The URL can be used to link to this page

2007-675 G/PE C I T Y OF E N C I N I T A S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 505 S. VULCAN AVE. 3 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 GRADING PERMIT PERMIT NO. : 675GI PARCEL NO. 260-275-1900 PLAN NO. : 675—G JOB SITE ADDRESS : 1719 SAN ELIJO AVE CASE NO. : 07044 / CDP APPLICANT NAME : RUEBEN & JAMIE MEHREN MAILING ADDRESS : PHONE NO. : 8 5 8 CITY: RANrun SANT FE STATE: CA ZIP: 92007' 344 - 1914- lt y: �C c rr LTyt 3 Zi-"f CONTRACTOR : KOCH—ARMSTRONG GENERAL ENG. INC. PHONE NO. : 619-561-2005 LICENSE NO. : 194819 LICENSE TYPE: A ENGINEER : RANCHO COASTAL ENGINEERING (DOUG LOGAN) PHONE NO. : 760-510-3152 PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 1/18/08 PERMIT EX /18/09 PERMIT ISSUED BY: INSPECT BEN OLIVER --------- ---------------- PERMIT FEES &DEPOSITS ---------------------------- 1 . PERMIT FEE . 00 2 . CIS MAP FEE . 00 3 . INSPECTION FEE 4 , 482 . 00 4 . INSPECTION DEPOSIT: . 00 5 . NPDES INSPT FEE 896 . 00 6 . SECURITY DEPOSIT 89, 645 . 00 7 . FLOOD CONTROL FEE 630 . 00 8 . TRAFFIC FEE . 00 9 . IN—LIEU UNDERGRND . 00 10 . IN—LIEU IMPROVMT . 00 ll . PLAN CHECK FEE . 00 12 . PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: . 00 - -- - — - — -- — --- - — — -- - -- — - — — DESCRIPTION OF WORK --- — --- ----- ---- — --- ----- — ----- PERMIT ISSUED TO INSPECT GRADING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLAN 675—G. APPLICANT SHALL MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL PER W.A.T. C.H. STD OR CITY APPROVED TRAFFIC PLAN AS NECESSARY. LETTER DATED 01/17/08 APPLIES . APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT ENGINEERING INSPECTOR BEN OLIVER AT 760-633-2807 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO START OF WORK. INSPECTION DATE — ------- INSPECTOR' S SIGNATURE ---- ---- ---- ------- ---- - INITIAL INSPECTION COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED Off' I t ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED g ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION 7 FINAL INSPECTION W1 17 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE LAW LATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF Y PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS APPLICATION. 7 ATE SIGNED PRINT NAME TELEPHONE NUMBER ,-_ „r ,-. ,, _ , /IT.TTTL�D ') y,r_vrTm Z nTT4 P..P ENGINEERING August 29, 2007 City of Encinitas Engineering Department RE: HYDROLOGY EVALUATION —THE MEHREN RESIDENCE 1719 SAN ELIJO AVENUE - CITY OF ENCINITAS Please allow this letter to serve as the hydrology study for the subject residence. Based on several site visits, it is our professional opinion that there is little or no off-site drainage entering onto this lot. We have researched the City's records on the project directly to the east, TPM 88-355 (APN 260-275-27). but due to the age of this project. there was very little information and apparently no grading plan was done. However, we have shown the off-site improvements and it certainly appears that the "potential" off-site drainage is intercepted by an existing concrete patio area with a couple of large area drains. The drainage is then directed to San Elijo Avenue, via an 8" corrugated plastic pipe through an existing 5-foot private drainage easement along the south side of the subject project boundary (see grading plan for further detail). Therefore, the only drainage affecting this lot is the lot area itself, which is approximately 9,500 s.f. Based on the County of San Diego Design and Procedure Manual and assuming urban single-family residential conditions, we would conservatively predict no more than 1.0 cfs in a 100-year storm, for the entire lot. It is our professional opinion that typical drainage devises utilized for single family residential construction, i.e., brow ditches, sheet flow, swales, berms and area drains will be more than adequate to handle the anticipated drainage for this residence. In addition, appropriate BMPs, both during and after construction. ill be implemented to the City's satisfaction. As Engineer of Work for this residential grading plan. we respectively request your acceptance of this hydrology evaluation. Should you have any questions or comments, juglas;ELogan.e to contact this office or respond, as such. with plan check comments. �0 pFtOFEgS70 O TAL ENGINEERING \y�`�oovG�S F 1(09 2 w e 38 Z 0 07 m � a 9 R.C.E. 39726 oCIVIL Principal CALIFOP Planning Civil S�rvey Structural Rancho Coastal Enginee inj Inc. 1635 S. Rancho Santa Fe Rd., Ste. 204, San Marcos, CA 9207c. Phone (760) 510-3152, Fax (760) 510-3153 www.rcesd.com RANCHO COASTAL ENGINEERING gingle ,Source Development Consultant March 21, 2012 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICATION MEHREN RESIDENCE -DRAWING NO. 675-G The grading under permit number 675-G has been performed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shown on the attached"As-Graded"plan. Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms with the approved grading plan and that swales drain at a minimum of I%to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Developmen ource Control and Treatment Control Best Management Practices as show on the drawing a required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part II were onstruc d and operational,together with the required maintenance covenant(s). ENGINEER OF RECO 'oF 5 E. [pC F2c Douglas E. Logan, R.C.E. 39726 of 9y m c~n 4 C 39728 m DATED: d `� �TF OF Verification by the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility: ENGINEERING INSPECTOR: DATED: Planning Civil Survey Structural Rancho Coastal Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 310 S.Twin Oaks Valley Rd.,#107-297,San Marcos, CA 92078 Phone(760)510-3152, Fax:(760)510-3153 A TTACPMENT `B" OETAIL OF ENCPOACPMENT IN 1719 SAN EL L/0 A I/E. z Joe b a , r r L I 41 EXISTING DRIVEWAY EXISTING LL TO p — —--- — BE REMO —— 3 WALL ENaPOuIa*eiT •BETA W6 ENCROAaMANT DRAMfAGE SWALE •RET MA4l •PROPOSED D�RMAGE SWALE SAN ELIJO AVE 10 5 0 10 20 30 SCALE IN FEET N SCALE: 1" = 10' ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects +' CZ Of District Support Services .: J Field operations EndniW Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM:. Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit NO. Name of Project WV&r%_19- Name of Developer Site Location (address ..number ...street name suffix) (lot! (bldg! The proposed grading of the subject site will -require construction of retaining walls that are also building walls. The inspection of the site retaining walls is to be done by the Field operations Division of the Engineering Services Department. However, the inspection of the building retaining walls is to be done by the Building inspection Division of the Community Development Department. Therefore, issuance of the necessary Building Permit is requested in order to facilitate the completion of rough grading. NO INSPECTIONS BEYOND FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATION E ORE ROUGH PROVIDED BY BUILDING INSPECTION UNTIL A NOTICE GRADING APPROVAL, WITHOUT CONDITIONS AND SIGNED BY THE ENGINEERING INSPECTOR, IS RECEIVED. FRAMING IS PROHBITED. (Signatre of Engineering Inspector) (Date) u (Signature of senior Civil Engineer, only if appropiate) (55- Date) Reference: Building Permit No. --- Special Note:Submit this form, if completed, to counter staff merely by placing a copy of it in both engineering technicians' in-boxes. Please remember to do a full rough grading approval and submit that paperwork, when completed. Office staff will handle the appropiate reductions in security, if any, and coordination with Building Inspection.Thank you. JSG/field2.doc 1 TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TD 760-633-2700 recycled paper Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING •GROUNDWATER a ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 24 January 2012 Rueben and Jamie Mehren Job No. 07-9442 P.O. Box 1612 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Pavement Design and Construction Proposed Mehren Residence 1719 San Elljo Avenue h Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with the request of your contractor, Mr. Bruce Wiegand, we have developed design and construction recommendations for the driveway pavement for the subject residence. It is our understanding that, in addition to normal residential vehicle loads, the pavement is required to be capable of supporting a 75,000-pound Ore truck. We previously performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the project, the results of which were presented In our report dated August 24, 2007, and have been providing earthwork observation and testing services for the project � grading operations since February 7, 2008. Based on the preceding, we recommend that the driveway pavement consist of 5.5 inches of concrete supported directly on the existing sandy subgrade soils. The upper 8 inches of the subgrade below the slab should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent just prior to paving. The concrete should conform to Section 201 of The Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2000 Edition, for Class 560-C-3250. We also recommend that the slab be reinforced with No. 4 reinforcing bars spaced at 18 inches in both directions. In addition to the preceding, it is our opinion that the planned use of 60 mm concrete pavers supported on 6 inches of aggregate base will provide adequate support for the proposed loads. The upper 6 inches of the paver subgrade soil as 7420 TRADE STREET*SAN DIEGO,CA.92121• (858)549-7222 0 FAX:(858)549-1604 • EMAIL.: geotech @gei-sd.com GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL& FOUNDATION ENGINEERING GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY FIELD REPORT ON OBSERVATION OF FOUNDATIONS DATE: f F '' TIME: CLIENT : JOB NO. PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: The footing excavations listed below were bottomed on material for which the bearing values Qrecommended in the foundation report are applicable. The cast-in-place drilled friction piles listed below penetrated material for which the allowable supporting capacities recommended in the foundation report are applicable. The ❑ piles were excavated to diameters at least as large as specified and the excavations extended at least to the depths indicated on the Foundation Plans. The excavations for the cast-in-place belled piers listed below were bottomed on material for ❑ which the bearing values recommended in the foundation report are applicable. The excavations were at least as large as specified on the Foundation Plans. The driven piles listed below were observed to be driven to the specified lengths and/or ❑ driving resistances to obtain the supporting capacities recommended in the foundation report. Based upon observations, it is our opinion that the foundation recommendations presented in the report of the foundation investigation, Job Not' " dated ` (are)/(are not) applicable to the conditions observed. Foundation Plans by dated were used as a reference for our observations. NOTE: 1. The observations reported above do not constitute an approval of foundation location, footing size or depth, reinforcement, or foundation design. 2. Loose, soft, or disturbed soils must be removed prior to placement of reinforcement or concrete. 3. The opinions and recommendations presented in this report were based upon our observa- tions and are presented in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. BY: IrilC-�i 7420 Trade St. San Diego, Ca. 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 r� —- ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects S City Of Support Services _`ndn�� Feld Operations Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service counter 4/ FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit No. Name of Project Bo 4^ A!1Peo_, Name of Developer Site Location ..(address._, _..number. ...street.name.. ` ;. ,, .. ..sufFxJ .'llov .. ,(bldg) , J have Inspected the gra ' gmt-the sst bject ite and havewe.rifie.d° ert)ficati© •.of.the•pad:bey the.;Enginee.r of Work,. dated:�---:�= :and certification of soil compaction by the Soil ngineer, date — -am',hereby satisfied.;that-the:.rough�gr-ading has:been corn etexi in--.ac rdance.Wlth=the;approvad .' plans ridl-specifications;- Chapter:23:24°of the-,Municipal Code;4 an`d':any-other-applicable': -,.. engineering standards and=specific project requirements., .Based..—my observation and the,certifications,_i=take no.exception to the asstlenee .of:a:_.: =F building permit for the lot(s) as noted or.Phase , if any, but only in so far as grading is concerned. However., this release is not Intended to certify the project with respect to other.engineering concerns, including .public road, drainage; water, sewer, park, and trail improvements, and their availability, any other public improvements, deferred monumentation;or final grading: 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 been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. (Signature of Engineering Ins ector) 9 9 9 p (Date) (Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only if appropiate) (Date) Reference: Building Permit No._- Special Note: Submit this form, if completed, to counter staff merely by placing a copy of it in both engineering technicians'in-boxes.Please remember to do a final inspection of the grading permit and submit that paperwork, when completed. Office staff will handle the appropiate reductions in security, if any, and coordination with Building Inspection.Thank you. JSG/field1docl TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-6633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Enciniras, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 11� recycled paper Field Clearance to Allow Occupancy TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Building Permit No. --/ l - � n Name of Project t--� 0 (`"F/) 10 C—W Name of Developer C1 I have inspected the site at ' l ' J s � C'�J�U G�U� address...number street name suffix and have determined that finish (precise) grading (lot no.) (bldg. no.) and any other related site improvements are substantially complete and that occupancy is merited. a / A 3 - 22 -/�- ignature of Engineering Ins or Date Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only if appropriate _ _ Date Reference: Engineering Permit No. ��J 6,1 Special Note: Please do not sign the"blue card"that is issued by Building Inspection Division and given to the developer.You are only being asked to verify field conditions. Office staff still has the responsibility to verify that compliance with administrative requirements is achieved,typically payment of impact fees or execution of documents. Return this form, if completed,to counter staff by dropping it in the slot labeled "Final Inspection" . Also, please remember to do final inspections on the related engineering permits and return that paperwork, if completed. Thank you. Page 1 of 1 Todd Baumbach From: Masih Maher Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 4:39 PM To: Todd Baumbach Cc: Ruben Macabitas Subject: 1719 San Elijo Ave Todd, I visited the site and as you mentioned it makes better sense to change the bioswale to a paved swale consistent with other projects along San Elijo. For the future projects, we will design the swales to be permeable pavers. Please have your contractor to install paved swale. The applicant could revise the plans at the as-built stage. Unless otherwise shown on the plans, the elevation difference between the swale invert and the right of way should be 6 to 8 inches. Grading a steep shoulder will impair City's ability to widen the street in the future. Thanks, Masih Maher 10/24/2011 RANCHO COASTAL ENGINEERING Single Source Development Consultant �l March 4, 2008 City of Encinitas J Engineering Services Permits RE: PAD CERTIFICATION - THE 14EHREN RESIDENCE 1719 SAN EILJ'O AVENUE, CARDIFF - DRAWING NO, 675-G Pursuant to Section 23 .24 .310 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for the subject residence. As the Engineer of Record for this project, I hereby state all rough grading for this residence has been completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards . 23 .24 .310 (B) . The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified on March 3 , 2008 and shown on the approved grading plan- • 93 .25 UPPER PAD ELEVATION PER PLAN: 93 .00 FEET SURVEYED • 87.25 MIDDLE PAD ELEVATION PER PLAN: 87 .00 FEET SURVEYED • 86.25 LOWER PAD ELEVATION PER PLAN: 86 .00 FEET SURVEYED 23 . 24 . 310 (B) 1 . Construction of line and grade for all engineered devices have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. 23 . 24 . 310 (B) 5 . The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. 23 .24 . 310 (B) 6 . The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. Note: The reason for the pad elevations being 0 . 25-feet lower than the plan is because the owner would like a thicker i section for the slab. The finished floor elevations an and CDP approval will not be changed. OQp0FE8S1'0 ST ENGINEER-ING, INC. 4 � � o Q G� w x — * cc 181 m� Logan, R.C.E. 39726 y 'NIL �P `�°�cAI.1FO�``' Planning Civil Survey Structural Rancho Coastal Engineering,Inc. 1635 S.Rancho Santa Fe Rd.,Ste.204,San Marcos,CA 92078 Phone(760)510-3152,Fax:(760)510-3153 www.reead.com I i iE ORIGINAL Oh=T'il3 DOCUML-N RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND, ) wA.:_,riEUGHBED ON SAN 1a 2GUb WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) L�J CA, MEN r NUMBEk ,,o8 uu26",)9 Cyr GGR�_1 EMI CO N 1 Y RE(,0kL)r_R _.AN v!EUO C:OUN f Y FIEI, Ui F ICE T M E_ 3 57 PM CITY CLERK ) CITY OF ENCINITAS ) 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE ) ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ) SPACE ABOVE ENCROACHMENT MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL COVENANT ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 67S-PC A.P.N. 2,60 - 2157 An encroachment permit is hereby granted to the Permittee designated in paragraph one, Attachment"A", as the owner of the Benefited property described in paragraph two, Attachment'A" to encroach upon City Property described in paragraph three, Attachment"A", as detailed in the diagram, Attachment "B". Attachments "A" and "B" are hereby incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth at length. In consideration of the issuance of this encroachment permit, Permittee hereby covenants and agrees, for the benefit of the City, as follows: 1. This covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrancers, successors, heirs, personal representatives, transferees, and assigns of the respective parties. 2. Permittee shall use and occupy the City Property only in the manner and for the purpose described in paragraph four, Attachment"A". 3. By accepting the benefits herein, Permittee acknowledges title to the City Property to be in the City and waives all right to contest that title. 4. The term of the encroachment permit is indefinite and may be revoked by the City and abandoned by Permittee at any time. The city shall mail written notice of revocation to Permittee, addressed to the Benefited Property which shall set forth the date upon which the benefits of encroachment permit are to cease. 5. City is entitled to remove all or a portion of the improvements constructed by Permittee in order to repair, replace, or install public improvements. City shall have no obligation to pay for or restore Permittee's improvements. 6. Permittee agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify from and against all claims, demands, costs, losses, damages, injuries, litigation, and liability arising out of or related to the use, construction, encroachment or maintenance to be done by the Permittee or Permittee's agents, employees or contractors on City Property. bp6603/08/22/06/gsabine - 7. Upon abandonment, revocation, completion, or termination, Permittee shall, at no cost to the city, return City Property to its pre-permit condition within the time specified in the notice of revocation or prior to the date of abandonment. 8. If Permittee fails to restore the City Property, the City shall have the right to enter upon the City Property, after notice to the Permittee, delivered at the Benefited Property, and restore the City Property to its pre-permit condition to include the removal and destruction of any improvements and Permittee agrees to reimburse the city for the costs incurred. Notice may be given by first class mail sent to the last known address of the Permittee, which shall be deemed effective three calendar days after mailing, or by any other reasonable method likely to give actual notice. 9. If either party is required to incur costs to enforce the provisions of this covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement for all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Permittee shall agree that Permittee's duties and obligations under this covenant are a lien upon the Benefited Property. Upon 30-day notice, and an opportunity to respond, the City may add to the tax bill of the Benefited Property any past due financial obligation owing to city by way of this covenant. 11. Permittee waives the right to assert any claim or action against the City arising out of or resulting from the revocation of this permit or the removal of any improvements or any other action by the City, its officers, agents, or employees taken in a manner in accordance with the terms of the permit. 12. Permittee recognizes and understands that the permit may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that the permittee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. 13. As a condition precedent to Permittee's right to go upon the City Property, the agreement must first be signed by the Permittee, notarized, executed by the City and recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego. The recording.fee shall be paid by Permittee. 14. Approved and issued by the City of Encinitas, California, this ('V'day of '�p►� 20.Q.e AGREED AND ACCEPTED PER EE Dated: �(7 D``1 BEgmARD!t' &BEN NLgF%EN Dated: I _&2—0 8 J'Ji A`I'W &LY9 IV (Notarization of PERMITTEE signtt re is attached) 4� /\City of Encinitas bp6603/08/22/06/gsabine ATTACHMENT "A TO COVENANT REGARDING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 6 7S A5 PARAGRAPH ONE: Permittee Mrs. Jamie Ann Mehren and Mr. Bernard Rueben Mehren PARAGRAPH TWO: Benefited Property LOT "E" ALONG WITH A PORTION OF LOT "I"', BLOCK 75 OF CARDIFF VILLA TRACT. PER MAP NO. 1469, RECORDED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ON AUGUST 10, 1912. APN 260-275-19-00 PARAGRAPH THREE: City Property Approximately 62 feet of the Easterly Right-of-Way of San Elijo Avenue, approximately 60 feet South of Liszt Avenue. PARAGRAPH FOUR: Purpose To allow for the construction of interim improvements along San Elijo to include a Privately Maintained Bio-Filtration Swale, Privately Maintained PCC Drainage Swales, Private Area Drain, and approximately 40-feet of a 4-foot high Retaining Wall. A T TA CNMENT F OETA IL OF ENCPOA CNMENT IN 1719 SAN EL/JO A I/E. gi!R bz a � , 1 EXISTING VEWAY DRI EXISTING LL TO BE REMOV D -_----- ---- PR SED ENCROACHMENT • RET ING WALL PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT BIO SWALE • RETAINING WALL • PROP SED P.C.C. SWALE • PROPOSED B10 SWALE • PROPOSED AREA DRAIN SAN E L I j O AVE • PROPOSED P.C.C. SWALE - __ - -- - ------ NOTE.- ALL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED 10 5 0 10 20 30 SCALE IN FEET N SCALE: 1" = 10' CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT I State of California I� � ss. I. County of S' t ( M J� �N LIP )� 008 , before me, �as h� ' On ' � Name and Title of Officer(e.g., Jane Doe,Notary ' ate A i A � Q \ r 1tP (- personally appeared a hl , ;;of Signer(s) ❑personally known to me (, ]�proved to me on the basis of satisfactory i evidence to be the perscl whose name® 4s/ re subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he xecuted t` •,,, RASHIDI N JACKSON heir authorized . �. COMM.#1750545 the same in d NOTARY PUBLIC•CALIFORNIA capacity ies and that by hei SAN DIEGO COUNTY —' signature s)on the instrument the person s( or Expires J 11,2011 � MY gym, une the entity.upon behalf of which the persono acted, executed the instrument. ESS my h nd an official seal. f� I� Signature of N Lary Public Place Notary Seal Above OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law,it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document C- r,t it i/7" AAVC.>E` AAIA EMQ��L N4 Title or Type of Document: L r � Number of Pages: !•� Document Date: a N V a( . Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: A Capacity(ies) Cloned by Sig r I ��r Signer's Name: nQf�ra u � �- eA/ Top of thumb here 4 Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact I ❑ Trustee ' ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: C.1997 National Notary Association•9350 De Soto Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402 Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ss. County of C I a- �sol�l before me, a5�t�dt On a Name and Title of Officer(e.g., Jane Doe,Notary Public) Date i' personally appeared tE A�' Names)of Sgner(s) K �; ❑ ersonally known to me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose namel@s 4000 • • RASHIM M.JACKSON subscribed to the within instrument and ;) comm.#1750545 acknowledged to me that I'�executed ri NOTARY PUBLIC•CALIFORNIA hei authorized I e SAN DIEGO COUNTY the same in ,C SANDIEGresJune1t,20tt capacity !es , and that by ) signature�on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person so acted, executed the instrument. WpTnSS my hand and seal. �i N zi '' -- SignaWre of ) (� Place Notary Seal Above �)I 5 OPTIONAL h the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relyio�ument document Though f and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another l I; Description of Attached Document �8t� @Nc NCB �, Cv a Title or Type of Document: t-4'e u J a>JUa� Document Date: u , Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ). Capacity(ies) CI imed by Signer _ Signer's Name: m z tJ� MelnrerJ ' Top of thumb here Individual ,, ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): K ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee k ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ' f � Signer Is Representing: ecSe[+ ®1997 National Notary Association•9350 De Solo Ave.,P.O.Box 2402•Chatsworth;CA 91313-2402 Prod.No.5907 Reorder:Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 State of California ) CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE County of ) CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT On � before me, �'� (here insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared Pc7 -K L'D21* who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s)whose name( is are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that(g?she/they executed the same ir<s er/their authorized capacity(ies), and that b hi er/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity R x upon behalf of which the person(s)acted,executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. RANDA G. MILUCpR Commission I/1 709M WITNESS my hand and official seal. Nocsry Publk Son Dlpo Counity My Commission UP.Jan.6,2011 Signature 4 (Seal) OPTIONAL INFORMATION Although the information in this section is not required by law,it could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this acknowledgment to on unauthorized document and may prove useful to persons relying on the attached document. Description of Attached Document Additional Information The preceding Certificate of Acknowledgment is attached to a document Method of Signer Identification titled/for the purpose of Proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence: L0 form(s)of identification O credible witness(es) Notarial event is detailed in notary journal on: containing pages,and dated Page# Entry# The signer(s) capacity or authority is/are as: Notary contact: ❑ Individual(s) Other ❑ Attorney-in-Fact ❑ Additional Signer(s) ❑ Signer(s)Thumbprint(s) ❑ Corporate Officer(s) F1 Title(s) ❑ Guardian/Conservator ❑ Partner-Limited/General ❑ Trustee(s) ❑ Other: representing: Name(s)of Person(s)or Entity(ies)Signer is Representing R 0 Copyright 2007 Notary Rotary,Inc.925y 29th3 St.,Des Moines,IA 50312.361'2 oN Form ACK03.,10/07. To re-order,call toll-free 1-877-349-6588 or visit us on the Internet at http://www.notaryrotary .com RANCHO COASTAL ENGINEERING Single Source Development Consultant March 21, 2012 MAP, 2 '1 2G112 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICATION MEHREN RESIDENCE-DRAWING NO. 675-G The grading under permit number 675-G has been performed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shown on the attached"As-Graded"plan. Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms with the approved grading plan and that swales drain at a minimum of 1%o to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Development, S ce Control d Treatment Control Best Management Practices as shown th drawing d required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part II were co stru ed and a perational,together with the required maintenance covenant(s). Q�oFESS/o/V ENGINEER OF RECORD: �0 4\ps E. t l<C" fiffuglas E. t ogan, R.C.E. 39726 c9y2c � o C39M z M �ry 1 M DATED: / ll s� clvIV P�\Q 9TFOF Ch. Verification by the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility: ENGINEERING INSPECT DATED: Planning Civil Survey Structural Rancho Coastal Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 310 S.Twin Oaks Valley Rd.,#107-297,San Marcos,CA 92078 Phone(760)510-3152, Fax:(760)510-3153 CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER: CONTRACTOR: 'TELEPHONE: -+u SITE FOIL ti s(Elsdv AK &-zTev 1C.1�L�rt-t�' B .3�1' ,� Lo�(� � I.L,�-rrlT /S /,�.��pc: Js /�►v-r'' r r 3 -/3-1Z ,u-pg duce— ff eq-A:--, b c 7F & W r �-L L,i o� 3 .216 12 c F2v✓r, .Z Week �/ft c►9'T7 o� , a d.1 2 � OE _ L 6wp �,G1u/L� c# -ti._i..� Gi�cE . O C-r lL VP E lC3 nifiL . Pact;� P of pwo A-t L m,�T�►�s r►�� Qem�►�� ti� &,, P Aaaq in1 v2N Nt�lsi . i4-f1 t9- ll r+7 t,) (2 i(�L I Y1,15 i gect: c_L i i ,1Z LV , c- m14429 6f l S Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. iNt SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING •GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 28 February 2012 Rueben and Jamie Mehren �?S'�".Job No. 07-9442 536 4t' Street Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: Earthwork Observation. Testing and Footing Inspection Services Mehren Residence 1719 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with your request we have provided earthwork observation, testing and footing inspection services for the subject project. These services were provided intermittently between February 7, 2008, and February 21, 2012. Robert Prater Associates (RPA) previously performed a geotechnical investigation for the property, the results of which were presented in their report dated June 30, 2003. We subsequently performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the project, the results of which were presented in our report dated August 24, 2007. In addition, we previously issued a mass grading report dated February 25, 2008, and a site retaining wall compaction report dated June 16, 2008. Based on our observations and the attached test results, it is our opinion that the mass fills and retaining wall and trench backfills were compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent, and the pavement subgrade as well as the base materials for the AC pavement area were compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent in accordance with our recommendations. The approximate field density test locations are Indicated on the attached Site Plan, Figure No. I. The results of the field density and laboratory compaction tests are presented in the attached Tables A and B, respectively. We also inspected the footing excavations for the residence and site retaining walls and it is our opinion that they were extended to the recommended depth and that the materials exposed were suitable for the support of footings designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the 2003 RPA report. 7420 TRADE STREETO SAN DIEGO,CA.92121• (858)549-7222 0 FAX:(858)549-1604 0 EMAIL:geotech@gel-sd.com Proposed Mehren Residence Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 2 This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 07-9442 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Wm. D. Hespeler,Agt. 396 Senior Geotechnical Engineer ,�oQ�tOF ESS/p�, w 3� No.998�7� x F-Iqx 3/31/t �� OF CAtF��\P DID 66/0 szozs vo'=wA NVs'iq Suns'aa v YiW"OKO"s s¢sI zsic-o Ls(ou):'ON 3NO14d OMQMNn»a WISWO OWOWU:3WHN S,tl33NI�N3 a o I ti IQ W6 Z Cc W W]NIb9J 140 Y • I xi rrr �� d �_\ $�2 € Y o ° � R• S Cam, , i � � �• B �i to c 6 M Alb 2L It'll- ' yg ° Hab a ! ° 6y/ r � ■1 � �SI� � LE� I rM z yay p�■l�b��ga� \ i! E. �� y�.l f �¢jltl9��- • -ml �a � 9i F�3�� C�� egg p i s= �g3t // Ala+, ti:' .• IQ pE alsb l �al at ate I lip His all 21 9 1 A 11 a a... ilbl� � Esi� e Z � 6a _�• - W _..M!!nOa x d f3l ! � �yQ- F 12 1.g r z lei 1, 'via! , SAN ELI) AVE �•b'I � e ¢ E! a ! @B �•-y�T Y�EE RM app ., 0� c � � �• � :¢° '� y e m^ 3 ap t P� EI U r .- — r r r r r r r r .- — r r r .-- r r r r r r .- — r .- — r r � U F- a N Of Q a O1 IA O N OD �m 4 t!7 f� V m m h m t� q 4t O m N (7 m O O r 10 c ro e °P d m to v V c N —V V, V V) ° N m n n ao n n m m m m m O •� r r N � N fV N to tQ � � c� c� c� t� c7c� c� c� c� �4Y c� cac� o M M W y h N N 0 N N N m M M W W W 0 W W (A a N U_ V1 m fn !A W U_ W NI LL N LL k [L a W LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL. LL y Q W W. F- N z W 13 D °D 0 > 4D -352 � a IL d Q o a c 2 g � F � � c a � �° c � M 7FD a) oD tM 3 t d N ro 16 o p `o o p 3 o H CD N N @ f? p s app {� {ap � .0 a W d Oo 0z co 0. 4 C a 4 n `o o _ _ s ' ° d c 'c' 'c c c c c c E p� c a .. .. .. zc� c� � , u) ma. �R � � � aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa � � � a � � � d e 0 a z z • N 17 r U7 m t-- come N O ~ d 04 � (L ■ ■ ƒ dz - - - - _ - _ _ - _ o Ju � 0 cc 2 § @ § a (n § a m G m § a § °3 � _ t � o o 0§ n o o co ca a co m R ¥ -4 ci o C4 N ® - ~ N ® N ^ a m In £ $ o ■ 0 a I f » T 9 O o 0 0 0 o e o ® • •w 0 o 0 o U) m U) CO) _ m m � m m - © > m m 0 0 LL LL W LL LL LL W w w w ) $� LL U- LL LL LU � L 1! A § & & & & & & S S & 2 c � § _§ 7 § § § / m 0 k k k } R > § ff S - - m20 § a § § ■ § © @ e e ■ « M M § 2 0 " � ) . % 0 ` e k 2 7 k $ a m ° 7 § k £ S � _ .9 3 _ a 2 14 .0 a LU « & 5 } b § § $ k k k 2 2 2 2 2 & § 2 E = = ! > ¢ > « > $ > E o 0 0 f 2 2 # J IS 3 3 o o m a ( k k k co � C NC4 / ƒ LLLL � � § r ( 3 C k k 2 2 2 r & E G g q q C 2 z U « d * W) w rl cc m o - LO . z g R n n n n n n w - N n ■ ƒ Job No. 07-9442 TABLE B LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST RESULTS (ASTM D1557-91) Compaction Maximum Optimum Test Source of Dry Density Water Content Curve No. Description of Material Material (Pcf) % 1 SILTY SAND (SM),Reddish Brown On-Site 131.0 9.2 2 WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW),Gray Import 135.4 5.8 Aggregate Base Irirl�� Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. p • SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING •GROUNDWATER• ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 24 January 2012 Rueben and Jamie Mehren Job No. 07-9442 P.O. Box 1612 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Pavement Design and Construction Proposed Mehren Residence 1719 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with the request of your contractor, Mr. Bruce Wiegand, we have developed design and construction recommendations for the driveway pavement for the subject residence. It is our understanding that, in addition to normal residential vehicle loads, the pavement is required to be capable of supporting a 75,000-pound fire truck. We previously performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the project, the results of which were presented in our report dated August 24, 2007, and have been providing earthwork observation and testing services for the project grading operations since February 7, 2008. Based on the preceding, we recommend that the driveway pavement consist of 5.5 inches of concrete supported directly on the existing sandy subgrade soils. The upper 8 inches of the subgrade below the slab should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent just prior to paving. The concrete should conform to Section 201 of The Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2000 Edition, for Class 560-C-3250. We also recommend that the slab be reinforced with No. 4 reinforcing bars spaced at 18 inches in both directions. In addition to the preceding, it is our opinion that the planned use of 60 mm concrete pavers supported on 6 inches of aggregate base will provide adequate support for the proposed loads. The upper 6 inches of the paver subgrade soil as 7420 TRADE STREET*SAN DIEGO,CA.921210 (858)549-7222 0 FAX:(858)549-1604 • EMAIL: geotech @gei-sd.com Proposed Mehren Residence Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 2 well as the aggregate base layer should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent. Preparation of all the pavement subgrade and placement of the paver base materials should be performed under the observation of our representative. Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either expressed or implied. This opportunity to be of continued service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Sob No. 07-9442 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Q�,,pFESS�oN� ��DOP�1D Ff�A l�Z c' `O �' No.398 m Wm. D. Hespele , G.E. 396 a E�.3/31/1�! Senior Geotechnical Engineer CNN cc: Addressee (4) �FCAvF� GEOTECH ICAL INVESTIGATION FOR 1719 SAN ELLTO AVENUE ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA JUNE 2003 June 30, 2003 900-268, 03-101 Mr. Steve Bouker 1593 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 Re: Geotechnical Investigation 1719 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California Gentlemen: In accordance with your request we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the subject site. The accompanying report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory tests, and engineering analysis. The soil, foundation, and geologic conditions are discussed and recommendations for the geotechnical engineering aspects of the site development are presented. If you have any questions concerning our findings, please call. Very truly yours, ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES ikED GC, QROfESS/p^, �� Cz %D HE'sAlFy h�y�C�N cc No. 17oa <c� Wo LLI 3 No.396 'D a CERTIFIED Wm. D. Hespeler,G.E. 396 Exp. 3/3=06v * Charles B. While, C.E.G. cPA GEoLOGIS7 �IFOF CALIF�� DF C AL�F WDHICBW:mkd Copies: Addressee(6) GEOTECENICAL INVESTIGATION For 1719 SAN ELIJO AVENUE Encinitas, California To MR STEVE BOUKER 1593 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California 92024 JUNE 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae No. Letter of Transmittal Title Page Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE l SITE CONDITIONS l A. Surface 1 B. Subsurface 1 C. Ground Water 2 D. Seismic Considerations 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 A. Earthwork 3 1. Clearing and Stripping 3 2. Treatment of Existing Fills 3 3. Excavation 4 4. Subgrade Preparation 4 5. Material for Fill 4 6. Compaction 4 7. Slopes 4 8. Trench Backfill 5 9. Drainage 5 10. Construction Observation 5 B. Foundations 6 1. Footings 6 2. Seismic Design Parameters 6 3. Slabs-On-Grade 6 4. Retaining Walls 7 5. Lateral Loads 7 C. Limitations 8 Figure 1 -Site Plan Table 1 - Summary of Materials Encountered in the Exploratory Test Pits APPENDIX A-Laboratory Testing Table A-1 -Results of No. 200 Sieve Tests Figure A-1 -Compaction Test Results Figure A-2-Direct Shear Test Results GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR 1719 SAN ELIJO AVENUE ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION In this report we present the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential construction at 1719 San Elijo Avenue in Encinitas,California. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the soil and geologic conditions at the site and to provide recommendations concerning the soil, foundation and geologic engineering aspects of the project. It is our understanding that the existing residence at the property will be demolished to make way for construction of a new one and/or two-story house of wood-frame and/or masonry block construction with slab-on-grade floors. In addition, a detached, single-story garage structure may be constructed on the property. Foundation loads are expected to be typical for this type of relatively light construction. SCOPE The scope of work performed in this investigation included a site reconnaissance,subsurface exploration, laboratory testing,engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data,and the preparation of this report. The data obtained and the analyses performed were for the purpose of providing design and construction criteria for the site earthwork, building foundations, slab-on-grade floors, and retaining walls. SITE CONDITIONS A. Surface The subject property is a roughly rectangular shaped lot with a plan area of about one-quarter acre. An existing wood-frame and adobe block house shell is located across the back half of the lot. The existing structure is located on a relatively flat,graded pad at an elevation of about 94 feet above mean sea level. A graded slope slightly flatter than 2(horizontal)to 1 (vertical)up to about 6 feet high descends to the southwest in front of the existing structure down to a relatively flat, gravel covered parking area at an elevation of about 86 feet. At the base of the slope is a nearly vertical,two-foot exposure of soil where a small retaining wall was recently removed. From the parking area,the lot continues to slope toward the southwest down to San Elijo Avenue at an elevation of about 79 feet. Vegetation across the lot consists of scattered medium to large shrubs and trees. B. Subsurface A subsurface investigation was performed at the site on June 25, 2003 to explore and sample the subsurface soils. Five exploratory test pits were excavated by hand to a maximum depth of 6'A feet at 1 1 900-268 Page 2 the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. A summary of the materials encountered in the test pits is presented in Table 1. Details of the laboratory testing and the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix A. In general, the subject property is underlain by existing fill soils and Pleistocene age, marine terrace sandstone deposits. Existing fill soils comprised of very loose to loose, silty sand were encountered in Test Pits 2 and 3 to depths of 5'/z to 6 feet. The existing fill soils are considered to be potentially compressible and not suitable for support of the proposed residence and associated improvements in their present condition. Sandstone deposits comprised of medium dense,silty sand were encountered beneath the fill soils in Test Pits 2 and 3. In the remaining test pits, sandstone deposits comprised of medium dense, silty sand were encountered at depths of 6 inches or less from the surface,beneath a thin layer of sandy topsoil or gravel. Based on our past experience with similar soils in the vicinity of the site, all of the materials encountered in the test pits possess a very low potential for expansion. No evidence of faulting, landsliding, or other geologic hazards was observed at the site. The summary of materials encountered in the exploratory test pits presented in Table 1 depicts subsurface conditions only at the specific locations shown on the site plan on the specified date of exploration. Subsurface conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these test pit locations. Also, the passage of time may result in changes in the subsurface conditions due to environmental changes. C. Ground Water Free ground water was not encountered in any of the exploratory test pits excavated at the site and no surface seeps were observed. It must be noted, however,that fluctuations in the level of ground water may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, rainfall, and other possible factors which may not have been evident at the time of our field investigation. D. Seismic Considerations The San Diego area, as most of California,is located in a seismically active region. The San Diego area has been referred to as the eastern edge of the Southern California Continental Borderland,an extension of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The borderland is part of a broad tectonic boundary between the North American and Pacific Plates. The plate boundary is dominated by a complex system of active major strike-slip(right lateral),northwest trending faults extending from the San Andreas fault, about 70 miles east,to the San Clemente fault,about 50 miles west of the San Diego metropolitan area. Based on a review of some available published information including the County of San Diego Faults and Epicenters Map,there are no faults known to pass through the site. The prominent fault zones generally considered to have the most potential for earthquake damage in the vicinity of the site are the active Rose Canyon and Coronado Bank fault zones mapped approximately 2 and 17 miles southwest of the site, respectively,and the active Elsinore and San Jacinto fault zones mapped approximately 28 and 51 miles northeast of the site, respectively. Although research on earthquake prediction has greatly increased in recent years, geologists and i seismologists have not yet reached the point where they can predict when and where an earthquake will i 900-268 Page 3 occur. Nevertheless, on the basis of current technology, it is reasonable to assume that the subject site may be subject to the effects of at least one moderate to major earthquake during the design life of the structure(s). During such an earthquake, the danger from fault offset through the site is remote, but relatively strong ground shaking is likely to occur. Strong ground shaking not only can cause structures to shake, but it also has the potential for including other phenomena that can indirectly cause substantial ground movements or other hazards resulting in damage to structures. These phenomena include seismically induced waves such as tsunamis and seiches, inundation due to dam or embankment failure,soil liquefaction,landsliding,lateral spreading,differential compaction, and ground cracking. Available'information indicates that the location of and geotechnical conditions at the site are not conducive for any of these phenomena. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for construction of the proposed residence provided the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The primary features of concern at the site are the poorly compacted condition of the existing fill soils and the unknowns with regard to the adequacy of the original subgrade preparation. In order to preclude the possibility of the proposed residence and associated improvements being subject to excessive total and differential settlements resulting from compression of any poorly compacted portions of the existing fill or inadequately prepared subgrade, we recommend that all existing fill materials be removed and recompacted. Detailed earthwork and foundation recommendations are presented in the following paragraphs. The opinions,conclusions,and recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Robert Prater Associates being retained to review the final plans and specifications as they are developed and to observe the site earthwork and installation of foundations. A. Earthwork 1. Clearing and Stripping The site should be cleared of all obstructions including the existing residence, retaining walls and associated foundations as well as any miscellaneous trash or debris that may be present at the time of construction. After clearing, the ground surface should be stripped of surface vegetation as well as associated root systems.-Holes-resulting from the removal ofburied obstructions that extend below the proposed finished site grades should be cleared and backfilled with suitable material compacted to the requirements given under Item A.6., "Compaction." Prior to any filling operations, the cleared and stripped materials should be disposed of off-site. 2. Treatment of Existing Fills In order to provide suitable foundation support for the proposed residence and associated improvements, we recommend that all existing fill material that remains after the necessary site excavations have been 900-268 Page 4 made be removed and recompacted. The recompaction work should consist of a) removing all existing fill material down to firm natural ground, b) scarifying, moisture conditioning, and compacting the exposed natural subgrade soils, and c) replacing the fill material as compacted structural fill. The areal extent and depth required to remove the fills should be determined by our representative during the excavation work based on his examination of the soils being exposed. Any unsuitable materials(such as oversize rubble and/or organic matter) should be selectively removed as directed by our representative and disposed of off-site. 3. Excavation Based on the results of the exploratory test pits and our experience with similar soils, it is our opinion that the required site excavations can be accomplished utilizing ordinary heavy earthmoving equipment. The bidding contractors should not, however, be relieved of making their own independent evaluation of the excavatability of the on-site materials prior to submitting their bids. 4. Subgrade Preparation After the site has been cleared, stripped,and the required excavations made,the exposed subgrade soils in those areas to receive fill, building improvements and/or pavements should be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to the requirements of Item A_6., "Compaction." 5. Material for Fill All on-site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume are in-general suitable for reuse as fill. Fill material should not contain rocks or lumps more than 6 inches in greatest dimension,not more than 15 percent larger than 2-1/2 inches, and no more than 25 percent larger than 1/4-inch. Any potentially expansive clayey soils removed from the required excavations should only be reused as fill below a depth of 12 inches below the finished site grades. In addition,any required imported fill material should be a low-expansion potential(Expansion Index of 30 or less per ASTM D 4829-95),granular soil with a plasticity index of 12 or less. All materials for use as fill should be approved by our representative prior to filling. 6. Compaction All structural fills should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent based on ASTMTest Designation D 1557-91. Fill material should be spread and compacted in uniform horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. Before compaction begins, the fill should be brought to a water content that will permit proper compaction by either. 1)aerating the fill if it is too wet, or 2) moistening the fill with water if it is too dry. Each lift should be thoroughly mixed before compaction to ensure a uniform distribution of moisture. 7. Slopes We recommend that any required cut and fill slopes be constructed to an inclination no steeper than 2 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The project plans and specifications should contain all necessary design features and construction requirements to prevent erosion of the on-site soils both during and after 900-268 Page 5 construction. Slopes and other exposed ground surfaces should be appropriately planted with a protective ground cover. Fill slopes should be constructed so as to assure that the recommended minimum degree of compaction is attained out to the finished slope face. This may be accomplished by "backrolling" with a sheepsfoot roller or other suitable equipment as the fill is raised. Placement of fill near the tops of slopes should be carried out in such a manner as to assure that loose, uncompacted soils are not sloughed over the tops and allowed to accumulate on the slope face. The sandy onsite soils will be susceptible to erosion. Therefore, the project plans and specifications should contain all necessary design features and construction requirements to prevent erosion of the on-site soils both during and after construction. Slopes and other exposed ground surfaces should be appropriately planted with a protective ground cover. It should be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to provide erosion control devices in order to protect slope areas and adjacent properties from storm damage and flood hazard originating on this project. It should be made the contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their as-graded form until all slopes, berms and associated drainage devices are in satisfactory compliance with the project plans and specifications. S. Trench Backfill Pipeline trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill. Backfill material should be placed in lift thicknesses appropriate to the-type of compaction equipment utilized and compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent by mechanical means. Our experience has shown that backfills for even shallow, narrow trenches, such as for irrigation and electrical lines, which are not properly compacted can result in problems, particularly with respect to shallow ground water accumulation and migration. 9. Drainage Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to the structure(s). In addition,roof gutters and downspouts should be installed so as to direct water away from foundations and slabs toward suitable discharge facilities. Ponding of surface water should not be allowed, especially adjacent to the structure(s). 10. Construction Observation Variations in soil and geologic conditions are possible and may be encountered during construction. In order to permit correlation between the preliminary soil and geologic data and the actual conditions encountered during construction and so as to aid in evaluating conformance with the plans and specifications as originally contemplated, it is essential that we be retained to perform on-site review during the course of construction. 900-268 Page 6 All earthwork should be performed under the observation of our representative to aid in proper site preparation, selection of satisfactory fill materials, as well as placement and compaction of the fills. Sufficient notification prior to earthwork operations is essential to make certain that the work will be properly observed. B. Foundations 1. Footings We recommend that the proposed residence and detached garage be supported on conventional, individual-spread and/or continuous footing foundations bearing on undisturbed natural soil and/or well-compacted fill material. All footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Footings located adjacent to the tops of slopes should be extended sufficiently deep so as to provide at least 8 feet of horizontal cover or 1-1/2 times the width of the footing, whichever is greater, between the slope face and outside edge of the footing at the footing bearing level. Footings located adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces situated below an imaginary 1-1/2 to 1 plane projected upward from the bottom edge of the adjacent utility trench. At the recommended depths footings may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for combined dead and live loads and 2,700 psf for.all loads, including wind or seismic. The footings should, however, have a minimum width of 12 inches. .All continuous footings should contain top and bottom reinforcement to provide structural continuity and to permit spanning of local irregularities. We recommend that a minimum oftwo No.4 top and two No. 4 bottom reinforcing bars be provided in the footings. In order for us to offer an opinion whether the footings are founded on soils of sufficient load bearing capacity, it is essential that our representative inspect the footing excavations prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Settlements under building loads are expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed residential structure(s). For footings designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the preceding paragraphs we estimate that post-construction differential settlements across any one structure should not exceed V2 inch 2. Seismic Design Parameters We recommend that design in accordance with the 1997.UBC for Near Source Coefficients be based on a Seismic Source Type of"B"for the Rose Canyon Fault Zone at a distance of three kilometers and a Soil Profile Type of"Sd" 3. Slabs-On-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade may be supported directly on low-expansion potential compacted fill soil and/or firm undisturbed low-expansion potential natural soil. Slab reinforcing as well as slab thickness should be designed in accordance with the anticipated use of and loading on the slab. As a minimum,however, we recommend that the slabs have a thickness of four inches and be reinforced with No.4 reinforcing bars at 24-inch center to center spacing both ways to minimize hairline cracking of the slabs due to concrete 900-268 Page 7 shrinkage. The reinforcing bars should be supported on small concrete block chairs or equivalent prior to placement of concrete. In areas where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are to be utilized and in other areas where floor dampness would be undesirable,we recommend that an impermeable membrane be provided beneath the slabs. The membrane should be covered with 2 inches of sand (minimum sand equivalent of 50) to protect it during construction. The sand should be lightly moistened just prior to placing the concrete. 4. Retaining Walls Retaining walls must be designed to resist lateral earth pressures and any additional lateral pressures caused by-surcharge loads on the adjoining retained surface. We recommend that unrestrained (cantilever)walls with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 30 pounds per cubic foot(pcf). Cantilever conditions are defined as walls capable of horizontal movements of at least 0.00511 at the top of the wall,where H is the height of the wall in feet. We recommend that restrained walls with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 30 pcf plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 5H pounds per square foot where H=the height of backfill above the top of the wall footing in feet. Unrestrained walls with up to 2(horizontal)to 1 (vertical) sloping backfills should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pcf. Restrained walls with up to 2 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) sloping backfills should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pcf plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 7H pounds per square foot where H=the height of backfill above the top of the wall footing in feet. Wherever walls will be subjected to surcharge loads,they should also be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to one-third the anticipated surcharge pressure in the case of unrestrained was and one-half the anticipated surcharge pressure in the case of restrained walls. The preceding design pressures assume that there is sufficient drainage behind the walls to prevent the build-up-of hydrostatic pressures from surface water infiltration. Adequate drainage maybe provided by means of weepholes with permeable filter material installed behind the walls or by means of a system of subdrains. Backfill placed behind the walls should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent using light compaction equipment. If heavy equipment is used, the walls should be appropriately temporarily braced. Retaining walls should be supported on footing foundations designed in accordance with the recommendations presented previously under Item B.1.,"Footings." Lateral load resistance for the walls can be developed in accordance with the recommendations presented under Item B.5.,"Lateral Loads." 5. Lateral Loads Lateral load resistance for structures supported on footing foundations may be developed in friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.35 is considered applicable. An additional allowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weight of250 pounds per cubic foot acting against the foundations may be used in design provided the footings are poured neat against the adjacent undisturbed native soils and/or compacted fill materials. These 900-268 Page 8 lateral resistance values assume a level surface in front of the footing for a minimum distance of 3 times the embedment depth of the footing and any shear keys and are based on a factor of safety of 1.5. C. Limitations The recommendations presented in this report are specifically for the proposed construction of a single family residence at 1719 San Elijo Avenue in Encinitas, California. Our office should be notified of any changes in the proposed development for further recommendations, if necessary, based on our review. As grading and foundation plans are developed we should be retained to review them for conformance to our recommendations. We also recommend that our office review any other plans which may affect the geotechnical conditions on-site such as landscaping,irrigation,plumbing,or other similar type plans. We should also be retained to review any future development plans including building additions in order to develop specificrecommendations for proposed construction. Additional subsurface exploration could be required. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on our evaluation of the subsurface materials encountered on-site, our understanding of the proposed development, and our general experience in the geotechnical field. If significant variations in the geotechnical conditions are encountered during construction our office should be consulted for further recommendations. The satisfactory performance of the site is also dependent on proper maintenance. Proper maintenance includes,but is not limited to,providing and maintaining good drainage away from structures and slopes, establishing good vegetation cover on slopes, and avoiding excess irrigation. Significant variations in geotechnical conditions may occur with the passage of time due to natural processes or the-works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the state of the practice may occur as a result of legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report should be reviewed and updated,if necessary, after a period of two years. Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made.in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in.fieu of all other warranties either express or implied. .:0.`;..00.•:: �• •'�...•.•......•.�� -I- or ��/O f " ��it��'` I • .I •....:000•.... l:�•.::••i:is••::•i•:••i Ih 1 1719 • AVENUE ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES Califomia • • i � 6 900-268 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF MATERIALS ENCOUNTERED IN THE EXPLORATORY TEST PITS Exploratory Test Pit No. Soil Type Depth (Feet) TP-1 Topsoil: SILTY SAND (BIN), brown, loose 0- '/2 Sandstone: SILTY SAND(SK, reddish brown, medium dense '/2- 1'/2 TP-2 Fill: SILTY SAND (SM), reddish brown, very loose 0 - 6 Sandstone: SILTY SAND (SM), reddish brown, medium dense 6 - 61/2 TP-3 Fill: SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown, loose 0 - 5'h Sandstone: SILTY SAND (SM), reddish brown, medium dense 51/2 - 6 TP-4 Fill: SILTY GRAVEL(GM), gray, loose 0 - '/4 Sandstone: SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown, medium dense '/4- 1'/z TP-5 Topsoil: SILTY SAND (SNO, brown, loose 0- '/2 Sandstone: SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown, medium dense '/2- 1'/2 B-1 APPENDIX A LABORATORY TESTING Five No. 200 sieve tests were performed on selected samples of the subsurface soils to aid in classifying the soils according to the Unified Soil Classification System. The results of these tests are presented in Table A 1. One laboratory compaction test(ASTM D 1557-91)was performed on a representative bulk sample of the on-site soils. The results of the test are presented on Figure A-1. One laboratory direct shear test was performed on a sample remolded to approximately 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. The sample was sheared at a constant rate under various surcharge pressures;failure was taken at the peak shear stress. The results of the test are presented on Figure A-2. 900-268 TABLE A-1 RESULTS OF NO. 200 SIEVE TESTS Percent Passing Sample No. 200 Exploratory Dept Sieve Test Pit No. (Feet) Sample Description TP-1 1'/2 SILTY SAND (SM), reddish brown 18 'IT-2 2 SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown 15 TP-2 4 SILTY SAND (SK, reddish brown 15 TT-3 4 SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown 15 TP-S 1 SILTY SAND (SNO, reddish brown 16 L M1•/ T'ES'T PIT NO. DEPTH(FT.) SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2 p_4' SILTY SAND(SM), reddish brown -- Zero Air Voids Curve Specific Gravity=2.70 135 130 u- U 125 Z u.l D 120 115 110 0 5 10 15 20 25 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY(PC17 123.7 OPTIMUM WATER CONTENT (%) 8.0 - TEST DESIGNATION ASTM D 1557-91 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES 1719 SAN ELIJO AVENUE c—mvGeorea,nkal&Vinft. &C--Ol gisft Encinitas, Califomia PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE A-1 900-268 June 2003 5.0 4.0 Y 3.0 W F- s • W 2.0 1.0 0 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 NORMAL PRESSURE (KSF) SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA TEST PIT NO.: 2 DEPTH(FT.): 0-4' TEST NUMBER 1 2 3 DESCRIPTION: NORMAL PRESSURE.(KSF) 1.10 2.20 4.40 SILTY SAND(SM), reddish brown SHEAR STRENGTH(KSF) 1.31 2.17 4.13 INITIAL H2O CONTENT(%) 8.7 8.7 8.7 FINAL H2O CONTENT(%) ---- ---- TEST RESULTS INITIAL DRY DENSITY(PCF) 110.5 111.0 110.8 APPARENT COHESION: 0.37 ks FINAL DRY DENSITY(PCF) ---- ---- APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION: 41 ° STRAIN RATE 0.01 inches per minute Note: Test was perfon-ned on a sample remolded to approximately 90 percent of the laboratory maximum. DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS ROBERT PRAYER ASSOCIATES 1719 SAN ELIJO AVENUE cmw*v say,=our a ceoao del Envh Encinitas, California PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE A-2 900-268 June 2003 Irrl i Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 24 August 2007 Rueben and Jamie Mehren Sob No. 07-9442 P.O. Box 1612 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Attn: Mr. Randy Jackson Subject: Update Geotechnical Reconnaissance Mehren Proposed Residence 1719 San Elijo Avenue Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with your request, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. has performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the subject property. Robert Prater Associates (RPA) previously performed a geotechnical investigation for the property, the results of which were presented in their report dated June 30, 2003. In addition, RPA previously provided limited earthwork observation and testing services at the property for a previously planned residence in February and March 2004. That work involved the demolition of a previously existing residence and the placement of up to about 2 feet of fill in the rear, eastern portion of the lot. The project stopped at that time and no grading report was issued. Our scope of work for this update reconnaissance has included a brief site inspection, review of the previously noted RPA investigation report, review of the "Preliminary Grading & Drainage" and foundation plans provided us, and the preparation of this update reconnaissance report. It is our understanding the proposed residence will be a two-story, split level structure with slab-on-grade floors. Grading will include cuts up to about 5 feet deep in the rear and central portion of the lot and fills up to about 3 feet deep in the front portion of the lot (see attached "Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan"). 7420 TRADE STREET•SAN DIEGO,CA.921210 (858)549-7222• FAX: (858)549-1604• EMAIL: geotech @gel-sd.com 1719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 2 The project will also include retaining walls at all the property lines as well as along the street frontage. The walls will range up to about 5.5 feet high. At the northeast corner and along the street frontage there will be a two-tiered wall system. Based on our document review and recent reconnaissance, the site is essentially as depicted in the RPA report except that the previously existing structures have been removed and most of the site has been cleared of vegetation. In addition about 2 to 3 feet of undocumented fill from the 2004 grading is present in the rear half of the lot. Based on the proposed elevations, most of the 2004 fill will be removed by the presently planned excavations. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the update reconnaissance, it is our opinion the conclusions and recommendations presented in the June 30, 2003, RPA geotechnical investigation report remain applicable for the currently proposed residential construction. We recommend, however, that the following supplemental recommendations also be included in the design and construction of the project. A. Concrete as"fa -on-grade Criteria 1. Minimum Floor Slab Thickness and Reinforcement: Based on our experience, we have found that, for various reasons, floor slabs occasionally crack, causing brittle surfaces such as ceramic tiles, to become damaged. Therefore, we recommend that all slabs-on-grade contain at least a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they occur. Interior floor slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches actual thickness and be reinforced with No. 4 bars on 18-inch centers, both ways, placed at midheight in the slab. 1719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 3 2. Concrete l2o/ation Joints: We recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness of the slab in any floor designs. The joints and cuts, if properly placed, should reduce the potential for and help control floor slab cracking. We recommend that concrete shrinkage joints be spaced no farther than approximately 20 feet apart, and also at re-entrant corners. However, due to a number of reasons (such as base preparation, construction techniques, curing procedures, and normal shrinkage of concrete), some cracking of slabs can be expected. 3. Slab Moisture Emission: Soil moisture vapor can result in damage to moisture-sensitive floors, some floor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in addition to mold and staining on slabs, walls and carpets. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made In thickness ranging from 10- to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5- to 10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance will be against puncturing. Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are commonly used, products designed specifically as vapor retarders possess higher tensile strength and are more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission into concrete slabs. The use of such products is highly recommended. 1719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 4 3.1 Vapor retarder joints must be lapped and sealed with mastic or the manufacturer's recommended tape. To provide protection of the moisture retarder, a layer of at least 2 inches of clean sand (minimum Sand Equivalent value of 50) on top and 2 inches at the bottom should also be provided. No heavy equipment, stakes or other puncturing instruments should be used on top of the liner before or during concrete placement. In actual practice, stakes are often driven through the retarder material, equipment is dragged or rolled across the retarder, overlapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc. All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder's effectiveness. 3.2 The vapor retarders are not waterproof. They are intended to help prevent or reduce vapor transmission and capillary migration through the soil into the pores of concrete slabs. Waterproofing systems must supplement vapor retarders if full waterproofing is desired. The owner should be consulted to determine the specific level of protection required. 4. Exterior Slab Reinforcement: As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, we recommend that all exterior pedestrian concrete slabs be founded on properly compacted, low-expansion potential fill soils. The slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 4 bars at 24-inch centers, both ways, at the center of the slab, and contain adequate isolation and control joints. The performance of on-site improvements can be greatly affected by soil base preparation and the quality of construction. It is therefore important that all improvements are properly designed and constructed for the existing soil conditions. The improvements should not be built on loose soils or fills placed without our observation and testing. 1.719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 5 For exterior slabs with the minimum shrinkage reinforcement, control joints should be placed at spaces no farther than 15 feet apart or the width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at re-entrant corners. Control joints in exterior slabs should be sealed with elastomeric joint sealant. The sealant should be inspected every 6 months and be properly maintained. B. etaininal W,-moment Walls Basement walls and wails that are curvilinear (such as along the street frontage and the house terrace) or have angle points that restrain them from movement (such as at the northeast and southeast corners of the property) should be designed for the restrained wall pressures presented in the RPA report. If the walls at the northeast and southeast corners of the property are structurally separated (including structurally separated footings) a short distance from the corners, then the unrestrained pressures may be utilized. The lower walls of two-tiered wall systems that are horizontally separated by less than twice the height of the lower wall should be designed to resist the lateral load from the higher wall, uniformly distributed against the lower wall. We recommend that retaining/basement wall drainage be provided by a composite drainage material such as Miradrain 6000/6200 and QuickDrain or equivalent. No gravel or perforated pipe is used with the Miradrain/QuickDrain system. The drainage material should terminate 12 inches below the finish surface where the surface is covered by slabs or 18 inches below the finish surface in landscape areas. C. Tennvo a Slopes Based on our document review and reconnaissance, temporary cut-slopes for construction of the proposed retaining walls should be safe against mass instability 1719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 6 at an inclination of 1.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical). Some localized sloughing or ravelling of the soils exposed on the slopes, however, may occur. Since the stability of temporary construction slopes will depend largely on the contractor's activities and safety precautions (storage and equipment loadings near the tops of cut-slopes, surface drainage provisions, etc.) it should be the contractor's responsibility to establish and maintain all temporary construction slopes at a safe inclination appropriate to his methods of operation. Where temporary construction slopes are not possible, temporary shoring will be required. Shoring parameters are dependent on the type of shoring system utilized and can be provided to your shoring contractor as needed. GRADING NOTES Geotechnical Exploration, Inc, recommends that we be retained to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing excavation to be as anticipated in this "Report of Update Geotechnical Reconnaissance" for the project. In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site grading work must be observed and tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading plans and the local grading ordinance. All retaining wall and trench backfill should be properly compacted. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage occurring due to improperly or uncompacted backfill placed without our observations and testing. LIMITATIONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on available data obtained from our document review and reconnaissance, as well as our experience with similar soils and formational materials located in this area of Encinitas. Of 1.719 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 7 necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations. it is, therefore, necessary that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at the time grading operations begin or when footing excavations are placed. In the event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued, if required. The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of a document review and reconnaissance that meet the contemporary standard of care in our profession within the City of Encinitas. No warranty is provided. This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to the building plans, especially with respect to the height and location of any proposed structures, this report must be presented to us for immediate review and possible revision. It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the recommendations summarized in this report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of this project are incorporated in the structural plans. We should be retained to review the detailed project plans once they are available, to see that our recommendations are adequately incorporated in the plans. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions presented herein are considered to be unsafe. Aft,0 1?19 San Elijo Avenue Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 8 Should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 07-9442 will expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, Q�pFESSIQe,._ GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. s 2 pmp�31g111S- Wm. D. Hespeler .E. 396 Senior Geotechnical Engineer FCCA�o Leslie D. Reed, Prigident 1pN1Al C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-09]/R.G. 3391 �� 0• q� 4 No. 999 Exp.3/31/ CERTIFIED ENGINEERING Q GEOLOGIST '9�OF CAL%FGP Awe IrrlEii Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING •GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 25 February 2008 Rueben.and Jamie Mehren Job No. 07-9442 P.O. Box 1612 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 Subject: Earthwork Observation and Testing Services Proposed Mehren Residence i 1719 San Elijo Avenue _� I I Encinitas, California �� ! A APR 9 2003 ` . Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with your requEILsL,-we are providlnb eart or observation and testing services for the subject project. We preswoasly' performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the project, the results of which were presented in our report dated August 24, 2007. Commencing on February 7, 2008, our representatives have been present at the site to provide earthwork observation and testing services associated with the mass grading operations for the project. The mass grading included the removal and recompaction of loose topsoils and existing fill soils that were not removed by planned cuts, prior to the placement of new fills. Planned cut and fill depths were up to about 4 feet deep. As of February 19, 2008, the mass grading for the project and the storm drain trench backfill along the south property line has been satisfactorily completed in accordance with our recommendations and the site is suitable for construction of the proposed residence and associated improvements designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in our August 24, 2007, update geotechnical reconnaissance report. Prior to construction of the garage footings and slab, however, the retaining wall backfill between the garage pad and the upper house pad must be properly placed and compacted. In addition, due to the inclement weather, all slab areas should be refinished as necessary immediately prior to constructing the slabs to repair any rain damage. The results of the field density and laboratory compaction tests performed through February 19, 2008, are presented in the attached Tables A and B, respectively. The approximate field density test locations are shown on the attached Figure No. I. 7420 TRADE STREET•SAN DIEGO,CA.92121• (858)549-7222• FAX: (858)549-1604• EMAIL:geotech @gei-sd.com Proposed Mehren Residence Job No. 07-9442 Encinitas, California Page 2 Work remaining at the site which requires additional observation and testing includes the placement and compaction of utility trench and retaining wall backfills, the inspection of footing excavations, the preparation and compaction of building slab subgrade (to repair any damage from rain or equipment working on the surface), hardscape and pavement subgrade soils, and the construction of pavements. Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either expressed or implied. This opportunity to be of continued service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 07-9442 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Wm. D. Hespeler .E. 396 ' Senior Geotechnical Engineer pg exp'31311• �c cc: Addressee (4) * cF sT orEC�o�� i Q N C 00 O aQ �� Z C 3 V y w c Q O O ani N (o ° F a ao t� co n ao � rn ao 0 rn o v v ai ri 0 c 30 cn O- W �p N m C7 t9 C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co.Q d LL [O lL LL LL LL LL ll. LL LL LL U- W LL y Q W W Y 1- y Z W ° ° J c W c O LL r O U. 0 >o T > _0 >- - - - - - N y m N d p) v v v v v N G) m C O y a� a fl CN y ip 5 0 0 1- m N N o w 0°a °a Q J Im Co rn c c c c c o o o 0 o a °m a s 0 t L t m I� 1°rn CD ago o. n y�y c_ c_ c c c o- I � � ,y y y Q O O O N W C C C C C b a a a p N C c c f' > > 3 0 0 W 16 A 0 0 L o 0 0 1O —L° �° —L° L o o a n a o o tl) W Vi t L O y y y L L L o 0 0 o c C 0 Z Z Z J J D 0) CO CO CO y > > U' C7 (7 J V 5 CO m a o O O O O O O O O O o cm 0- Q1 a 0 . N M a A A A A a a A 1 s 0 0 d � Z y0 ZI N m v LO m n m m o n co v �n m ao O CL CL Job No. 07-9442 TABLE B LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST RESULTS (ASTM D1557-91) Compaction Maximum Optimum Test Source of Dry Density Water Content Curve No. Description of Material Material (ND 1 SILTY SAND (SM),Reddish Brown On-Site 131.0 9.2 Figure No. IIIc S H 1 Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 16 June 2008 Rueben and Jamie Mehren Job No. 07-9442 P.O. Box 1612 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 __----'� Subject: Earthwork Observation and Testin Service Proposed Mehren Residence-Site Retaining Walls $ 1719 San Elijo Avenue `; Encinitas, California Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mehren: In accordance with your request we are providing earthwork observation and testing services for the subject project. We previously performed an update geotechnical reconnaissance for the project, the results of which were presented in our report dated August 24, 2007. In addition, we previously issued a mass grading report dated February 25, 2008. As of this date most of the retaining wall backfills have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with our recommendations. The completed wall backfills are indicated on the attached Site Plan, Figure I. The results of the field density and laboratory compaction tests performed to date, are presented in the attached Tables A and B, respectively. The approximate field density test locations are also shown on the attached Figure No. I. This opportunity to be of continued service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 07-9442 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, Q�pFESS/p�,_ GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. No.398 a Exp.3/311,(� Wm. D. Hesp er, G.E. 39 GPv Senior Geotechnical Engineer s14 �OF F C AV W�� cc: Addressee (4) 7420 TRADE STREET*SAN DIEGO, CA. 92121 • (858)549-7222• FAX: (858) 549-1604 • EMAIL: geotech @gei-sd.com 8 4 0 8 16 24 SCALE IN FEET SCALE: 1' 6' LEGEND: -�-C— OVERHEAD POWER LINES O AME IB'NU x 6'B�P.cc' —s— SEWER LINE b . I I N�� M'— GAS L LINE 1I�n' w MAY MM o 0'"—' CAS LINE F I FLAT p�f RS' S —-—-— PROPERTY LINE RR(ETXRATKW H ST. CENTER LIE REA ICI :IANN — — EASEMENT LINE X WE I A INDICATES EDGE OF PAVEMENT E l I WM INDICATES WATER METER =Ai'MII � ® INDICATES 4AIOSCAPED BMP SWALE 7 PER(A55 OETAL A',SHEET 3 I gCI1pY INS 9ET . AREA GRAIN(6'MIN.) v (n I dye > I. — r P.VC-/AJI.S.DRAIN PPE O 1.0%MN. £ ' (Az j =Z====`aC PROPOSE)HOUSE FOOTPRINT I �� 1 !�W.L I 6)� PROPORD WAIL FFR PLAN M[R tMN I C..I 01900 �lI/ 'S ----1 C 1'WATER%RNLE W/DUAL METER f r-N PER WAS IS-%W-17 I S D ST 4�4'SW I/3j' 1f ER ASLYL r9RME I 2w - �l 260-275-27 IF/UK BEER AR w IB-0�Krf7,BY SDIQ E E)OST. %y G� AREA I ♦ ` ADRAJN W NOTE TW-IDI ATE6HN&i ORAOE Il 1 N I O TOP OF RETAINING 01 A6T 8' PORTION f vZT MV MAW D-I EXIST INDICATES 6' IOU- If RTES FINISH GRADE —U P.C.C.CURB O BOTTOM OF WALL CDT .�` L�81 rTR' - TOP OF FOanNG) ATW-INDICATES ARCHITECTURAL TOP OF WELL I IH71RE Ar WE PA V TF-INDICATES TOP OF POOTINO O'cap P.cc \ ELEVATION LO N f DeMNff SWEE PER fV N OMR S'UASS I R 0) E,I BILE MAY IN Legend RAT BIER R o Q //7yyllllll g0f5 c� RIP(EE0811EIf t<i N • Indicates Approximete Location of a UO ET,pT[pra�,_ 37 Field Denso Test to C. G Indicates Completed Site Well b 'b BacMills O '� E 7gJI Z SU � •l, 0 V1 W O 4r c IF TI Z STORM WATER TREATMENT NOTE: PLOT PLAN a INDICATES LANDSCAPE AREA t or 610-SWALE FOR (IF F STERN WATER POLLUTION BAIP. 1b BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED k NOT TO BE MOMIED w/o ENO Z w PERMIT FROM CITY. ERRL Proposed Mehren Residence W COM Site Retaining Walls LL IIC/DI 1719 San Elijo Avenue W Encinitas,CA. iQ pI Figure No.I Z Job No.07-9442 41 FOR O DISTURBANCE NOTE: «T L)4PI w h on, c Ex loration,Inc. i INTC ALL THE WOW PROPM M THIS PLAN IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE APPLICANT'S LAN � PROPERTY. F ANY DISTURBANCE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS ANTICIPATED POL .. _. June 2008 O V) AS A RESULT OF ANY PROPOSE)WORK A WRITTEN LETTER OF PERMISSION A P S FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY ON ER MUST BE OBTAINED AND SUBMITTED U u) TO THE CITY PRIOR 70 START OF ANY SUCH WORK. ANY DISTURBANCE ON THE ADJACENT PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY NC 5pP3e y�.'r' w EM6INEERIN6 AUTHORIZED IN WRITING AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IS GROUNDS FOR A STOP-WORK TO BE ISSUED FOR THE PROJECT UNTIL THE REQUIRED QUI IIIIII Sllftl IITII1F1III CIIllltlll LEI PEON IS OBTAINED. PUF M SOL 1635 S RANCHO SANTA FE/204 Q OVA SAN HARM CA.92076 Z REVISIONS APPROVED DATE RE (780)510-3152 °ERENCES DATE /(760)310-3153 Faz oil 9442 Offy ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DRAWING N0. .. cONn w(n 3ESIDENCE 676-G o a. SHEET N0. 07-044 CDP WQ SHEET 2 of 9 FEE MIME t LEGEND: �S- ° +EAO ��w- SEMpT ENE *ATM LNE \7 IST. �� GAS LINE EA ,_ PROPERTY Lot ON AIN EFNTM Lee ` 2A � a 0 8 16 WpCATES EASELOT LNE 8 40 fEe? N ® NE11lATEF w T ft'CAXS WE I PER�A �OW ppiplE 1$ . �T 3 --A.�1 ego PG � ��e 'SEA oaAw la.►a.) 0 1 � ,3 NOt15F1.ox yet PRM4sD VAL 1l w 'm c V* � out £ � 14S 7 S Evsr.. DN A TO o TW- S�.A 1 Q TOP P71. ` A I C-C CURB PpR �P Rf rNf. _ftnomo, Got" TOPOF;71�poor 1 ,---____ ArW.WftAru Acv r F9 WAS 11tiP OF '. ayW,11,BySAVM C_,.1 TP.L � QEVATpdP 'xOO}LNo ILegend I N N a £ 3740 F!e metes gPProxi 1 U bDe Matet O u�l'Tes! �H1ion o1 h v 1 pLOr PLAN o t+N e ft I Propo Q ... I ,'A1ah 171R%Ming W/s aside f/1 Fnoin/tyr Gq A,e�vue 2 a Job MtttiO'k4 ob No.07.9442 Geot � Exr�t Alcal y oa w+�lp ♦ �, oral #��?aI�W� • ri - Jun_r a m Inc' 2 $TO o Wwtac► 4.,.. =ti ® SIM too PM 10,33,R ENGIN 1760)aim 4AR�S SANTA ANCHO FE EERING SER►�CES DEP E (760)9.-"078' Fps 2 SEE NT °ROWING Y DI$TURfA `SNODENCE "0' LW oaa crop 67$-GEC pvtomTy. cc � w�.1 t 2 OF a � � Q TO�Rc�� W r N � � 7 p V V Q O w N pr N o V � p C l0 O aj ar N O N m t- t- Oi f� t� t0 t0 OD l0 b y y N r to � 3v N N N w W °D $� N vi ui m c7 c7 N N N N N y in N N u. � � N LL j O LL CD OD O � LL LL. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL QN LU r uj p c a o a 4 O w W n n a y LL w v LL q o .p ig CL 'C C C- CL TL CL `o `o o i Q ano 3 ° w of m m a� `o o v Q O L 3 L 50 L 0 L 0 L pO o L t o t o ° o o A � � 0 tl 1 M tl o O m = `N o F+esO U) to I? O N CM w w o o v v v v 3 c 3 O c c aN� c c d s y v J w w w n M a c c c c c o- n n m o 0 0 s s c c c c c o 3 5 S S 4C-- 3 m o o n a a L L w w w w w w w w w w c o c c c c c c c c c c m L L w w C C C C C C C C C N L L L d m E m d a Q Q a N Q Q N 10 t0 .0 Z C r 3 a o `0 0 o n a d'o w o 0 z5 0 Z Z Z J J to U1 dJ fA fA > > U' U' U' J Q R' Q a' �p �p z c LL u « O O O O O O O O $ O O O O O O ^N " aD aD aD t0 oO t0 O m $ O O O O O _.. O O O O O O O O O O O _ � z 0 o N vo v u4 m r Z O N co N m N N N N N (V N N N N !•f V d Z N (7 �' IA t0 ►� m 61 d H O a` & � � 0 k \ 3 s k % k CIA cn 0 s 9 � 9 p m o n a 7 0 tv % to 1 e = = 2 m a G k0 % t e 9 e n o \ �2 f f - ] E E j L LL & LU / r r f 2 tu & & & k & � ] L § k f LL o ca � . o e r e $ 2 k 2 / z k \ t 2 § .2 a § b t & f 2 « 2 k L f k k $ � � / � © k 2 § ? 6 \ \ § f 0 E V LL k G@ G CO G G G % § § q § @ m d) ® © a a a to © ¢ § k 2 C� 2 R R $ to % % � 30b N0, 07-9442 TABLE B ABORATORY COMPACTION TEST tS�,TS (ASTM D1557-91) L Maximum Optimum S ource)f Dry Density Water Conter Materiel -- - - �r 131.0 9.2 Compaction On-SO Test De tion of Material Reddish Brown Cure—�— SILTY SAD 1 'igure No. IHc saoas VO 'SODHVw Nvs 'iroz 3lins 'oa 3A ViNVS OHONV8 s W9L :SS38GO`d DID 66X asl€—ole (osc) 'ON 3NOHd 9NR133NION3 W SV0O OHONV6 :3VWN S,833NION3 z °o . a W W I a $4 � � illi ► � �� z Z° 1 v • a3¢ Wg CI � aao c� Z TO W W 1 ^ O Wa lq�s I W° F <� 2 z W 1 J! OLLVd 30SON00 1SiX3 ` ; .n 0 Qa o� W W Z 7 1 LJ _ -- W N xt ,.• z 53133' _WN �ZZ Gyy 1991��v JJ Q 1 9 .k 0 - z o 0 5j $i uj ol Ic •fir M S� az p4 Ii��g � _�� Er�`�� 3 � W b 3 -Ai stir �•� o, � s HIM'S S = � � Ogg � ao 1pi p� � 6 %11, mua 11J M •l7 YZ L 3I0vs Li Q Z O d o �.. N }� Ilia 9 - N Z jai ? N � �_ ze W IaMal I W0)�a � s;� =K< � all, a iP�� F �o Z�a fly �i -of=Z�w�n�Ci�j �� tS- i r�k C4 0Pguql%rr' I Y HIM!� I e L I AVE b SAN E T iO jigg 00 ------------- cr tu is, P % gig 2 12 9Z NIC o 9 (osc):'ON�3N Hd JNIHMNIJN3 VISVOO OHOW8 3V4VN S,833NINN3 DID Groro M 2 o W n Z 1 N W— m ~ B g8 eo� p� a4 0�ff �C y! � N $ v @ C.- e b o 2 I I I I i Z m �p Wa W 31 I a • =3a W° J I I I r W -.tV W¢ o L Zuj I J� ouvd 2LWNOO ISLU I p a W z �( W m � >�, a a 2z iL z = yy,aYOO� °•" N y 5 91 'v a# b0 WN 93 _ 10 tj 3)z �= a fwi ri 't I zam Z it; it • • oYU CL? F52 < a Ic big 5 _ •fir r+• �� >3 F ��,��- � F�;� �� 3 ,�•� c� P yy�,yy/jj �n �t7f� $rte-y�(NX YS�pLy � NFL LL GOOOOO]F� �yWb<� �S �_� "'�Gi i fib€ o �S'� �� i3 �; �o� � � U gg. 1p a [6 NO IL 2& f— •____ . I z � = o q Mal 0 -�L V I I w I vQ fn o Wig C4 Po AV 8 (4� a F gg %116 g , F.. a e ° b7 Eb �¢Ii _ � Y g SAN ELIJ — AVE s _--7 qe ~ � Go zt _ ; V � � . W ` - _•W vp1�1u h t > _ w w w OC ° lit R�a co H ZSx-