The URL can be used to link to this page

2006-199 G City OoNGINEERING SER VICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering March 20, 2008 Attn: Citibank 113-A North El Camino Real Encinitas, California 92024 RE: Jessica Toth and Erol Ertuck 403 Sheffield Avneue APN 260-283-12 Grading Permit 199-G Final release of security Permit 199-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, a full release in the remaining security deposited is merited. Assignment of Account 40034154316, (in the original amount of$35,346.00), reduced by 75% to $8,836.50, is hereby released in entirety. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at(760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Debra Geisha J Lembach Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Jessica Toth Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 14 recycledpaper City o NGINEERING SER VICES DEPARTMENT Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering February 7, 2007 Attn: Citibank 113-A North El Camino Real Encinitas, California 92024 RE: Jessica Toth and Erol Ertuck 403 Sheffield Avneue APN 260-283-12 Grading Permit 199-G Partial release of security Permit 199-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion control, all as necessary to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposited is merited. Assignment of Account 40034154316, in the amount of$35,346.00, may be reduced by 75% to $8,836.50. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at(760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Q V Debra Geishart y Le bach Engineering Technician Finance Manager Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Jessica Toth Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S_ Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 AD., recycled paper u e ORIGINAL OF THIS DOGWI-0 MS RECORDED �([ONN W. V, 2[0002 I/OCIR EN I i Rlr 0 M. 2-02OM2 Recording Requested by: ) GREGORY J. SMITH, COM RECORDER City of Encinitas ) SAN DIEGO CITY RECORDER'S OFFICE TIME: 4:22 PM When Recorded, Mail to : ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas, CA 92024 ) For the benefit of the City ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY APN: 260-281-14, 260-283-12 , 260-283 -13 . RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUMMARY VACATION, OF EXISTING RIGHT-OF- WAY FOR PUBLIC ROAD PURPOSES ON SHEFFIELD AVENUE BETWEEN BRISTOL AVENUE AND ROSSINI DRIVE WHEREAS, Rossini Park Estates , LLC submitted an application to vacate existing right-of-way for public road purposes on Sheffield Avenue between Bristol Avenue and Rossini Drive as shown on Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, the vacation proceedings are conducted under Chapter 4 of Part 3 of the State of California Streets and Highway Code, and WHEREAS, On December 12, 2001, City staff distributed notices to residents within 300 feet of the proposed vacation and to all public utility companies, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Encinitas on February 27, 2002 , heard all persons interested in the proposed vacation at 6 : 00 p.m. in the City of Encinitas Council Chambers, 505 South Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92024 ; and NOW BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Encinitas, has adopted the resolution to summary vacate existing right-of-way for public road purposes on Sheffield Avenue between Bristol Avenue and Rossini Drive in accordance with the following: 1 . The project as proposed is consistent with the City of Encinitas General Plan and General Plan Circulation Element in that the portion of Sheffield Avenue being vacated is not a circulation element road as within the General Plan. G:\Debra\Resolutions\RES-ROSSINI 6997 VA-dg.doc 2 . The project as proposed complies with the California Environmental Quality Act since it is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061 (13) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines . 3 . There is no present or prospective use identified for the public right-of-way on the vacated portion of Sheffield Avenue. RESERVING AND EXCEPTING from vacation and abandonment the following easements : 1 . A 12 ' wide public utility and emergency vehicular access easement as shown on Exhibit 2 . 2 . A San Diego Gas and Electric Company utility easement over the Easterly 25 ' of the proposed vacated area as shown on Exhibit 3 . 3 . A Cox Communications utility easement over the Easterly 61 of the proposed vacated area as shown on Exhibit 4 . PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of February, 2002 , by the following vote, to wit : AYES : Bond, Guerin, Houlihan, Stocks. NAYS : Holz ABSENT: Noriev ABSTAIN: None. 0 Christy Gu n, Mayor City of Encinitas ATTEST,,: eborah Cervone, City Clerk I, Deborah Cervone, City Clerk of The City of Encinitas, California do hereby cerlify under penalty of perjury That the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of Ibis document on file in my office. In witness whereof, I have set my hand and the Seal of the City of Encinitas Ibis_day of Y c 20 0, Deborah Cervone, City G:\Debra\Resolutions\RES-ROSSINI 6997 VA-dg.doc EXHIBIT LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEDICATED PER MAP THEREOF NO. 1547, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 18, 1913, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE AND SHEFFIELD AVENUE, THENCE NORTH 57 056'35" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 22.15 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF- BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 57°56'35" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SAID SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 39.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 171.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 32 003'25" WEST, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 029'05" AN ARC LENGTH OF 49.29 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 74°25'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 4937 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BRISTOL AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 00°24'20" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID BRISTOL AVENUE, 40.82 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT 15.28 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON A POINT OF CURVATURE OF THE SOUTHWEST RETURN OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE AND BRISTOL AVENUE, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 89 035'40" EAST, THENCE NORTHERLY, NORTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 104 052'37" AN ARC LENGTH OF 27.97 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 74 043'03" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, 24.02 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 153.73 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 15 046'08" WEST, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°13'19" AN ARC LENGTH OF 43.53 FEET; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 58 034'30" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, 32.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 26.18 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 31 041'27" WEST, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 66 043'08" AN ARC LENGTH OF 30.49 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON A POINT OF CURVATURE OF THE SOUTHEAST RETURN OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE AND ROSSINI DRIVE; THENCE NORTH 06 037'40" WEST, 39.17 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF-BEGINNING. SEE EXHIBIT"12B"ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. S:ISNIPESIEN 11211LEGALSII2A.doc 20' 20' = Z SCALE: i"-3p' r m Q' m PLX "'2 l —� m • i� r coy. 1 i — 13R'STOL N A VEIN(J� S00.24'20";y J 40.82' ° PORTION OF SHEFFIELD � tx AVENUE TO BE VACATED . .�, .: kl BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT N 1 24.02 rn •` N 20 A 1) LA 9 5 S 5 20, `� H R / I• � ` N J/� r a=66 43'08 w R=26.18' L=30.49' C.�s3: PORTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE Nr, w� TO BE VACATED BY SEPARATE T.P.0.B. ° �nl DOCUMENT v`_ i N 06'37'40" W nlw ROSSINI DRIVE Z N 06',37'40" W 39.17' I� RJ ,5JjNll PARK MAP 1647 1 AMrCX AVE. 5 sit AYE. �� LAND SG o ?S °�A RD C J " W 1068 m * E+p.06-30-04 VKC MAP or CALF°�� ,l/ 2/14/02 NO SCAU G. HOWARD DYE L.S. 4068 DATE EXHIBIT-- Z LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEDICATED PER MAP THEREOF NO. 1547, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO _ COUNTY, MARCH 18, 1913, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE AND SHEFFIELD AVENUE, T IENCE NORTH 57°56'35" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 22.15 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF- BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 57 056'35" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SAID SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 39.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 171.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 32 003'25" WEST, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 029'05" AN ARC LENGTH OF 49.29 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 74°25'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 49.37 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BRISTOL AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 00°24'20" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID BRISTOL AVENUE, 12.43 FEET, THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY SOUTH 74 025'40" WEST 46.12 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 159.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 15°34'20" WEST, THENCE WESTERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 029'05" AN ARC LENGTH OF 45.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 57°56'35" WEST 45.24 FEET; THENCE NORTH 06°37'40" WEST 13.29 FEET TO THE TRUE- POINT-OF-BEGINNING. SEE EXHIBIT "13B"ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. S:ISNIPESIENI 1211LEGAMMA.doc 20' 20' LI X 4' 6 1 1 — _ — _ , SCAB 1~=30• _ m _ i LAT -n I rn r � L _�SRISTOL N SO0'24'20~E .�VENUE 12.43' 0 +-.. ty ....... N k� J . PORTION OF SHE E I ELD rn AVENUE TO BE VACATED BY THIS DOCUMENT W (R) N_153_4'20" - si. • .. 0=16'29'05" R=159.32' L L=45.84' PROPOSED 12' WIDE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT cz� x %p � �� A t� n PORTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE N 06'37'40" W TO BE VACATED BY SEPARATE c°y T.P.0.8 a 13.29' DOCUMENT N 06'37'40" W ROSSINI DRIVE N P.o.e. Ir?JJ:JII\II Fr'1 t`?%( A/JAF 1 J r7 fr 31 OCK 9,-f? 9ftE H WAMIO( AVE. I X � 5 N b 9FrF7 K' AVE 0 LANDS o �W �25� A RD G�L� ettyt NO X068 � E�.06-JO-04 VICU Y MAP elf cALtE°�� 2/15/02 No SC" G. HOWARD DYE L.S. 4068 DATE EXHIBIT 3-_ LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEDICATED PER MAP THEREOF NO. 1547, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 18, 1913, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE AND SHEFFIELD AVENUE, THENCE NORTH 57°56'35" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 61.68 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 171.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 32 003'25" WEST, -THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 029'05" AN ARC LENGTH OF 49.29 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 74°25'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 23.47 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF-BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 74°25'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 25.90 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BRISTOL AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 00°24'20" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID BRISTOL AVENUE, 40.82 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT 15.28 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON A POINT OF CURVATURE OF THE SOUTHWEST RETURN OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE AND BRISTOL AVENUE, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 89 035'40" EAST, THENCE NORTHERLY, NORTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 104°52'37" AN ARC LENGTH OF 27.97 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 74 043'03" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, 6.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 00 024'20" WEST 20.82 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF-BEGINNING. SEE EXHIBIT"14B"ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART THEREOF. S.ISNIPESIEN l 12 l 1LE GALS 114A.doc 20' 20' SCAB "=30• ,� FLAB m v I of ti I KRIS cv s 4 '20"� —�—T —Tp� A VENUE 40..82 — � o N w e=104'52'37' h ? © R=15.28' tD^' L=27.97' N15.16_57"W(R) —� T.P.0.B ''' -p- S74'43'03 W 6.00' 15.34'20_ W (R) _ _ NOO'24'20'W 20.82' Q. N tO PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE TO BE VACATED U, BY THIS DOCUMENT 1 � "'- �r, PORTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE �n a TO BE VACATED BY SEPARATE N r' DOCUMENT �- N 06'37'40" W ROSSINI DRIVE N P.0.B. i R0:5:9Ij\II PAJr?.K MAP SL J c:( 9, IAfMlO( AVE. -6o- Z 9fFF[ AVE. LAND A RD v �• O .c ,c o No. 1068 rn z * E�.O6-70-01 r �r Ac"Ty AAAP 9lf Ar CALL0o�`� 2/15/02 NO SC&E G. HOWARD DYE L.S. 4068 DATE �•\CYJ70C��LTH 70Y�f1WG�CY�7LA nwr_ EXHIBIT LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEDICATED PER MAP THEREOF NO. 1547, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 18, 191-3,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE AND SHEFFIELD AVENUE, THENCE NORTH 57°56'35" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 61.68 FEET TO TEE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 171.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 32 003'25" WEST, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 029'05" AN ARC LENGTH OF 49.29 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 74°25'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE, 43.15 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF-BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 74 125'40" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE 6.22 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BRISTOL AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 00 024'20" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID BRISTOL AVENUE, 40.82 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP OF A NON-TANGENT 15.28 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON A POINT OF CURVATURE OF THE SOUTHWEST RETURN OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE AND BRISTOL AVENUE, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS ' NORTH 89 035'40" EAST, THENCE NORTHERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL. ANGLE OF 52 036'11" AN ARC LENGTH OF 14.03 FEET; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 00 024'20" WEST 27.06 FEET TO THE TRUE-POINT-OF-BEGINNING. SEE EXHIBIT "15B"ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PAT THEREOF. SA SNIPES1EN1121V—EGALS\15A.doc 20' 20' FnV' ��A I 0)� Z r _ SPST o I S00' 20.,E -�`� O` N 40 82 A vE= 6.22• o N I �I h T.P.O.B a52'3s'11" R=15.28' `0 o w \� L=14.03' ''-C °'- \-N36_59'29=EIRZ f NOO'24'20"W N 34 20" W (R) _ —— 27.06' PORTION OF SHEFFIELD AVENUE TO BE VACATED os BY THIS DOCUMENT PORTION OF ROSSINI DRIVE TO BE VACATED BY SEPARATE o Na DOCUMENT N N 06'37'40" W ROSSINI DRIVE N P.0.8. r?ossjj\lj F"Ur?.K MAP 15-1117 J rif 9,15 SITE W WARY I« EVE. -6D- Z d 5 9iFFI I AN0 AVE. S�0 SG9 � ►. A RD .c o V No.4066 Al * F>�A&-30-04 �r9lFV or CA1.\F 2/15/02 �A\ITY MAP G. HOWARD DYE L.S. 4068 DATE c.\cwiocc\cu »Y\nivG\cY-1Sq nwr IfcD4, .�S''8 e ��5� •s :'3.ice _./ i _ A .r �.LI -jf ncjr f" 77� �.,� - �� •<A3G�moo- x �� .�"L-� ��11 � xi k� Ll ,s ��m'` :ar ;�=�S'"• � � 11Js�.�i�r �-"/��; �fr �� .� ,�� :'4,s/ .r"cadr��"-c�tp �. ,� "`.t, �.`�( 'fir"i h«4'fi��,. •{ �+ y Y� S� �• ; [ 7 "3 '-�• �6ss- Y t�# 'F.� t �r� Xl (/f� j�• 9 Ilt - f �-��"�"�,q�� ,�y�� ``'sG � "+ x_v� �:� 17 lwy��y(: �� VVV: o��r.,V � ,l8 -.L�[ °� •�I - ' I_ I L C Recording Requested By: ) City Engineer ) When Recorded Mail to: ) City Clerk ) City of Encinitas ) 505 South Vulcan Avenue ) Encinitas,CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Assessor's Parcel No. 260-283-12 Project No.: 0199-G W.O.No.: 04-281 CDP THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain private storm water treatment facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibits attached hereto and made a part hereof, is entered into by Erol Erturk and Jessica S. Toth, husband and wife as joint tenants, (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") for the benefit of future owners who will use the private storm water treatment facilities (hereinafter referred to as " Owner(s)", which shall include the Developer to the extent the Developer retains any ownership interest in any land covered by this agreement.. WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of approval by the City of Encinitas (herein referred to as "City") of a development project and pursuant to City of Encinitas Municipal Code Section 24.16.060 and Section 24.29.040; and WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property as described in Exhibit "A" that will use and enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s), said real property hereinafter referred to as the "property"; and WHEREAS, Property use and enjoy the benefit of certain facilities for storm water treatment and pollution control, said facilities described in Exhibit`B"attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm water treatment system be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for the periodic maintenance and repair of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the apportionment of the expense of such maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public the private storm water facilities be adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis in compliance with the City of Encinitas Municipal Code and other related City policies and requirements; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute a covenant running with the land,binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION AS FOLLOWS: 1. The property is benefited by this Agreement, and present and successive owners of all or any portion of the property are expressly bound hereby for the benefit of the land. 2. The private storm water facilities shall be constructed by the Owner, its successors and assigns, in accordance with the plans and specifications identified in the Plan. 3. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water treatment facilities shall be paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest or each such owner. 4. In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall be liable under this Agreement for their then pro rata share of expenses and such pro rata shares of expenses shall be computed to reflect such newly created parcels. 5. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall be limited to the following: reasonable improvements and maintenance work to adequately maintain said private storm water treatment facilities in proper working order as determined by applicable City policies and requirements and to permit access to said facilities. Repairs and maintenance under this Agreement shall include, but are not limited to, repairing access roadbeds, repairing and maintaining drainage structures, removing debris, perpetually maintaining adequate groundcover and/or other erosion control measures within the private property in order to prevent sedimentation, and other work reasonably necessary and proper to repair and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for their intended purposes and to prevent sedimentation in storm water runoff. The private storm water facilities shall be maintained regularly as necessary to keep the facilities in proper working order, with a minimum maintenance frequency of twice annually. In the event a maintenance schedule for the Storm Water BMP facilities (including sediment removal)is outlined on the approved plans, the schedule will be followed. 6. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation for the construction of improvements imposed as a condition of the development, the obligation to repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities as herein set forth shall commence when improvements have been completed and approved by the City. 2 7. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm water treatment facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owners or their successors in interest shall be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which caused the necessity for the extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the storm water treatment facilities to the condition existing prior to said damage. 8. Any liability of the owners for personal injury to an agent hereunder, or to any worker employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the owners for damage to the property of agent, or any such worker, or of any third persons, as a result of or arising out of repairs and maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne, by the owners as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. Owners shall be responsible for and maintain their own insurance, if any. By this Agreement, the Developer does not intend to provide for the sharing of liability with respect to personal injury or property damage other than that attributable to the repairs and maintenance undertaken under this Agreement. 9. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify and hold harmless City, City's engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, directors, officers, agents and employees from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal injury and other costs, including costs of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, any user of the storm water treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising out of or in any way related to the use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the private storm water treatment facilities. 10. Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's approval of the plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a review, inspection acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City, City's engineer and its consultants, and each of its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents, shall have no responsibility or liability therefore. 11. The Owner, its successors and assigns, shall inspect the stormwater management/BMP facility and submit to the City an inspection report annually. The purpose of the inspection is to assure safe and proper functioning of the facilities. The inspection shall cover the entire facilities, berms, outlet structure, pond areas, access roads, etc. Deficiencies shall be noted in the inspection report. 11. Chapter 11.12 of the Encinitas Municipal Code outlines in detail the nuisance abatement process and the City's authority to require correction of any property maintenance violation that is deemed a public health or safety hazard or threat. The City is authorized to collect sums as appropriate for recovery of the costs for abatement of any property maintenance violation should the property owner fail to voluntarily comply. 3 12. The Owner, its successors and assigns, hereby grant permission to the City, its authorized agents and employees,to enter upon the Property and to inspect the stormwater managementBMP facilities upon reasonable notice whenever the City deems necessary. The purpose of inspection is to follow-up on reported deficiencies and/or to respond to citizen complaints. The City shall provide the Owner, its successors and assigns, copies of the inspection findings and a directive to commence with the repairs if necessary. 13. In the event the Owner, its successors and assigns, fails to maintain the stormwater management/BUT facilities in good working condition acceptable to the City, the City, its agents, or its contractors, may enter upon the Property and take the steps necessary to correct deficiencies identified in the inspection report and to charge the costs of such repairs to the Owner, its successors and assigns. In the event the CITY pursuant to this Agreement,performs work of any nature, or expends any funds in performance of said work for labor, use of equipment, supplies,materials, and the like,the Owner, its successors and assigns, shall reimburse the City upon demand, within thirty(30)days of receipt thereof for all actual costs incurred by the CITY hereunder. If said funds are not paid in a timely manner, City reserves the right to file an assessment lien on the real property with the County Recorder of County of San Diego. It is expressly understood and agreed that the City is under no obligation to maintain or repair said facilities, and in no event shall this Agreement be construed to impose any such obligation on the City. 14. This Agreement imposes no liability of any kind whatsoever on the CITY and the Owner agrees to hold the CITY harmless from any liability in the event the stormwater management/BUT facilities fail to operate properly. 15. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to the end and intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running with the land and any subsequent purchaser of all or any portion thereof, by acceptance of delivery of a deed and/or conveyance regardless of form, shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound by these presents, including without limitation, the right of any person entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement to institute legal action as provided in Paragraph 9 hereof, such remedy to be cumulative and in addition to other remedies provided in this Agreement and to all other remedies at law or in equity. 16. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon majority approval of the owners and consent of the City. 17. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby. 18. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an "Association" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(a), anything in this 4 Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply at and during such time as (i) the Property is encumbered by a "Declaration" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(h), and (ii) the Common Area of the property (including the private storm water treatment facilities) is managed and controlled by an Association: (a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the "agent" as referred to in Paragraph 7 above. The Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment to the Declaration, shall receive no compensation for performing such duties. The costs of such maintenance and repair shall be assessed against each owner and his subdivision interest in the Property pursuant to the Declaration. The assessments shall be deposited in the Association's corporate account. (b) The provisions in the Declaration which provide for assessment liens in favor of the Association and enforcement thereof shall supersede Paragraph 8 of the Agreement in its entirety. No individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of the Common Area (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Property except as may be allowed by the Declaration. (c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which reduces or limits the Association's rights and duties pursuant to its Bylaws and Declaration. 19. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners. 19. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land and shall be deemed to be for the benefit of the land of the owners and each and every person who shall at anytime own all or any portion of the property referred to herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parti s have executed this Agreement This t4 day of veswZk� 2006. Developer: Erol Erturk ssica S. Toth Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement. 5 ATTACHMENT A TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT PROJECT NO. 04-281 CDP PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 1269, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, February 1, 1973. Together with that portion of Sheffield Avenue as vacated to the public use by the City of Encinitas Resolution No. 2002-06 recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, March 12, 2002 as file No. 2002-208652 of Official Records 6 ATTACHMENT B TO COVENANT REGARDING REAL PROPERTY: PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT PROJECT NO. 04-281 CDP PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT DESCRIPTION THOSE PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AS SHOWN ON "GRADING PLAN FOR 403 SHEFFIIELD AVENUE, TOTH RESIDENCE", CITY OF ENCINITAS GRADING PLAN 0199-G. CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT _ r. State of California ss. County of (`2, Die CC) I On JQV• 1, SW O , before me,?*OAJO 4 it•/u l4Lc7zi Jie, A)awr I°0461-z Dale Name and Title of Officer(e.g.,'Jane Doe,Notary Public") personally appeared J"J5rPL5*1CA 6. 7-6Tly Name(s)of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me droved to me on the basis of satisfactory . evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) (-e ..� ..».•...+�.� subscribed to the within trument and *ANQA-G,MILUO� acknowledged to me tha�ey executed Cotmniso"41389205 the same in his e(r au rized tarry Pubk-Cali ca acit (es y > San Dilt90 County p y( ), and that b hisQber heir 1, My Commission Exp.Jan. 6,2007 signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Place Notary Seal Above Poature of No is OPTIONAL Though.the information below is not required bylaw,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: - ❑ Individual . Top of thumb here ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: 0 1997 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth;CA 91313.2402 Prod.No.5907 Reorder.Call Toll-Free 1-800-878.8827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT : State of California ' ss. County of I On _tbu- 7. 2006, before me,?,f,�J,m 4.1411tJ(J/Ie?, Date Name and Title of OWcer(e.g.,-Jane Doe,Notary Pubridl ' personally appeared 4. E&9'r R K Name(s)of Signer(s) ' ❑ ersonally known to me l p; ved to me on the basis of satisfactory . evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)Qre ...., subscribed to the withwi. instrument and 1.-G.�MILUpUR acknowledged to me t(be%,he/they executed �ommMNuon'913#9205 the same in r/their authorized tary '4Wfa uis capacity(ies), and that by is/ er/their sl.e Oiapo county 111p aien UP.Jan.6,2007 signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or •�•••� the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) �.: acted, executed the instrument. r' WITNESS my hand and official seal. Place Notary Seal Above re of Notary Publi OPTIONAL ) Though.the information below is not required bylaw,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document ' Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s)Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual • ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): Top of thumb here ❑ Partner—❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: O 1997 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth;CA 91313-2402 Prod.No.5907 Reorder.Cad Tod-Free 1-800-876-6827 CITY1 CARDIFF - PERMIT Fx? , 1 , PERMIT FEF _ r J i PLAN CH -, 1NEPECT70K W T T I t 1e= F r+ T 1 r'^ COMFACTION REPORT ENGINFEF _ ROUGH GRADING FINRL TNBPECT105 ° LANE -,LA : , ANY PERMIT VSGED FURSURNT TO THIS APT! 17A?:� ,1 w C190LE ONE , ,r,: _ : y HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS For TOTH RESIDENCE APN: 260-283-12 CDP-04-281 CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Prepared For Jessica Toth ;--� 403 Sheffield Ave. Encinitas, CA 92014 ,! 1 7 PE 1483 r PREPARED BY: PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 � oFESj (858)259-8212 �� silos ys Fy DATE: 5-31-06 3 C 68-� �� REVISED: 8-24-06 EXP �7 cfvm OFCALIFQQ� W. JUSTIN ITER, RCE 68964 DATE N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION DISCUSSION..............................................................................A CONCLUSION.............................................................................B 100 YEAR PRE DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS.........C 100 YEAR POST DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS .......D APPENDIX.................................................................................F Isopluvials Intensity Duration Curve SCS Soil Classification Node Map Detention Volume Calculations N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE#1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 A. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to analyze the storm water runoff produced from the 100 year storm event of the existing and post-developed condition of the Sheffield Ave. proposed project site. The subject property is physically located at 403 Sheffield Ave., Encinitas, California. The property is geographically located at N 33 001'40" W 117 016'55". Pre-Developed Conditions The existing condition of the project site consists of an empty lot at 403 Sheffield. The parcel is surrounded by Sheffield Ave. to the north. To the east and south of the property are single family residences. Bordering the property to the west is Rossini Dr. The portion of Rossini Dr. along the property is a gravel walking path. Current drainage on the property is sheet flow from east to west. Upon leaving the site, runoff is collected in an existing creek to the west of Rossini Dr. The existing terrain is light vegetation with few a trees. At the end of Sheffield Avenue a concrete channel carries runoff to a near by creek. The highpoint of the property is in the south east corner of the lot at an elevation of 160 ft. The low point on the property is along the center of the westerly property line at an elevation of 149. For the existing 100 year flows the property.was divided into three separate drainage hydrologic sub-basins, A1, A2, and A3 as shown on the attached node map. The drainage sub-basins produced peak flows of 0.08 cfs, 0.19 cfs, and 0.31 cfs, respectfully. Post- Development Conditions The proposed development consists of the construction of a single family home. Runoff collected along the east side of the property will be collected in area drains or flow overland to the north side of the property. The water collected in the area drain system as well as the overland flow will discharge over BMP area before it leaves the site. Runoff collected on the northern portion of the property will flow to the north and into a proposed concrete channel on Sheffield drive. Runoff collected in the southern portion of the property will flow to the south and west and discharge along the western border of the property. Runoff collected along the west portion of the property will sheet flow over BMP areas before leaving the site. The total post-development flows for area Al, A2, and A3 are 0.09 cfs, 0.39 cfs, and 0.48 cfs, respectfully. As a result of the increase in impervious surface, two detention basins are necessary. Both basins will have a capacity of 200 cubic feet, yielding a total of 400 cubic feet of detention. The detention calculations have been included in the appendix of this report. A detail and specifications of the detention basins is included on the project grading plan. N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 Methodology and Results Introduction The hydrologic model used to perform the hydrologic analysis presented in this report utilizes the Ration Method (RM) equation, Q=CIA. The RM formula estimates the peak rate of runoff based on the variables of area, runoff coefficient, and rainfall intensity. The rainfall intensity (I) is equal o: I = 7.44xP6 xD" Where: I = Intensity (in/hr) P6 =6-hour precipitation(inches) D=duration(minutes—use Tc) Using the Time of Concentration (Tc), which is the time required for a given element of water that originates at the most remote point of the basin being analyzed to reach the point at which the runoff from the basin is being analyzed. The RM equation determines the storm water runoff rate (Q) for a given basin in terms of flow (typically in cubic feet per second (cfs) but sometimes as gallons per minute (gpm)). The RM equation is as follows: Q = CIA Where: Q= flow(in cfs) C =runoff coefficient, ratio of rainfall that produces storm water runoff(runoff vs. infiltration/evaporation/absorption/etc) I = average rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the Tc for the area, in inches per hour. A=drainage area contributing to the basin in acres. The RM equation assumes that the storm event being analyzed delivers precipitation to the entire basin uniformly, and therefore the peak discharge rate will occur when a raindrop that falls at the most remote portion of the basin arrives at the point of analysis. The RM also assumes that the fraction of rainfall that becomes runoff or the runoff coefficient C is not affected by the storm intensity, I, or the precipitation zone number. The hydrologic soil group classification for the site is"D". The methodology used herein to determine Q too is the modified rational method. The computer modeling program utilized to perform the hydrologic analysis of the proposed project site is produced by Advanced Engineering Software (AES2003). The pre and post-development runoff coefficients, used to analyze the both conditions, were determined by using weighted"C" average. N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 C= 0.90 x (% impervious) + Cp x (1-%impervious) Where: Cp = pervious surface runoff coefficient (varies depending on soil type from 0.2 to 0.35—since analysis assumes type d soils Cp =0.35) For the proposed development the runoff coefficient utilized for the hydrologic analysis of the project site was calculated to be 0.72, based on an impervious percentage of 46.8%. For the pre-developed condition the runoff coefficient utilized for the hydrologic analysis of the project site was calculated to be 0.35, based on an impervious percentage of 3.3%. B. CONCLUSION Based on the information and calculations contained in this report it is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering, Inc. that the storm drain system as proposed on the corresponding Grading Plan will function to adequately intercept, contain and convey Qioo to the appropriate points of discharge. WHydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 C. 100 YEAR PRE DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 .. ....._...... HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++*+++++++++*+++++++++++++++++++++++++*+++++++++ RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2001,1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2002 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2002 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: Pasco Engineering, Inc. 535 N. Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 +++++++++***************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * PRE CONSTRUCTION HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR 100 YEAR STORM + * 403 SHEFFIELD AVE. * 1483 5-31-06 FILE NAME: 1483PRE.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 10:53 05/31/2006 ---------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ----------------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.500 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth) * (Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5400 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 45.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 158.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 153.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 5.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.031 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.03 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.08 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.10 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .3500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 55.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 159.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 8.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 4.102 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.19 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.19 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.10 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 21 --------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .3500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 60.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 160.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 149.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 11.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.966 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 TC(MIN.) = 6.00 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.31 N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 D. 100 YEAR POST DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2001,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2002 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2002 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: Pasco Engineering, Inc. 535 N. Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 *********+**************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * POST CONSTRUCTION HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR 100 YEAR STORM * 403 SHEFFIELD AVE. * 1483 5-31-06 ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: 1483POST.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 10:57 05/31/2006 ----------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.500 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth) * (Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* N:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8124/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.10 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 45.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 158.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 153.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 5.00 2.598 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) _ *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.09 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.03 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.09 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.10 TO NODE 5.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 157.30 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 6.30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.704 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.39 N:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE#1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 6.10 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE-°--21---------- ----------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5400 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 159.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 150.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 9.00 4.846 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) _ *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.856 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.48 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.48 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: 6.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 TC(MIN.) _ PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.48 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 HYDROLOGY STUDY for TOTH RESIDENCE PE 1483 F. APPENDIX N:\Hydrology& Hydraulics\1483 HYDRO REPORT.doc PE# 1483 10:30 AM 8/24/2006 Cd Cd cd 4-4 0 ce- b Irnperial CountY .......... ........... .... ....... .......... .GE.91 L IV .......... .......... Si .00.L L t 1p -T 0 C, 41 AW-ILL •bj) �/.•�.11 5 � .O -- �7 a 5 s s sY4� f!t f= � U � $ Imperial County Q ° o. •Sl.9ll � �,_ r � N ._....qtr (\,. l .OE.91l h — .. •r (� :=qtr. .�.�" m ••�• -� o.' ......... .._... .1 Q) ZQ, f sw.stt O ¢ -_ , co 4a --• - 1`J• > _-- •� AO.LIt ,oa.LU N • - - - � st,tu fi AE.LII OE.LIt C C 00 o Q • u .r. w VIM FA MrAmm s•,a� an��.a■e_C■iriirr�i WWA51cs� '■ ■ ra.ssm�s _ a�at• a�aanaaat•�■a��w�ww•w.��w�w �.aorv�. ��. ��■�sr�r�a►�mm.��m�m..emacu - ts,as' WA4 rAM�M m�marnna��aaw� aa+� ssmiAWarir� mrmu.�n�a .. ArAWAWArAWMFM =aaa saaa■aaaau��• mm Imm►�sr MWAG mm am= _cam ' • ' =�-�� _cx�=c=°�c��:�= ==.�i iw��-...►�.e5� --- suo=.s�ra..-■w ��i�ii•wltSltJ��/��►-iw•� ■.-I ...■■H----a H��DSO H� �.�isi�■auH��r�u�.I�H�H��•HC�� .ri.�H��..■..w■s- . at.a�i�aa�ae•aaa�/�r��/�e•mr�iaae.��an■n�stia�� `�n.ua.ass�sse, �as,a■assaassatas i�r�rs�srs ��rMAaa+sss.�.tas��s•■w .i.aaivaaasu■asm aafa�aH�■aaaa��SWIM S� aalat•I as.�a�a�aas•aaar��e,�s•s.� s• ■■�..,GinmC��on�n�.aa-�aaas�et�s. C�■��..i/�i��7C'i��ii�■ii��ai�aa� �.n■■G."ii■..m�� iC �• =WW O■H-.Q�HHH .1AWrAW .a.��.'FLC�n..�r /�er`C�■i�.�CC ..■■...H.00a�t•t•� ��.��r�.rG�r��►�r�.r .►�..�.�C■a�■aae.CCSa■■o■■..w.ar��t■� =a�=Am s �c�rilcu�I att� aa�aaat.aaaae• ■.a.■■a...sasnaes• es��a�aa��r. �!��ia'�s,�Csss�a_�Cia�.as��sas�a Ca�ass s. °1'm. �..Pr �waamta�.�aaaaar``��=Caa�asaa��maa.n■a�a�assfassoa+ a�a WMAW�t r sMA �A aaaaa�u�et= Eate• .tau nuaa•��atrs ar/ r s�irsaar�nat�Q��a�a�ela�� aata.�taafaass�a�auMM Q`iii�i'i��i� C� �i '�i�� ■Tin=Ciis�iCi son�i: 'u' t .rr rte► r �► s �� ■n � nm � w os o+ 05- co co .N ,N _ c^b d t1 O c^lD c^CC O T T �OV�^ M t'- er► eta, n^C h^G �.a, ►- ►- Cl > O c O y C O L N O N 1 1 t Co.—— U o a pN� O = N O L C14 z i c p O r c O O .H O O c \ 1 \ r•1 i .n D O L V�' �„ ^ N N L t O L O O C O N m L U n a r L O v a•= � D r C -- °o.E-s- O M T WT f1! _ V - cU a� � v tGUvI �CL Zm t° C J ^~ /~ _ � N �• = L � O n N a at N . a n O tT 1 1 1 1 as a tE m 0 o\— 1 1 W% M r n 0 o 0 M UN fl- e 1 o x bK� ox E 4- U V O4- 0 P } ■ C N h • C N O V �j o O _ o � o� <_ CL m v0 p p rV � v L L^ O cr O% } N csv H �� a. 0,0- O W O 0 O L N O+ N N C W% O O '�" .. pea ►- O a,O O W J " h C` _a 0 e c L C * 1 E < U c o o r 0 o O � N U oW c li C, E a CO 9 C O a = a U 0 CD o c o O K N LNd �O N bQ1L1 Cf" 40b:;: _ oo LVo 1 }O CO t La CO000.0-0 m ¢, p^ O N O G N O V N �r4 C4-t n _ V O h 13 T ..} trN \=NnN H h b O _ M } G V O 9 C � L � F_-•- O < r1U � a w o C cz rl� 00 07 07 00 H M N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O CO ^ i O R. i.. V N > cA�— V) 00 "t O (ON 00 07 V' 7 C- U M I R C- 00 CG OO 0G O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O vJi c�7 N C CJ fl. C ai U ca N cn LL C O v v a0 r- t W) N OO r � -^ v'1 -^ � - A N cn cn v, 7 vi- V, 1-i %D r� r� o0 00 00 0o C p o 6 0 0 0 o 6 o 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 °- U V m cn tu t7 r Q _ v 00 a0 N vl %O m oq .> N N M M �t •� V1 V1 N h 00 00 00 . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -C V y .fl m F V_ O O iC * O O v1 O O cn O wl O O V7 O O V, V U N N M W) "D 00 00 OO O, O, O, 4� L=• 1 en Ey0.4 o by ,A C V1 y y y •'b . y y y to m y y ..yam. •V G CG O i i O O O O V — - E r U C Li c C A A A A A A A A A o c: � p rn h o o U o C zN U O N N 7 [- N �t 00 O w r ►-r C is r r cs is cs c3 co U O C C a� u G C C C G C � C C � n 0. 'D r •n 3 N O '-2 Tl 'G -D -D ••o pp tC C d U d v U � 0 U CJ 4r-) W U G. ••�.• O y0 C i7 m O C - r a�i o v ca - `� r r. ° i C] A m A E -� o -w = o c •� O O C C C G r 2 0 O U 3 Oy Z G �.. - 'r '� C5 r ��' W aoi aci 0 ai lu Q ai 0 b '� � � � a i =d a � ? ° ' > CLO C Oo Z z c u N o G G 4 N m 0 C C m v a o v u y o m 0 C] A A A - c '5 'V • .o a z -02 u api aCi J •� � 11 0 o 0 0 CZ o v�A � .° .°� .°a x x v U U U 1 \ P , \ o � , U ' , j \ . I I , \ rs�:a s / ,L V I� i 4 t 6{ Lw PRE-DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA Q10' 0.19 cfs Tc= 5 min C= 0.35 #1= 72 P10,6= 2.5 in A= 0.09 acres (7.44 M-Dk.645) (1"DW) (Vi-vo) (AWAT) (Q=dA) (Re-ordered) D I VOL AVOL I (INCR) Q VOL ORDINATE # (MIN) (IN/HR} (IN) (IN) (IN/HR) (CFS) (CF) (CF S) 0 0 - 0.00 0.00 0.55 6.59 0.19 57 1 5 6.59 0.55 0.15 1.84 0.06 17 0.00 2 10 4.21 0.70 0.11 1.30 0.04 12 0.00 3 15 3.24 0.81 0.09 1.05 0.03 10 0.00 4 20 2.69 0.90 0.07 0.89 0.03 8 0.00 5 25 2.33 0.97 0.06 0.78 0.02 7 0.00 6 30 2.07 1.04 0.06 0.70 0.02 7 0.01 7 35 1.88 1.10 0.05 0.64 0.02 6 0.01 8 40 1.72 1.15 0.05 0.59 0.02 6 0.01 9 45 1.60 1.20 0.05 0.55 0.02 5 0.01 10 50 1.49 1.24 0.04 0.51 0.02 5 0.01 11 55 1.40 1.29 0.04 0.48 0.02 5 0.01 12 60 1.33 1.33 0.04 0.46 0.01 4 0.01 13 65 1.26 1.36 0.04 0.44 0.01 4 0.01 14 70 1.20 1.40 0.03 0.42 0.01 4 0.01 15 75 1.15 1.44 0.03 0.40 0.01 4 0.01 16 80 1.10 1.47 0.03 0.38 0.01 4 0.01 17 85 1.06 1.50 0.03 0.37 0.01 3 0.01 18 90 1.02 1.53 0.03 0.36 0.01 3 0.01 19 95 0.99 1.56 0.03 0.34 0.01 3 0.01 20 100 0.95 1.59 0.03 0.33 0.01 3 0.01 21 105 0.92 1.62 0.03 0.32 0.01 3 0.01 22 110 0.90 1.64 0.03 0.31 0.01 3 0.01 23 115 0.87 1.67 0.03 0.31 0.01 3 0.01 24 120 0.85 1.70 0.02 0.30 0.01 3 0.01 25 125 0.83 1.72 0.02 0.29 0.01 3 0.01 26 130 0.81 1.75 0.02 0.28 0.01 3 0.01 27 135 0.79 1.77 0.02 0.28 0.01 3 0.01 28 140 0.77 1.79 0.02 0.27 0.01 3 0.01 29 145 0.75 1.81 0.02 0.26 0.01 2 0.01 30 150 0.73 1.84 0.02 0.26 0.01 2 0.01 31 155 0.72 1.86 0.02 0.25 0.01 2 0.01 32 160 0.70 1.88 0.02 0.25 0.01 2 0.01 33 165 0.69 1.90 0.02 0.24 0.01 2 0.01 34 170 0.68 1.92 0.02 0.24 0.01 2 0.01 35 175 0.66 1.94 0.02 0.23 0.01 2 0.01 36 180 0.65 1.96 0.02 0.23 0.01 2 0.01 1483-Predevelopm Hydrograph area 2 =4=6 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA 37 185 0.64 1.98 0.02 0.23 0.01 2 0.01 38 190 0.63 2.00 0.02 0.22 0.01 2 0.01 39 195 0.62 2.02 0.02 0.22 0.01 2 0.01 40 200 0.61 2.03 0.02 0.21 0.01 2 0.01 41 205 0.60 2.05 0.02 0.21 0.01 2 0.02 42 210 0.59 2.07 0.02 0.21 0.01 2 0.02 43 215 0.58 2.09 0.02 0.21 0.01 2 0.02 44 220 0.57 2.10 0.02 0.20 0.01 2 0.02 45 225 0.57 2.12 0.02 0.20 0.01 2 0.02 46 230 0.56 2.14 0.02 0.20 0.01 2 0.03 47 235 0.55 2.15 0.02 0.19 0.01 2 0.04 48 240 0.54 2.17 0.02 0.19 0.01 2 0.06 49 245 0.54 2.19 0.02 0.19 0.01 2 0.19 50 250 0.53 2.20 0.02 0.19 0.01 2 0.03 51 255 0.52 2.22 0.02 0.18 0.01 2 0.02 52 260 0.52 2.23 0.02 0.18 0.01 2 0.02 53 265 0.51 2.25 0.01 0.18 0.01 2 0.01 54 270 0.50 2.26 0.01 0.18 0.01 2 0.01 55 275 0.50 2.28 0.01 0.18 0.01 2 0.01 56 280 0.49 2.29 0.01 0.17 0.01 2 0.01 57 285 0.49 2.31 0.01 0.17 0.01 2 0.01 58 290 0.48 2.32 0.01 0.17 0.01 2 0.01 59 295 0.47 2.33 0.01 0.17 0.01 2 0.01 60 300 0.47 2.35 0.01 0.17 0.01 2 0.01 61 305 0.46 2.36 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 62 310 0.46 2.38 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 63 315 0.46 2.39 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 64 320 0.45 2.40 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 65 325 0.45 2.42 0.01 0.16 0.00 1 0.01 66 330 0.44 2.43 0.01 0.16 0.00 1 0.01 67 335 0.44 2.44 0.01 0.15 0.00 1 0.01 68 340 0.43 2.45 0.01 0.15 0.00 1 0.01 69 345 0.43 2.47 0.01 0.15 0.00 1 0.01 70 350 0.43 2.48 0.01 0.15 0.00 1 0.01 71 355 0.42 2.49 0.01 0.15 0.00 1 0.00 72 360 0.42 2.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 SUM= 190 cubic feet 0.00 acre-feet Check: V= C*A*P6 V= 0.01 acre-feet NOT OK 1483-Predevelopment Hydrograph area 2 8/24/2006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA RM-HYDROGRAPH Project 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 w 0.10 CJ 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) 1483-Predevebpnm t Hydrograph area 2 8124r100G POST-DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA Q10= 0.39 cfs Tc= 5 min C= 0.72 !� 72 P10,6= 2.5 in A= 0.09 acres (7.44 P6*Dti.645) O*CV90) (VI-VO) (A VIA T) (Q=dA) (R"fdered) D I VOL AVOL I (INCR) Q VOL ORDINATE # (MIN) (IN/HR) (IAN) (IN) (IN/HR) (CFS) (CF) (CFS) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.55 6.59 0.39 117 1 5 6.59 0.55 0.15 1.84 0.12 36 0.01 2 10 4.21 0.70 0.11 1.30 0.08 25 0.01 3 15 3.24 0.81 0.09 1.05 0.07 20 0.01 4 20 2.69 0.90 0.07 0.89 0.06 17 0.01 5 25 2.33 0.97 0.06 0.78 0.05 15 0.01 6 30 2.07 1.04 0.06 0.70 0.05 14 0.01 7 35 1.88 1.10 0.05 0.64 0.04 12 0.01 8 40 1.72 1.15 0.05 0.59 0.04 11 0.01 9 45 1.60 1.20 0.05 0.55 0.04 11 0.01 10 50 1.49 1.24 0.04 0.51 0.03 10 0.01 11 55 1.40 1.29 0.04 0.48 0.03 9 0.01 12 60 1.33 1.33 0.04 0.46 0.03 9 0.01 13 65 1.26 1.36 0.04 0.44 0.03 8 0.01 14 70 1.20 1.40 0.03 0.42 0.03 8 0.01 15 75 1.15 1.44 0.03 0.40 0.03 8 0.01 16 80 1.10 1.47 0.03 0.38 0.02 7 0.01 17 85 1.06 1.50 0.03 0.37 0.02 7 0.01 18 90 1.02 1.53 0.03 0.36 0.02 7 0.01 19 95 0.99 1.56 0.03 0.34 0.02 7 0.01 20 100 0.95 1.59 0.03 0.33 0.02 6 0.01 21 105 0.92 1.62 0.03 0.32 0.02 6 0.01 22 110 0.90 1.64 0.03 0.31 0.02 6 0.01 23 115 0.87 1.67 0.03 0.31 0.02 6 0.01 24 120 0.85 1.70 0.02 0.30 0.02 6 0.01 25 125 0.83 1.72 0.02 0.29 0.02 6 0.02 26 130 0.81 1.75 0.02 0.28 0.02 5 0.02 27 135 0.79 1.77 0.02 0.28 0.02 5 0.02 28 140 0.77 1.79 0.02 0.27 0.02 5 0.02 29 145 0.75 1.81 0.02 0.26 0.02 5 0.02 30 150 0.73 1.84 0.02 0.26 0.02 5 0.02 31 155 0.72 1.86 0.02 0.25 0.02 5 0.02 32 160 0.70 1.88 0.02 0.25 0.02 5 0.02 33 165 0.69 1.90 0.02 0.24 0.02 5 0.02 34 170 0.68 1.92 0.02 0.24 0.02 5 0.02 35 175 0.66 1.94 0.02 0.23 0.02 5 0.02 36 180 0.65 1.96 0.02 0.23 0.01 4 0.02 37 185 0.64 1.98 0.02 0.23 0.01 4 0.02 38 190 0.63 2.00 0.02 0.22 0.01 4 0.02 39 195 0.62 2.02 0.02 0.22 0.01 4 0.03 40 200 0.61 2.03 0.02 0.21 0.01 4 0.03 41 205 0.60 2.05 0.02 0.21 0.01 4 0.03 1483-Postdevelopment Hydrograph area 2 8/2412006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA 42 210 0.59 2.07 0.02 0.21 0.01 4 0.03 43 215 0.58 2.09 0.02 0.21 0.01 4 0.04 44 220 0.57 2.10 0.02 0.20 0.01 4 0.04 45 225 0.57 2.12 0.02 0.20 0.01 4 0.05 46 230 0.56 2.14 0.02 0.20 0.01 4 0.06 47 235 0.55 2.15 0.02 0.19 0.01 4 0.08 48 240 0.54 2.17 0.02 0.19 0.01 4 0.12 49 245 0.54 2.19 0.02 0.19 0.01 4 0.39 50 250 0.53 2.20 0.02 0.19 0.01 4 0.07 51 255 0.52 2.22 0.02 0.18 0.01 4 0.05 52 260 0.52 2.23 0.02 0.18 0.01 4 0.04 53 265 0.51 2.25 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.03 54 270 0.50 2.26 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.03 55 275 0.50 2.28 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.02 56 280 0.49 2.29 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 57 285 0.49 2.31 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 58 290 0.48 2.32 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 59 295 0.47 2.33 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 60 300 0.47 2.35 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 61 305 0.46 2.36 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 62 310 0.46 2.38 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 63 315 0.46 2.39 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 64 320 0.45 2.40 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 65 325 0.45 2.42 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 66 330 0.44 2.43 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 67 335 0.44 2.44 0.01 0.15 0.01 3 0.01 68 340 0.43 2.45 0.01 0.15 0.01 3 0.01 69 345 0.43 2.47 0.01 0.15 0.01 3 0.01 70 350 0.43 2.48 0.01 0.15 0.01 3 0.01 71 355 0.42 2.49 0.01 0.15 0.01 3 0.01 72 360 0.42 2.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.01 SUM= 390 cubic feet 0.01 acre-feet Check: V= C*A*P6 V= 0.01 acre-feet NOT OK 1483-Postdevelopment Hydrograph area 2 8124/2006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA RM-HYDROGRAPH Project 0.45 0.40 0.3s 0.30 —0.25 - w CO 0.20 0.15- 0.10 0.05 - 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) 1483-Poddevebpmat Hydrograph area 2 8/24/2006 PRE-DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA Q10= 0.31 cfs Tc= 5 min C= 0.35 72 P10.6= 2.5 in A= 0.15 acres (7.44-P6-Dti.645) MOM) (VI-VO) (AWAT) (Q=,4) (Re-ordered) D I VOL AVOL I (INCR) Q VOL ORDINATE # (MIN) (IN/HR) (IN) (IN) (IN/HR) (CFS) (CF) (CFS) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.55 6.59 0.31 93 1 5 6.59 0.55 0.15 1.84 0.10 29 0.01 2 10 4.21 0.70 0.11 1.30 0.07 21 0.01 3 15 3.24 0.81 0.09 1.05 0.05 16 0.01 4 20 2.69 0.90 0.07 0.89 0.05 14 0.01 5 25 2.33 0.97 0.06 0.78 0.04 12 0.01 6 30 2.07 1.04 0.06 0.70 0.04 11 0.01 7 35 1.88 1.10 0.05 0.64 0.03 10 0.01 8 40 1.72 1.15 0.05 0.59 0.03 9 0.01 9 45 1.60 1.20 0.05 0.55 0.03 9 0.01 10 50 1.49 1.24 0.04 0.51 0.03 8 0.01 11 55 1.40 1.29 0.04 0.48 0.03 8 0.01 12 60 1.33 1.33 0.04 0.46 0.02 7 0.01 13 65 1.26 1.36 0.04 0.44 0.02 7 0.01 14 70 1.20 1.40 0.03 0.42 0.02 7 0.01 15 75 1.15 1.44 0.03 0.40 0.02 6 0.01 16 80 1.10 1.47 0.03 0.38 0.02 6 0.01 17 85 1.06 1.50 0.03 0.37 0.02 6 0.01 18 90 1.02 1.53 0.03 0.36 0.02 6 0.01 19 95 0.99 1.56 0.03 0.34 0.02 5 0.01 20 100 0.95 1.59 0.03 0.33 0.02 5 0.01 21 105 0.92 1.62 0.03 0.32 0.02 5 0.01 22 110 0.90 1.64 0.03 0.31 0.02 5 0.01 23 115 0.87 1.67 0.03 0.31 0.02 5 0.01 24 120 0.85 1.70 0.02 0.30 0.02 5 0.01 25 125 0.83 1.72 0.02 0.29 0.02 5 0.01 26 130 0.81 1.75 0.02 0.28 0.01 4 0.01 27 135 0.79 1.77 0.02 0.28 0.01 4 0.01 28 140 0.77 1.79 0.02 0.27 0.01 4 0.01 29 145 0.75 1.81 0.02 0.26 0.01 4 0.01 30 150 0.73 1.84 0.02 0.26 0.01 4 0.01 31 155 0.72 1.86 0.02 0.25 0.01 4 0.01 32 160 0.70 1.88 0.02 0.25 0.01 4 0.02 33 165 0.69 1.90 0.02 0.24 0.01 4 0.02 34 170 0.68 1.92 0.02 0.24 0.01 4 0.02 35 175 0.66 1.94 0.02 0.23 0.01 4 0.02 36 180 0.65 1.96 0.02 0.23 0.01 4 0.02 37 185 0.64 1.98 0.02 0.23 0.01 4 0.02 1483-Predevelopment Hydrograph area 3 8/24/2006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA 38 190 0.63 2.00 0.02 0.22 0.01 3 0.02 39 195 0.62 2.02 0.02 0.22 0.01 3 0.02 40 200 0.61 2.03 0.02 0.21 0.01 3 0.02 41 205 0.60 2.05 0.02 0.21 0.01 3 0.03 42 210 0.59 2.07 0.02 0.21 0.01 3 0.03 43 215 0.58 2.09 0.02 0.21 0.01 3 0.03 44 220 0.57 2.10 0.02 0.20 0.01 3 0.03 45 225 0.57 2.12 0.02 0.20 0.01 3 0.04 46 230 0.56 2.14 0.02 0.20 0.01 3 0.05 47 235 0.55 2.15 0.02 0.19 0.01 3 0.07 48 240 0.54 2.17 0.02 0.19 0.01 3 0.10 49 245 0.54 2.19 0.02 0.19 0.01 3 0.31 50 250 0.53 2.20 0.02 0.19 0.01 3 0.05 51 255 0.52 2.22 0.02 0.18 0.01 3 0.04 52 260 0.52 2.23 0.02 0.18 0.01 3 0.03 53 265 0.51 2.25 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.02 54 270 0.50 2.26 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.02 55 275 0.50 2.28 0.01 0.18 0.01 3 0.02 56 280 0.49 2.29 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 57 285 0.49 2.31 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.02 58 290 0.48 2.32 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.01 59 295 0.47 2.33 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.01 60 300 0.47 2.35 0.01 0.17 0.01 3 0.01 61 305 0.46 2.36 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 62 310 0.46 2.38 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 63 315 0.46 2.39 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 64 320 0.45 2.40 0.01 0.16 0.01 3 0.01 65 325 0.45 2.42 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 66 330 0.44 2.43 0.01 0.16 0.01 2 0.01 67 335 0.44 2.44 0.01 0.15 0.01 2 0.01 68 340 0.43 2.45 0.01 0.15 0.01 2 0.01 69 345 0.43 2.47 0.01 0.15 0.01 2 0.01 70 350 0.43 2.48 0.01 0.15 0.01 2 0.01 71 355 0.42 2.49 0.01 0.15 0.01 2 0.01 72 360 0.42 2.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.01 SUM= 315 cubic feet 0.01 acre-feet Check: V= C"A*P6 V= 0.01 acre-feet NOT OK 1483-Predevelopment Hydrograph area 3 8/24/2008 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, CA RM-HYDROGRAPH Project 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 H V d 0.15 0.10 0.05 el 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time(min) 1483-RredevelopmeM Hydrograph area 3 8124!2006 . . ... .......... ....... POST-DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, California Q,o= 0.48 cfs Tc= 5 min C= 0.54 #= 72 P,O,s= 2.5 in A= 0.15 acres (7.441P6 D'-.645) (l'DO) (VI-VO) (A VIA n (Q=dA) (Re-ordered) D I VOL AVOL I (INCR) Q VOL ORDINATE # (MIN) (IN/HR) (IN) (IN) (IN/HR) (CFS) (CF) (CFS) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.55 6.59 0.48 144 1 5 6.59 0.55 0.15 1.84 0.15 45 0.01 2 10 4.21 0.70 0.11 1.30 0.11 32 0.01 3 15 3.24 0.81 0.09 1.05 0.08 25 0.01 4 20 2.69 0.90 0.07 0.89 0.07 22 0.01 5 25 2.33 0.97 0.06 0.78 0.06 19 0.01 6 30 2.07 1.04 0.06 0.70 0.06 17 0.01 7 35 1.88 1.10 0.05 0.64 0.05 16 0.01 8 40 1.72 1.15 0.05 0.59 0.05 14 0.01 9 45 1.60 1.20 0.05 0.55 0.04 13 0.01 10 50 1.49 1.24 0.04 0.51 0.04 12 0.01 11 55 1.40 1.29 0.04 0.48 0.04 12 0.01 12 60 1.33 1.33 0.04 0.46 0.04 11 0.01 13 65 1.26 1.36 0.04 0.44 0.04 11 0.01 14 70 1.20 1.40 0.03 0.42 0.03 10 0.01 15 75 1.15 1.44 0.03 0.40 0.03 10 0.02 16 80 1.10 1.47 0.03 0.38 0.03 9 0.02 17 85 1.06 1.50 0.03 0.37 0.03 9 0.02 18 90 1.02 1.53 0.03 0.36 0.03 9 0.02 19 95 0.99 1.56 0.03 0.34 0.03 8 0.02 20 100 0.95 1.59 0.03 0.33 0.03 8 0.02 21 105 0.92 1.62 0.03 0.32 0.03 8 0.02 22 110 0.90 1.64 0.03 0.31 0.03 8 0.02 23 115 0.87 1.67 0.03 0.31 0.02 7 0.02 24 120 0.85 1.70 0.02 0.30 0.02 7 0.02 25 125 0.83 1.72 0.02 0.29 0.02 7 0.02 26 130 0.81 1.75 0.02 0.28 0.02 7 0.02 27 135 0.79 1.77 0.02 0.28 0.02 7 0.02 28 140 0.77 1.79 0.02 0.27 0.02 7 0.02 29 145 0.75 1.81 0.02 0.26 0.02 6 0.02 30 150 0.73 1.84 0.02 0.26 0.02 6 0.02 31 155 0.72 1.86 0.02 0.25 0.02 6 0.02 32 160 0.70 1.88 0.02 0.25 0.02 6 0.02 33 165 0.69 1.90 0.02 0.24 0.02 6 0.02 34 170 0.68 1.92 0.02 0.24 0.02 6 0.03 35 175 0.66 1.94 0.02 0.23 0.02 6 0.03 36 180 0.65 1.96 0.02 0.23 0.02 6 0.03 37 185 0.64 1.98 0.02 0.23 0.02 5 0.03 38 190 0.63 2.00 0.02 0.22 0.02 5 0.03 39 195 0.62 2.02 0.02 0.22 0.02 5 0.03 40 200 0.61 2.03 0.02 0.21 0.02 5 0.04 41 205 0.60 2.05 0.02 0.21 0.02 5 0.04 1483-Postdevelopment Hydrograph area 3 8/24/2006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, California 42 210 0.59 2.07 0.02 0.21 0.02 5 0.04 43 215 0.58 2.09 0.02 0.21 0.02 5 0.05 44 220 0.57 2.10 0.02 0.20 0.02 5 0.05 45 225 0.57 2.12 0.02 0.20 0.02 5 0.06 46 230 0.56 2.14 0.02 0.20 0.02 5 0.07 47 235 0.55 2.15 0.02 0.19 0.02 5 0.11 48 240 0.54 2.17 0.02 0.19 0.02 5 0.15 49 245 0.54 2.19 0.02 0.19 0.02 5 0.48 50 250 0.53 2.20 0.02 0.19 0.02 5 0.08 51 255 0.52 2.22 0.02 0.18 0.01 4 0.06 52 260 0.52 2.23 0.02 0.18 0.01 4 0.04 53 265 0.51 2.25 0.01 0.18 0.01 4 0.04 54 270 0.50 2.26 0.01 0.18 0.01 4 0.03 55 275 0.50 2.28 0.01 0.18 0.01 4 0.03 56 280 0.49 2.29 0.01 0.17 0.01 4 0.03 57 285 0.49 2.31 0.01 0.17 0.01 4 0.02 58 290 0.48 2.32 0.01 0.17 0.01 4 0.02 59 295 0.47 2.33 0.01 0.17 0.01 4 0.02 60 300 0.47 2.35 0.01 0.17 0.01 4 0.02 61 305 0.46 2.36 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.02 62 310 0.46 2.38 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.02 63 315 0.46 2.39 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.02 64 320 0.45 2.40 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.02 65 325 0.45 2.42 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.02 66 330 0.44 2.43 0.01 0.16 0.01 4 0.01 67 335 0.44 2.44 0.01 0.15 0.01 4 0.01 68 340 0.43 2.45 0.01 0.15 0.01 4 0.01 69 345 0.43 2.47 0.01 0.15 0.01 4 0.01 70 350 0.43 2.48 0.01 0.15 0.01 4 0.01 71 355 0.42 2.49 0.01 0.15 0.01 4 0.01 72 360 0.42 2.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.01 SUM= 486 cubic feet 0.01 acre-feet Check: V= C*A*Ps V= 0.02 acre-feet NOT OK 1483-Postdevdopment Hydrograph area 3 8/24/2006 Rational Method Hydrograph Calculations for 403 Sheffield Ave. Cardiff, California RM-HYDROGRAPH Project 0.60 0.50 0.40 00.30 - c� 020 0.10 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time(min) 1483-Poskkwlopro "rograph area 3 8124Y1000 DETENTION BASIN VOLUME CALCULATIONS REQUIRED DETENTION VOLUME FOR MAIN STREAM: Post Development Runoff—Pre Development Runoff Detention Volume for area 2 = 390 CF - 190 CF = 200 CF Detention Volume for area 3 = 486 CF — 315 CF = 171 CF CHRISTIAN WHEELER I N G I N I� I R I N C u Lt JW� 8 200 6 ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SHEFFIELD AVENUE ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA SUBMITTED TO: JESSICA TOTH 2020 EDINBURG AVENUE CARDIFF, CALIFORNIA 92007-1710 SUBMITTED BY: CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING 4925 MERCURY STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92111 gi 4925 Mercury Street ♦ San Diego, CA 9211 1 ♦ 858-496-9760 f FAX 858-496-9758 W CHRISTIAN WHEELER [ NGINI [ [ZINC May 1,2006 Jessica Toth 2020 Edinburg Avenue CWE 2050098.01 Cardiff, California 92007-1710 SUBJECT: REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE,APN 260-283-12, SHEFFIELD AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA. Dear Ms. Toth: In accordance with your request and our proposal dated March 16, 2006,we have completed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the subject property. In general, we found the subject property suitable to support the proposed single-family residence,provided the recommendations presented herewith are followed. We have determined that the site is underlain by Quaternary-age terrace deposits that are mantled by fill material in the southern portion of the site and by a thin layer of topsoil in the remaining portions of the site. The fill material, topsoil, and an upper weathered layer of the terrace deposits are considered unsuitable in their present condition to support settlement-sensitive improvements. Specific recommendations are presented in the body of this report to address this condition. N The site is located in an area that is relatively free of geologic hazards that will have a significant effect on the proposed construction. The most likely geologic hazard that could affect the site is ground shaking due to seismic activity along one of the regional active faults. However,construction in accordance with the requirements of the most recent edition of the L'niform Building Code and the local governmental agencies should provide a level of life-safety suitable for the type of construction proposed. 4925 Mercury street ♦ San Diego, CA 921 1 1 ♦ 858-496-9760 ♦ FAX 858-496-9758 C-\VF 2050098.01 \fa} 1,2006 Page No. 2 If�-ou have any questions after rep iewing this report,please do not hesitate to contact our office. This opportunity- to be of professional sen-ice is sincerer- appreciated. Respectfully- submitted, CfIRISTIAN \VHEELER ENGINEERING I Wail Mokhtar,Staff Engineer 2 Charles H. Christian, GE #00215 '��/�� CI-IC:CRB:scc:w-m Curtis R. Bur ett, C.E.G. #1090 cc: (6) Submitted Q �oFESS7C �\�p ED GF�I Q s� G? Q7 vQ No. 1090 n n v No.GE215 z m CERTIFIED LLJ * NGINEERING Exp.9-30 07 x GEOLOGIST * cPj Exo. 10-06 Q �7ECHN��O�� 9,FCF CA�1F��\ OF C, TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Project Description...............................................................................................................Page Project Scope................................... 1 Findings............ 2 Site Description.................... ................................................. General Geology- and Subsurface Conditions.............................................................................................3 Geologic Setting and Soil Description............................................................................................. :artificial Fill.................................... 3 ................................................................ Topsoil................ ..........................3 ................................................................4 GrounTerrace Deposits............................................................................................................................................-1 dwater.........................................................................................................................................................-1 Tectonic Setting.................. ............................................................................................. Geologic Ilazards.................................................. ...............4 Ground Shaking ...........................................................................................5 Landslide Potential and Slope Stabili . .............................................................................................................5 ty.............................................................................................................5 Lidue faction................................................ ...........................................................................................................6 Flooding...................................................... ...................................................................................................... Tsunamis............................ Selches ................................................................................................ Conclusions..................................... 6 Recommendations........................................................................................................................................................6 7 Grading and Earthwork............................................................................................................. General....... 7 .............. ............................................................................................................................................7 Observation of Grading.............................................................................. Clearing and Grubbing ..7 g........................................................................................................................................7 __.. Site Preparation................................. . ............................7 Processing of Fill Areas......................................................... Compaction and Method of Fillin .....................................7 g..................................................................................................................8 Surface Drainage................. Foundations................................................................................................. 8 General.................... 8 ................... .......................................................................................................................8 New Conventional Foundations.......................................................................................................................8 Bearing Capacity............................................ Footing Reinforcement............... 8 ........................................................................................................................9 Lateral Load Resistance............................. 9 Settlement Characteristics...................................................................................................................................9 Expansive Characteristics............................ FoundationPlan Review.....................................................................................................................................9 9 Foundation Excavation Observation...............................................................................................................9 Seismic Design Parameters..................... On-Grade..S..l.a..b................................................................................................... .............................................................................. 10 10 Interior Floor Slabs............................................................................................................................................lU Under-Slab Vapor Retarders................ ................................................................ Exterior Concrete Flanvork..................... ....................... ..............11) Earth Retaining Walls......................... .................................. ................................... CWL 2050098.01 Proposed Single-Family Residence Sheffield Avenue, Encinitas, California Foundations Passive Pressure I Equivalent Fl, id 11 . .......12 Pressures Waterproofing and Subdrain ............—12 Limitations 12 Review, Observation and Testing ..........................13 L"'IfOrtnity of Conditions ...............................................13 Changein Scope................................ ............................................I........13 ....... Time Limitations.............................................................................................................................................13 Professional Standard.....................................................................................................................................13 Chent's Responsibilitv ................................ .... . .14 FieldExplorations................................................................ .. .............................................................................14 . ............................................................................I...... Laboraton-Testing......................................................................I..............................................................................15 14 ATTACHMENTS TABLES Table I '�fax* I 'mum Ground Acceleration, Page 5 Table II Seismic Design Parameters, Page 10 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page I PLATES Plate I Site Plan Plates 2-6 Test Trench Logs Plate 7 Laboratory Test Results Plate 8 Retaining W'all Subdrain Detail APPENDICES �\ppendixA References Appendix B Grading Specifications (--kk,'E 2050098.01 Proposed Single-Family Residence Sheffield AVeIILIC, Encinitas, California W CHRISTIAN WHEELER I: N C I N I f R I N C -- PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE-FALNIIL1"RESIDENCE SHEFFIELD AVENUE ENCINITAS C.ILIFORN1,A INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical investigation performed for a proposed single- _ family residence to be constructed on a vacant lot located adjacent to and south of Sheffield Avenue,in the Cardiff-by-the-Sea area of the city of Encinitas, California. Figure Number 1,presented on the following page, provides a site vicinity-map showing the approximate location of the property. The subject site is a vacant,nearly trapezoidal-shaped lot identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 260-283-12 and as Parcel 1 of Parcel Ivfap 1269. ky,'e understand that it is one-sto ro osed to construct a le-famil P P r5' single-family residence on the lot. The proposed home will be of wood-frame construction with an on-grade concrete floor slab and will be supported by conventional shallow foundations. Site retaining walls are also proposed for the residential project Grading is expected to consist of cuts and fills of less than five feet from existing grades. To aid in the preparation of this report, we were provided with a site plan for the proposed project prepared by Cohn and Associates,Architecture Planning,dated November 4, 2005. A copy of this plan was modified to show our geologic mapping and the locations of our exploratory test trenches. This modified map is included herewith as Plate No. 1. We have also reviewed our previous geologic reconnaissance report for the site entitled "Report of Geologic Reconnaissance, Proposed Single-Family Residence,Rossini Drive Encinitas, California", Report No. 201.423.1,dated July 5, 2001. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Jessica"Toth and her design consultants for specific application to the project described herein.Should the project be changed in any way, the modified plans should be submitted to Christian \Wheeler Engineering for review in order to determine their conformance with our recommendations and to determine if any additional subsurface investigation,laboratory testing and/or recommendations are warranted. Our professional services have been performed,our findings obtained and our recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in Geu of all other warranties,express or implied. 4925 Mercury Street f San Diego, CA 921 11 ♦ 858-496-9760 ♦ FAX 858-496-9758 SITE VICINITY MAP (Adapted from Thomas Brothers Maps) PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SHEFFIELD AVENUE ENCINITAS CALIFORNIA i North SITE i k IIIGS C P 0 SS I Racy � t DG 111 IGf ITS- f 6PICGE , . C ARETTA WY < f - < SANDCA WARWICK AV z jP -� - �. �� ✓ V �,.�C T f 1 1•riff,' CD a li i lt%i Q U � �' % ° E,UpFSiI[I'E Ail FS r rQ }h -SA Y 3 EL [do V i j # 9ij STATE BEACH ell 9G ___ i=1'iil f7F Thnm�. (AVE 2051098.01 \fay 2006 Figure 1 (AVE 2U50098.0 1 _ May 1,2006 Page No. ? PROJECT SCOPE Our preliminary geotechnical investigation consisted of surface reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, obtaining representative soil samples, laboratory testing analysis of the field and laboratory data and review of relevant geologic literature. Our scope of service did not include assessment of hazardous substance contamination,recommendations to prevent floor slab moisture intrusion or the formation of mold within the structure, or any other services not specifically described in the scope of services presented below. More specifically, the intent of this investigation was to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions of the site to the depths influenced by the proposed construction; b) Evaluate, by laboratory- tests and our experience with similar soils, the engineering properties of the various strata that may influence the proposed construction,including bearing capacities, expansive characteristics and settlement potential; C) Describe the general geology at the site including possible geologic hazards that could have an effect on the proposed construction, and provide the seismic design parameters as required by the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code; � d) Address potential construction difficulties that may be encountered due to soil conditions, groundwater or geologic hazards, and provide recommendations concerning these problems; e) Develop soil engineering criteria for site preparation and grading, as necessary; Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structure anticipated and develop soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design; g) Provide design criteria for restrained and unrestrained retaining walls; h) Present our professional opinions in this report, which includes in addition to our conclusions and recommendations, a plot plan, exploration logs and a summary of the laboratory- test results. CNVE 2050098.01 - May 1,2006 Page No. 3 It is not within the scope of our services to pertorm laboraton- tests to evaluate the chemical characteristics of the on-site soils in regard to their potentially corrosive impact to on-grade concrete and below grade improvements. If desired,we can submit representative soil samples to a chemical laboratory- for analysis. Further,it should be understood Christian Wheeler Engineering does not practice corrosion engineering. If such an analysis is necessary, we recommend that the developer retain an engineering firm that specializes in this field to consult with them on this matter FINDINGS SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is a nearly trapezoidal-shaped lot identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 260-283-12 and as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 1269,located adjacent to and south of Sheffield avenue,in the Cardiff-by-the-Sea area of the city of Encinitas. The site is bounded on the south and east by developed residential properties; the property on the north of Sheffield Avenue and on the west of Rossini Drive is open, undeveloped land. The lot is approximately 160 to 200 feet long(north-south direction) and approximately 55 to 60 feet deep (east-west direction); the size of the lot is approximately 11,700 square feet. A 15-foot wide sewer easemet that runs in an east to west direction is located in the southern portion of the lot. It should be noted that a small portion of a 50-foot riparian setback encroaches up to about 8 feet into the western portion of the site. The topography of the site is characterized by a slightly,sloping, westerly-facing, predominantly natural slope. - Elevations at the site range from approximately 150 feet along the western property line to approximately 160 feet along the eastern property-line. The site is currently vacant and supports a light to moderate growth of grasses, forbs, succulents, and brush. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The subject site is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County. Based upon the results of our subsurface explorations and analysis of readily available,pertinent geologic literature,we have found that the site is underlain by Quaternary- age terrace deposits that are mantled by fill material in the southern portion of the site and by a thin layer of topsoil in the remaining portions of the site.The subsurface materials encountered within our test trenches are described below in order of increasing age: ARTIFICIAL FILL(Qao:An approximately 2-foot-thick layer of fill material was encountered within our trench T-1,which was excavated in the southern portion of the site. The fill generally-consisted of CyyF, 2100098.01 �Iav 1, 2006 Page No. 4 medium to dark brown, silty sand (Sl%1) that was moist and very loose in consistency. The existing fill is expected to possess a "low"expansion index and moderate to high settlement potential,and is considered unsuitable in its present condition to support fill and/or settlement sensitive improvements. TOPSOIL: An approximately-1- to?-foot-thick laver of topsoil soil was encountered near the surface within our exploratory-trenches T-?through T-5. This material generally consisted of medium to dark brown,silt< sand (Sidi) that was h pically moist and verb-loose in consistency. The encountered residual soil is expected to possess a "low"expansion index,and moderate to high settlement potential,and is considered unsuitable in its present condition to support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements. TERRACE DEPOSITS(Qt): Quaternary-age terrace deposits were encountered below the fill material and topsoil within each of our exploratory trenches,and are expected to underlie the site at depth. These deposits generally consisted of medium brown to reddish-brown,silt-sand (SNI) that was typically damp to moist. The terrace deposits were generally found to be medium dense to dense with some relatively loose weathered upper portions.The encountered terrace deposits are expected to possess a"low"expansion index. XVIth the exception of the upper loose deposits in the areas of trenches T-1,T-3 and T-5, the terrace deposits are expected to possess low settlement potential,and are considered suitable In their present condition to support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered in our subsurface explorations and we do not expect any groundwater related conditions during or after the proposed construction. However,it should be recognized that minor groundwater seepage problems might occur after constriction and landscaping at a site even where none were present before construction. These are usually minor phenomena and are often the result of an alteration in drainage patterns and/or an increase in irrigation water. Based on the anticipated construction and landscaping, it is our opinion that any seepage problems that may occur will be minor in extent. ft is further our opinion that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an individual basis if and when they occur. TECTONIC SETTING: No faults are known to traverse the subject site. However, it should be noted that much of Southern California, including the San Diego County hat $ t3 area, is characterized by a series of Quaternary- age fault zones that consist of several individual, en echelon faults that generally strike in a northerly to northwesterly-direction. Some of these fault zones (and the individual faults wi " thin the zone) are classified as active"according to the criteria of the California Division of\lines and Geology. Active fault zones are those that have shown conclusive evidence of faulting during the Holocene Epoch (the most recent 11,000 years). The Division of Mines and Geology used the term "potentially active"on Earthquake Fault lone maps until 1988 to refer to all Quaternary-age (last 1.6 million years) faults for the (-'\1'E 3050098.0 1 Nfay 1,3006 Page No. 5 Purpose of evaluation for possible zonation in accordance with the_llquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning _pct and identified all Quateman--age faults as "potentially active"except for certain faults that were presumed to be inactive based on direct geologic evidence of inactivitl-during all of Holocene time or longer. Some faults considered to be "potentially active"would be considered to be "active" but lackspecific used by the State Geologist, such as )'61ciiie and well-delined Faults older than Quaternary-a e are not specifically defined in Special Publication 43, Fault Rupture Ilazard Zones in California,published by the California Dig ision of Nfines and Geology. However, it is generally accepted that faults showin no movement during the Quaternary-period may be considered to be "inactive". g A review of available geologic maps indicates that the active Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located approximately 4 kilometers west of the subject site. Other active fault zones in the region that could possibly-affect the site include the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone to the northwest, the Coronado Bank Fault Zone to the west and the Elsinore and Earthquake Valley Fault Zones to the northeast. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS GROUND SHAKING: A likely geologic hazard to affect the site is ground shaking as a result of movement along one of the major active fault zones mentioned above. The maximum ground accelerations that wou attributed to a maximum magnitude earthquake occurring along the nearest fault segments of selected faultd be zones that could affect the site are summarized in the following Table I. TABLE I: MAXIMUM GROUND ACCELERATION Fault Zone Distance Maximum Magnitude Maximum Ground Rose CanS,on Earth wake Acceleration Nei ort-In lewood p 1- 7 3 l�la httude 0.44 Coronado Bank 28 km 7.1 NIa itude 0.18 Elsinore ulian -I6� 7.6 1 NIa ittide 0.18 7.1 1�Ia itude F,arth uake Valle, G8 km 0.10 C.5 i�fa ittide 0.05 Probable ground shaking levels at the site could range from slight to moderate, depending on such factors as the magnitude of the seismic event and the distance to the epicenter. It is possible that the site will experience the effects of at least one moderate to large earthquake during the life of the existing and proposed improvements. LANDSLIDE POTENTIAL AND SLOPE STABILITY: _1s part of this investigation we reviewed the Publication, "Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego i%letropolitan _Area"by Tan, 1995. This (-AVE ?050098.01 . %lay 1, 2006 Page No. 6 reference is a comprehensive study that classifies San Diego County into areas of relative landslide susceptibility. _according to this publication, the site is located in Relative Landslide Susceptibihty Area 3-1,which is considered to be"generally susceptible"to landsliding and includes gentle to moderate slopes. Based on the competent nature of the underlying formational materials and the gently sloping topography of the sit it is our professional opinion that the potential for slope failures within the site is low. e, LIQUEFACTION: 1$e near-surface soils encountered at the site are not considered susceptible to liquefaction due to such factors as soil density grain-size distribution and the absence of shallow groundwater conditions. FLOODING: The site is located outside the boundaries of both the 100-year and the 500-year floodplains according to the maps prepared by the Federal Emergency INfanagement ygency. TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis are great sea waves produced by submarine earthquakes or volcanic eruptions. Due to the site's elevation and location, the risk of the site being affected by a tsunami is considered low. SEICHES: Seiches are periodic oscillations in large bodies of water such as lakes,harbors,bays or reservoirs. Due to the site's location,it should not be affected by seiches. CONCLUSIONS In general,no geotechnical conditions were encountered wlich would preclude the constriction of the proposed single-family residence provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. Based on our investigation,we have determined that the site is underlain by(quaternary-age terrace deposits that are by fill material in the southern portion of the site and by a thin layer of topsoil in tlae remaining portions ons of the site. The fill material, topsoil, and the upper weathered portions of the terrace deposits are considered unsuitable in their present condition to support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements. As such, the existing fill material, topsoil and the upper weathered portions of the terrace deposits will need to be removed from the area to support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements and be replaced as structural fill. The site is located in an area that is relatively free of geologic hazards that will have a significant effect on the proposed constriction. The most likely geologic hazard that could affect the site is ground shaking due to seismic activity along one of the regional active faults. Elowever,construction in accordance with the requirements of the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and the local governmental agencies should provide a level of life-safety suitable for the type of constriction proposed. (ANT', 2050098.01 -- NIay 1, 2006 Page No. 7 - RECOMMENDATIONS GRADING AND EARTHWORK GENERAL: All grading should conform to the guidelines presented in_appendix Chapter_A33 of the Uniform Building Cede, the minimum requirements of the City of Encinitas,and the Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions attached hereto as .Appendix B,except where specifically-superseded test of this report. Prior to grading,a representative of Christian �t'heeler in the Engineering should be present at the preconstruction meeting to provide additional grading guidelines,if necessary,and to review the earthwork- schedule. schedule. k OBSERVATION OF GRADING: Continuous observation by the Geotechnical Consultant is essential during the grading operation to confirm conditions anticipated by our investigation, to allow adjustments in design criteria to reflect actual field conditions exposed,and to determine that the grading proceeds in general accordance with the recommendations contained herein. CLEARING AND GRUBBING:Site preparation should begin with the removal of all vegetation in areas support settlement sensitive improvements,and other deleterious materials,including all significant root to material. The resulting organic materials should be disposed of in an appropriate off-s'te fa n°, Discin of the vegetation is not considered an appropriate means to remove the vegetation and could result in the requirement that soils contaminated with vegetation be exported From the site. _ SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation should consist of the removal of the existing fill material, topsoil and upper weathered portions of the terrace deposits from the area to support fill and/or settlement-sensitive improvements and replacing these unsuitable materials as structural fill. Tlie combined layer of unsuitable materials had a thickness of about? to 5 feet within our exploratory-trenches, but may be thicker in localized areas. The removals should extend to contact with the underlying competent portions of the terrace deposits. The removals should extend at least 5 feet outside the area to support the proposed residence or to the 50-foot riparian setback,whichever is less, and? feet outside areas to support exterior flatwork.The bottom of the excavation should be approved by our project geologist,engineer,or technician supervisor prior to placing or constructing improvements. P g fills PROCESSING OF FILL AREAS: Prior to placing any new fill sods or constricting any new improvements in areas that have been cleaned out and approved to receive till, the exposed soils should be scarified to a de th of L-inches, moisture-conditioned, and compacted to at least 91)percent relative compaction. P CWE 2050098.01 Itlay 1,2006 page No. 8 COMPACTION AND METHOD OF FILLING:_111 structural fill placed at the site should be compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of masiunum dry density as determined by_15TM Laboratory Test D1557. Fills should be placed at or slightly-above optimum moisture content,in lifts six to eight inches thick, with each lift compacted by mechanical means. Fills should consist of approved earth material, free of trash or debris, roots,vegetation,or other materials determined to be unsuitable by our soil technicians or project geologist. Fill material should be free of rocks or lumps of soil in excess of twelve inches iii maximum dimension. However,in the upper two feet of pad grade, no rocks or lumps of soil in excess of sit inches Should be allowed. Utility trench backfill within five feet of the proposed structure and beneath the drivewav, concrete flatwork, and pavements should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. SURFACE DRAINAGE: The ground around the proposed structure should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the stricture without ponding. In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to the stricture slope away at a gradient of at least two percent. Densely vegetated areas where runoff can be impaired should have a minimum gradient of at least five percent within the first three feet from the stricture. Gutters and downspouts should discharge into controlled drainage devices. FOUNDATIONS GENERAL: Based on our findings and engineering judgment and provided the site is prepared as recommended herein, the proposed single-family residence may be supported by conventional continuous and _ isolated spread footings. The following recommendations are considered the minimum based on soil conditions and are not intended to be lieu of structural considerations. .111 foundations should be designed by a qualified structural engineer. NEW CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONS: New spread footings supporting the proposed one-story- structure should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches below finish pad grade and should have a minimum width of 12 inches. Isolated footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Retaining wall footings should be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade and have a minimum width of 24 inches. BEARING CAPACITY: Conventional continuous spread footings with a minimum depth of 18 inches and width of 12 inches may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (pst). This value may be increased by 700 psf for each additional foot of embedment depth and 300 psf for each CWE 2050098.01 -- \Iay 1, 2006 Page No. 9 additional foot of width, up to a maximum of 4,000 psf. The bearing value may also be increased by one-third for combinations of temporan loads such as those due to wind or seismic loads. FOOTING REINFORCEMENT:The project structural engineer should provide reinforcement requirements for foundations. However, based on soil conditions, we recommend that the minimum reinforcing for continuous footings consist of at least two No. 5 bars positioned three inches above the bottom of the footing and two No. 5 bars positioned two inches below the top of the footing. LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE:Lateral loads against foundations may be resisted by friction between the bottom of the footing and the supporting soil,and by the passive pressure against the footing. The coefficient of friction between concrete and soil may be considered to be 0.30. The passive resistance may be considered to be equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot. This assumes the footings are poured tight against undisturbed soil. If a combination of the passive pressure and friction is used, the friction value Should be reduced by one-third. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and differential settlement is expected to be less than about 1 inch and 1 inch over 40 feet respectively,provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor cracks normally occur in concrete slabs and foundations due to shrinkage during curing or redistribution of stresses, therefore some cracks should be anticipated. Such cracks are not necessarily an indication of excessive vertical movements. EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated foundation soils are expected to have a "low" expansion potential. The recommendations presented in this report reflect this condition FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW: The foundation plans should be submitted to this office for review in order to ascertain that the recommendations of this report have been implemented,and that no additional recommendations are needed due to changes in the anticipated construction. FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATION: Ill foundation excavations should be observed b the y Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing concrete to determine if the foundation recommendations pr herein are complied with. x111 footing excavations should be excavated neat, level and square. All loose orated unsuitable material should be removed prior to the placement of concrete. CWT ?0500 98.01 i�fay 1,2006 Page No. I o SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Based on our Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analt-sis, the�%L Iaximum Ground_acceleration at the site is estimated to be 0.-}-}g(based upon a 1�Iar-.imam�'�[ag�mde Seismic Event of 7? I\Iagiuttide along the Rose Cant-on Fault). For stnicniral design purposes,a damping ratio not greater than 5 percent of critical dampening,and Soil Proft) 'I'ipe Sc:are recommended (UBC Table 16-J). Based upon the location of the site at approximately-I kilome is east of the Rose CanN,on Fault(Type B Fault),Near Source Factors N,equal to 1.1 and N, equal to 1.3 are also applicable.These values, along with other seismically related design parameters from the Uniform Bilding Code (L'BC) 1997 edition,Volume II,Chapter 16, utilizing a Seismi below. c Zone 1 are presented in tabularlform TABLE II: SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS UBC—Chapter 16 Seismic Table No. Recommended Parameter 16-I Seismic Value lone Factor 1 16-1 oil Profile Ts e 0.40 Sc 16- ) Seismic Coefficient G, 0.40 Na 16-R Seismic Coefficient C, N - 16-S 0.56 N,. Near Source Factor N;, 16-T Near Source Factor N,_ 1.1 16-[x' Seismic Source Type 1.3 B ON-GRADE SLAB GENERAL: It is our understanding that the floor system for the proposed residence will consist of a concrete slab-on-grade floor. The following recommendations are considered the minimum slab requirements based o the soil conditions and are not intended in lieu of structural considerations. ased on INTERIOR FLOOR SLABS: The minimum floor slab thickness should be four inches (actual) and slab should be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 18 inches on center each u a. the floor. Slab reinforcement should be supported on chairs such that the reinforcing bars are positioned at mid-height i floor slab. The slab reinforcement should extend into the perimeter foundations at least six inches. The the garage slab may be constructed independent of the garage perimeter footings, but the slab and foundation 1e new should have a felt strip between them. If the garage slab and footings are constricted monolithically the reinforcement should extend into the perimeter foundations at least six inches. 3 e slab UNDER-SLAB VAPOR RETARDERS:Steps should be taken to minimize the transmission of moisture vapor from the subsoil through the interior slabs where it can potentially damage the interior floor coverings. g CAFE 2050095.01 May 1,2006 Page No. 11 Local industry standards hpically include the placement of a vapor retarder, such as visqueen,between two, ?_ inch-thick layers of coarse sand placed directly beneath the concrete slab. This is the most common under-slab vapor retarder system used in San Diego County. Tlie vapor retarder should be at least 13-mil visqueen with sealed seams and should extend at least 12 inches down the sides of the interior and perimeter footings. The sand should cont�i less than 10°'o passing the number 100 sieve and less than 50`6 passing the number 300 sieve. Although the system described above has historically performed adequately, national standards for the installation of vapor retarders below interior slabs are changing as evidenced in currently published standards including ACI 302, "guide to concrete floor and slab construction" and AST-M E1643, "standard practice for installation of water vapor retarder used in contact with earth or granular 611 under concrete slabs". Rather than placing the vapor retarder between the two sand layers, both of these standards recommend placing the sand capillary break layer onto the subgrade with a vapor retarder placed above the sand and the concrete placed directly onto the vapor retarder. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these installation procedures. An advantage to placing concrete directly onto a vapor retarder is that it eliminates the layer of sand between the slab and vapor retarder. This layer of sand typically contains moisture prior to the placement of concrete and can receive more moisture during the curing and construction processes. This moisture can be retained in the sand layer for an extended period of time until the concrete moisture decreases to the point at which the excess sand moisture is absorbed by the concrete and transmitted up through the slab. This process can take many months depending upon the environmental conditions. One disadvantage to placing concrete directly onto a vapor retarder is that removing the sand layer from directly beneath the concrete restricts the ability of the concrete to lose moisture on both the top and bottom surfaces during the initial curing period. Variations in the drying rate between the top and bottom surfaces can result in increased concrete cracking, curling, and other finishing issues. The drying rate differences and their potential side effects can be minimized, however,with suitable finishing and curing procedures. Recognizing the stated benefits and limitations of these standard below-slab vapor retarder systems, the owner and designer should select the system that they believe is most suitable for this project considering the construction schedule and planned floor coverings. It should be understood that neither of the described systems provides a "waterproof barrier". It should also be understood that slab concrete contains free water - and should be allowed to reach equilibrium in an environment similar to that anticipated in the completed structure prior to installing floor coverings. We recommend that the flooring installer perform standard (AXT:?U51)098.01 May 1, 2006 Page No. 12 moisture vapor emission tests prior to the installation of all moisture-sensitive floor coverings in accordance with ASTRI F1869 "standard test method for measuring moisture vapor emission rate of concrete subtloor using anhydrous calcium chloride". EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of tour inches. Reinforcement should be placed in exterior concrete tlativork to reduce the potential for cracking and movement. Control joints should be placed in exterior concrete flatwork to help control the location of shrinkage cracks. Spacing of control joints should be in accordance with the American Concrete Institute specifications. When patio slabs,walkways and porch slabs abut perimeter foundations, they should be doweled into the footings. EARTH RETAINING WALLS FOUNDATIONS: Foundations for proposed retaining walls should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations for shallow foundations presented previously-in this letter. PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passive pressure for the anticipated foundation soils may be considered to be 300 Pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This pressure may be increased by one-third for seismic loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to soil may be assumed to be 0.30 for the resistance to lateral movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the friction should be reduced by one-third. EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURES: The equivalent fluid pressure for the design of"unrestrained"and "restrained"earth retaining strictures with level backfdl may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 35 and 55 pounds per cubic foot,respectively.An additional 13 pounds per cubic foot should be added to the above value for 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) sloping backfill. These pressures do not consider any other surcharge. If any are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil pressure. This value assumes a drained,nondetrimentally expansive (E.L<50) backfill condition. WATERPROOFING AND SUBDRAIN: Waterproofing details should be provided by the project architect. A suggested wall subdrain detail is provided in Plate Number 8. %X`e recommend that the Geotechnical Consultant observe all retaining wall subdrains to verify proper constriction. CWE ?050098.o1 May- 1, 2006 Page No. 13 LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and specifications. Such plans and specifications should be made available to the Geotechiucal Engineer and Engineering Geologist so that they may review and verify their compliance with this report and with the Uniform Building Code. It is recommended that Christian V'heeler Engineering be retained to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to verify compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of constriction. UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably-from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary. CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that we may determine if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. It should be verified in writing if the recommendations are found to be appropriate for the proposed changes or our recommendations should be modified by a written addendum. TIME LIMITATIONS The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however,occur with the passage of time,whether they are due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards-of-Practice and/or Government Codes may-occur. Due to CXX'E 2050098.01 Nlay 1, 2006 Page No. 14 such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or iii part by changes beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of two rears without a review 13v us veri6' the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. ying PROFESSIONAL STANDARD In the performance of our professional services,we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarilv.exercised be members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations where our borings, surveys,and explorations are made,and that our data,interpretations,and recommendations are based solely-on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data,interpretations,and recommendations, but shall not be responsible for the interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever,express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be performed by us,or by our proposal for consulting or other services or by our fun is of oral or written reports or findings. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of the Client,or her representatives, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to tine attention of the structural engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further their responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such recommendations during constriction. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Five subsurface explorations were made on April 6,2006 at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number I. These explorations consisted of test trenches excavated using a Case 580L backhoe. The fieldwork was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology-personnel. The explorations were carefully logged when made. "The explorations were carefully logged when made. The trench logs are presented on tine following Plate Numbers 2 through 6. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the densih,or consistency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as very loose, loose, medium dense,dense or very-dense. The CAVE 2050098.01 _ i\Iav 1, 2006 Page No. 15 consistency of silts or clay,s is given as either ven•soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. Disturbed and"relatively undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Societti for Testing and 1\Iaterials (AS-111) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed is presented below: a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory-by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determined for representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency-with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-place moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the trench logs. c) COMPACTION TEST:The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the existing fill were determined in the laboratory in accordance with AST,%1 Standard Test D-1557, Nfethod A. The results of this test are presented on Plate Number 7. d) DIRECT SHEAR TEST:Direct shear tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soils to determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. The samples were saturated and tested at different vertical loads. The shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The results Of this test are presented on Plate No. 7. - LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T-1 Date Excavated: 4/6/2006 Logged by: DF Equipment: Case 580L Project Manager: CI K: Existing Elevation: 155' Depth to Water: N/A Finish Elevation: 157.5' Drive Weight: N/A U SUI%I'NL3RY OF St'BSLRF:\CF. CONDITIONS J - Artificial Fill(Oaf(:Medium brown to dark brown,moist,ven 1 loose,SILTY SAND (S,\I), fine to medium-grained,with trace gravels and organics. 2 Terrace Deposits (Qt):Medium brown to reddish-brown,moist, X11)6.8 101.1 3 loose,SILTY SAND (SCI),fine to medium-grained. CK I)� highly friable from 2 to 5 feet. 4 .fit 4Y feet becomes moist,medium dense to dense. 5 Ch 7,8 I18.0 Trace clay present from 5 to 6 feet. 6 - 7 At 6'/ feet becomes medium brown to orangish-brown. 1:K 7.2 117.9 _. 9 -- L10 Test pit terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater. PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Rossini Drive, Encinitas, California CI IRIIN I:VN �ti'HEF.LER BY: MW7 D.y'1'E: '\i.n-21106 1 `' `1 1 N I I K I JOB NO. : 20511098 PL_A"I'B NO.: 2 LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T-2 Date Excavated: 4/6/2006 Logged by: DF Equipment: Case 5801, Project Manager: CI IC Existing Elevation: 158' Depth to Water: N/A Finish Elevation: 157.5' Drive Weight: N/A Z U Sl_',NU\L\RY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS z Topsoil:Dark brown,moist,very loose,SHAY SAND (S.\),fine 1 to medium-grained,with organics. CK 1.8 98.6 2 Terrace Deposits (Qt): Medium brown to reddish-brown,damp, loose to medium dense,SlLn'SAND (SNI),fine to medium- 3 grained. CK 6.3 115.2) Moderately friable from V12 to 3 feet. At 3 feet becomes moist,dense. At 41/2 feet becomes moist,medium dense to dense. Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater. 6 9 L10 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Rossini Drive, Encinitas, California CHRI-S-HANWHETI-FR -\I\Vl JDATE: MaN-2006 UOB NO. : 2050098 1PLATE NO.: 3 LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T-3 Date Excavated: 4/6/21106 Logged by: DF Equipment: Case 5SOL Project Manager: CIIC Existing Elevation: 153' Depth to Water: N/.k Finish Elevation: 155' Drive Weight: N/_1 SL'_,%ii'LkRY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS J 2 5 Topsoil: Dark brown to medium brown,moist,ven loose,SILTY 1 SAND (S\I),fine to medium-grained,with organics. 2 ` Terrace Deposits (Qt): Medium brown to reddish-brown,damp, 3 medium dense,SILTY SAND (S\1), fine to medium-grained. Ch h.1 115.4 Moderately friable upper 1 foot. 4 At 31/ feet becomes moist,dense. (ai 5.7 117.7 5 Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater. 6 8 9 10 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Rossini Drive, Encinitas, California CI IRISTI:�N �V1IEELE R BY: �\MI DATE: Mav 2006 � OB NO. : 2050098 PI,_NTE NO.: 4 LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T-4 Date Excavated: 4/6/2006 Logged by: llF Equipment: Case 580L Project Manager: CHC Existing Elevation: 155' Depth to Water: N/.k Finish Elevation: 152.5' Drive Weight: N/3 _ z Nr-1 -U -� SUNl-,UL RY OF SUBSLRF.ICE CONDITIONS J z Topsoil:Medium to dark brown,moist,very loose,SILTY 1 SAND S\ , fine to medium- rained,with organics. Terrace Deposits (Qt):Reddish-brown to medium brown,damp, 2 medium dense,SILTY SAND (S,\L), fine to medium-grained. to 3.8 115.9 Moderately friable upper 1 foot. 3 At 2 feet becomes moist,dense. CK 5.1 1172 -t Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater. 5 6 7 8 9 L10 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE wRossini Drive, Encinitas, California CHRIS H \N \VHEH.ER BY: NMI DATE: Max-2006 1 ti `' I h I I 1z l ,, `, V OB NO. : 2050098 PLATE NO.: 5 LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T-5 Date Excavated: 4/6/2006 Logged by: DF Equipment Case 580L Project :Manager: CI IC Existing Elevation: 154' Depth to Water: N/.k Finish Elevation: 154' Drive Weight: N/_\ x SL'-MMARY OF SUBSURF.kCE CONDITIONS J x 3 z S Topsoil: Dark brown,moist,ven.loose,SILTY SAND (SCI),fine to 1 medium- rained,with organics. Terrace Deposits (Qt):'Medium brown to reddish-brown,damp, 2 loose to medium dense,SILTY SAND (SCI), fine to medium-grained. CK 1.7 lot.,) 'Moderately friable from 1 to-M feet. 3 At-I feet becomes moist,dense. 5.3 113.1 5 "Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater. 6 7 8 9 10 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Rossini Drive, Encinitas, California CHRI�TI,�N V�'HEE_LER BY: NRV D_vu, May 2006 ' it OB NO. : 2050098 111_A"I'1 NO.: 6 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PROPOSED SINGLE-F-VNIIL-I'RESIDENCE? SHEFFIELD .\VFNL'E ENCINITAS C.U-IFORNIA MAXIMUM DENSITY/ OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT Sample Number Test Trench T-1 @ 2'-5' Description Reddish-brown, Silt-sand (SN1) Maximum Densit- 113.1 pcf Optimum Moisture Content 10.6 percent DIRECT SHEAR TEST Sample Number Test Trench T-1 @ T-5' Description Remolded'Fo 90 Percent :\ngle of Friction 32 degrees .Apparent Cohesion 150 psf CAFE 2050098.01 iAiav 2006 Plate No. 7 I I l L Slupc Minimum x:74 ✓ /.y/)" v 6-inch 6-inch \[inimum 'z \Iaa. v ri, a 3/4 inch Crushed Rock or Mirafi G100N or Equivalent l p d Waterproof Back of Wall Per architect's Specifications v / a c 711 Top of Ground or Concrete Slab 9 v Geofabric Completely X a kX-rapped Around Rock 6-inch Minimum Minimum !� � 4-inch Diameter i< Perforated Pipe x PVC Schedule 40 RETAINING WALL SUBDRAIN DETAIL No Scale ' PROPOSED 5-LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 69TH Street and Klauber Avenue,San Diego,California CHRI_1�11A\ HULLR IM I1(: Alac 2006 4'1^_1 All:RfA 10 1 RI.I I w ullx;ri,r\1,11(�RNI.�')2111 1 N.rrtSxuGV-r,sti 2050098.01 P1_\I k�(�.: 8 C\VE 2050098.01 May 1, 2006 _Appendix :k, .\-I REFERENCES Anderson,).G.;RockNvell,R.K. and Agnew,D.C., 1989, Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region, Earth!�uake Spectra,Volume 5,No. 2, 1989. Blake,T.F.,2000, EQF.1t_'LT,_A Computer Prograrn for the Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from 3-D Fault Sources,Version 3.0,Thomas F. Blake Computer Services and Software,Thousand Oaks,California. Boore,David M.,Joyner,William B.,and Fumal,Thomas F.., 1997,"Empirical Near-Source attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and Vertical Components of Peak Ground acceleration,Peak Ground Velocity-,and Pseudo-absolute Acceleration Response Spectra",in Seismological Research Letters,Volume 68,Number 1,January/February-January/February- 1997. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997,"Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California",CDMG Special Publication 117. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998,Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada. Jennings,C.W., 1975,Fault Map of California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Map No. 1,Scale 1:750,000. Countywide Flood Insurance Rate Map,Nlap No. 06073C 1044F(panel 1044 of 2375),prepared by the Federal Emergency Management agency,effective date June 19, 1997. Tan,S.S. and Kennedy, M.P., 1996,Geologic Maps of the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangles,San Diego County, California;California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 96-02 Kern, P., 1989, Earthquakes and Faults in San Diego County, Pickle Press, 73 pp. Tan, S.S., 1995,Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area,San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 95-03. Wesnousk-y-,S.G., 1986, "Earthquakes,Quaternary Faults,and Seismic Hazards in California",in Journal of Geophysical Research,Volume 91,No. B12,pp 12,587 to 12,631,November 1986. CWE 2050098.01 May 1, 2006 appendix A, A-2 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS San Diego County, 1960, Map Sheet 314-1683;Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet. San Diego Count}, 1985, Map Sheet 314-1683; Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet. United States Geological Survey, 1953,Encinitas Quadrangle;Scale 1 inch = 2000 feet United States Geological Survey, 1968, Encinitas Quadrangle;Scale 1 inch = 2000 feet United States Geological Survey, 1975, Encinitas Quadrangle;Scale 1 inch = 2000 feet PHOTOGRAPHS Aerial Fotobank,Inc., 1995,Aerial Foto-Map Book,San Diego County,Sheet 1167 Aerial Graphics, 1982, 1984-85, 1986-87, Aerial Foto-Map Book,San Diego County,Sheet "13E Aerial Map Industries, 1968,Aerial,Atlas, San Diego County,Sheet SD 52 Lenska's Aerial Atlas, 1994,The Thomas Guide, Sheet 1167 Palomar Pictures, 1972,Map Book,San Diego County,Sheet 38 Real Estate Data Inc., 1972, 1975, 1976, 1977,Volume 2, Page 153 San Diego County, 1970, Flight 4,Photographs 12 and 13;Scale: 1 inch= 1000 feet (approximate). San Diego County, 1973,Flight 33, Photographs 5 through 7;Scale: I inch= 1000 feet(approximate). San Diego County, 1978, Flight 168, Photographs 41 through 43;Scale: 1 inch= 1000 feet (approximate). San Diego County, 1983,Photographs 544 and 545;Scale: I inch= 2000 feet (approximate). San Diego County, 1989,Photograph 1-309;Scale: 1 inch= 2000 feet (approximate). CWE 2050098.01 NIay- 1, 2006 _appendix B - 1 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS PROPOSED SINGLE-F:1-IILY RESIDENCE SHEFFIELD AVENUE I NCINITAS CALIFORNIA GENERAL INTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing,compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer. OBSERVATION AND TESTING Christian Wheeler Engineering shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules,changes and new information and data so that lie may provide these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading operations, the Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations. If,in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as questionable or unsuitable soil,unacceptable moisture content,inadequate compaction,adverse weather, etc., construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall recommend rejection of this work. "Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following American Society for"Testing and Materials test methods: CNVE 2050098.01 May 1, 2006 appendix B - 2 Maximum Density& Optimum Moisture Content-AST'1 D-1557-91 Densin-of Soil In-Place -ASTNI D-1556-90 or ASTIM D-2922 - All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing AST-M testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed,and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content,compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soil which possesses an in-situ density-of at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density. W'hen the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent formational soil. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the equipment width,whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (2) percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. Any abandoned buried strictures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described procedure should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water fines. Any buried strictures or utilities not to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that lie may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 CWE 2050098-01 May 1, 2006 Appendix B - 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap-,will depend on the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or a qualified Structural Engineer. FILL MATERIAL iviaterials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils,soils of poor gradation,or soils with tow strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material,but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. _any import material shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary-geotechnical investigation report. When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be carefully Filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non-structural tills is discussed in the geotechnical report,when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot roller shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at a ratio of CWE 2050098-01 IMay 1, 2006 _lppendix 13-4 two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over-built and cut- back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all till material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at = least 90 percent of maximum dry density-or the degree of compaction specified in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the _. Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surficially stable. Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day-of such conditions by written communication from the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily-field report. If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by- the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer. CUT SLOPES The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage,lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Geotechnical Engineer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the tilling and compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall release the Grading Contractor from his duty- to compact all till material to the specified degree of compaction. C\X'E 2050098.01 \lay 1, 2006 _appendix S- 5 SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, Filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moistture content and density of the fill materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS- SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural ground, compacted fill,and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper twelve inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTNI) Laboratory Test D4829-95. OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil over six inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of placement of such material is provided by the Geotechnical Engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required. CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENCINEE. RINC REPORT OF GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE COMPACTION TESTING PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SHEFFIELD AVENUE �1 ENCINITAS,CALIFORNIA ; 2 5 25 21x11 i'Y r vim'„�ITAJ PREPARED FOR: JESSICA TOTH 2020 EDINBURG AVENUE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA,CALIFORNIA 92007-1710 PREPARED BY: - CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING 4925 MERCURY STREET SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92111 w 4925 Mercury Street + San Diego, CA 92111 + 858-496-9760 + FAX 858-496-9758 W CHRISTIAN WHEELER E N G I N E E R I N G January 30,2007 Jessica Toth CWE 2050098.05 2020 Edinburg Avenue Cardiff-by-the-Sea,California 92007-1710 SUBJECT: REPORT OF GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE COMPACTION TESTING,PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE,APN 260-283-12,SHEFFIELD AVENUE,ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA. Reference: "Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation,Proposed Single-Family Residence,APN 260-283-12,Sheffield Avenue,Encinitas,California,"by Christian Wheeler Engineering,dated May 1,2006. Dear Ms Toth, In accordance with your request and with the requirements of Section 1701.5.13 of the Uniform Building Code,Christian Wheeler Engineering has prepared this report to summarize our observations of the earthwork operations at the subject site,and to present the results of relative compaction tests performed in the fills that were placed during the grading of the project. The observation and testing services addressed by this report were coordinated by Mr.Mark Turner of Turner Construction and were provided during the period of December 8,2006 through January 23, 2007. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject site is nearly trapezoidal-shaped lot identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 260-283-12 and as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 1269,located adjacent to and south of Sheffield Avenue,in the Cardiff-by-the Sea area of the city of Encinitas.The site is bounded on the south and east by developed residential properties;the property on the north of Sheffield Avenue and on the west of Rossini Drive is open,undeveloped land. Prior to the earthwork addressed by this report, the topography of the site was characterized as being slightly sloping,westerly-facing, 4925 Mercury Street 4 San Diego, CA 92111 ♦ 858-496-9760 ♦ FAX 858-496-9758 CWE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 2 predominantly natural slope.Vegetation at the site consisted of a light to moderate growth of grasses, forbs,succulents,and brush. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: It is our understanding that the subject site is to be developed by the construction of a one-story, single-family residence of wood-frame construction.We anticipate that the proposed structure will have conventional foundations and on-grade concrete floor slabs. PLAN REFERENCE: In order to augment our understanding of the designed configuration of the project,our firm was provided with a grading plan for the site prepared by Pasco Engineering of Solana Beach,California.Plate No. 1 of this report is a reproduction of the plan,modified to show the approximate locations of our field tests and the relevant limits of contact with the encountered geologic units. SCOPE OF SERVICE Services provided by Christian Wheeler Engineering during the course of the earthwork consisted of the following: • Participation in a pre-grading meeting to address the geotechnical aspects of the work and to coordinate our testing and observation services. • Periodic observation of the earthworking operations. • Providing field recommendations for elements of the earthwork not specifically addressed by the referenced geotechnical report. • Recording the approximate elevations and limits of significant geotechnical elements. • Performance of relative compaction tests in the fills placed. • Performance of laboratory maximum density and optimum moisture content determinations on the soils encountered in the earthwork,and, • Preparation of this report. CV,rE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 3 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING GRADING CONTRACTOR:The earthwork addressed by this report was performed by Cut-Rite Contracting Co. of San Marcos,California,Contractor's License No. 464415. The primary equipment utilized by the contractor in the work consisted of the following: 1 Caterpillar 330CL Excavator 1 Caterpillar D4H Crawler Dozer 1 Caterpillar 824 Wheel Dozer 1 Reciprocating Compactor 1 Water Hose. 1 CLEARING AND GRUBBING:Prior to the earthwork addressed by this report,the portions of the site to receive new fill and/or improvements were cleared and grubbed of the pre-existing vegetation.The materials were stockpiled and subsequently removed from the site. REMOVALS: Removal excavations of potentially compressible artificial fill,topsoils and the upper weathered portions of the terrace deposits were made in the areas to support fill and/or settlement sensitive improvements.The excavations were extended to the contact with the underlying competent portions of the terrace deposits and laterally at least five feet outside the area to support the proposed residence and at least two feet outside areas to support exterior flatwork. Materials generated during the removal operations were stockpiled for use during the structural fill operations. Prior to the placement of new fill soils,the floor of the removal excavations were scarified,moisture conditioned and recompacted prior to the placement of new fill. FILL PLACEMENT: Fill materials consisting of the excavated and imported silty sands were placed by the excavator,crawler dozer and wheel dozer in relatively thin,uniform lifts.Moisture conditioning was applied as necessary with compactive efforts made by wheel rolling with the wheel dozer and track-walking with the crawler dozer to attain a minimum of at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. RETAINING WALL BACKFILL:Prior to the proposed construction of the retaining walls, the foundation excavations were observed by a representative of our firm. The foundations were found to extend into competent fills and/or formational soils and considered suitable for the support of the walls. Preceding the backfilling of the retaining walls,subdrains were installed at the base of the walls. CWE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 4 The subdrains consisted of four-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe set in a matrix of crushed rock and wrapped with a geotechnical filter fabric.Backfill operations consisted of the native silty sands being placed by the loaders in relatively thin,uniform lifts. Moisture conditioning was applied as necessary and compactive efforts made by the reciprocating compactor to attain a minimum of at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD TESTS: Field tests to measure the relative compaction of the fills and backfills were conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D 2922-91;"Standard Test Methods for Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in Place by Nuclear Methods." The locations of the field tests were selected by our technician in areas discerned to exhibit relative compaction that was generally representative of that attained in the fill and backfill. The results and approximate locations of the field tests are shown on the attached plates. LABORATORY TESTS:The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the predominate soils encountered in the earthwork were performed in our laboratory by ASTM Test Designation D 1557-91, "Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort." The tests were conducted in accordance with the methodology prescribed for the grain-size distribution of the soils tested. The results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate No. 2. CONCLUSIONS GENERAL: It is the opinion of Christian Wheeler Engineering that the earthwork addressed by this report has been performed substantially in accordance with the recommendations presented in the referenced geotechnical report and the city of Encinitas grading requirements.This opinion is based upon our observations of the earthwork operations,the results of the density tests taken in the field, and the maximum density tests performed in our laboratory. It is our further opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed construction. Our recommendations for the minimum design of foundations for the proposed structure,originally presented in the referenced geotechnical report,are reproduced in the"Foundations" section of this report. CONE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 5 AS-BUILT GEOLOGY: The geologic units encountered during the earthwork operations were generally consistent with those anticipated in our referenced report of geotechnical investigation. The earthwork operations addressed by this report have,in our opinion,satisfactorily mitigated the potentially adverse conditions described in the referenced report. REMAINING WORK As of the date of this report,additional work remains to be done on the site for the backfilling of utility trenches and the preparation of the subgrade underlying the proposed flatwork areas. Our firm should be contacted when these operations are performed so that we can verify their compliance with the applicable specifications. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL: It is our opinion that the proposed structure may be supported by conventional continuous and spread footings. Specific details for the design of the foundations should be provided by the structural engineer for the project;however,the foundation design should incorporate the minimum recommendations presented in the following paragraphs. EXPANSION CHARACTERISTICS:The soils present within the zone of influence of the proposed foundations are considered as being non-detrimentally expansive,with an Expansion Index less than 50. The recommendations presented herein reflect this condition. CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONS:New spread footings supporting the proposed one-story structure should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches below finish pad grade and should have a minimum width of 12 inches. Isolated footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Retaining wall footings should be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade and have a minimum width of 24 inches. BEARING CAPACITY: Conventional footings with the above recommended minimum dimensions may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot. This value may be increased by 700 psf for each additional foot of embedment depth and 300 psf for each additional foot of width,up to a maximum of 4,000 psf.This value may be increased by one- third for combinations of temporary loads such as those due to wind or seismic loads. FOOTING REINFORCING: Based on the as-graded soil conditions,we recommend that the minimum reinforcing for continuous footings consist of at least two No. 5 bars positioned three CWE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 6 inches above the bottom of the footing and two No. 5 bars positioned two inches below the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE: Lateral loads against foundations may be resisted by friction between the bottom of the footing and the supporting soil,and by the passive pressure against the footing. The coefficient of friction between concrete and soil may be considered to be 0.30. The passive resistance may be considered equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds per cubic foot. This assumes the footings are poured tight against undisturbed soil. If a combination of the passive pressure and friction is used,the friction value should be reduced by one-third. FOUNDATION OBSERVATION: In order to confirm that the footing excavations extend into a suitable bearing stratum and to verify that the footing dimensions and reinforcing steel schedules are in accordance with the minimum recommendations provided by the geotechnical engineer,Christian Wheeler Engineering should be contacted to observe the excavations in advance of structural inspections that may be conducted or required by the Building Official. ON-GRADE SLAB RECOMMENDATIONS INTERIOR FLOOR SLABS:The minimum floor slab thickness should be not less than four inches. The floor slabs should be reinforced with at least No. 3 bars placed at 18 inches on center, each way,and the reinforcement should extend horizontally at least 6 inches into the footings. Slab reinforcing should be positioned on chairs or mortar blocks at mid-height in the floor slab. UNDER-SLAB VAPOR RETARDERS: Steps should be taken to minimize the transmission of moisture vapor from the subsoil through the interior slabs where it can potentially damage the - interior floor coverings. Local industry standards typically include the placement of a vapor retarder, such as visqueen, between two,2-inch-thick layers of coarse sand placed directly beneath the concrete slab. This is the most common under-slab vapor retarder system used in San Diego County. The vapor retarder should be at least 15 mil visqueen with sealed seams and should extend at least 12 inches down the sides of the interior and perimeter footings. The sand should contain less than 10%passing the Number 100 sieve and less than 5%passing the Number 200 sieve. Although the system described above has historically performed adequately,national standards for the installation of vapor retarders below interior slabs are changing as evidenced in currently CWE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 7 published standards including ACI 302,"Guide to Concrete Floor and Slab Construction" and ASTM E1643,"Standard Practice for Installation of Water Vapor Retarder Used in Contact with Earth or Granular Fill Under Concrete Slabs". Rather than placing the vapor retarder between the two sand layers,both of these standards recommend placing the sand capillary break layer onto the subgrade with a vapor retarder placed above the sand and the concrete placed directly onto the vapor retarder. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these installation procedures. An advantage to placing concrete directly onto a vapor retarder is that it eliminates the layer of sand between the slab and vapor retarder. This layer of sand typically contains moisture prior to the placement of concrete and can receive more moisture during the curing and construction processes. This moisture can be retained in the sand layer for an extended period of time until the concrete moisture decreases to the point at which the excess sand moisture is absorbed by the concrete and transmitted up through the slab. This process can take many months depending upon the environmental conditions. One disadvantage to placing concrete directly onto a vapor retarder is that removing the sand layer from directly beneath the concrete restricts the ability of the concrete to lose moisture on both the top and bottom surfaces during the initial curing period. Variations in the drying rate between the top and bottom surfaces can result in increased concrete cracking,curling,and other finishing issues. The drying rate differences and their potential side effects can be minimized,however,with suitable finishing and curing procedures. Recognizing the stated benefits and limitations of these standard below-slab vapor retarder systems, the owner and designer should select the system that they believe is most suitable for this project considering the construction schedule and planned floor coverings. It should be understood that neither of the described systems provides a"waterproof barrier". It should also be understood that slab concrete contains free water and should be allowed to reach equilibrium in an environment similar to that anticipated in the completed structure prior to installing floor coverings. We recommend that the flooring installer perform standard moisture vapor emission tests prior to the installation of all moisture-sensitive floor coverings in accordance with ASTM F1869"Standard Test Method for Measuring Moisture Vapor Emission Rate of Concrete Subfloor Using Anhydrous Calcium Chloride". CWE 2050098.05 January 30,2007 Page 8 EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK: Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of four inches. Reinforcement and control joints should be constructed in exterior concrete flatwork to reduce the potential for cracking and movement. Joints should be placed in exterior concrete flatwork to help control the location of shrinkage cracks. Spacing of control joints should be in accordance with the American Concrete Institute specifications. LIMITATIONS The descriptions,conclusions and opinions presented in this report pertain only to the work performed on the subject site during the period from December 8,2006 through January 23,2007. As limited by the scope of the services which we agreed to perform,the conclusions and opinions presented herein are based upon our observations of the work and the results of our laboratory and field tests. Our services were performed in accordance with the currently accepted standard of practice in the region in which the earthwork was performed,and in such a manner as to provide a reasonable measure of the compliance of the described work with applicable codes and specifications. With the submittal of this report,no warranty,express or implied,is given or intended with respect to the services performed by our firm,and our performance of those services should not be construed to relieve the grading contractor of his responsibility to perform his work to the standards required by the applicable building codes and project specifications. Christian Wheeler Engineering sincerely appreciates the opportunity to provide professional service on this project. If you should have any questions after reviewing this report,please do not hesitate to contact our firm. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN ELER ENGINEERING . ( 'L� L7 - ),—,— Dug s icks,Supervisor Charles H. Christian,R.G.E. 00215 Q,�,pFESSlp) _SO.Cy9� CHC/DH:dd c') _�, � c� c) No.GE215 z m Exp.9-30-07 cc: (4) Submitted �r *T �F0r�cHN�°P� P ��0 F CAL�F� SUMMARY OF TESTS Project:Toth Residence MASS GRADING Test No. Date Location Elev. Soil Type Moisture Dry Max. %Rel. (feet) (%) Density Density Comp. (pco 1 12/11/2006 Northwest Side of Lot 1 149.5 2 8.9 120.5 127.0 94.9 2 12/11/2006 Middle West Side of Lot 150.0 2 8.5 116.0 127.0 91.3 3 12/11/2006 Southwest Side of Lot 148P152.0 5 2 7.4 117.5 127.0 92.5 4 12/11/2006 Northwest Side of Lot 3 7.1 113.4 121.3 93.5 5 12/11/2006 Middle West Side of Lot 3 8.6 113.3 121.3 93.4 6 12/12/2006 Southeast Side of Lot 3 8.4 116.7 12.1.3 96.2 7 12/12/2006 Middle East Side of Lot 155.5 3 9.4 113.3 121.3 93.4 8 12/12/2006 Northeast Side of Lot 153.0 3 8.6 114.2 121.3 94.1 9 12/12/2006 Center South Side of Lot 152.0 3 9.2 115.3 121.3 95.1 10 12/12/2006 Center of Lot 152.0 3 9.1 114.0 121.3 94.0 11 12/12/2006 Center North Side of Lot 151.5 3 8.8 115.6 121.3 95.3 12 1/23/2007 Middle E Side of Lot .G) 157.0 1 5.4 108.1 113.1 95.6 13 1/23/2007 Southeast Side of Lot .G. 158.0 1 6.1 107.6 113.1 95.1 14 1/23/2007 Southwest Side of Lot .G. 154.5 1 5.6 107.8 113.1 95.3 15 1/23/2007 Middle W Side of Lot .G. 155.5 3 7.3 111.5 121.3 91.9 16 1/23/2007 Northwest Side of Lot .G. 153.0 3 5.6 110.8 121.3 91.3 17 1/23/2007 Northwest Side of Lot .G. 152.8 3 7.2 110.6 121.3 91.2 RETAINING WALL Test No. Date Location« Elev. Soil Type Moisture Dry Max. %Rel. (feet) (%) Density Density Comp. (pcf) RW1 1/11/2007 Western Wall 154.5 2 8.2 116.7 129.0 90.5 RW2 1/11/2007 Western Wall 154.5 2 8.6 117.7 129.0 91.2 RW3 1/15/2007 Northern Wall 154.8 1 10.7 108.7 113.1 96.1 RW4 1/15/2007 Northern Wall 154.8 1 9.8 110.4 113.1 97.6 RW5 1/15/2007 Northern Wall 154.8 1 9.6 109.5 113.1 96.8 RW6 1/17/2007 Northern Wall 156.0 1 8.6 111.2 113.1 98.3 RW7 1/17/2007 Western Wall 154.5 3 9.4 114.8 121.3 94.6 RW8 1/23/2007 Northern Wall .G. 156.0 1 7.6 108.9 113.1 96.3 RW9 1/23/2007 Northern Wall .G. 156.0 1 5.5 106.2 113.1 93.9 RW10 1/23/2007 Northern Wall .G. 156.5 3 8.1 110.3 121.3 90.9 RW11 1/23/2007 Northern Wall .G. 157.0 3 7.9 111.5 121.3 91.9 RW12 1/23/2007 Northern Wall .G. 155.0 3 6.3 112.6 121.3 92.8 RW13 1/23/2007 Western Wall .G. 155.0 3 5.4 110.9 121.3 91.4 RW14 1/23/2007 Westem Wall .G. 155.0 3 1 5.1 110.3 121.3 90.9 RW15 1/23/2007 Western Wall .G. 155.0 2 6.2 114.9 127.0 90.5 RW16 1/23/2007 Western Wall .G. 155.0 2 5.2 115.3 127.0 90.8 RW17 1/23/2007 Southern Wall G 153.0 2 7.3 115.8 127.0 91.2 CWE 2050098.05 Plate 2 1VSAXIUMDR'DENSTI"Y"andQPTTMUM�MCIISTtJR�'�OxP,N'X'..,� ASTMu1557=9 . Soil Typ Description USCS Optimum Moisture Maximum Dry Class (/o) Density(pcfl 1 Reddish-Brown SILTY SAND SM 10.6 113.1 2 Medium Brown SILTY SAND SM 9.5 127.0 3 Reddish-Brown SILTY SAND SM 10.7 121.3 CWE 2050098.05 Plate 3 7 PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 (858)259-8212 WAYNE A. PASCO FAX(858)259-4812 R.C.E. 29577 January 22, 2007 PE 1483C City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: ENGINEER'S PAD CERTIFICATION 403 SHEFFIELD AVE(199-G) To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code,this letter is hereby submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for the above referenced site as the Surveyor for the subject property. I hereby state that the rough grading for this project has been completed in conformance with the approved plan and requirements of the City of Encinitas Codes and Standards. Certification was performed on January 22, 2007. The following is a list of pad elevations as field verified and depicted on the approved grading plan pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 (B): Pad Elevation Pad Elevation Location Per Plan Per Field Measurement UPPER PAD (SE) 158.0' 158.0' MIDDLE PAD (NE) 157.0 157.0' GARAGE PAD 152.8' 152.8' LOWER PAD (NLY) 155.5' 155.5' LOWER PAD (SLY) 154.5' 154.5' If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, P SCO ENGINEERING, INC. \A AC. os ph as G °p Director of Land Surveying Exp.LS 06/30/07 OF CALIF 12/18/2006 14:44 8584969758 CHRISTIAN WHEELER EN PAGE W CHRISTIAN WHEELER LNGINEEKIN December 18,2006 Jessica Toth CWE 2050098.04 2020 Edinburg Avenue Cardiff,California 92007-1710 SUBJECT: INTERIM REPORT OF MASS GRADING OBSERVATION AND TESTING SERVICES,PROPOSED TOTH RBIDENCE,APN 2t;G-283-12,SHUI'>E+IEW AVENUE, ENCINITAS.CALIFORNIA Reference: 1)Report of pttlhninary Geotcchnical Investigation,proposed Single.Fnmily Residence,APN 260-283-12,Sheffield Avenue,Encinitas,California,prrpwYd b,,Chtisdan Wheeler Bagineesing,Report No.2050098.01,dal d May 1,2006 Dear Ms.'Toth: In accordance with the t+egwost of I&Mark Turner of Truster Construction,Inc.,we have prepared this letter to verlf� that Christian Wheeler Engi nccring has provided earthwork obeexvation and testing services of the Pmparations completed to-date at the subject site.It is our undersmnding that low foundation wags need to be constructed before the Maas grading for the site can be completed. The operations observed consisted of the clearing of existing vegetation,removal of potentially compressible surficial soils,Ox"vation of-a keyway at the toe of the proposed fill slope,undencutdrig the cut portion of the building pad,and the tcplacement of the excavated soils as structural fill. The eartMmtk thusfu completed has,in our opinion,been performed its accordance with the recommendatiosts ptceented in the shave refcseaced repo rt Relative compaction tests taken in the new fills are Suatet than 90 percent of the matamum dry density of the fill. soils. A final report of our field tests and observations will be submitted upon the completion of the earthworL If you have any questions after reviewing this letter,plcasc do not hesitetc to contact our office. This oppattutity to be of professional setvicc is sincerely appreciated. Respectfiilly submitted, CHRIS'T'IAN WHEELER ENGINEERING QAppES$JO,, is ghc,H R.G.E, #00215 CHC/dh ' rz> No•GE215 Exp.9-30-07 cc: (1) Submitted k (3) Mark Turner Construction OF CA 4925 Mr,.rcury ytrcet ♦ San MC,90, CA 92111. + 958-496.9760 + FAX 958.496-9758 CITY OF ENCINITAS Department of Eneineerine Services Date No. 403 Sheffield CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION DIVISION 10/02/07 Grading ENGINEER'S DAILY DIARY w T F S S Circle Day Shift Hours Start ## Weather Clear 76 F stop X1.30 Location of Operation 403 Sheffield Toth Residence HOURS- ITEM NO. EQUIPMENT AND/OR LABOR: 3 EQPT. DESCRIPTION O EQPT N0. LABOR (Of Equipment or Labor) 0 W J REMARKS Description of Operation Met with Bob Keely Parks and Rec, Masih Maher Engineering and Jessica Toth, Errols. The decision was Toths finish the trail per city standards and call for final inspection when ready. to have the rights the the Toths continue to dispute. Y Sheffield continues to enjoy atlous easement Intermittent Inspection Nick Deile CITY OF ENCINITAS Report No. Toth Residence Department of Eneineerine Services Date 403 Sheffield CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION DIVISION 70/02/07 ENGINEER'S DAILY DIARY M T W T F S S Grading Shift Hours Circle Day Start ## Stop 11:30 Weather Clear 76 F Location of Operation 403 Sheffield Toth Residence HOURS - ITEM NO. EQUIPMENT AND/OR LABOR: z DESCRIPTION 0 EQPT. O EQPT NO. LABOR (Of Equipment or Labor) o` W J REMARKS Description of Operation Work performed over the weekend without inspectionon trail,work does not meet city standard for compaction, line or r Notice to correct may be issued for trail work. g ade. Intermittent Inspection Nick Deile i a t f t a � � z r 7 T 44 � r�?Yci f � Ss7 " t f 1 Jg y �r L� • ✓� fL �F` � F, t` a 'Y ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN NOTE. DETAIL SHOWS TYPICAL SIGNAGE. CONSULT CITY FOR SPECIFIC TRAIL NUMBER, DIFFICULTY, & PERMITTED TRAIL USERS FOR EACH TRAIL SEGMENT, TRAIL MARKERS SHOULD BE INSTALLED EVERY 1/4 MILE 3-314" DUAL SIDED FLEXIBLE MARKER �"--- CITY TRAIL IDENTIFICATION 3" C ) TRAIL DIFFICULTY (1/2") DIFFICULT PERMITTED TRAIL USERS /�- (3"x 3" BROWN & WHITE SYMBOLS) !� PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES (3" x 3" BROWN & WHITE SYMBOLS 0 WITH RED SLASH) USE CARSONITE DUAL SIDE RECREATIONAL MARKER (CIS-3066) (1-800-648-7974) OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT. COLOR: BROWN ALL SIGN TEXT TO BE PREPARED ON PRESSURE SENSITIVE DECALS USING WHITE CENTURY SCHOOLBOOK LETTER STYLE. ON BROWN BACKGROUND. 53 AFFIX DECALS TO BOTH SIDES IN THE SAME POSITION. ALTERNATE SIGNAGE FROM ONE SIDE OF TRAIL TO OTHER. SET CLEAR OF TRAIL TREAD. TRAIL NUMBER (1'/"} I , r TRAILS MAS`E- PLAN DETAIL 6 34 TRAN_SMMAL FORM _ City. of Encinitas S Vulcan Avenue FAX 760/633,2818 Encinitas CA 9202"33- Engu, g . 760/f33-2770 AIS 4SENDTo FA".: �C NO.OF PAPE.S: OF: ?Z>g!% FROM: PHONE: %0 .633. 0 Ple Hand&. q Con� ban P.Y1. /''''� ;—J Please ReA$by COMM I ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN SIDE SLOPES LESS THAN 3;1 TRAIL EASEMENT WIDTH 10'—12' TREAD WIDTH 2' • FXIgTrN G GRADF 2%CROSS GRADE 3`MINIMUM BERM FOR DRAINAGE C SS t�4 FOR EROSION CONTROL FN�.l SLOp F DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS FOR ALL UP SLOPES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT RUN-OFF ON TO TRAIL, . SIDE SLOPES GREATER THAN 3;1 TRAIL EASEMENT WIDTH ?�\ 2" TREAD WIDTH, 2• A� FENCE 2%CROSS SLOPE FOR DRAINAGE J� sly FQ9t�4T F9� DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS FOR ALL UP SLOPES SMALL BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT RUN-OFF ON TO TRAIL Wf lam M TRAIL S MA.S R P AIS ;DE"TAIL 3 31 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN 81.0.O.C. ,/—"- 5" X 5" PVC POST ..... `ter 2"X 6" PVC RAIL r J l.. PLAN -'-- PVC FENCE POST CAP AT EVERY POST _ 2"X6"X8'PVC RAIL o 5"X 5" PVC POST (WITH SIDES CENTER ROUTED TO RECEIVE RAILS) PROPERTY LINE FINISH GRADE ° CONCRETE FOOTING EVERY TWO POSTS o . ;o ► : NOTES: FILL PVC POST WITH CONCRETE AT THESE LOCATIONS N Al. o ALL CHANGES OF DIRECTION to.1. ri p o ALL END POSTS o ALL GATES o EVERY THIRD POST SECTION OTHER FENCING MATERIAL MAY BE UTILIZED, WHEN APPROVED BY THE CITY Is IN 11; 111 R °E ETAS TRAILS MAST R PLAN DETAIL. 4 32 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN „�y T UPSLOPE/7\ ro � UPSLOPE EXTEND 12”MIN, NATIVE STONES USED AS ENERGY DISSIPATOR 318"THICK CONTINUOUS RUBBER MIN-NET RETENTION 0.4 LBS.! CU.FT. z 2 X 6 TREATED WOOD TRAIL TREAD SPACING: — PE SPACE BARS EVER 2-.—i 3% f�) 4.7% 8'10% 80' + nn COMPACTED 11-15% lo, SOIL Icss than lox S0, 20' 30d GALV,NAIL @ 4"O.C. 2 ROWS,STAGGERED CROSS SECTION SITE AND SOIL CONDITIONS MAY CAUSE T?EE PLACEMENT TO BE AD,IL►STJ:D NOT TO SCALE I, AI WDETAIJ ER P qS 36 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN STANDARDS Introduction Paths and trails included in the Master Plan shall be developed in accordance with the fo standards. In certain locations where physical or environmental constraints preclude the practical implementation of a path or trail under the following standards, the City of Enci the reserves the right to modify the standards in order to preserve the continuity of the system s m y ty' avoid or minimize environmental impacts, and preserve co munity character. The City's goal is to design and construct path and trail segments in as natural a condition as possible w ensuring public safety, avoiding environmental impacts, and preserving community character.still Deviations from the standards are subject to the approval of the City of Encinitas. ese modifications will be made only after a determination is made that 'public safety or environmental resources will not be impacted. Although the plan endeavors to ro id e standards for all conceivable occurrences, it is impossible to ensure that every detail will addressed. Therefore, site specific conditions may dictate the redesign or refine be standards to meet unusual field circumstances. ment of The purpose of the Recreational Trail Standards are to: • Ensure trail safety by: -minimizing trail hazards, including natural & vehicular interface; -minimizing trail deterioration; and, -providing for adequate surveillance to reduce crime and vandalism. • Protect the rights of adjacent landowners, thus making the trail a sought after ameni • Minimize maintenance costs. ty • Provide for a consistent trail identity that maintains the unique flavor of each neighborhood yet presents a cohesive trail system. g hood • Avoid or minimize disturbance to the natural environment. • Maximize the enjoyment of users through a diversity of experiences. • Reduce liability exposure to the City of Encinitas. 20 I ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN WATER BARS: Water bars shall be installed (See "Water Bars" detail) where trail gradient and soil types indicate that erosion will compromise the trail tread surface. If minor rivulets appear over time, water bars shall be installed to decrease the chances of more serious erosion. Effective water bars minimize the speed, volume and distance traveled by water down a trail. The actual number and spacing of water bars depends on the steepness of slope, the amount of water entering a trail, the construction of the tread (hillsides or steps), and the availability of places to divert water. Generally, the greater the slope and the more water channeled by a trail, the greater the need for water bars. Placement should be near the top of the slope to catch water before it gains momentum. VEGETATION: Vegetation adjacent to the trail tread shall be preserved as much as Possible to protect the aesthetic quality of the trail. Vegetation should be cleared to a height of 15 feet and a width of 8 feet within the trail easement. Pruning along trails should be selective. Stumps may be treated to prevent sprouting. Dead and dying limbs and snags which may fall on the trail should be removed. Groundcover plants and low shrubs should not be cleared except from the actual trail tread. Where a trail is on a side slope, the vegetation on the uphill side will be more invasive and should be cut back more severely than vegetation on the downhill side. FENCING: Trail fencing shall be constructed of a material as approved City, and shall be installed on one side of the trail n esstha determination is made by the City that fencing is not necessary for safety, environmental resource protection, or rivate ro e Fencing may not be necessary or desired where the trail is olocated in open space areas where a fence would be visually obtrusive to the natural environment, or in less natural areas, where vegetation, non- trail fencing, or other physical features provide adequate delineation of the trail. 24 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN GRADING: Hillside trails should be benched into native material. Traild to be constructed on fill slopes will be allowed onlys with propose recommendation of a registered civil or geo-technical engineer. Drainage and grading design plans shall be submitted to the City b registered civil engineer or landscape architect. y a SIGHT LINES & The design speed for trail travel should not exceed 10 miles per VERTICAL CURVATURE hour. With this assumption, sight distance should be no les feet. s than 50 CLEARANCE: 15 feet minimum beneath structures or tree limbs. TRAIL TREAD: Trail tread is to be decomposed granite, installed as follows: Scari tread areas to a depth of 6 inches removing rocks, clods and all undesirable materials. Fine grade and compact native soil to a 90% relative compaction as determined by spread 4 inches (minimum) of decomposed grate-7(crushed or decomposed granite with maximum 1/4 inch diameter particles). or On the approval of the City, native soil may be substituted for the decomposed granite tread, where it is determined that the soil type and the absence of moisture will provide a trail surface that will provide an acceptable tread for users. At road or driveway crossings, shall be rough textured to prevent horses from slipping of the trail, material at road and driveway crossings shall be heavy Pavement concrete or other similar material approved b Ci brushed pp y the "Intersection Crossing"detail). ty (See WEED CONTROL: As weeds appear, they shall be controlled chemically, mechanically, or culturally. There must be strict supervision of the applicators to ensure that chemical applications are confined only to the trail tread and are applied per State and N.P.D.E.S. (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) standards. Light mulch, as approved by the City, may be used on the trail tread to control weeds. 23 ---------- ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN UNDERPASSES: Underpasses or culverts used for trail undercrossings should confo to the following standards: rm • Height: 15 feet Minimum • Width: 12 feet Minimum In underpasses 50 feet or longer, illumination should be installed in the passage to provide a minimum of one uniform foot candle. The specific designs for underpasses should meet the individual situation and should be designed by a registered engineer and submitted to the City for review and approval. CREEK On trails &paths which will be utilized by p CROSSINGS: and bicyclists, provide a bridge or culvert over tcreeks or drai asp the design of which shall be performed by a registered engineer using the following standards: Bridge: • Width: 8 foot tread minimum. • Bridge and ramp slopes: 8%maximum. • Surface or tread: Non-skid or non-slip surface such as wood, textured concrete or asphalt. • Rails: Install protective side railings. Culverts: For small drainages, culvert should have a 12 inch minimum diameter for ease of cleaning. They should have 12 inch minimum cover and be sloped approximately 2%. The size, slope and cover of culverts should be calculated to ensure that the trail is passable at all times. In general the trail tread above the culvert should be a minimum 12 inch deep compacted decomposed granite or native soil. Soil should be protected with rip-rap from concentrated flows, particularly at culvert outlets. Headwalls and outlets should be protected and concealed with boulders where possible On some trails, where usage is determined by City staff to be Primarily equestrians, a wet crossing (or ford) may be used where the velocity and depth of the water is acceptable the majority of the year(See "Wet Crossing"detail). 26 I ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN intersections, trail, signage shall be installed advising trail users to wait at the crossing activation button until the signal indicates safe crossing. At intersections where trails cross streets, the City will review on a case by case basis, any special circumstances in regard to right turn on red which may represent a potential hazard. TRAIL The following standards should be used in determining the degree of DIFFICULTY difficulty a trail user will encounter on any given trail: STANDARDS: ♦ NOT DIFFICULT • Majority of the 'trail is on a 0% - 8% slope. No slopes exceed 10%. • Trail is well marked, maintained, cleared, and graded. • Frequent access points, so that there is a possibility of any length of trip. • Great for leisure hikes and would present no difficulty for equestrians or bicyclists. ♦ MODERATE • Majority of the trail is on an 8% - 12% slope. No slopes exceed 15%. • Less clearance and more climbs. • Less access points. • Better for the intermediate rider or bicyclist or experienced hiker. ♦ DIFFICULT • Majority of the trail is on a 12% or greater slope or the trail has slopes which exceed 15%. • Requires one to be in good physical condition and an experienced rider. • May require bicyclists to have advanced skills. 28 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN 1'MINIMUM I i 1 I DRILL HOLES FOR STAKES: + 3 STAKES pER TIE. 1 SET "BELOW SURFACE OF TIE STAKES + STAKES ARE TO BE MINIMUM ' Il4 REBAR-24"MINIMUM LENGTH PLAN STAKES MUST BE COUNTERSUNK 1` 5% MAXIM M GRADE TIES MAY BE STAKED{?J HIGH BUT AT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 12- SECTION �^•- RAILROAD TIES TP,AR.S MASTER PLAN DETAIL 10 38 ENCINITAS TRAILS MASTER PLAN •j4'd�f .`f{�� f �`�jry r 1; .,...,tom•. ;• '4..x•,1 .tom . •. •� , j J: ADAPTED FROM NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TRAILS MANAGEMENT HANDBOOK SET SPIKES 8' O.C. MAX. DRIVEN TO A DEPTH BELOW TOP OF POLE SURFACE TREAD MATERIAL TREATED POLES 4" DIAMETER 8'WIDTH MIN. COMPACTED FILL 10" MIN. I 6" MIN.'.... TRENCH I, 'TRAILS MASTER P.LA_ DETAIL 12 40 4 ' ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital improvement Projects �� District Pld rt City Of Support Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL TO: Subdivision.Engineering Public Service counter FROM:, Field operations Private contract inspection RE: Grading Permit No. Name of Project 1 �-C 5;-5 God h; Name of Developer �; / �� Z(o 9 q03 SGIe � E�0 , Site Location ame,. ...s (bl gJ :(address.'.::_..number ...street. ,., - ;' . i have: nspected the g ng'st,thesubject.°site and:haV&XeAffed1ettifl`eatFc�n #.the oad:b�l: :` -''°. 0 and-c facation of soft.�', r of Work con �. , date ~� �. i:am hereby . the. �' '-* r. the,Soil Engineer, ` p compa.ctfan*by in has:been corrifiietetls:tt�:accordance:wIM-the:approv satisfied.that-the:.rougb-g 'g al code`'-antiY:arty a�tt�er<appiicable „o f:-the P2 :..; ...,-. :: plans)arid°spec)#u ttons; -Chapter X3.24 �Mtlrtiap PT :. ..e �-jgstandards and= pacific projectreq�irem : PE BE ;,. •Based=on-, nY observation anas noted or l any, p n�Y in so far as rading s: : := building permit for the lot(s) concerned. However., this release is not intended to certify warProject e with respect trail other.engineering concerns, including .public road, drainage; improvements, and their' availability, any other public improvements, deferred monumentation;or final grading. prior to final Inspection-of the Building Pedrmitlsle ndni hed precise grading, planting and -- advised so that I can verify that final grading irrigation) has een comp) d in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. INI'_ NA (Date) (signature of Engineering inspector) HAI PENAL (Date) (signature of senior dull Engineer, only ff appropfate) Reference: Building Permit No. if completed, to counter staff merely by placing a copy of it in both engineering Special Note Submit this forest, P permit and submit that paperwNork, r technicians,in-boxes.Please remember to do a final inspection ct the girding GNAT when completed. Office staff will handle the appropiate reductions in security. if any. and coordination with Building Inspection.Thank you. J�S - RIN 1T 1T JSG/field1doc1 IRCLE � recycled paper .., 'en1.�z_,ifnn 1 PAX 760-633-2627 505 S. vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 9202`13633 TD. 760-633-2700 City of Encinitas August 6, 2007 Erol Erturk 403 Sheffield Ave. Encinitas, Ca 92024 Permit 199- G Mr. Erturk After reviewing the plan submitted by issue of the easements and trails. However; the problem is of uch a does not address the feel it is reasonable to withhold occupancy. The issue of the trail only waiver to the requirements. All other re wire ch a scale that I do not q ments for Occupancy easements be met. Sincerely, 1 reg Shi s P.E. Field Op rations TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recyc led paper Page I of 1 Nick Deile From: Erturk, Erol[erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 9:32 PM To: Nick Deile; Jessica Toth Cc: Mike Emerson; Ma ela Padilla; Kristine R Y9iel Subject: RE: 403 Sheffield Final - Cardiff by the Sea Thanks and will keep the erosion control devices until landscaping is Erol complete. no problem. From: Nick Defile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:03 PM To: Erturk, Erol; Jessica Toth Cc: Mike Emerson; Mayela Padilla; Kristine Rygiel Subject: 403 Sheffield Final - Cardiff by the Sea Erol, Your project was inspected on 3-18-2008, and appears to stable recommending final approval, per city code please continue to maintain erosion control devises until mains erosion at the present time. I t permanent landscaping is installed. Thank you. t NICK DOLE Field Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 office 760-633-2818 Fax r2 PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. 535 NORTH HIGHWgy 101, SUITE A WA R.C.E.295577 77 C SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 (858)259-8212 JOSEPH FAX(858)259-4812 P L.S.52211 11 W.JUSTIN SUITER R.C.E.68964 February 12, 2008 61"T_Z5 PE 1483 City of Encinitas 505 So. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Attn: Nicholas Deile RE: AS GRADED CERTIFICATION FOR GRADING P 403 SHEFFIELD LAN 199-G Dear Mr. Deile Please be advised that on February above referenced lot and found that the20adinhis office field reviewed the grading on the Preformed in substantial conformance with the ttacchedaAs-Gra permit NO. 199-C,has been If you have an As-Graded Plan. office. y questions pertaining to the above,please do not hesitate to contact this Very truly yours, PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. } �p Joseph Y N C. uhas, L.S. 5211 �0 1AN SU Director of Land Surveying � LS 5211 it Exp.06/30!09 Nick Deile From: Nick Deile Sent: Monday,Y October 29, 2007 7:33 AM Cc: 'Erturk, Erol; John Frenken; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Subject: Duane Thompson; 'itoth@curiousco.com' RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 1012, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 S (Grading plan#199G) Erol, A post fence is required and D.G. trail surfacing, I also need the co nstruction asbuilts. Please call to schedule a final inspection when ready. NICK DEILE 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 11:22 PM To: Nick Deile Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding plan #1996) 9 g closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading Nick, Hope you weathered through the fires ok. I have watered down the edges of the slope to get compaction e some ground cover. per your e-mail below. I also planted Is it complete? Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:21 AM To: Nick Deile; John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding plan #1996) 9 g closure on 403 Sheffield (Gradin 9 Nick, Thanks a bunch for your quick e-mail response. AND Wow, I didn't realize that you have gone out there and looked at it already. That is awesome! I know the area you are talking about on the outer edge. As we loose dirt inevitably covered those outer edges that merge into the evenings to water down the area and I will contact you u peed away at the slope, some e boulders. Give me a few of Y guys again later in the week. 1 One clarification question - Can I go ahead and translplant some You guys had also made that suggestion when we met last week. I did not d cover over the slope? looked ok. want to do that until he slope Thank you all again for staying on top of this to get through it uic Regards, q klY I very much appreciate it. Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile@ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:21 AM To: John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: FW: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding plan #1996) 9 g closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading Erol, The outer edge is still loose and needs moisture to Properly com pact. I will have Parks and Rec look at it when it's complete. They will let me know it a fence is still re uir NICK DEILE q ed. Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk@hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 11:35 PM To: Erturk, Erol; Nick Deile Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Jessica Toth Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding plan #1996) 9 g closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading Nick, Hope you had a good weekend. I have attached 2 photos - 05Oct07 refers to what we saw forget his name, was it Dave? when you, Masih, the fellow for P&R (I and I met last Tuesday. The 08Oct07 is what it looks like now. is a 4-6 ft wide path with compacted dirt and gravel on top. We r slope to bring the rise over run down to 1:2. I made 3 measurem There removed dirt to perpendicular the western the western side to check. ents perpendicular to the path on Please call me to set up a visit regarding the path as soon as os sible (858-655-3018). It would also be great if the parks&rec fellow could drop by as well. p Regards, Erol Erturk 2 (858) 655-3018 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 10:54 PM To: 'Nick Deile' Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; 'Jessica Toth' Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding ng closure on 40 3 Sheffield (Grading plan # Nick, I completely understand and I am terribly sorry but I can't get out of work to on this path cleanup. I need to get the final approval as soon as possible and ring the week to work for me to do it. this is the only way to The only other way I can think of would be for the city to immediate) assume and all liability for the requested work. Y me all costs, responsibility, Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 5:05 PM To: Erturk, Erol Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Nick Deile Subject: RE: Recap of closure on 40 conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding cl 1996) 3 Sheffield (Grading plan # Erol, Please see attached form regarding weekend work, It would be better to s during normal business hours. schedule the trail work NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 11:01 AM To: Nick Deile Cc: Jessica Toth; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol; Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 03 Sheffield (Grading plan # Nick, Per our conversation on Tuesday 10/2 at the site, I will be working on Sat urday on shaping the path and smoothing the slope per Masih's request. However, this does not mean a change in ownership 3 shown in existing documentation for the path. You asked that I notify you. We will be working from 8 am to 3 m thi need, please come by. p s Saturday. If you feel the Please also note that I am tracking costs associated with these added r from Pasco for just under$1,000 for all the discussions the city engaged them regarding the path. In addition, we will accrue a cost of$120 of labor this Saturda requests. So far there is a bill Y Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:57 AM To: Masih Maher; Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding Closure osure o n 403 Sheffield.(Grading plan # Masih, Thanks again for responding. Please be sure to include me in that m help bring Nick up to speed, I am reiterate/reclarify below (Nick, You also may want to read trail, starting from the bottom to get the whole picture). Y meeting at the site. a d the e-mail order to I have pointed out to Masih and Duane that any improvements should map. Therefore, I would refer you to the agreed upon trail SPECIFICALLY is called out separately in the drawing from the other c show up in the appropriate working with Rossini Park Estates agreed to put it 4 city easements. That is the Cy Councillt i years ago and that is where it belongs. I oppose adding path references in my final documentation as a condition for my final approval. estates still needs to complete their as built in order to get final as well? If take this issue up when the come in? pp al. Doesn't Rossini park y Tom Sanford can then work with the ocity and appropriate you not neighbors in the community to get buy off as he has done on other matt Park Estates development. ppropriate matters before for the Rossini Please let me know if you have any issues or concerns with anything I have stated. So far, I have heard no disagreements from neither Masih nor Duane. Yt Regards, Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message----- From: Masih Maher[mailto:MMaher @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:56 AM To: Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 4 199G) Nick/Duane Could you please schedule a field meeting with Parks & Rec and I request? , , to review in the field Erol's Thanks, Masih Maher, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Encinitas, Engineering Department 505 South Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: 760-633-2776 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:57 AM To: Masih Maher Cc: Duane Thompson; Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding ng closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # Masih, Thank you very much for the voice mail. Let me up front apologize for causing all of us. g the inconvenience this is As I stated in my e-mail below, you had said you wanted to come out and voiced concerns about getting the appropriate people out there in a timely ee the path. When I would ask Duane to schedule it and that it could be done within 2 weeks fashion you had said you back in August. MY RECOMMENDATION -- I would strongly encourage you to work w when they come in to complete their as built for Map #14411. That approach Rossini Park Estates for With the history and existing documentation. (you can reference my e-mail below)Id be consistent Also, in order to help you move forward, I have taken pictures of the You to see. I think you can make the decision that this can and should resolved dropped Park Estates map #14411 closure occurs. peed them off for resolved when the Rossini I am under pressure to complete my a week of September 24th for this to be rp so ved and get my bond released. I cannot wait beyond the Please feel free to contact me any time. Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] 5 Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 12:02 AM To: Duane Thompson Cc: Masih Maher Subject: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 1996) reardi 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # Dear Duane and Masih, Thank you for your time August 28th at the counter. To reca observation to you: P our c onversation, I made the following 1. The path is clearly delineated on Note G of Map #14411 (entitled F, This separate designation was already agreed upon during the 4-1 made 0 back in Rossini Park en Sh in 2003 w Estates completed between Sheffield and Warwick (agreement City of Encinitas TM 99-230"). was vacated, I believe). effield 2. The referenced map (#14411) shows a path location from Sheffield parts of Sheffield and Rossini. There is no reference to our parcel wit regard Rossini from the vacated 3. Our design intent was to stay within the boundaries of our regard to the path. part of Rossini. We put the boundary of our driveway well within our ro Property line with some stakes for your convenienc property line. We did not vacate our design intent. a to demonstrate that have fulfilled our original g 4. Our grading plan was already approved with no need to show an ything for the path. As noted in bullet 3, nothing has changed from the original intent. 5. As far as we know, the original design intent for the path and the ' completed for the Map #14411. Had the original intent been Properly c ompleted, there would be no must be independent discussion needed which 4 proof that the path mu P y final as-built have not been pendent of our property. 6. As it stands, there is more than enough room for the path to co agreement without crossing into our property. The slope concerns are related to the vacated part of R connect to Rossini as the original There is no reason for us to show anything in our drawings Rossini which is NOT part of our property. As such, I have requested that the proposed modifications be re because I do not want to assume the cost, responsibility, the y, and from our as-is drawing Property. liability of a path that is not on my Prior to making a decision, Masih wanted to come out and see th would ask Duane to set up the field visit within 2 weeks. Please let us will check in with Duane on Thursday 7/6. e Path for himself. He said he know when the visit will be. I Regards, Erol Erturk (858) 655-3018 6 Also, in order to help you move forward, I have taken pictures of the path You to see. I think you can make the decision that this can and should resolved wh beresol ed wh en the Rossini them off for Park Estates map #14411 closure occurs. I am under pressure to complete my a week of September 24th for this to be rp solved and get my bond released. I cannot wait beyond the Please feel free to contact me any time. Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol fmailto:erol.erturk @hp.comj Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 12:02 AM To: Duane Thompson Cc: Masih Maher Subject: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield ffield (Grading plan # Dear Duane and Masih, Thank you for your time August 28th at the counter. To recap our conversation,observation to you: I made the following 1. The path is clearly delineated on Note G of Map #14411 (entitled made back in 2003 when Sheffi "City This separate designation was already agreed upon during the 4-lot dev p Rossini Estates completed between Sheffield and Wa►wick (agreement of Encinitas TM 99-230"). was vacated, I believe). e d 2. The referenced map (#14411) shows a path location from Sheffield o parts of Sheffield and Rossini. There is no reference to our parcel with e° Rossini from the vacated 3. Our design intent was to stay within the boundaries of our Bard to the path. part of Rossini. We put the boundary of our driveway well within our Property the Property line with some stakes for your convenient property line. We did not vacate our design intent. e to demonstrate that we halve fulfilled our original 9 4. Our grading plan was already approved with no need to show anything bullet 3, nothing has changed from the original intent. 9 for the path. As noted in 5. As far as we know, the original design intent for the path and the fins - completed for the Map #14411. Had the original intent been proper) s Ibuil d, there would be no t have not been Y tom discussion needed which is proof that the path must be independent of p ete 6. As it stands, there is more than enough room for the path to °ur property. agreement without crossing into our property. P connect to Rossini as the original The slope concerns are related to the vacated part of Rossini which is N There is no reason for us to show anything in our drawings. OT Part of our property. As such, I have requested that the proposed modifications be removed fr om our as-is drawing because I do not want to assume the cost, responsibility, and the liability of a path that is not on my 7 property. Prior to making a decision, Masih wanted to come out and see the would ask Duane to set up the field visit within 2 weeks. Please let us k now when the visit will be. will check in with Duane on Thursday 7/6. path for himself. He said he I Regards, Erol Erturk (858) 655-3018 s Nick Defile From: Nick Deile Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 3:57 PM To: Bob Keeley Subject: FW: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield plan#199G) Id (Grading Bob, Erol Erturk on 403 Sheffield still can not understand what is expected, I am turning Shields for action. g this over to Greg NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 2:02 PM To: Nick Deile; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 40 plan #199G) 3 Sheffield (Grading Nick, So can you please confirm that someone from Parks and Rec has visited the site? If so, could you please tell me who it was and when was it done? I was told that it has to adhere to the 2:1 slope requirement. If that can be done a path is between 4-6 feet then I was told that it would be acceptable. nd the width of the Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 12:51 PM To: Erturk, Erol; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 plan #199G) Sheffield (Grading As always yes! For your information I have also had numerous telephone calls from wondering when the trail will be made safe and complete. If it is more convenient to uscal residents Your bond to complete this work please contact Greg Shields. e a portion of NICK DEILE Engineering Services 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office i -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:31 AM To: Nick Deile; John Frenken; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson; jtoth @curiousco.com Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) ed ( admg Nick, Have you had Parks & Rec look at it per your previous e-mail? Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 7:33 AM To: Erturk, Erol; John Frenken; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson; jtoth @curiousco.com Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield plan #199G) (Grading Erol, A post fence is required and D.G. trail surfacing, I also need the construction asbuilts. Pleas schedule a final inspection when ready. a call to NICK DEILE 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 11:22 PM To: Nick Deile Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield plan #199G) ield (Grading Nick, Hope you weathered through the fires ok. I have watered down the edges of the slope to get compaction per your e-mail below. I al some ground cover. . so planted Is it complete? Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:21 AM 2 To: Nick Deile; John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Gradin g plan #199G) Nick, Thanks a bunch for your quick e-mail response. AND Wow, I didn't realize that you have gone out there and looked at it already. That is awesome! I know the area you are talking about on the outer edge. As we chipped away at the slope, some loose dirt inevitably covered those outer edges that merge into the boulders. Give me a few of evenings to water down the area and I will contact you guys again later in the week. One clarification question - Can I go ahead and translplant some ground cover over the slope? You guys had also made that suggestion when we met last week. I did not want to do that until the slope looked ok. Thank you all again for staying on top of this to get through it quickly. I very much appreciate it. Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:21 AM To: John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: FW: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) ( g Erol, The outer edge is still loose and needs moisture to properly compact. I will have Parks and Rec look at it when it's complete. They will let me know it a fence is still required. NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 11:35 PM To: Erturk, Erol; Nick Deile Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Jessica Toth Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) ( g Nick, 3 Hope you had a good weekend. I have attached 2 photos - 05Oct07 refers to what we saw when you, Masih, the fellow for P&R I forget his name, was it Dave?) and I met last Tuesday. The 08Oct07 is what it looks tike now. There is a 4-6 ft wide path with compacted dirt and gravel on top. We removed dirt to eaze the western slope to bring the rise over run down to 1:2. 1 made 3 measurements perpendicular to the path on the western side to check. Please call me to set up a visit regarding the path as soon as possible (858-655-3018). It would also be great if the parks&rec fellow could drop by as well. Regards, Erol Erturk (858) 655-3018 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 10:54 PM To: 'Nick Deile' Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; 'Jessica Toth' Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) Nick, I completely understand and I am terribly sorry but I can't get out of work to during the week to work on this path cleanup. I need to get the final approval as soon as possible and this is the only way to for me to do it. The only other way I can think of would be for the city to immediately assume all costs, responsibility, and all liability for the requested work. y, Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 5:05 PM To: Erturk, Erol Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Nick Deile Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Gradin g plan #199G) Erol, Please see attached form regarding weekend work, It would be better to schedule the trail work during normal business hours. NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 4 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 11:01 AM To: Nick Deile Cc: Jessica Toth; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol; Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield la 199G) (Grading plan # Nick, Per our conversation on Tuesday 10/2 at the site, I will be working on Saturday on shaping the a and smoothing the slope per Masih's request. However, this does not mean a change n ownership shown in existing documentation for the path. p You asked that I notify you. We will be working from 8 am to 3 pm this Saturday. If you feel the need, please come by. Please also note that I am tracking costs associated with these added requests. So far there is from Pasco for just under$1,000 for all the discussions the city engaged them regardin the path bill addition, we will accrue a cost of$120 of labor this Saturday. g p h. In Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:57 AM To: Masih Maher; Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading 199G) eld ( g plan # Masih, Thanks again for responding. Please be sure to include me in that meeting at the site. In ord help bring Nick up to speed, I am reiterate/reclarify below (Nick, you also may want to read th er to trail, starting from the bottom to get the whole picture):, e e-mail I have pointed out to Masih and Duane that any improvements should show up in he appropriate t map. Therefore, I would refer you to the agreed upon trail SPECIFICALLY noted in map (#14411). is called out separately in the drawing from the other city easements. That is where the Cit It working with Rossini Park Estates agreed to put it 4 y Council years ago and that is where it belongs. I oppose adding path references in my final documentation as a condition for my final approval. Doesn't Rossini park estates still needs to complete their as built in order to get final as well? If so, why would you not take this issue up when they come in? Tom Sanford can then work with the city and appropriate neighbors in the community to get buy off as he has done on other matters before for he Rossini Park Estates development. 5 Please let me know if you have any issues or concerns with anything I have stated. So far, I have heard no disagreements from neither Masih nor Duane. Regards, Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message----- From: Masih Maher [mailto:MMaher @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:56 AM To: Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading radin g p Ian # Nick/Duane Could you please schedule a field meeting with Parks & Rec, and I, to review in the field Erol's request? Thanks, Masih Maher, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Encinitas, Engineering Department 505 South Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: 760-633-2776 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:57 AM To: Masih Maher Cc: Duane Thompson; Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading radin g p Ian # Masih, Thank you very much for the voice mail. Let me up front apologize for the inconvenience this is causing all of us. As I stated in my e-mail below, you had said you wanted to come out and see the path. When I voiced concerns about getting the appropriate people out there in a timely fashion, you had said ou would ask Duane to schedule it and that it could be done within 2 weeks back in August. y MY RECOMMENDATION -- I would strongly encourage you to work with Rossini Park Estates for when they come in to complete their as built for Map #14411. That approach would be consistent with the history and existing documentation. (you can reference my e-mail below). 6 Nick Deile From: Nick Deile Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 12:51 PM To: 'Erturk, Erol'; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 1012, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan#199G) As always yes! For your information I have also had numerous telephone calls from local residents wondering when the trail will be made safe and complete. If it is more convenient to use a portion of Your bond to complete this work please contact Greg Shields. NICK DEILE Engineering Services 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:31 AM To: Nick Deile; John Frenken; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson; jtoth @curiousco.com Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) ( ding Nick, Have you had Parks & Rec look at it per your previous e-mail? Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 7:33 AM To: Erturk, Erol; John Frenken; Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Bob Keeley Cc: Duane Thompson; jtoth @curiousco.com Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield G plan #199G) eld ( rading Erol, A post fence is required and D.G. trail surfacing, I also need the construction asbuilts. Please schedule a final inspection when ready. call to NICK DEILE 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk@hp.com] Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 11:22 PM To: Nick Deile i Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) Nick, Hope you weathered through the fires ok. I have watered down the edges of the slope to get compaction per your a-mail below. I also some ground cover. o planted Is it complete? Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 9:21 AM To: Nick Deile; John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield plan #199G) (Grading Nick, Thanks a bunch for your quick e-mail response. AND Wow, I didn't realize that you have there and looked at it already. That is awesome! gone out I know the area you are talking about on the outer edge. As we chipped at loose dirt inevitably covered those outer edges that merge into the boulders.a Givehme la fe' some ew of evenings to water down the area and I will contact you guys again later in the week. One clarification question - Can I go ahead and translplant some ground cover over the sl guys had also made that suggestion when we met last week. I did not want to do that until the You looked ok. slope Thank you all again for staying on top of this to get through it quickly. I very much appreciate Pp ate it. Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile@ci.encinitas.ca.usj Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:21 AM To: John Frenken; Bob Keeley Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol Subject: FW: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 She plan #1996) Sheffield (Grading Erol, The outer edge is still loose and needs moisture to properly compact. I will have Parks and Rec look z at it when it's complete. They will let me know it a fence is still required. NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 11:35 PM To: Erturk, Erol; Nick Deile Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Jessica Toth Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 10/2, 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan #199G) Nick, Hope you had a good weekend. I have attached 2 photos - 05Oct07 refers to what we saw when you, Masih, the fellow for P&R (I forget his name, was it Dave?) and I met last Tuesday. The 08Oct07 is what it looks like now. There is a 4-6 ft wide path with compacted dirt and gravel on top. We removed dirt to eaze the western slope to bring the rise over run down to 1:2. 1 made 3 measurements perpendicular to the path on the western side to check. Please call me to set up a visit regarding the path as soon as possible (858-655-3018). It would also be great if the parks&rec fellow could drop by as well. Regards, Erol Erturk (858) 655-3018 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 10:54 PM To: 'Nick Deile' Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; 'Jessica Toth' Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) Nick, I completely understand and I am terribly sorry but I can't get out of work to during the week to work on this path cleanup. I need to get the final approval as soon as possible and this is the only way to for me to do it. The only other way I can think of would be for the city to immediately assume all costs, responsibility, and all liability for the requested work. Regards, 3 Erol -----Original Message----- From: Nick Deile [mailto:NDeile @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 5:05 PM To: Erturk, Erol Cc: Greg Shields; Masih Maher; Nick Deile Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) Erol, Please see attached form regarding weekend work, It would be better to schedule the trail work during normal business hours. NICK DEILE Construction Inspector 760-802-8147 Cell 760-633-2782 Office -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 11:01 AM To: Nick Deile Cc: Jessica Toth; Masih Maher; Erturk, Erol; Duane Thompson Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) Nick, Per our conversation on Tuesday 10/2 at the site, I will be working on Saturday on shaping the path and smoothing the slope per Masih's request. However, this does not mean a change in ownership shown in existing documentation for the path. You asked that I notify you. We will be working from 8 am to 3 pm this Saturday. If you feel the need, please come by. Please also note that I am tracking costs associated with these added requests. So far there is a bill from Pasco for just under $1,000 for all the discussions the city engaged them regarding the path. In addition, we will accrue a cost of $120 of labor this Saturday. Regards, Erol -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:57 AM To: Masih Maher; Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) 4 Masih, Thanks again for responding. Please be sure to include me in that meeting at the site. In order to help bring Nick up to speed, I am reiterate/reclarify below (Nick, you also may want to read the e-mail trail, starting from the bottom to get the whole picture): I have pointed out to Masih and Duane that any improvements should show up in the appropriate map. Therefore, I would refer you to the agreed upon trail SPECIFICALLY noted in map (#14411). It is called out separately in the drawing from the other city easements. That is where the City Council working with Rossini Park Estates agreed to put it 4 years ago and that is where it belongs. I oppose adding path references in my final documentation as a condition for my final approval. Doesn't Rossini park estates still needs to complete their as built in order to get final as well? If so, why would you not take this issue up when they come in? Tom Sanford can then work with the city and appropriate neighbors in the community to get buy off as he has done on other matters before for the Rossini Park Estates development. Please let me know if you have any issues or concerns with anything I have stated. So far, I have heard no disagreements from neither Masih nor Duane. Regards, Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message----- From: Masih Maher [mailto:MMaher @ci.encinitas.ca.us] Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:56 AM To: Nick Deile; Duane Thompson Cc: Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield (Grading plan # 199G) Nick/Duane Could you please schedule a field meeting with Parks & Rec, and I, to review in the field Erol's request? Thanks, Masih Maher, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Encinitas, Engineering Department 505 South Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Phone: 760-633-2776 -----Original Message----- From: Erturk, Erol [mailto:erol.erturk @hp.com] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:57 AM To: Masih Maher Cc: Duane Thompson; Jessica Toth; Erturk, Erol 5 Subject: RE: Recap of conversation on 199G) Tues 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield heffield (Grading plan # Thank you very much for the voice causing all of us. mail. Let me up front apologize for the inconvenience t ' As I stated in my email below, his is voiced concerns about ' YOU had said would ask Duane to schedule it and that ' you wanted to come out and see the appropriate people out there in ►t could be a timely path. When I done within 2 weeks back in fashion, YOU had said you MY RECOMMENDATION -_ August. when they come in to I would strongly With the history Compete their as built for you to ry and exist- Map #14411. Work with Rossini Park g documentation. (you can reference That a Estates for Also, in order to help approach would be consistent YOU to see. p y°u move forward y e-mail below). Park I think you can make the decision that t n Estates map #14411 closure occurs. pictures of the his can and should ab aesolvedpyh them off for I am under pressure to complete when the Rossini week of September 24th for this to be resolved. and ved. get my bond released. I cannot wait be o Please feel free to contact me any time Y nd the Erol Erturk 858 655 3018 -----Original Message__-__ From: Erturk, Erol Sent: Tuesday, [mailto:erol.erturk @h Se Duane Thompson 04, 2007 1 :02 A Cc: pson 2:02 AM Masih Maher Subject: Recap of conversation on Tue 199G) s 8/28 regarding closure on 403 Sheffield Dear Duane and Masih, (Grading plan # Thank you for your time observation to August 28th at the counter. you: To recap our conversation, I made the followin path is clearly delineated 9 This separate designation Note G of Estates gnation was already agreed upon#14411 (entitled "City completed between Sheffield and y Of Encinitas 7' was vacated, I believe) pOn during the 4-lot develo M 99-230 Warwick (agreement made back by Rossini Park) 2. The referenced ack in 2003 when Sheffield parts of Sheffield and p (#14411) shows a Rossini. There is no reference to our Sheffield o Path 3. Our deli onto Rossini from 'art of design intent was to stay parcel with regard to the the vacated Rossini. We Y within the boundaries Of o path. Put the boundary of our boundaries our property Y well within ur line. We did not vacate our our property line. I have marked the 6 Property line with some stakes for your convenience to demonstrate that we have f 4. Our grading plan was alread fulfilled our original bullet 3, nothing has changed frYom the with no need to show anything for the e original intent. 5. As far as we path. As noted in completed for the 1V1a' the original design discussion p #14411. gn intent for the path and the final as- needed which is Had the original intent been proof that the proper) built have not been 6. As it stands path must be independent y Completed, there there is more than enough of our pro would be no agreement without crossin gh roo prop ' The slope concerns g into our m for the path to connect to There is no re are related to the vacate ated Rossini as the reason for us to show part of original anything in our drawings.�n� which is NO7 As such, I have re part of our property because t guested that the proposed do not want to assume the modifications be re Property. cost, responsibility, oved from ponsibi and the liabilit m °ur as-is drawing Prior to making y°f a path that is would ask pu g a decision, Masih w not on my ana to set u anted to come out and see the will check in with Duane on Thursda 7/ within 2 weeks. Please let s know himself. Y 7/6. He said he Regards, w when the visit will be. 1 Erol Erturk (858) 655-3018 '�/ ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT , Cite of CaPffal Improvement Projects P. District Support Services Field OPerations Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL Y TO: Subdivision.Engineering Public Service Counter FROM:- Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit No. Name of Project T co "� �,e� 1^�-C'C -e Name Of Developer -C.5.5 G A- Site location 03 s GI e 19CI ELD :. � f?`ij /Z!o 9 ,(address:;:-..number. et name,. - stye - — ...s fbl ,I haveAnspected the g rrg, t tlae object site and:havercenfle�i er>afreatioslso .the pad,b the.:Engineer of Work,. Go -� y compaction by the Soil Engineer, n r , date .,::p .. d 3d ce ,'facation of soli.:'.- : .fiatisfi :alat the:.rough grading has:been-corr�pfetezis irr acco arise wi�h:tkie p rovey� pians,artd-specifications-'-Chapter:,23:fi4-of:.ttre p d erTMneering:standards c nr;05pecif)c project requirements..,.-.--,-.Murrrpal- ar�ti�:any air-aplilicable bull Base d g per observation and the.certifications, 1=take 110--exception to-the.-issuance:of ar.: building permit for the lots) as noted or-Phase concerned. However., this release is not intended toi certif�r the project With respect to is other.engineering concerns, Including .public road, drainage; water, sewer, improvements, and their availability, any other publi �defiles monumentation;or final grading: c Improvements, Prior to final Inspection of the Building Permit(s) and legal Occupancy, I need to be further advised so that I can verify that final grading (i.e., finished precise grading, planting and Irrigation) has een comp) d In accordance with the approved plans and specifications. �5 rcIgn°ture Eng eennglns e `C" �er/e p ctor) (Date) (Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only 7 appropiate) (Date) Reference: Building Permit No. Special Note: Snbmit this fo technicians'in-boxes.Please rIn' if completed, to counter staff mm by remember to do a final inspection o e Placing a copy of it in bath eaginee i g when completed. Office staff ruin handle the appmpiate reductions grading security, f and submit that PaP�rk. Building Inspection Thank you. ty, if any, and coordination with J5G/fieldIdocl FAX 76"33-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 � recycled paper C I T Y O F E N C I N I T A S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 505 S . VULCAN AVE. ENCINITAS, CA 92024 CARDIFF SANITATION DISTRICT SEWER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PERMIT NO. : DCS00576 PARCEL NO. 260-283-1200 __======= JOB SITE ADDRESS : 403 APPLICANT NAME SHEFFIELD AVE. PL's NO. : MAILING ADDRESS: . `7ESSICA TOTH CASE NO. : CITY: ENCINITAS 2020 EDINBURG AVE. CONTRACTOR STATE: CA ZIP: 92024 PHONE NO. : 760-942-7450 - LICENSE NO. : MARK TURNER INSU RANCE COMPANY PHONE NO. :OMPANY NAME: 760-434-6104 POLICY NO. SUA INSURANCE CO. LICENSE TYPE: B : G-200273GL02 ENGINEER POLICY EXP. DATE: PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 1/18/07 5/16/07 PERMIT EXP. P E INSPECTOR: DATE: 5/16/07 PERMIT ISSUED B RONALD QUIGG ------ PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS 1 • PERMIT FEE --------------------- __ 3 • INSPECTION FEE 400 . 00 2 , PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: 5 • PLAN CHECK FEE . 00 4 • INSPECTION DEPOSIT: • 00 7 • FLOOD CONTROL FEE : 00. 00 SECURITY DEPOSIT • 00 ------ 00 8 . TRAFFIC FEE • 00 ---- DESCRIPTION OF WORK 00 PERMIT ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW 4 PROPERTY, IN PUBLIC EASEMENT. �� SEWER LATERAL ON PRIVATE PER W.A. T. C.H. STANDARDS OR CITY APPROVED TRAFFIC T BE PERFORMED PER STANDARD SEWER TRAFFIC CONTROL LATERAL & CONTROL PLAN. WORK TO TRENCH REPAIR DETAILS . ---- INSPECTION ----------------_ ------- DATE ------ INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE INITIAL INSPECTION _ FINAL INSPECTION 2 • 2 ? ------------------- -- ------------------- �t/ ,�.P • r�� .��. ------ ------ ------- ----- I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED PERMIT __ ss AND DO HEREBY_CERTIFY_UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT ALL THE INFORMATION IS TRUE. SE DATE IGNED PRINT NAME _ CIRCLE ONE: O TELEPHONE NUMBER 1 . WNER 2 . AGENT 3 . OTHER TOTH RESIDENCE CHRISTIAN WHEELER E N C I N P.: I; R. I N G DATE: JANUARY2007 JOB NO.; 2050098.05 BY:. DH/DD/HC PLATE NO.: 1 GRADING PLAN 1 1 RESME r C ANY OFFSITE WORK OR CONSTRUCTION WILL REQUIRED A PERMISSION TO GRADE LETTER AUTHORIZING SAID WORK. FAILURE TO OBTAIN SAID LETTER MAY RESULT IN A STOP WORK ORDER 12' PUBLIC UTILITY AND EMERGENCY p..:; " \ VEHICLE ACCESS'EA5EMENT I3 12" X 12" TYPICAL"-''_ " "o r PER 02- 208652 n. '° AREA DRAIN PROPOSED "G =1 MASONRY TW =160.0 EXISTING WATER TW =159.0 RETAINING WALL o 0 QPpFESSIpA �Q�OPn JUSTIry r m� w a No. 68964 �' m : Exp. 12/31/07 sr clvzv ��P 9�OF C GRAPHIC SCALE o so 20 30 METER W5 -09 PER WAS "' °,._. BW =157,0 TW =160.0 TG-157.2 5 SIDE YARD B = <,�, .... TW =158.0 12 "'° X::.12 TYPICAL TG =157.5 = �. BiV =157.0 TG =15 r\ IE- 156.2r BW =157.0 AREA DRAIN 2E =156.5 S13 2i 56'E 95.43'_ TW _✓ SETBACK B: 157.9 _' S l .�. 15= . R 171.32' -- - _ _- s =__ =_- 5 - TE� .5 6�' AtwI6 30' 04 - =568 - - - L =49.34 r �. - DRAIN PIPE TO BMP TREATMENT AREA NOT TO BE m • „ t ° ~� _ t ♦ I \ DAYLIGHT @ 156.0 20% MAX.- - ` ,r," W -156:5 TG 157: Q. , TG -157.2 Sg MODIFIED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF / Hr45 o EASEMENT PER DOC. THE CITY OF ENCINITAS W =155.9 W =156.5 �\ / TE 156.0 IE= 156:2 " " - HP =158.2 N0. 1991- 124419 12.5 EASMENT PER DOC 4 8 = 155.'9.,; 6 _ \ \,. �/ 6" PVC DRAINPIPE 6" PVC ORAINPIP RECORDED MARCH 1ST 1991 04- 639731 5= 155.0 ::, 155.5 \ 1510 \� f't "' b Qdaf C 157 HYDROSEED BASE Q = 6. 7 IC 1535 C {CE ,? .. _ � - � FS 15 a � e 4:: O - _ R s G __ w �-- F. --- - - �, � _� -�"• TG_156.8 ----- ,m�_�.�,_,��"'..-- �...,,� 15.0. .: ,.- _ 155 � `�� o• 14' PRIVATE ROAD AND UTILITY`''- FS= 4.0 - ° ": IE 155.8 12" F� <__. EASEMENT RESERVED FOR BENEFIT / P&1RASIDBNCE OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP 1269 N h. -< '; ", / s„ \ W, -155.4 // TG�156i f q P11S7S _ - ghcs� tel APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING Iu PER MAP 14411 e'', 4.i 8,= 153.5/.: _ .r, . _ PAD =151.0 Qdaf SEWER MAIN TO BE FIELD VERIFIED -:T 1, w 8 `d . C "_ - QQ� y BY CONTRACTOR s 113: • . tl _ --� APN: 260 - 281 -25 ":.. `� ) - - TW -156.8 I'll, F�'�"""F"_ ----- ._._�.�- _ -�I 0 .0 BMP TREATMENT SWALE NOT TO BE \ ➢ > 1 PERMISSION OF 49.5 F. MODIFIED WITHOUT �. ,•..$; :.. a. daf 2% > BW =153.2 11 F Q Qd'af; N x 2% MIN o `w4 THE CITY OF ENCINITAS ° ... PROPOSED TYPE 149.5 PROPOSED SE LATERAL P ED WER LA F 12, J . \ aTWe156..l4 ct� C -1 RETAININGw" E , .1.. ' .:...: a .. p.. +1•. ' t, . ' : . BW =1 2.9 QRB A5A 0 Eli- LIMIT - OF EXISTING PAVEMENT "�' • j. m PRRBSiDB[dC6 F 7 a fir•.' . Qdaf',;' , . ' ' ;: • .. � t 153 5 (FS- 152.2) .,. .. .. > , • : , FS= :13.3J . "' r. .. 17 P.AD =152.8 �FF =154.0 4 ,., Y �.a; I pRQA038DRffiIDBIVCB TW =15 :'':. � , .,,.. a; :. -. P 2if S i+1�ISS 0 a BW =154. 1 148.0 4 G,., PAIkm FA TA=1545 ra EXISTING CONCRETE APRON r D''..'. fiET OR7 WAYs.R.:',tl '. Qda�f 5.8 L 54.8 °a TG =154.4 s , _., f S 1 I "p� ,;, ...P•: >. .a ..T6- :151 \0. ; • it52 :31- -- .4 14 IE =151.9 \- 16 ., ,. F 133.51 _„ : <. „ _ 154 , iEYB 147" :a. f>% \ TG 1 W W, TW 16 6 v'> 1 IE -151.2 P.9D =153. o:. EXISTING CONCRETE CURB ;, : - `; . v : :. •. • -,.. � - y ��: FS =153.3 AND GUTTER TO BE REMOVED eo, 9. ", > °'" a�1N >. • - a B .'S1 W.. W PROPOSED TYPE G i - 15 Rw __ CURB PORTION-OF-SHEFFIELD AVE. ..:; 5 "K-. . 3; 1485` > -\ q51 VACATED PER 02- 208652 1440 - -' `. � •-- ""' - "." --� "' ✓ EASMENT DPER PMR1269ENOOAD FS =151.0 N H S EASMENT 2' CURB CUT \ X BEING GRANTED OR RESERVED. 73.84' \ TG =150.5 _ PROPOSED CONCRETE a .. � ..-, -, � -,_. _ , -,- , -, -,- --,,,� _ _Y TG -151.4 r - �' � TG 151.6 PROP IE =149.5 RIPRAP PROPOSED 6" -- R=430.26 = i9 "o0'00- L- 142.66' TE =150.6 IE =150.4 a "' EXISTING SANITARY OSEO PRIVATE INFILTRATION EO -TYPE G -1 CONCRETE BURM ._,._._ --- � TG 150.2" TW =154 4 SEWER MANHOLE 4' -°{ GRASS AND EARTH SWALE 20% MAX, TURF REINFORCEMEFFF MATTING UV RESISTANT VMAXa 0350 BY NORTH AMERICAN r3REEN OR EGUAL SEC,770N 15-0 NOT TO SCALE IE =149.2 BASIN - SEE DETAIL r��j� CURB \ FS= 151.1 12" X 12" TYPICAL °" -�'- BW =151.5 HATCHED AREA REPRESENTS --'' C W ■ •. LEGEND DRAIN PRIVATE TNFILTRATIDN TYPE r_4 RE INING WALL -� AREA PROPOSED 50' RIPARIAN BASIN - SEE DETAIL _ PER SEPERATE RCHITECTURAL DRAINPIPE TO LANDSCAPE AREAS FOR BEST - o MANAGEMENT PRACTICE NOT TO \ SETBACK (2005) / HATCHED AREA'- REPRESENTS PLAN°• ' -/ DAYLIGHT @ 151.5 RELATIVE COMPACTION TESTS LANDSCAPE AREAS FOR BEST o BE MODIFIED WITHOUT A PERMIT O cu. FROM THE CITY "-- - =____ � ____ ' v -•- MANAGEMENT. PRACTICE NOT TO „ � ,. •,,,,",,.-- •�""^~ 154.0 r _ ELEVATION AT BOTTOM OF REMOVAL BE _MOD.TF_:TE2WLTHOUT A _PERMIT FROM THE CITY Qg DOCUMENTED ARTIFICIAL FILL OVER TERRACE uUU u_v Qt DEPOSITS 1` v - u EXISTING I.O.D. 0 2 LIMITS OF REMOVAL & RECOMPACTION EXI IN 10. PER DOCUMENT 72 3 9860 REC..12 -11 -72 VACATED PER CITY OF ENCINITAS RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -52 AS DOC. 03- 1068857 C') . `:- - REC. SEP 02 2003 �,��•..�..� �. RADINh PLAN ,r -.. • 3 5� -a- .: EXT iNO CONCRETE' CURB l (FL= 152.8! )� " 1 1 ND' G T "T0 8E- REMOVED 24' ROW v � 15 4. D 2 ° • � ,. h tk, t D (FL= 152N.5R2E)'. T E " ,8XISTING .�• AVEMENT : ' � 1 • . g% v V. k, (FS= (FS= 152.2) D' .� �, � v .. •.nom. �. .;,:;,; « " ' Q •• , • ` . M,P. fFS13.1) D V. MATCH EXISTING CURB'bCQND,,, S TION v,' D EXISTING CONC TE CURB AND GUTTER TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED TYPE G -1 D CURB CENTER LINE OF S14EFFIELO aT=,n -' AVE.. TO REM IN llil - FS =151.0 2' CURB CUT y; REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE EXISTRE CONU ETE PAYING EXISTING ASIFALT PAVING I 'ON C-C NOT TO SCALE FS= 151.0 C-1 „ PROPOSED TYPE G -1 "> CURB PROPOSED CONCRETE RIPRAP BENCHMARK SCALE CITY OF ENCINITAS PT. NO. 1047 NAME CAOT 11 -DC HORIZONAL L =10' EL 231.69 NAVD 88 ASSUMED DATUM ELEVATION OF 233.51 VERTICAL N/A r. 1 Irtm To PROPOSED CONCRETE D DRIVEWAY PROPOSED TYPE G-1 1 CURB PER SD:W NNW; OASFET) LINE REPRESENTS EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED PLANTER EXISTING 6-2 - CURB Alm GUTTER OVER BASE 4ST-iff Lw1�1 TRAVEL LANE I TRAVEL LANE 2% 1 2% EX AC PACING ` EXISTING G -2 CURB AND GUTTER YE!. ?"Y`F"OOl CAL me c7/0N NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE PROPOSED TYPE C -1 MASOWY RETAINING WALL ' n 1.14, , -I J PROPOSED PRIVATE INFILTRATION I I , PRIVATE SERE P DRAIN BASIN - SEE DETAIL HATCHED AREA REPRESENTS .,' (- - IF= SEE PLAN SCGEM N'f CT CE OTT TO I BE MODIFIED WITHOUT A PERMIT hi FROM THE CITY 6" PERFORATED PVC PIPE @ 1% PRIVATE AREA DRAIN PROPOSED DRAINAGE DIRECTION G= SEE PLAN HATCFED AREA REPRESENTS TG-- SEE PLAN LANDSCAPE AREAS FOR BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE NOT TO BE MODIFIED WITHOUT A PERMIT FROM THE CITY PRIVATE AREA DRAIN in ,�� PROPOSED TG= SEE PLAN o� FWISHEO SURFACE IE =SEE PLAN .I111111I Ilii Il,�ill�i��1 I A ° -� ^V ' a FILTER y GRAVEL v / V=/JwT A7 /OIV OA / NOT TO SCALE - �A7p-��7yr� p �e pT L Aysy�ypwT�r p•• B ff yeaNG DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY APPROVALS C= OF �id�ld.IN dAS 'i�S Ld'�L`11�11�t7 t'K. 9.t1e-iJA1! TGL TGL WJS PLANS PR P ED UNDER THE SUPERVISIPN OF PECQMMENDE APP D GRADING PLAN FOR: 403 SHEFFIELD AVENUE DATE: BY; _ BY REVIEWED BY: TU C+ 1 !i RESIDENCE L : R. C. E. NO. 68964 DATE: 111210, U DATE: 11 DATE WILLIAM USTIN SUITER EXP. 12 -31 -05 PRIVATE AREA DRAIN TG=SEE PLAN IE= SEE PLAN )RATED @1% f CWE LEGEND T -5 APPROXIMATE TEST TRENCH LOCATION Oaf_ ARTIFICIAL FILL OVER Qt TERRACE DEPOSITS Qt TERRACE DEPOSITS GEOLOGIC CONTACT NOTE. TOPSOIL NOT MAPPED '' ,':•'s z <.s z z c q 6 \ \ '" JhIG 7 SjCwu `r°. '" SE GAC.iti Mr \1 A \\ `. FIN r -\\ ,:ROr UNIT/ FRONT YARD SETE;.::K C - --- - -- - - - - -- =- LhJC _ ¢/G I� I _.J ��9 + '�' VA11« QV %.f,4r ��' ^ti41'F�/"�VI ✓�`��.Iw // I ............. _. ......... _._. -_�. _ ...___..._.. _ � \� \\ \ \ J\ j \ I b RU ARVA _ _ Vi- I N }Fl.. --- PF:AIN LINE O rAYLISHT - \ _ F _ _ w / I f:\ F. 1 4 \ L'R?.INAG_ et r.MANAGEMEN: _.. _ _ FRAGT GE TYP. EAC-++ SIDE i" �_. .� � � � �,., /- - 7 F.5 1510! r.r. i5mry - 441 E`_1 %K" - ._. -__._. �a^.�!:'A!'^A: ^•Eiv; - - �-- � -��- -- 1 V \ - - _ Dr \: - i ` _ t o II ,.;��% :. • ,.. wrxG. Y 5I 3.1 l I F.F. - �_ � REAR. Y ARW ... - l)�:e - TG..Er '.^.".q ,_.. .;;........c .. \ .. F.F. I %:O' :a0 \ .. -r.. ..'.. • •.' , ' ' ..� LINE. OF 45' V!a15 LI-1' . _- - � - --� - JcW 7`GF0 _ T..r, --_- . --- - - I F.S. I a't I F.F.,IS3a I.r_. 'F.S 1349 t F.S., � .�� x \ ...• G.;R.F3 F''=" _. I - '� _ ❑n \ II I7r7[ ❑� .. - _ _ _ _ ��_.._._ _ - _ - . -- -h - - - �-- - - --- - - GF riFZAINA. t GYP. ' -- - 1:,-e -- - -- -7G:E Y.� ,ANYE:R _ ."o - -_- --' I5, _ _ _ J u \^\ - - - �__ 51 FOOT PIV RiAN i --- 1 ' ;—•�i C�O' = 5' HIGH kNOOni FENCE ; At J^,G ..._. __ -- x z o, IN UAN:75r-ARL-ARI!A5,.- 708.3`.= `�T'�iA *A,- '_':i`rIE^ \ 5i=73 ,- ,C'.<`2005 / FIRAG !G1= (E- F) TOE 5E PRI\ /AT...LV it..IN fAIN'wr -J" DGnN*P0��, IG ch°:A!N THF?OuG -1 r -1t: ,,:;, IO' .-•- ;:.SUh'EI`i AREA iN ' LtDG.'`i Gp r•>AV'L-MENi� _�___'_----- ----._ _� -- 0 12 24 48 SCALE: 111=92' I DATE /PURPOSE re GOB 0 a U !L Ea: CS W z 7 Q C W u_ L.i ilS wz CIS V e if.Ii v:6d7�.gt,R?. F ; C APO No. C15560 v N. 4/30/07 . p f� 4 DATE SCALE DRA'IhN 5VWJ JOB OrI?. FILE SHEET Al OF SHEE?6 PROPOSED SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE DATE: APRIL2006 JOB NO.: 2050098.01 ,. CHRISTIAN WHEELER BY CAC /WM/AC P L A T E NO.: 1 E N f. I N F U Ii. I N C i;\ 2� cg s� WARWICK AVE. 0 Ip L u ' w SHEFFIELD AVE. 4 G L Y v {a 51-rE a 0u.i 4 S R "MIL P.T E. Oq Q ' Ir1 -. � BRIGHT N AVE. rn STAFF-OM AVE. o� \ \ '" JhIG 7 SjCwu `r°. '" SE GAC.iti Mr \1 A \\ `. FIN r -\\ ,:ROr UNIT/ FRONT YARD SETE;.::K C - --- - -- - - - - -- =- LhJC _ ¢/G I� I _.J ��9 + '�' VA11« QV %.f,4r ��' ^ti41'F�/"�VI ✓�`��.Iw // I ............. _. ......... _._. -_�. _ ...___..._.. _ � \� \\ \ \ J\ j \ I b RU ARVA _ _ Vi- I N }Fl.. --- PF:AIN LINE O rAYLISHT - \ _ F _ _ w / I f:\ F. 1 4 \ L'R?.INAG_ et r.MANAGEMEN: _.. _ _ FRAGT GE TYP. EAC-++ SIDE i" �_. .� � � � �,., /- - 7 F.5 1510! r.r. i5mry - 441 E`_1 %K" - ._. -__._. �a^.�!:'A!'^A: ^•Eiv; - - �-- � -��- -- 1 V \ - - _ Dr \: - i ` _ t o II ,.;��% :. • ,.. wrxG. Y 5I 3.1 l I F.F. - �_ � REAR. Y ARW ... - l)�:e - TG..Er '.^.".q ,_.. .;;........c .. \ .. F.F. I %:O' :a0 \ .. -r.. ..'.. • •.' , ' ' ..� LINE. OF 45' V!a15 LI-1' . _- - � - --� - JcW 7`GF0 _ T..r, --_- . --- - - I F.S. I a't I F.F.,IS3a I.r_. 'F.S 1349 t F.S., � .�� x \ ...• G.;R.F3 F''=" _. I - '� _ ❑n \ II I7r7[ ❑� .. - _ _ _ _ ��_.._._ _ - _ - . -- -h - - - �-- - - --- - - GF riFZAINA. t GYP. ' -- - 1:,-e -- - -- -7G:E Y.� ,ANYE:R _ ."o - -_- --' I5, _ _ _ J u \^\ - - - �__ 51 FOOT PIV RiAN i --- 1 ' ;—•�i C�O' = 5' HIGH kNOOni FENCE ; At J^,G ..._. __ -- x z o, IN UAN:75r-ARL-ARI!A5,.- 708.3`.= `�T'�iA *A,- '_':i`rIE^ \ 5i=73 ,- ,C'.<`2005 / FIRAG !G1= (E- F) TOE 5E PRI\ /AT...LV it..IN fAIN'wr -J" DGnN*P0��, IG ch°:A!N THF?OuG -1 r -1t: ,,:;, IO' .-•- ;:.SUh'EI`i AREA iN ' LtDG.'`i Gp r•>AV'L-MENi� _�___'_----- ----._ _� -- 0 12 24 48 SCALE: 111=92' I DATE /PURPOSE re GOB 0 a U !L Ea: CS W z 7 Q C W u_ L.i ilS wz CIS V e if.Ii v:6d7�.gt,R?. F ; C APO No. C15560 v N. 4/30/07 . p f� 4 DATE SCALE DRA'IhN 5VWJ JOB OrI?. FILE SHEET Al OF SHEE?6 PROPOSED SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE DATE: APRIL2006 JOB NO.: 2050098.01 ,. CHRISTIAN WHEELER BY CAC /WM/AC P L A T E NO.: 1 E N f. I N F U Ii. I N C i;\