 5491604 This Wall in File:cArp611hectanda de Is playa 6.rpb.rp5 Retain Pro 6.1d,SAWS49K(a)INS-2004 Cantilevered Retaining all Design Code:CIBC 2001 Repatranon 0:RP413UIS 9 i9 Criteria Soil Data Footing Dimensions S Strengths Retained Heigh = 10.00 ft Allow Sod Bearing 4,000.0 pal Toe Width 1.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Width = 925 Heel Active Pressure 52.0 psf/it Total Footing Width 10.75 Slope Behind Wad = 2.00:1 Toe Active Pressure 38.0 psf/ft Footing Thickness = 25.00 in Height of Soil over Toe = 12.00 in Passive Pressure = 350.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 It Sod Density = 120.00 pcf Key Width 12.00 in FootingilSol Friction = 0.650 Key Depth = 14.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 4.00 ft Wind on Stem = 20.0 psf Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 12.00 in Pc = 3,000 psi Fy 60,000 psi Footing Concrete Density 150.00 pcf Min.As% = 0.0018 Cover Q Top = 2.00 in Btm= 3.00 in Surcharge Loads Lateral Load Applied to Stem Adjacent Footing Load Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 pef Lateral Load = 0.0 W/ft Adjacent Footing Load O.0 be Used To Resist Sliding&Overturning ...Heigh to Top = 0.00 ft Footing Width 0.00 ft Surcharge Over Toe 0.0 psf ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Eccenbicity 0.00 in NOT Used for Sliding&Overturning Wad to Ftg CL Dist 0.00 ft Axial Load Applied to Stem Footing Type Line Load Axial Dead Load 0.0 lbs Base Above/Below Sol 0.0 ft at Back of Wad = Axial Live Load 0.0 lbs Axial Load Eccentricity 0.0 in Earth Pressure Seismic Load Kae for seismic earth pressure - 0.670 Added seismic base force 4,107.7 lbs Design Kh !m 9 Ka for static earth pressure = 0.407 Difference: Kae-Ka = 0.263 Using Mononobe-Okabe/Seed-Whitman procedure Design Summary Stem Construction Top Stem 2nd Stem OK Stem OK Wall Stability Ratios Design height ft= 6.25 0.00 Overturning = 2.01 OK Wad Material Above"Flt" = Masonry Concrete Sliding = 1.59 OK Thickness = 8.00 14.00 Total Bearing Load - 21,620 Ibs Rebar Size = # 8 # 7 ...resultant etc. 21.96 in Rebar Spacing = 8.00 8.00 Sol Pressure @ Toe = 4,065 psf NG Rebar Placed at = Edge Edge Sol Pressure Q Heel 0 psf OK Design Data Allowable 4,000 psf fb/FB+fa/Fa = O.M 0."11 Sol Pressure Exceeds Allowablsl Total Force;Section lbs= 597.8 5,722.4 ACI Factored C Toe 3,791 psf Moment...Actual ft-#= 996.9 23,468.4 ACI Factored @ Heel = 0 psi Moment....Allowable ft-#= 1,663.2 43,243.9 Footing Shear Q Toe - 0.0 psi OK Shear....Actual psi= 11.8 29.9 Footing Shear a Heel = 90.3 psi OK Shear....Allowable psi= 19.4 93.1 Aliowable = 93.1 psi Lap Spice if Above in= 48.00 62.30 Sliding Cake (Vertical Component Used) Lap Spice if Below in= 71.20 13.42 Lateral Sliding Force = 10,697.4 lbs Wad Weight psf= 78.0 175.0 less 100%Passive Force = - 2,985.9 lbs Rebar Depth 'd' in= 5.25 11.56 less 100%Friction Force - - 14,052.8 Masonry Data Added Force Req'd 0.0 lbs OK fm psi= 1,500 ....for 1.5:1 Stability = 0.0 be OK S Psi= 24,000 Sold Grouting = Yes Special inspection No Modular Ratio'n' = 25.78 Short Term Factor = 1.000 Equlv.Solid Thick. in= 7.60 CMMacs�Bak Type= Medium Weight rc psi= 3,000.0 Fy psi= 60,000.0 Geotedwical Exploration,Inc. Title HACIENDAS DE LA PLAYA Page: I gll(r. 7420 Trade Street Job# : 05-6870 Dsgnr: JAC Date: JUL 14,2005 San Diego,CA 92121 Description.... Phone 858 549 7222 10.0'HIGH RETAINING WALL WITH A 2 TO 1 SLOPE Fax 858 6491604 This Wall in File:c: 1V=ienda de la playa 6. Rdefin Pro f''d' °)' Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design code:c®c 2001 R.plsaanon r:RP-1 tss4�s 9 9 Footing Design Results Too How Factored Pressure 3,791 0 psf Mu':Upward = 4,064 0 ft-# Mu':Downward = 584 0 ft-* Mu: Design = 3,480 23,468 ft-* Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.00 90.28 psi Allow 1-Way Shear 93.11 93.11 psi Other Acceptable Sizes&Spacings Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Toe: Not req'd,Mu<S"Fr Heel Reinforcing = #6 C 13.25 in Heel:#4QD 5.00 in,#5@ 7.75 In,06Q 11.00 in,#7C 15.00 in,080 19.75 in,09Q 24. Key Reinforcing = #6 Q 18.00 in Key: #4@ 12.50 in,05Q 19.25 in,06C 27.25 in,#7Q 37.25 in, Sunmwry of Overturning&Resisting Forces&Moments .....OVERTURNING..... .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Force Distance Moment Item Ibs ft ft-* lbs It ft4 Heel Active Pressure = 6,760.4 5.38 36,337.2 Soil Over Heel 9,700.0 6.71 65,070.8 Toe Active Pressure -180.6 1.03 -185.6 Sloped SoN Over Heel Z 1,960.2 8.06 15,790.6 Surcharge Over Toe = Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Axial Dead Load on Stem = 0.00 Load Q Stem Above Sol = 10.0 12.33 123.3 Sol Over Toe _ - 180.0 0.75 135.0 Seismic Earth Load = 4,107.7 9.68 39,741.7 Surcharge Over Toe = Stem Weight(s) = 1,425.3 2.03 2,886.4 Earth Q Stem Transitions= 225.0 2.42 543.8 Total = 10,697.4 O.T.M. 76,016.5 Footing Weight = 3,359.4 5.38 18,056.6 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 2.01 Key Weight = 175,0 4.50 787.5 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure- 21,619.7 be Vert.Component = 4,594.8 10.75 49,394.4 Vertical component of active pressure used for soli pressure Total= 21,619.7 be R.M.- 152,665.1 2. 8.in Mas w/#8 @ 8.in o/c Solid Grout, -- --. rt N6°A 4'-3' -2 3/4' is 14.in Conc w/#7 @&in o/c % --- ------ -—----- --- -------- I • 10'-0' 10'-6' r a /, i • 2 112' 6-3' • N � • ar` G � g V-0. • 2' CC 2-1 0 — L*kO@18.in @ 2' Toe Designer select #6@13.25in all horiz.reinf, @ Heel See Appendix A 4'-0' 1'-0' 5'-9" 1'-6' 9'-3' f 2 r y 20.psf Li j �j °— 6760.4# Pp=2985.9# 4065.4psf Drainage Study Haciendas de la Playa Portion of Lot 1, Map No, 10676 Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California Prepared for: Haciendas de la Playa Homeowners, LLC c/o Curtis Property Management _ 4059 Oceanside Boulevard, Suite M Oceanside, CA 92056 Prepared by: Christensen Engineering & Surveying 7888 Silverton Avenue, Suite "J" San Diego, CA 92126 (858) 271-9901 December 12, 2006 Introduction This project involves the construction of a new wall to repair the failed slope along the easterly side of Vulcan Avenue southerly of Encinitas boulevard. A portion of the slope repair and wall construction takes place in Vulcan Avenue right-of-way which some of the failed slope in within Lot 1 of County of San Diego Tract 4293 as shown on Map No. 10676. The project also includes landscaping, the construction of a curb outlet and short section of a drainage ditch.site walls and driveway. The attached drainage area map is from a survey,by Christensen Engineering and Surveying dated August 2006. The area of slope repair drains to Vulcan Avenue and this pattern will persist following construction. Areas above the slope are drained by the onsite drainage system. These areas will continue to be serviced by the onsite drainage system following construction. There will be a slight decrease in the quantity of runoff generated from the site due to the landscaping that is to be _._ included in the area currently occupied by the failed slope. The Rational Method was used to calculate the anticipated flow for the 100-year storm return frequency event. The curb outlet was tested and found adequate to convey anticipated runoff. 'iess IOIygC OF C \� _ Antony K. Christensen 12-12-06 Date RCE 54021 - Exp. 12-31-07 JN A2005-58 Calculations 1• Intensity Calculation (From the City of San Diego Drainage Design Manual, page 86, San Diego County Hydrology Manual, Table 3-3) Tc = Time of concentration = 1.8(1.1-C)Dist 1n ( S 1/3 ) Since the slope over the area with the greatest elevation change is (24'/30') 80% over the site and the distance traveled is 30 feet and the runoff coefficient is 0.80. Tc = 0.69 minutes. Since this result.in an unrealistic Intensity the time of concentration is chosen to be 5.0 minutes. Ix = 7.44 P6 Duration -0.645 Since D = 5.0 Ix= 2.63 P6 from: San Diego County Hydrology Manual Rainfall Isopluvial Map for 100 year Rainfall Event— 6 Hour P6(100)= 2.7�. The six-hour storm is selected over the 24-hour storm due to its closer approximation to the site's time of concentration. So: I1oo= 2.63 (P6) I100= 2.63 (2.7) I1 oo= 7.11 inches 2• Coefficient Determination Since the area of runoff is over steep sandstone with little vegetation there is very little oppgrtunity for infiltration. There for the following coefficient is utilized: C= 0.80 Following construction the area of the wall and the small area fronting the wall that flows to the curb outlet will have a combined coefficient of. Area of vegetation = 0.005Acres (C= 0.35) Area of wall = 0.061 Acres (C= 1.0) C= (0.005 * .35 + 0.061 * 1.0)/0.066 C= 0.95 Following construction the runoff flowing over the vegetated area fronting the wall and the sidewalk will have a coefficient of: Area of vegetation = 0.115Acres (C= 0.35) Area of sidewalk = 0.046 Acres (C= 1.0) C= (0.115 * .35 + 0.046 * 1.0)/0.161 C= 0.54 3. Volume calculations Q = CIA Areas of Drainage The area of drainage is only the area of the wall and the area fronting the wall behind the sidewalk. The design keeps the runoff from the top of the bluff flowing to the area drains and drainage ditch between the top of slope and residences as it is preconstruction and that area is not analyzed in this study. The Pre-Construction drainage area flows over the slope and across the sidewalk fronting the slope and into Vulcan Avenue. This pattern persists for most of the area fronting the new wall. The area of the wall and a small portion of the area fronting the wall, at the north end, will be conveyed into the proposed curb outlet. Area Pre-Construction(Slope and sidewalk)= 0.227 Acres Area Post-Construction(Wall flowing to curb outlet)= 0.066 Acres Area Post-Construction(Fronting wall and Sidewalk)= 0.161 Acres Q 100 Pre-Construction(Slope and sidewalk)) = (0.80) (7.11) (0.227) Q100 Post-Construction(Wall flowing to curb outlet)— (•95) (7.11) (0.066) Q100 Post-Construction(Fronting wall and Sidewalk)) — (0.54) (7.11) (0.161) Q100 Pre-Construction(Slope and sidewalk)) = 1.29 cfs Q100 Post-Construction(Wall flowing to curb outlet)= 0.45 cfs Q100 Post-Construction(Fronting wall and Sidewalk)) — 0.62 cfs 4. Discussion Prior to construction the area of the slope drains onto the sidewalk adjacent to the site and then onto Vulcan Avenue. Following construction this pattern of flow will continue. Additionally the runoff from the rain that contacts the wall will be conveyed by a concrete gutter/swale to a curb outlet and onto Vulcan Avenue. The area of imperviousness will decrease slightly due to the area of landscaping that will be incorporated into the new design once the wall is constructed. The area above the slope has runoff that is conveyed by area drains and a drainage ditch offsite. This pattern of conveyance will continue following construction. To total quantity of runoff should decrease, slightly. S. Test for Adequacy The curb outlet as tested and found capable of conveying 0.61 cfs of runoff. APPENDIX o °? _ c cq: �O N r- O M C\ O, N v) vn r M N A M N N r- 00 00 00 00 i O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O — M d) � G. U Q) Y L O �O N vi 00 O� 00 00 r- C u M M of ',I' W' r �p r-� rl: 00 00 00 00 •+ v O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y a N (d ° U L C U F a c a� N cE cn a N aEi cn L U M 000 000 000 O cd UO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O •U 4 Ocn ,edq O l, 00 00 N V'1 �p �p �p O M M N U DD 00 00 'A .� G O O C O C O O O O O O O O O 'q bA Q) U_ C v, o V-, o o -n o o V) ° O N N 00 00 00 al O, O� 4: r-i .y o o Fy a f3, c WV) rn v ni N N U U O N N (, O O O O O O O O p` •V „U, 7 fzl W co Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ¢ Q U 2:1 cn Q C A A A A A o, ,r, O O ° c .5 OL c 0 Cl N vM E rA 'A as E W iC R7 lC llS N fC fV id R7 .o ° O p G 7 tom. � U=i a�i Uri Uci a�i UCi aoi Uri aoi � � � � io � 3 b o Us o ;v v o b -2 cc M ai a'i Uri U�'i u 0 U ai - UU E UCi E a p: r� rx r� rx o; rx rx rx z 0 O O 4] � o a o N A A A ^ o o U C) n 8 m w iv v U Uri U°i co ca v C7 3 o z a W C L 72 :n b 04 04 ;c ; ;o 4 b o . — y am : U a i E a 1 i 'o v ° ` U r o � 4 � i 'o 'a n c C c C C a d U = O cn u ono .n c •� '� A A � A � •� •� •'o •u •o' •o' � �•- -d z CJ Q C A Q i aF�Li a a IOU > . n O 3 3 3 y Uri a�i Ubi ob E k U ¢ U cn U .a .a x U U U U U ° . D z C L C O T �D CO N O on v (O (P m N c0 U - � _ rn (p vi o vviriNC- - - .- _ � ,- @ O C',0, e m <^ N� ✓ (/� N C r N U O N e N O) n N N - - - - - 0, ti p �p _ O join vivi V C7(`SNmID ^ p �i L V � m w. �D U U LL ,n_ N n 61'n N U7 o N y O n - CO p N E tp ,a N d (�- c�i6v om (O � cO�(O On cmoal � �. T S = O C _ m (O h O O m N N N - - - O 01 C U i O y � NO 0 (1) D m 70 N O U (D C � V N (0 U a s a- o�� O1ihn (N� (n°r°tiN(moc�'� �om "; :n C N O m (n N = C .. u c m m N N N - - - 0 0 0 E m � Lm ° o o c vN.O L N - NvO�Yin NOicOWd Orn cDN C N O = C_ M O� n v) O m m N NN CO O O O J C U m C Q O '- O m - O>m O CO N CO O O N N O 17 r (G O CCam p O L i II � � n (o vimm NNN ^ .- � .- OOCOO V C Q (Z O O C T N c Np m O C C a I I C L a (n N- N N m 0 N M (O m �O NN CO N Nn o IC m� Q v0 .a y € v E a� D R NN - - 00C 00001 Q .✓T 2- O T O a (D 'C - rn rn(NO e N c:>Siam v --� -m N. w y N a t N C- C � (0 �i. `� M L = m.m.N.�, •-_•-,� O O O O O O o J O U) CD m Q O C C a N I N U C (pp c a c o _ m m mNm mmmrno0 m oNrn �'. C [y �' N m U � - � M v) � - - (O - .D (giornm (o(D V1e (giN C -C 3 U W L C N N ^ - 0 pp0 p 0 pp0 000 pp ppO o O o O C O T U C Q L.. (� 0 f-' D O CD 'u IIx II ~ U c0 N n O N N m V (A CO O1 N N d T 12 a, Z a o - 6-Hour Precipitation(inches) I m o. (o vi vi a o r� ch N N - _ W O -- -.. U fm c - 10 C, -- -_ - - - n 0 _ C Ali ..... ....... ..... i c ID CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) co lD In V (h N - N - (jnoy/saycuij!(tlssuajuj 0 0 0 0 0 0 w a S31f1NIW NI 3WI1 MO-13 CINH-1�13IAO , ul Lu) O 11 U r O CR O� r- O� � II o 1 R V cm O O Z i 3 J 0 O E 0 . f— 1 � 1 cn i � m o�o o 5 r�U L E E I V: O L Q O II C L I m E c O c CCD: p o O M > m a o U a NNr 1 Oa LL LL CL Qy c W O U' o O O O 133.J NI 30NViSIQ 3S8nOO?tl3-LVM a Q 6i U 0 - San Diego County Hydrology Manual Date: June 2003 Section: 3 Page: 12 of 26 Note that the Initial Time of Concentration should be reflective of the general land-use at the upstream end of a drainage basin. A single lot with an area of two or less acres does not have a significant effect where the drainage basin area is 20 to 600 acres. Table 3-2 provides limits of the length (Maximum Length (LM)) of sheet flow to be used in hydrology studies. Initial T; values based on average C values for the Land Use Element are also included. These values can be used in planning and design applications as described below. Exceptions may be approved by the "Regulating Agency" when submitted with a detailed study. Table 3-2 MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH (LM) & INITIAL TIME OF CONCENTRATION T; Element* DU/ .5% 1% o 0 2/0 3/0 5% 10% Acre LM Ti LM T; LM Ti LM T; LM Ti LM T; Natural 50 13.2 70 12.5 85 10.9 100 10.3 100 8.7 100 6.9 LDR 1 50 12.2 70 11.5 85 10.0 100 9.5 100 8.0 100 6.4 LDR 2 50 11.3 70 10.5 85 9.2 100 8.8 100 7.4 100 5.8 LDR 2.9 50 10.7 70 10.0 85 8.8 95 8.1 100 7.0 100 5.6 MDR 4.3 50 10.2 70 9.6 80 8.1 95 7.8 100 6.7 100 5.3 MDR 7.3 50 9.2 65 8.4 80 7.4 95 7.0 100 6.0 100 4.8 MDR 10.9 50 8.7 65 7.9 80 6.9 90 6.4 100 5.7 100 4.5 MDR 14.5 50 8.2 65 7.4 80 6.5 90 6.0 100 5.4 100 4.3 HDR 24 50 6.7 65 6.1 75 5.1 90 4.9 95 4.3 100 3.5 HDR 43 50 5.3 65 4.7 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.4 100 2.7 N. Com 50 5.3 60 4.5 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.4 100 2.7 G. Com 50 4.7 60 4.1 75 3.6 85 3.4 90 2.9 100 2.4 O.P./Com 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 100 2.2 Limited 1. 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 100 2.2 General 1. 50 3.7 60 3.2 70 2.7 80 2.6 90 2.3 100 l.9 *See Table 3-1 for more detailed description 3-12 AE EQUATION Tc = 11.9L3 0.385 Feet ; E 5000 Tc = Time of concentration(hours) L = Watercourse Distance(miles) 4000 AE = Change in elevation along 3000 effective slope line(See Figure 3-5)(feet) Tc Hours Minutes 2000 4 240 3 180 1000 900 800 2 120 X00 60a\ 100 ♦ 60 400 \N.F+ 70 30D ♦d\ore 1 60 \ 50 200 \ — ♦ 40 ♦ L Miles Feet ♦ 30 100 \1 4000 20 1a 3000 16 50 0.3 ♦ 14 40 2000 1800 \ 12 30 1600 \ ♦ 1D 1400 ♦ 9 1200 6 20 1000 900 T soo 6 700 s00 5 10 500 4 400 300 3 S Z P 200 L Tc SOURCE:Califomia Division of Highways(1941)and Kirpich(1940) F I Nomograph for Determination of G U R E Time of Concentration (Tc)or Travel Time(Tt)for Natural fttersheds �� o ' 91hh � _ I fi r z M 8 Imperial County 6i 3� 44 r aJ6 .S4.9LL J 1 N• .. I tr r..r_ •ti.I�� . • o Q ?? y d , 1 • • or R m 03 4 Of v $ z o M g Imperial County s p � Jo- ...... M :,• � ...N � : ' O rl :OE.9LL •' •' �O• r t 9? i �S7 WSJ . .. •.. j Aao w0 6A ` •` �` !n qp l, •..,. � � t ,ter � i•6 r••4' aR •tt , jr• kk S 1 _ gcean CZ 0 PRINT "Type of Conveyance is'' ; tg$ 10 INPUT "Enter the flow quantity" ; Q 20 INPUT "Enter the Slope" ; s - 25 INPUT "Enter the Diameter" ; D 30 INPUT "Enter the Roughness Coefficient" ; n 35 theta = . 001 -- 40 A = ( 1 / 8 ) * ( theta - sine ( theta) ) * D 2 50 R = ( 1 / 4 ) * ( 1 - ( (SIN( theta) ) / theta) ) * D 60 Qt = ( 1 . 49 / n) * A * (R - ( 2 / 3 ) ) * s ( 1 / 2) 70 IF Qt < Q THEN theta = theta + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Q equals" ; Qt ; " theta equals" ; theta 80 IF theta > 6 . 28318 THEN PRINT "Pipe Diameter Too Small " 82 IF theta > 6 . 28318 THEN END 85 IF Qt < Q GOTO 40 ELSE GOTO 90 90 V = Q / A 95 PRINT "Velocity equals" ; V 100 IF theta < 3 . 14159 THEN Y = . 001 ELSE GOTO 141 110 X = Y * (D - Y) 120 Z = ( ( SIN( . 5 * theta) ) * D / 2) ^ 2 130 IF Z > X THEN Y = Y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Depth Equals" ; Y 140 IF Z > X GOTO 110 ELSE 150 141 Y = D / 2 142 X = Y * (D - Y ) 143 Z = ( ( SIN( . 5 * theta) ) * D / 2 ) ^ 2 _ 144 IF Z < X THEN Y = Y + . 001 ELSE PRINT "Depth Equals" ; Y 145 IF Z < X GOTO 142 ELSE 150 150 INPUT "Do you want a hardcopy of Data? Enter 1 if Yes" ; C 160 IF C = 1 GOTO 165 ELSE END 165 LPRINT "Type of conveyance is a: " ; tg$ 170 LPRINT "Diameter of conveyance equals" ; D; "Feet" 180 LPRINT "Slope of conveyance equals" ; s * 100 ; 190 LPRINT "Roughness equals" ; n 200 LPRINT "Flow quantity equals" ; Qt ; "CFS" 210 LPRINT "Area equals" ; A; "Square Feet" 220 LPRINT "Velocity equals" ; V; "FPS" 230 LPRINT "Depth of flow equals" ; Y; "Feet " RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND, ) t, CIRIGiNA.L OF TF;IS DOCUMENT WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) �^tip' RE-c ORDED ON MAR 13,2007 } C)CCUMENT N!UMBER 2UC7-0 170435 SMI 1 1 CCUNT'r" HcUGHDER Acv < <G( CUUNI Y HECOHDER ,OFFICE TIME 159 FM } CITY CLERK ) CITY OF ENCINITAS ) 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE } ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ENCROACHMENT MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL COVENANT ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 0427-PE A.P.N. 258-090-37 An encroachment permit is hereby granted to the Permittee designated in paragraph one, Attachment"A", as the owner of the Benefited property described in paragraph two, Attachment'A"to encroach upon City Property described in paragraph three, Attachment"A", as detailed in the diagram, Attachment"B". Attachments"A" and "B" are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth at length. In consideration of the issuance of this encroachment permit, Permittee hereby covenants and agrees, for the benefit of the City, as follows: 1. 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. 2. Permittee shall use and occupy the City Property only in the manner and for the purpose described in paragraph four, Attachment"A". 3. By accepting the benefits herein, Permittee acknowledges title to the City Property to be in the City and waives all right to contest that title. 4. The term of the encroachment permit is indefinite and may be revoked by the City and abandoned by Permittee at any time. The city shall mail written notice of revocation to Permittee, addressed to the Benefited Property which shall set forth the date upon which the benefits of encroachment permit are to cease. 5. City is entitled to remove all or a portion of the improvements constructed by Permittee in order to repair, replace, or install public improvements. City shall have no obligation to pay for or restore Permittee's improvements. 6. Permittee agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify from and against all claims, demands, costs, losses, damages, injuries, litigation, and liability arising out of or related to the use, construction, encroachment or maintenance to be done by the Permittee or Permittee's agents, employees or contractors on City Property. bp6603/01/25/07/gsabine 7. Upon abandonment, revocation, completion, or termination, Permittee shall, at no cost to the city, return City Property to its pre-permit condition within the time specified in the notice of revocation or prior to the date of abandonment. 8. If Permittee fails to restore the City Property, the City shall have the right to enter upon the City Property, after notice to the Permittee, delivered at the Benefited Property, and restore the City Property to its pre-permit condition to include the removal and destruction of any improvements and Permittee agrees to reimburse the city for the costs incurred. Notice may be given by first class mail sent to the last known address of the Permittee, which shall be deemed effective three calendar days after mailing, or by any other reasonable method likely to give actual notice. 9. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement for all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Permittee shall agree that Permittee's duties and obligations under this covenant are a lien upon the Benefited Property. Upon 30-day notice, and an opportunity to respond, the City may add to the tax bill of the Benefited Property any past due financial obligation owing to city by way of this covenant. 11. Permittee waives the right to assert any claim or action against the City arising out of or resulting from the revocation of this permit or the removal of any improvements or any other action by the City, its officers, agents, or employees taken in a manner in accordance with the terms of the permit. 12. Permittee recognizes and understands that the permit 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. 13. As a condition precedent to Permittee's right to go upon the City Property, the agreement must first be signed by the Permittee, notarized, executed by the City and recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego. The recording fee shall be paid by Permittee. 14. Approved and issued by the City of Encinitas, California, this day of , 20_. AGREED AND ACCEPTED PERMITTEE Dated: l2 act Cy 2TI5 SGe r t Print Name and Title For Haciendas de la Playa Owner's Association (Notarization of PERMITTEE signature is attached) City pA Encinitas SEATTACHED AWL"ACKNOWLEDGMENT bp6603/01/25/07/gsabine ATTACHMENT "A" TO COVENANT REGARDING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT No. 0427-PE PARAGRAPH ONE: Permittee Hacienda de la Playa Owner's Association PARAGRAPH TWO: Benefited Property Lot 1, Map No. 10676 PARAGRAPH THREE: City Property Portion of the northerly right-of-way of Vulcan Avenue. PARAGRAPH FOUR: Purpose For private retaining wall, curb outlet, concrete swale, landscaping and irrigation. Co-0 Z mp �D< M iz o / ?� 40C � 1 �� _, � °Oar le nom �m m z cn / !�z v / � I b zm 1 0 ,. M> z 7° m chD m C a oM >* o a, G)r O y O Z � ,y5 PInto.,' k ' r Z s� y N C40 y V UB SIP ~ 9 b33N1` m Z m O o z m mn N -z zr � oz 000 �G) CD ® o 0 G)0 �' w my m r z m ~ m �m 0 mz cnU 0 Q Z n CA O-D J �Z O O Z n �a 0 , CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ss. County of On before me, — 9 tkc_ Date Name and Title of Officer e. ( g.,"Jane Doe,Notary ublic") personally appeared ��T i S ( -�—�r'�(� �Qj ) Names)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me r ved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are —=..�M subscribed to the within instrument and l DEBRA S .CURD acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed Comri fs ion#1620705 the same in his/her/their authorized r Notary PWk-CCOOM10 capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their 1. San DkW Courdy signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or MV COMM E9*ft Nov 12.2004 the entity upon behalf of which the person(S) acted, executed the instrument. WITN my nd and official seal Signature of Notary Public }� 1 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: G-n CfC90 j q L P_ S, 44 n m)00-e 4 M n Val CoUeV10.n � . Document Date: pi,� { Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: A Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: S l--,or"n I�Idividual Top of thumb, ❑_Corporate Officer—Title(s): r ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑General l ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Trustee '' ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: (J ©1999 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402•www.NationalNotary.org Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 .........................................................................................••.....•..••..� CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California 1 ss County of San Diego On 8071 ' /Z, 2607 , before me, Randa G. Milliour, Notary Public, personally appeared Peter Cota-Robles, personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Randa G. Milljo RANDA G.Mllupt UMWON n$170"64� C PlIbIlle. �► o C "'�r Exp.Jan.6,2011 Place Notary Seal Above : % --OPTIONAL_ ' Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the docu- ment and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: • Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: . FRIOGPH MMMM o Indivi dual THUMBPRINT❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s) F SIGNER❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑Attorney in Fact f thumb here ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑Other. Signer is Representing: PARTIAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PORTION OF LOT 1, MAP 10676 SITE ADDRESS: J18 PLAYA BLANCA ENCINITAS DATE OF SURVEY- MAY 12, 2005 BENCH MARK: ENCINITAS BM ENC -32 2IN BRASS DISC SAN DIEGO COUNTY ENGINEER DEPT. SET IN IN TOP OF CURB EAST SIDE OF VULCAN AVENUE, 200 FT NORTH OF E STREET. JJ �J SCALE* 159 °20' i\jlJ P 1 PROPERTY LINE J} 3 FT CHAIN LINK FENCE '99' .rr BW:92.5 W:101. TF:89.5 BW:96 0 I poRC S ' �9 + B„ TREE \ 0 1 4 g F:94.0 \, C0 R 6 96 _ \ \ 10 _ _, _ _ } Q L 1 -COVER m \\ �o — J tiO BW:95. s oO.CJ T s X09 I �o TF:92. Upper all W:98.0 9s PO 1 03.8 - J Termie at C16 BW92.5 + 9�9 \� o� - -6 HAC FT WALL WITH PLAYA r EXISTING SLOPE EASEMENT REC. 8/4/61 o Crosse Se tion H ENTRANCE SIG AS FILE /PAGL NO. 115426 O:R. ° 91 `'y �J FT CHAIN LINK F E �� " PA TREE �G 91� PALM TREE I �p / 12" T ` A24" PALM TREE -�.� tC 66. 8$ - - - - - - - - - r - r 2 6" r LM TREES r 1 FT SO, DRA f CHAIN�INK FE�+EE 1 FT S� DRAIN TC 881 p -�O ��65 I g0 PROP RTY LINE TC 8 jR kk I CONC. l�I4LK 9 C WALK I L CONS WALK TC g>8j47 IN 1 �� ' � R' �h�� o�� 1�1� Wo'� 00� 0h� of %JIL �� eJl 0�� 0y�� gO1 6 �� 1�� ep �1�� 1i� �� 88 0 00 o BW:86.5 J SSG Middle :92.0 UB8 FF�G :78.0 Ce B -.860 W:84. Wall BW:84.8 BW:77.5 Termination TF:84.8 '0 BW:70.0 TF:77.5 - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - I G P G TF:70.0 - Debris Wall NOTE: THE BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON WAS PLOTTED FROM Legend RECORD DATA PER MAP10676. A BOUNDARY SURVEY WAS NOT yAND S PERFORMED FOR THE r,. ROC�� PREPARATION OF THIS MAP El L. VULCAN A VENUE * E P.S. 7194 *� W;99,5 TW — Top of Wall Elevation Haciendas de la Playa �'9 F L1S Bw.92.5 BW Bottom of Wall Elevation TF:89.5 Western Slope O CA TF — Top of Wall Footing Elevation SE Corner of S. Vulcan Avenue TODD C. ROCKWELL L.S. 7194 Q adn Encinitas Boulevard L --------- J Approximate Location of Cross Section Encinitas, CA. Job No. 05 -8870 �r� 10 Geotechnical BARRYROCKWELL SURVEYING 9 I. Cross Section presented as Figures Ilia —Illd Exploration, Inc. 4891 RONSON COURT, SUITE I SAN DIEGO, CA 92111 1 (858) 569 -9146 J 05029 I ra LOT I 1 ' _ COUNTY OF SAN DVEC3OTRACT 4293 ^�InI _^ MAP Y VO. 10678 1� 1 @A Q e fI0.9 1�1 14xA s. S yy apm 0j \' v 1119 8 �y LOT Post- Construction Area p }$ ffi < ER— MAP COe I®VN U �— -- - - —= ��a E Too:1 Oe®6V Ac res COUNTY OF SAN DECO TRACT 429 e n TO FROM Z a. ncc:: ------ 5�\ eM m9 \��" _� / / jR�►hl��' �A ®° Bad U —' mn < ea~ + alk e v� CAN �� \ s m9 \ / —_ - -- `--'— ^.. _ °� a " ois l \I � —Ci �� • -. r l �. \ � n i 333 Pre- Construction Area Post- Construction Area 0.227 Acres Fronting Wall 0.161 Acres SCALE 111 = 40" 0 40' 80° 120' 180' REVISIONS APPROVED I DATE REFERENCES BENCHMARK SCALE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHE KED BY APPROVALS 2" SAN DIEGO COUNTY ENO. DEPT. BRASS DISK PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF ED APPROVED SET IN TOP OF CURB, EAST SIDE OF VULCAN AVE. RECOMMENb 200' NORTH OF "E" STREET. HORIZONTAL 1 " = 20' ELEVATION = 89.86 M.S.L. (NGVD29) BY: POINT NO. 1032 VERTICAL N/A BY DATE DECEMBER 10, 2006 BY: STATION NAME: ENC -32 ANTONY K. CHRISTENSEN DATE DATE, DATE- R.C.E. 54021 EXPIRES 12- 31.2007