The URL can be used to link to this page

2009-10309 GLine: \ C I T Y OF E N C I N I T A S 1 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 505 S. VULCAN AVE. ENCINITAS, CA 92024 CONTRACTOR : MALONE BROTHERS INC LICENSE NO.: 333688 ENGINEER : COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 9/15/10 PERMIT EXP. /11 PERMIT ISSUED BY INSPEC : NICK DEI - ------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS PHONE NO.: 760 - 638 -0722 LICENSE TYPE: B PHO 760- 230 -6025 1. PERMIT FEE GRADING PERMIT PERMIT NO.: 10309GI PARCEL NO. 261 -091 -2100 PLAN NO.: .00 JOB SITE ADDRESS: 2358 NEWCASTLE AVE CASE NO.: 08139 / CDP APPLICANT NAME MRS JUNE MOSER 8. TRAFFIC FEE 00 MAILING ADDRESS: 520 W VALLEY PKWY #6 PHONE NO.: 760 - 745 -0555 CITY: ESCONDIDO CHECK FEE STATE: CA ZIP: 92025- .00 CONTRACTOR : MALONE BROTHERS INC LICENSE NO.: 333688 ENGINEER : COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 9/15/10 PERMIT EXP. /11 PERMIT ISSUED BY INSPEC : NICK DEI - ------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS PHONE NO.: 760 - 638 -0722 LICENSE TYPE: B PHO 760- 230 -6025 1. PERMIT FEE .00 2. GIS MAP FEE .00 3. INSPECTION FEE 2,736.00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00 5. NPDES INSPT FEE 547.20 6. SECURITY DEPOSIT 54,719.97 7. FLOOD CONTROL FE .00 8. TRAFFIC FEE 00 9. IN -LIEU UNDERGRN .00 10.IN -LIEU IMPROVMT .00 ll.PLAN CHECK FEE .00 12.PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00 ------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT TO GUARANTEE BOTH PERFORMANCE AND LABOR /MATERIALS FOR EARTHWORK, DRAINAGE, PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS, AND EROSION CONTROL. CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL AT ALL TIMES PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS OR APPROVED PLAN. LETTER DATED APRIL 15, 2010 UPDATED JULY 15, 2010 APPLIES - - -- INSPECTION ---- ------ - - - - -- DATE -- - - - - -- INITIAL INSPECTION OC T d -,,-atv COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED — Lg iZ0 \b ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED o %b ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION IL - Z - Z \o FINAL INSPECTION 57 -� _ rj_gj_# •• IRE 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 LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF ANY PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS APPLICATION. SIGNATURE wahrla ) /-IOSZ --d- PRINT NAME CIRCLE ONE: 1. OWNER 2. AGENT 3. OTHER 9/ 4120 /o — DATE/SIGNED h 260- %` S 6Y0G TELEPHONE NUMBER C I T Y OF E N C I N I T A S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 505 S. VULCAN AVE. ENCINITAS, CA 92024 ------ ------------- - - - - -- DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------------------- PERMIT FOR SEWER LATER IN CONJUNCTION WITH GRADING PLAN 10309 -G. CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL AT ALL TIMES PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS OR APPROVED PLAN. TRENCH REPAIR PER CITY OF ENCINITAS UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL AND RESURFACING STANDARD. - - -- INSPECTION ---------- - - ---- DATE -- - - - - -- INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - -- INITIAL INSPECTION FINAL INSPECTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- - - -- I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED PERMIT PENALTY OF PERJURY T;IAT ALL THE INFORMATION IS SIGNAT PRINT NAME CIRCLE ONE: 1. OWNER 2. AGENT 3. OTHER AND DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER TRUE. /5 /D DATE SIGNED / / Z��& TELEPHONE NUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PERMIT NO.: 10309CN PARCEL NO. 261- 091 -2100 PLAN NO.: JOB SITE ADDRESS: 2358 NEWCASTLE AVE CASE NO.: 08139 / CDP APPLICANT NAME : WALLIE AND WANDO MOSER MAILING ADDRESS: 520 W VALLEY PKWY 46 PHONE NO.: 760- 745 -0555 CITY: ESCONDIDO STATE: CA ZIP: 92025 - CONTRACTOR : ZONDIROS CORP PHONE NO.: 619 - 339 -7875 LICENSE NO.: 766708 LICENSE TYPE: A INSURANCE COMPANY NAME: TRAVELERS POLICY NO. C0358IP990 POLICY EXP. DATE: 1/15/11 ENGINEER COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS NO 760 - 230 -6025 PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 9/15/10 PERMIT E 11 PERMIT ISSUED BY: INSPE NICK DEILE ------------------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS ---------------------------- 1. PERMIT FEE 400.00 2. GIS MAP FEE .00 3. INSPECTION FEE .00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00 S. NPDES INSPT FEE .00 6. SECURITY DEPOSIT .00 7. FLOOD CONTROL FE .00 8. TRAFFIC FEE .00 9. IN -LIEU UNDERGRN .00 10.IN -LIEU IMPROVMNT .00 ll.PLAN CHECK FEE .00 12.PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00 ------ ------------- - - - - -- DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------------------- PERMIT FOR SEWER LATER IN CONJUNCTION WITH GRADING PLAN 10309 -G. CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL AT ALL TIMES PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS OR APPROVED PLAN. TRENCH REPAIR PER CITY OF ENCINITAS UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL AND RESURFACING STANDARD. - - -- INSPECTION ---------- - - ---- DATE -- - - - - -- INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - -- INITIAL INSPECTION FINAL INSPECTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- - - -- I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED PERMIT PENALTY OF PERJURY T;IAT ALL THE INFORMATION IS SIGNAT PRINT NAME CIRCLE ONE: 1. OWNER 2. AGENT 3. OTHER AND DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER TRUE. /5 /D DATE SIGNED / / Z��& TELEPHONE NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos. Calilornia 92069 • (760) 839 -7302 - Fax: (760) 480 -7477 - w .designgroupca.com LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS PROPOSED NEW DUPLEX LOCATED AT 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE ^,'. IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 4 I I L L — EDG Project No. 084350 -1 August 20, 2008 PREPARED FOR: Wanda J. Moser 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA 92026 9 SEP 1 5 2010 ;. ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP Cf4RDnW M I SP'vfMY [[45l.IMI� O ti q \� \I l [IYVI+O�I [LV.II':K4 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos. California 92069 - (760) 839 -7302 • Fax: (760) 480 -7477 • www.designgroupca.com Date: August 20, 2008 To: Wanda J. Moser 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA 92026 Re: Proposed New Duplex to be Located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Subject: Geotechnical Investigation and Report In accordance with your request and our Work Authorization and Agreement dated Apol 4, 2008, we have performed a limited subsurface investigation of the subject site for the proposed residential development. The findings of the investigation, earthwork recommendations and foundation design parameters are presented in this report. In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. If you have any questions regarding the following report please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, ENGINEERING DE V , Erin E. Rist California RCE #65122 No, 65122 r4 1* ExP.9 /30/200-7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SCOPE....................................... SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................ ............................... 1 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................ ............................... i SUBSOIL CONDITIONS ........................... ............................... 1 GROUND WATER ................................. ............................... 2 LIQUEFACTION .................................. ............................... 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........... ............................... 3 GENERAL................................. ............................... 3 EARTHWORK.............................. ............................... 3 FOUNDATIONS............................ ............................... 4 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE ............... ............................... 6 RETAINING WALLS ......................... ............................... 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE ....................... ............................... 9 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING ...... ............................... 10 MISCELLANEOUS ............................... ............................... 10 FIGURES Site Vicinity Map ......................... ............................... Figure No. 1 Site Location Map ........................ ............................... Figure No. 2 Approximate Location of Test Pits ........... ............................... Figure No. 3 Test Pit Logs ........................ ............................... Test Pit Nos. 1-3 APPENDICES References.............................. ............................... Appendix A General Earthwork and Grading Specifications . ............................... Appendix B Testing Procedures ....................... ............................... Appendix C Retaining Wall Drainage Detail .............. ............................... Appendix D SCOPE This report gives the results of our limited geotechnical investigation for the property located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue in the City of Encinitas, California. (See Figure No. 1, "Site Vicinity Map ", and Figure No. 2, "Site Location Map "). The scope of our work, conducted to date, has included a visual reconnaissance of the property and surrounding areas, a limited subsurface investigation of the property in the area of proposed improvements, field analysis, soil testing and preparation of this report presenting our conclusions and recommendations. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property appears to be a rectangular shaped lot located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue in the City of Encinitas, California. The site is bordered to the north and south by similarly developed residential properties, to the west by an alley and to the east by Newcastle Avenue. The general topography of the site area consists of moderately sloping foothill and hillside terrain. The topography of the site itself generally slopes gently descending from east to west. At the time of this report the site is developed with an existing single story residence. Based upon our conversations with the project architect and review of the preliminary site plan we understand that the proposed improvements will include the following: 1. Demolition of the existing residence and detached garage. 2. Construction of a new residential duplex founded on slab on grade floors. FIELD INVESTIGATION Our field investigation of the property consisted of a site reconnaissance, site field measurements, observation of existing conditions on -site and on adjacent sites, and a limited subsurface investigation of soil conditions. Our subsurface investigation consisted of visual observation of 3 test pits in the general areas of proposed construction, logging of soil types encountered, and sampling of soils for laboratory testing. The locations of our test pits are given in Figure No. 3, "Approximate Location of Test Pits ". SUBSOIL CONDITIONS Materials consisting of topsoil and fill soil underlain by weathered and competent sandstone were encountered during our subsurface investigation of the site. Soil types are described as follows: Topsoil/Fill Topsoil /fill soils consist of dark brown to brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense slightly silty to silty sands with roots in the upper 3 feet. Toposil /fill and weathered sandy materials found in the upper 3 feet below adjacent grade of the area of improvement are not suitable for the support of structures or settlement sensitive improvements in their present state. Topsoil and fill soil onsite generally classify as SW -SM according to the Unified Classification System, and based on visual observation generally possess potentials for expansion in the low range. Moser Development Page No. 1 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP OSOTSCHNICAL. LNIL, SMUCTO CONSULTANIS Sandstone Sandstone was found to underlie fill onsite. Sandstone materials consisted of rust brown, moist to very moist, dense, slightly silty to silty sandstone. Sandstone materials are considered suitable for the support of overlying fill soils, structures and structural improvements, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Sandstone classify as SW -SM according to the Unified Classification System, and based on visual observation and our experience possess potentials for expansion in the low range. For detailed logs of soil types encountered in test pit excavations, as well as a depiction of observed locations, please see Figure No. 3, "Approximate Location of Test Pits" and Test Pit Logs Nos. 1 -3. GROUND WATER Ground water was not encountered during our subsurface investigation of the site. Groundwater is not anticipated to be a significant concern to the project provided the recommendations of this report are followed. However, in our experience groundwater conditions can develop where no such condition previously existed. Proper surface drainage and irrigation practices will play a significant role in the future performance of the project. Please note in the "Concrete Slab on Grade" section of this report for specific recommendations regarding water to cement ratio for moisture sensitive areas should be adhered. The project architect and /or waterproofing consultant shall specifically address waterproofing details. LIQUEFACTION It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults in the Southern California region. However, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. Liquefaction of cohesioniess soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, granular soils undedain by a near - surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Because of the dense nature of the soil materials underlying the site and the lack of near surface water, the potential for liquefaction or seismically- induced dynamic settlement at the site Is considered low. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and current design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. Moser Development Page No. 2 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP WOIECM L.CW S UCTVq L CO MTMnS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided that the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. Unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the upper 3 to 3 1/2 feet at the locations investigated are not suitable for the support of settlement sensitive improvements in its present stale. Based upon our conversation with the project architect and owners we understand the proposed site development will consist of approximately 3 feet of cut in the front portion of the property and 3 feet of fill along the rear portion of the property. We anticipate a removal and recompaction of unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site, anticipated upper 3 to 4 feet below existing adjacent grade. Removals shall be conducted as described in the Earthwork section below. The following recommendations should be considered as minimum design parameters, and shall be incorporated within the project plans and utilized during construction, as applicable. EARTHWORK Site grading is anticipated to include the removal and recompaction of unsuitable soil profiles and undercutting of the building pad to a depth of at least one foot below deepest footing. 1. Site Preparation Prior to any grading areas of proposed improvement should be cleared of surface and subsurface debris (including organic topsoil). Removed debris should be property disposed of off -site prior to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing structures, orother improvements which extend below the undercut depths noted, should be filled and compacted using on -site material or a non - expansive import material. 2. Removals Fill /unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site in our test pit excavations, upper approximately 3 to 4 feet, are not suitable for the structural support of buildings or improvements in their present state. In general grading should consist of the removal of unsuitable soil to competent subgrade materials, scarification of subgrade to a depth of 12 inches, and the re- compaction of fill materials to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Excavated fill materials are suitable for re -use as fill material during grading, provided they are cleaned of debris and oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter (oversized material is not anticipated to be of significant concem) and are free of contamination. 3. Transitions Any structural sensitive improvements should be constructed on a uniform building pad. The Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Calitomia ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTELNNC. CML. S1Al1CTUUL CONSULTANTS Page No 3 Job No. 084403 -1 entire building pad should be undercut a minimum depth below adjacent grade of 3 feet, or to a minimum of 12 inches below deepest footing. We anticipate a minimum of 2.5 feet below adjacent grade. Based upon our test pit excavations we anticipate minium removals of 3 feet along the western portion of the lot and 4 to 4.5 feet at the eastern portion of the lot. We anticipate the new residence will be founded on footings bearing on recompacted fill material. Removals and undercuts should extend a minimum of 5 feet (or to a distance at least equal to depth of fill removals, whichever is greater) beyond the footprint (including patio columns, etc.) of the proposed structures and settlement sensitive improvements. Where this condition cannot be met it should be reviewed by the Engineering Design Group on a case by case basis. Removal depths should be visually verified by a representative of our firm prior to the placement of fill. A subgrade drain may be installed at building undercuts, as determined in the field at the time of grading. Undercut subgrade should be sloped at a minimum of 1% to the new drain, and the drain should be sloped at a minimum 1% to an acceptable daylight outlet. Refer to Canyon Subdrain Details in Appendix B of this report. 4. Fills All fill and backfill should be brought to approximately +2% of optimum moisture content, and re- compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557 -91). Surficial, loose or soft soils exposed or encountered during grading (such as any undocumented or loose fill materials) should be removed to competent material. Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. If the import of soil is planned, soils should be non - expansive (EI <30) and free of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. Where new foundations extend across a retaining wall backfill wedge footings shall be deepened through fill to competent sandstone. 5. Slopes Permanent slopes may be cut to a face ratio of 2.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). Permanent fill slopes shall be placed at a maximum 2:1 slope face ratio. All temporary cut slopes shall be excavated in accordance with OSHA requirements. Subsequent to grading planting or other acceptable cover should be provided to Increase the stability of slopes, especially during the rainy season (October thru April). FOUNDATIONS We anticipate that the proposed foundation system for proposed house will utilize slab on grade floor system and continuous shallow perimeter foundations. The following design parameters may be utilized for new footings extended to recompacted fill. Footings bearing in competent materials may be designed utilizing maximum allowable soils pressure of 2,000 psf. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Califomia ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEWECNNIM.CMLSMUCMN C0NSULTMr5 Page No.4 Job No. 0044031 Seismic Design Parameters: Seismic Design Parameters: Minimum Footing Width Site Class D Sos (9) 0.761 So, (g) 0.422 Bearing values may be increased by 33% when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 3. The following parameters should be used as a minimum, for designing footing width and depth below lowest adjacent grade: No. of Floors Supported Minimum Footing Width 'Minimum Footing Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Grad 1 15 inches 18 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches I 24 inches Footings may be deeper in the field to extend to competent sandstone profiles. This condition should also be noted on project structural plans. 4. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two #4 bars at the bottom (3 inches above the ground). For footings over 30 inches in depth, additional reinforcement, and possibly a stemwall system will be necessary. This detail should be reviewed on a case by case basis by our office prior to construction. 5. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and be reinforced with a minimum of #4 bars at 12 inches o.c. in each direction (3 inches above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. 6. Forfootings adjacentto slopes, a minimum 12 foot horizontal setback In material or properly compacted fill should be maintained. A setback measurement should be taken at the horizontal distance from the bottom of the footing to slope daylight. Where this condition can not be met it should be brought to the attention of the Engineering Design Group for review. 7. All excavations should be performed in general accordance with the contents of this report, applicable codes, OSHA requirements and applicable city and /or county standards. 8. All foundation subgrade soils and footings shall be pre- moistened a minimum of 18 inches in depth prior to the pouring of concrete. Moser Development Page No. 5 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICK CNIL SMUCMR CON LTMTS CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE Concrete slabs on grade should use the following as the minimum design parameters: Concrete slabs on grade of the building should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches (5.5 inches at garage and driveway locations) and should be reinforced with #4 bars at 18 inches o.c. placed at the midpoint of the slab. All concrete shall be poured per the following: Slump: Between 3 and 4 inches maximum Aggregate Size: 3/4 - 1 inch Air Content: 5 to 8 percent Non- Moisture Sensitive Areas: Compressive Strength = 2500 psi minimum. Moisture Sensitive Areas: Water to cement Ratio - 0.45 maximum Compressive Strength = 4,000 psi minimum (No special inspection required for water to cement ratio purposes, unless otherwise specified by the structural engineer) Moisture retarding additive in concrete at concrete slab on grade Floors and moisture sensitive areas. 2. In moisture sensitive areas (i.e. interior living space where slab vapor emission is a concem), the slab concrete should have a minimum water to cement ratio of 0.45, generally resulting in a compressive strength of 4,000 psi (non - special inspected). This recommendation is intended to achieve a low permeability concrete. All required fills used to support slabs, should be placed in accordance with the grading section of this report and the attached Appendix B, and compacted to 90 percent Modified Proctor Density, ASTM D -1557. For all interior slabs, a uniform layer of 4 inches of washed, clean sand (Sand Equivalent > 50, decomposed granite is generally not acceptable) is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a visqueen layer (15 mil) should be placed mid - height in the sand bed to act as a vapor retarder. The visqueen layer should lap a minimum of 6 inches, sealed along all laps per manufacturer's recommendations, and extend down the interior edge of the footing excavation a minimum of 12 inches. 5. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. 6. All subgrade soils to receive concrete flatwork are to be pre- soaked to 2 percent over optimum moisture content to a depth of 18 inches. Brittle floor finishes placed directly on slab on grade floors may crack if concrete is not adequately cured prior to installing the finish or if there is minor slab movement. To minimize potential damage to movement sensitive Flooring, we recommend the use of slip sheeting techniques (linoleum type) which allows for foundation and slab movement without transmitting this movement to the floor finishes. Moser Development Page No. 6 2358 Newcastle Avenue. Encinitas, California g Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOM01MAL, CML. SMUCTuN C SMTN 8. Exterior concrete flatwork and driveway slabs, due to the nature of concrete hydration and minor subgrade soil movement, are subject to normal minor concrete cracking. To minimize expected concrete cracking, the following may be implemented: • Concrete slump should not exceed 4 inches. • Concrete should be poured during " cool" (40 - 65 degrees) weather if possible. If concrete is poured in hotter weather, a set retarding additive should be included in the mix, and the slump kept to a minimum. • Concrete subgrade should be pre- soaked prior to the pouring of concrete. The level of pre- soaking should be a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches. • Concrete may be poured with a 10 inch deep thickened edge. Flatwork adjacent to top of a slope should be constructed with a outside footing to attain a minimum of 7 feet distance to daylight. • Concrete should be constructed with tooled joints or sawcuts (1 inch deep) creating concrete sections no larger than 225 square feel. For sidewalks, the maximum run between joints should not exceed 5 feet. For rectangular shapes of concrete, the ratio of length to width should generally not exceed 0.6 (i.e., 5 ft. long by 3 ft. wide). Joints should be cut at expected points of concrete shrinkage (such as male comers), with diagonal reinforcement placed in accordance with industry standards. • Drainage adjacent to concrete flatwork should direct water away from the improvement. Concrete subgrade should be sloped and directed to the collective drainage system, such that water is not trapped below the flatwork. • The recommendations set forth herein are intended to reduce cosmetic nuisance cracking. The project concrete contractor is ultimately responsible for concrete quality and performance, and should pursue a cost - benefit analysis of these recommendations, and other options available in the industry, prior to the pouring of concrete. RETAINING WALLS Retaining walls up to 6 feet may be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations and minimum design parameters: Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report, and should maintain minimum footing depths outlined in "Foundation" section of this report. 2. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material with low potential for expansion (E.I. <50) will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. Based upon our field investigation onsite soil may be utilized as retaining wall backfill, to be confirmed in the field at the time of site grading. For sloping backfill, the following parameters may be utilized: Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP croreceniuu, cmi, srrtucru codwi*.wrs Job No. No, 7 Backfill Sloping Condition 2:1 Slope 1.5:1 Slope Active Fluid Pressure 50 pcf 65 pcf Any other surcharge loadings shall be analyzed in addition to the above values. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed for an at rest soil pressure of 65 psf. Retaining walls shall be designed for lateral forces due to earthquake, where required by code, utilizing the following design parameters. The peak ground acceleration at the subject site is estimated using California Geological Survey Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page, with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years. For the subject site the peak ground motion is estimated to be 0.302 g. For design purposes, peak acceleration may be reduced by 0.5 (Reference No. 3), to obtain a design horizontal ground acceleration value, which forthis site is equal to 0.152g (Q. General engineering practice recognizes the Mononobe -Okabe /Seed- Whitman equation for the calculation of additional lateral earth pressure. The resultant seismic load should be applied as an inverted triangular distribution from the bottom to top of wall. The resultant force should be applied at a distance of 0.6 times the height (H) of the wall above the base. For yielding walls (designed utilizing active pressure coefficient), which are not restrained, the seismic load may be determined as follows Yielding Walls: P (3/6) kN (gamma) H' Where : k,,=0.152 g ; gamma =unit weight of soil Forrestrained walls (designed utilizing at rest pressure coefficient) which are restrained from movement, the seismic load may be determined as follows Non - Yielding Walls: P„E= k„ (gamma) H' Where : kH 0.152 g ; gamma =unit weight of soil Retaining wall designs for sites with a hydrostatic pressure influence (i.e groundwater within depth of retaining wall or waterfront conditions) will require special design considerations beyond the scope of this letter. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf. This value assumes that the soil being utilized to resist passive pressures, extends horizontally 2.5 times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than 2.5 times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available horizontal length, A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive earth pressures above. Moser Development Page No. 8 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECNNICO. CIVIL. SMUCTUMI. CONSULTORS 8. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. 9. All walls shall be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards contained in the "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail ", Appendix D. The waterproofing elements shown on our details are minimums, and are intended to be supplemented by the waterproofing consultant and /or architect. The recommendations should be reviewed in consideration of proposed finishes and usage, especially at basement levels, performance expectations and budget. If deemed necessary by the project owner, based on the above analysis, and waterproofing systems can be upgraded to include slab under drains and enhanced waterproofing elements. 10. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section of this report. Backfill shall consist of soil with a very low expansion potential, granular, free draining material. 11. At moisture sensitive locations, i.e. basement walls /building retaining walls, cast -in -place concrete retaining walls should be considered in lieu of masonry retaining walls for moisture intrusion purposes. 12. Retaining wall backfill zone shall be detailed to reduce moisture intrusion. Detailing of the retaining wall shall include both french drain at the base of the stem to collect subsurface water. SURFACE DRAINAGE Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative and will play a critical role on the future performance of the dwelling and improvements. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to foundation walls, ortops of slopes. The ground surface surrounding proposed improvements should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the structure in all directions, with a minimum slope of 2% for a horizontal distance of 7 feet (where possible). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Area drains and retaining wall backdrains shall not be tied to the same drainage system. Roof gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the new and existing structures and tightlined to the area drain system. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Area drains should be kept free of debris to allow for proper drainage. Over watering can adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions. Irrigation should be limited to only the amount necessary to sustain plant life. Low flow irrigation devices as well as automatic rain shut -off devices should be installed to reduce overwatering. Irrigation practices and maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems are an important component to the performance of onsite improvements. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of all drainage systems should be inspected. Problems such as gullying or ponding should be corrected as soon as possible. Any leakage from sources such as water lines should also be repaired as soon as possible. In addition, irrigation of planter areas, lawns, or other vegetation, located adjacent to the foundation or exterior Flat work improvements, should be strictly controlled or avoided. Moser Development Page No. 9 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Callfomia Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOnCMMCSL CIVIL MUCTUML CO SULTB S CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by our investigation of the project area. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be verified in the field during construction. The following items shall be conducted prior /during construction by a representative of Engineering Design Group in order to verify compliance with the geotechnical and civil engineering recommendations provided herein, as applicable. 1. Review of final approved structural plans prior to the start of work for compliance with geotechnical recommendations. 2. Attendance of a pre-grade/construction meeting prior to the start of work. 3. Testing of any fill placed, including retaining wall backfill and utility trenches. 4. Observation of footing excavations prior to steel placement and removal of excavation equipment. 5. Field observation of any "field change" condition involving soils. 6. Walk through of final drainage detailing prior to final approval. The project soils engineer may at their discretion deepen footings or locally recommend additional steel reinforcement to upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during site observations. Engineering Design Group assumes no liability for structures constructed utilizing this report not meeting the above Observation and Testing protocol. Before commencement of grading the Engineering Design Group will require a separate contract for quality control observation and testing. Engineering Design Group requires a minimum of 48 hours notice to mobilize onsite for field observation and testing. MISCELLANEOUS It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. All of the above can induce movement that frequently results in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the exploratory test pits. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed structure; however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soils profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed. Therefore, no warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the investigation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Man -made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state of the art knowledge and/or legislation, are rapidly occurring. Asa result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes. Therefore, this report for the specific site, is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. Moser Development f5age No 10 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEGTEGMIC CN SMULTI CCMULTMTS It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and/or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions, be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue. Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP ceonxwuca.Cry SMMTUe consuLTWT5 Page No. 11 Job No. 084403 -1 SITE APPROXIMATE SITE VICINITY PROJECT NAME MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 084350 2121 Monliel Road, San Marcos, CA 92069 1 Phone: (760 )839 -7302 Fax: (760 )480 -7477 � ., _ � � 510 ', � • , . ,� ,.� t1 I � • 0� 5fi 1 • � ��[) TI J M � ��wti�� - -. � it �►��Ir�f� ��T SITE APPROXIMATE SITE VICINITY PROJECT NAME MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 084350 2121 Monliel Road, San Marcos, CA 92069 1 Phone: (760 )839 -7302 Fax: (760 )480 -7477 01 APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION I PROJECT NAME I MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 1 23M NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENGNITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER 084350 FIGURE ....1 \r Ns Q Q I i 6 ?� Q Q Q I - m�� E: 31 iy 0lgyrw IfYOIII, r♦ m I © � `� .2 LLfll aiM u k @ 4rl 1 I QI abi . — Oi \ �•�I I �'" � gnus' 6 W \ to v I moam Q r A\ nix \ aAM �� \` " 5K lase Eqi ` d m�L y vs 6 \4 t_ SITE '�rLll fRR , rn OS1M a uMN • RAW lA(bl]Y n0 + 01 APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION I PROJECT NAME I MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 1 23M NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENGNITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER 084350 FIGURE Tr r,, L , ■ TPNO S IJ Tp No. 1� N �a E TP1 - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PITS PROJECT NAME MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 084350 2121 Monbel Road, San Marcos, CA 92069 3 Phone: (760)839-73D2 Fax: (760)480-7477 Project Name: Maser Duplex TEST PIT LOG NO. 1 EDG Project Number: 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 4 Location: See Figure No. 3 Sheet 1 of 1 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Date(s) August 8, 2008 Total Depth: 3 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIUFILL: SW -SM Level: Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes Elev. 2.7 - 3.2 feet SANDSTONE SW -SM Excavation Hand Dug Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty Method: sands. Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0- 2.7 feet TOPSOIUFILL: SW -SM Dark brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense, slightly silty sands with roots. 2 2.7 - 3.2 feet SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: 2 I 3 4 I 5 8 7 8 Z; 0OMMOSER. WANDA- DAN. 094350.t1REPORTS. LETTERSREST PRLOG-1 pd Project Name: Moser Duplex TEST PIT LOG NO. 2 EDG Project Number: 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 5 Location: See Figure 3 Sheet 1 of 1 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Date(s) August 8. 2008 Total Depth: 3.5 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIL /FILL: SW -SM Level. Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes Elev. 3 -3.5 ft. SANDSTONE SW -SM Excavation Hand Dug Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty Method: sands. Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0.3 ft. TOPSOIL /FILL: SW -SM Dark brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense, silty sands with small roots. 2 3 -3.5 ft. SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: Z:VOMMOSER. WANDA -DAN. 0993501 \1REPORTS. LETTERSUEST PIT LOG -2.v d Project Name: Moser Duplex Total Depth. 3.5 feet Groundwater TEST PIT LOG NO. 3 EDG Project Number: 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 6 Location: See Figure 3 Sheet 1 of 1 Dark to rust brown to grey, dry to slightly moist, loose 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Date(s) August 8, 2008 Total Depth. 3.5 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIUFILL/WEATHERED SANDS' SW -SM /SC Dark to rust brown to grey, dry to slightly moist, loose Level: medium dense, silty to slightly clayey sands with small to Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes 2 Elev. SANDSTONE SW -SM Excavation Hand Dug Rust brown to grey, moist, dense, silty sands. Method: Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0 -3 ft. TOPSOIUFILL/WEATHERED SANDS' SW -SM /SC Dark to rust brown to grey, dry to slightly moist, loose medium dense, silty to slightly clayey sands with small to medium roots. 2 3 -3.5 ft. SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown to grey, moist, dense, silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: ZVOMMOSER, WANDA- DAN, 0940;0.11REPORTS, LETTERSITEST PR LOG -3 Pd APPENDIX -A- APPENDIX A REFERENCES 1. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. Landslide Hazards in the Southern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California. Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 33, 1995. 2. California Geological Survey, Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. 3. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Fault- Rupture Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 1990. 4. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Rupture Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 1990. 5. Day, Robert W. "Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering Design and Construction." 1999. McGraw Hill. 6. Engineering Design Group, Un- published In -House Data. 7. Franklin, A.G. and Chang. F.K. 1977, 'Permanent displacements of Earth embankments by Newmark sliding block analysis, Report 5, Miscellaneous Paper, S 71 -17, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vickburg, Mississippi." 8. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. 9. Ploessel, M.R. and Slossan, J.E., 1974 Repeatable High Ground Acceleration from Earthquakes: California Geololgy, Vol. 27, No. 9, P.195 -199. 10. State of California, Geologic Map of California, Map No:2, Dated 1977. 11. State of California, Fault Map of California, Map No:1, Dated 1975. 12, Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) Seismology Committee, 2006- "Macroseminar Presentation on Seismically Induced Earth Pressure ". APPENDIX -B- GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 Generallntent These specifications are presented as general procedures and recommendations for grading and earthwork to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These general earthwork and grading specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report and shall be superseded by the recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these specifications, as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading plans. 2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes, at least 24 hours in advance, so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. No grading operations should be performed without the knowledge of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor shall not assume that the geotechnical consultant is aware of all grading operations. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, recommendations in the geotechnical report, and the approved grading plans not withstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than recommended in the geotechnical report and the specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction should be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557. -1- 3.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots and all other deleterious material should be removed or properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, governing agencies and the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. In general, no more than 1 percent (by volume) of the fill material should consist of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be allowed. 3.2 Processing: The existing ground which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. 3.3 Overexcavation: Soft, dry, organic -rich, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be overexcavated down to competent ground, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. For purposes of determining quantities of materials overexcavated, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. 3.4 Moisture Conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 3.5 Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed, screened of deleterious material, and moisture - conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. -2- 3.6 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, at least 2 feet into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches should be excavated into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 should be benched or otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 3.7 Evaluation of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe -of -fill benches, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. 4.0 Fill Material 4.1 General: Material to be placed as fill should be sufficiently free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed as recommended by the geotechnical consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 4.2 Oversize: Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade, within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction, or within 15 feet horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. -3- 4.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be given to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the proposed import materials. 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 5.1 Fill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and previously evaluated to receive fill, in near - horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 5.2 Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 5.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture - conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (unless otherwise specified). Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and uniformity of compaction. 5.4 Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the fill out to the slope face would be at least 90 percent. -4- 5.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests of the moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill soils should be performed at the consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. In general, the tests should be taken at approximate intervals of 2 feet in vertical rise and /or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils. In addition, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately one test should be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and /or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. 6.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems, if recommended, should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials should not be changed or modified unless recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade depending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the survey, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains. 7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the geotechnical consultant (as necessary) during grading. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation, overexcavation, and refilling of cut areas and/or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e., stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recommended. 8.0 Quantity Determination For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated during grading and /or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. -s- MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING & DRAINAGE DETAIL NQIE THIS DETAIL REPRESENTS THE MINIMUM WALL DRAINAGE AND (NOT TO SCALE) WATERPROOFING APPLICATION TO S477SFY THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN WENT OF THE RETAINING WALL THE ARCHfTECT OR DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN AND SPECIFICATION OF THE WATERPROOFING ASSEMBLY. i0p OF WALL BLDG WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED AE © DRAIN LINE 90X MIN, RELATIVE 9 COMPAC71ON X GRADIENT 70 SUITABLE OUTLET — EXACT PIPE LOCATION TO BE HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER m DETERMINED BY SUE 1 2 O MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & C) PROPOSED SLOPE B4CKCUT PER PROTECTED WITH PR07EC77ON BOARD OSHA STANDARDS OR, PER —I I— =1 ALTERNATIVE SLOPING PLAN, OR PER (ABOVE MIRAORAIN) MASTIC NOT TO �� APPROVED SHORING PLAN 1 1= 11 — HE 1111— lill 0 BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT 8 3 O MIRAORAIN (OR EOUAL) INSTALLED I�DIiANV 8 FOAM PR07ECT)ON BOARD BELOW PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING GRADE k LN PROTEC770M BOARD 2 ®MIRAFI FILTER FABRIC INSTALLATION NOTES W/ 6- LAP RETAINING WALL 3 O 314' GRAVEL. (1 SF / FT) (GONG OR CMU) © DRAIN LINE (SCH 40 OR QUIV,) PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN 2 X GRADIENT 70 SUITABLE OUTLET — EXACT PIPE LOCATION TO BE 4 DETERMINED BY SUE CONSTRAINTS C) PROPOSED SLOPE B4CKCUT PER 5 OSHA STANDARDS OR, PER ALTERNATIVE SLOPING PLAN, OR PER 6 APPROVED SHORING PLAN 0 4x40 (45) CONCRETE CANT 0 8 FFG/W LL CONNECTION (UNDER WALL F0077NG WATERPROOFING) 8 FOAM PR07ECT)ON BOARD BELOW GRADE k LN PROTEC770M BOARD ARV GRADE PER MFR SPECIFICATION INSTALLATION NOTES MANUFACTURER'S CERTIFIED c, INSTALLERS ONLY. ° c 7 APPLICATIONS TO BE 6 CONFIRMED BY ALT LOCA7>ON MANUFACTURER$ REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS JOB NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP 2121 MONTIEL RD SAN MARCOS, CA 97069 FIGURE (760) 839 -7307 W (760) 180 -7477 SIDE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL EXISTING GROUND SURFACE F{N 19HED SLOPE FACE FINISHED CUT PAD PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE / / FROM TOP OF SLOPE TO OUTSIDE EDGE OF KEY ------------ Iviai,— Ir , 7 , COMPACTE _ -- - =_===-F = == OVERBURDEN OR = s _____ UNSUITABLE __ _ —= ' =' = =� PAO OVEREXCAVA710N DEPTH - 1 -_ _ 1 � �inl: AND RECOMPACTION MAY BE MATERIAL — 3!-?___ _ - RECOMMENDED BY THE — _ -__2E_ GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT ----- — ___ — BENCH BASED ON ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. MIN. i5' MIN. I —,COMPETENT BEDROCK OR LOWEST / MATERIAL AS EVALUATED KEY BENCH 1/ BY THE GEOTECHNICAL DEPTH (KEY) CONSULTANT NOTE: Subdrain details and key width recommendations to be provided based on exposed subsurface conditions � Y KEY DEPTH I STABILITY FILL / BUTTRESS DETAIL OUTLET PIPES -4' m NONPERFORATED PIPE, 1(i0' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY, 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY KEY WIDTH AS NOTED ON GRADING PLANS 15' MIN. e' MIN. OVERLAP 3/4'- 1 -1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL (3 lPlft. MIN.)— 4' fd NON - PERFORATED/ PIP FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)* goo,IL DRAIN TRENC SEE T- CONNECTION DETAIL S' MIN. COVER 4' PERFORATED PIPE 4' MIN. BEDDING ETAIL -BACK CUT 1:1 OR FLATTER --BENCH SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL LOWEST SUBDRAIN SHOULD BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET PERFORATED 10' MIN. PIPE �"� EACH SIDE NON- PERFORATED CAP OUTLET PIPE T- CONNECTION DETAIL *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4'- 1.1/2' GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size % Passing 1" 100 3/4" 90 -100 3/8" 40 -100 No. 4 25 -40 No. 8 18 -33 No. 30 5 -15 No. 50 0 -7 No. 200 0 -3 Sand Equivalent >75 NOTES: For buttress dimensions, see geotechnical report /plans. Actual dimensions of buttress and subdrain may be changed by the geotechnical consultant based on field conditions. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdraln pipe should be Installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be installed SUBDRAIN TYPE- Subdrain type should be Acrylon trlle Bulsdlene Styrene (A.B.S.), Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125,SOR 32.5 should be used for maximum fill depths of 35 feet. Clan 200,SDR 21 should be used for maximum fill depths of 100 feet. BENCHING CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS —EXISTING GROUND SURFACE FI SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE BELOW SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAILS -REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE �B' MIN. OVERLAP e' MIN. OVERLAP\ (MIRAFI 140H OR APPROVED I } ' / EQUIVALENT)* \ �I 3/4'- 1.1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL (9}0/ft. MIN.) e' MIN. C COYER COVER - 4' MIN. BEDDING - B' d MIN. - PERFORATED PIPE DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL DESIGN FINISH SUBDRAIN GRADE ` - -- _ _- TRENCH 1 SEE ABOVE 15 MIN �---- PERFORATED 15' MIN. B' 0 MIN. PIPE NONPERFORATED t)' 0 MIN. 3/4'- 1-1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL (eft3 /ft. MIN.) *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF 3W-1 -1/2' GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size % Passing 1" 100 3/4" 90 -100 3/8" 40 -100 No. 4 25 -40 No. 8 18 -33 No. 30 5 -15 No. 50 O-7 No. 200 0 -3 Sand Equivalent >75 Subdrain should be constructed only on competent material as evaluated by the gsolechnidal consultant. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrain pipe should be Installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be Installed. SUBDRAIN TYPE - Subdrain type should be Acrylonitrlla Butadiene Styrene (A.B.S.), Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125,SOR 32.S should be used for maximum fill depth& of 35 feet. Class 200,SDR 21 should be used for maximum fill depths Of 100 fast. KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS FILL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL EXISTING GROUND SURFACE 2' MIN KEY DEPTH FILL - OVER -CUT SLOPE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE •15' MIN LOWEST BENCH (KEY) BENCH REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BENCH / MIN.-+ _LREMOVE UNSUITABLE 2 LOWEST MIN. BENCH MATERIAL KEY (KEY) DEPTH CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE i CUT - OVER -FILL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL �W MIN. 2' MINI LOWEST KEY DEPTH BENCH (KEY) CUT SLOPE I / (TO BE EXCAVATED / PRIOR TO FILL s PLACEMENT) ENCH :REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL NOTE: Back drain may be recommended by the 9eotechnical consultant based on actual field conditions encountered. Bench dimension recommendations may also be altered based on field conditions encountered. 4 , ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL SLOPE FACE PINLSH GRADE MAX. OVERSIZE WINDROW � __ _ t3RANULAA SOIL (S.EL JO) TO 8E _ _ DENSIFIED IN PLACE BY FLOOOINO DETAIL TYPICAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW 1) Rock with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches should not be used within 10 feet vertically of finish grade (or 2 feet below depth of lowest utility whichever is greater), and 15 feet horizontally of slope faces. 2) Rocks with maximum dimensions greater than 4 feet should not be utilized in fills. 3) Rock placement, flooding of granular soil, and fill placement should be observed by the geotechnical consultant. 4) Maximum size and spacing of windrows should be in accordance with the above details Width of windrow should not exceed 4 feet. Windrows should be staggered vertically (as depicted). 5) Rock should be placed in excavated trenches. Granular soil (S.E. greater than or equal to 30) should be flooded in the windrow to completely fill voids around and beneath rocks. I Y APPENDIX -C- J ' Y LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES Direct Shear Test Direct shear tests are performed on remolded and/or relatively undisturbed samples which are soaked for a minimum of 24 hours prior to testing. After transferring the sample to the shearbox, and reloading, pore pressures are allowed to dissipated for a period of approximately 1 hour prior to application of shearing force. The samples are sheared in a motor - driven, strain controlled, direct -shear testing apparatus. After a travel of approximately 1/4 inch, the motor is stopped and the sample is allowed to "relax" for approximately 15 minutes. Where applicable, the "relaxed" and "peak" shear values are recorded. It is anticipated that, in a majority of samples tested, the 15 minutes relaxing of the sample is sufficient to allow dissipation of pore pressures set up due to application of the shearing force. The relaxed values are therefore judged to be good estimations of effective strength parameters. Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of representative samples is evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 29 -2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation. The prepared 1 -inch thick by 4 -inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water for 24 hours or until volumetric equilibrium is reached. Classification Tests: Typical materials were subjected to mechanical grain -size analysis by wet sieving from U.S. Standard brass screens (ASTM D422 -65). Hydrometer analyses were performed where appreciable quantities of fines were encountered. The data was evaluated in determining the classification of the materials. The grain -size distribution curves are presented in the test data and the Unified Soil Classification is presented in both the test data and the boring logs. V APPENDIX -D. q+ • MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING & DRAINAGE DETAIL WQ THIS DETAIL REPRESENTS THE MINIMUM WALL DRAINAGE AND (NOT TO SCALE) WATERPROOFING APPLICATION TO SATISFY THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT OF THE RETAINING WALL THE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN ANO SPECIFICATION OF THE WATERPROOFING ASSEMBLY. TOP OF WALL BLDG WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED LAACKRLL 90x MIN. RELATIVE 9 COMPACTION 1 O HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER e MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WTIH PROTECTION BOARD If=1 I (ABOVE MIRADRAIN) MASTIC NOT TO BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT I —Ilk —I ® MIRADRAIN (OR EQUAL) INSTALLED K END MIRADRAIN PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING 2 ®AmAFI FILTER FABRIC W /6. LAP RETAINING WALL 3 O 314' GRAVEL (1 SF / FT) (GONG OR CMU) © PERFORATED LINE (SCH 40 OR Q UIV..)ORNN PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN 2 X GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET - EXACT PIPE LOCATION TO BE 4 DETERMINED BY SITE CONSTRAINTS O PROPOSED SLOPE BACKCUF PER 5 OSHA STANDARDS OR, PER ALTERNATIVE SLOPING PLAN, OR PER APPROVED SHORING PLAN 6 ® 4'x4' (45) CONCRETE CANT 0 FTG/WALL CONNECTION (UNDER WALL FOOTING WATERPROOFING) 8 OFOAM PROTECTION BOARD BELOW GRADE & UV PROTECTION BOARD ABV GRADE PER MFR SPECIFICATION a ° a ld57ALLAIlON NOTES MANUFACTURER'S CERTIFIED q INSTALLERS ONLY. c 7 APPLICATIONS TO BE \ CONFIRMED ALT LOCATION MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS JOB NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP 2121 UDNFFE( RD SW WRCOS. G 92069 (760) 639 -7302 fAX (760) 460 -7477 FIGURE ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP Y 2121 Montiel Road, San Marcos, California 92069 --(760F839--7662 • Fax. (750) A9b -7477 • www,desl ngroupea.ca Date: January 11, 2010 SEP 5 2010 To: Wanda J. Moser ES 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA 92026 Re: Proposed New Duplex to be Located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Subject: Updated Geotechnical Report Ref: " Geotechnical Limited GeotechnicalInvestigation and Recommendations, Proposed New Duplex, located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue in the City of Encinitas, California." Prepared by Engineering Design Group, dated August 20, 2008. In accordance with the request of the City of Encinitas we have provided this updated report. Please note as a part of this update no additional subsurface investigation was conducted. In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. We understand the site topography has not changed from that described in our original report, referenced above. Based upon our review of the grading plan we understand the proposed improvements will include the following: 1. Demolition of the existing residence and detached garage. 2. Construction of a new residential duplex founded on slab on grade floors with associated landscape improvements, including site retaining walls. The following consists of our current geotechnical recommendations for the above referenced project. In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a gectechnical standpoint provided that the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. Unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the upper 3 to 3 1/2 feet at the locations investigated are not suitable for the support of settlement sensitive improvements in its present state. Based upon our review of the preliminary grading plan the proposed site development will consist of approximately 3 feel of cut in the front portion of the property and 3 feet of fill along the rear portion of the property. We anticipate a removal and recompaction of unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site, anticipated upper 3 to 4 feet below existing adjacent grade. Removals shall be conducted as described in the Earthwork section below. The following recommendations should be considered as minimum design parameters, and shall be incorporated within the project plans and utilized during construction, as applicable. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GECTrC HMUr COIL. STFUbdnA CG SU11 M5 Page No. 1 Job No 084403 -1 EARTHWORK Site grading is anticipated to include the removal and recompaction of unsuitable soil profiles and undercutting of the building pad to a depth of at least one foot below deepest footing. 1. Site Preparation Prior to any grading areas of proposed improvement should be Geared of surface and subsurface debris (including organic topsoil). Removed debris should be properly disposed of off -site prior to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing structures, or other improvements which extend below the undercut depths noted, should be filled and compacted using on -site material or a non - expansive import material. 2. Removals Fill /unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site in our test pit excavations, upper approximately 3 to 4 feet, are not suitable for the structural support of buildings or improvements in their present state. In general grading should consist of the removal of unsuitable soil to competent subgrade materials, scarification of subgrade to a depth of 12 inches, and the re- compaction of fill materials to 90 percent minimum relafive compaction. Excavated fill materials are suitable for re -use as fill material during grading, provided they are cleaned of debris and oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter (oversized material is not anticipated to be of significant concern) and are free of contamination. 3. Transitions Any structural sensitive improvements should be constructed on a uniform building pad. The entire building pad should be undercut a minimum depth below adjacent grade of 3 feet, or to a minimum of 12 inches below deepest footing. We anticipate a minimum of 2.5 feet below adjacent grade. Based upon our test pit excavations we anticipate minium removals of 3 feet along the western portion of the lot and 4 to 4.5 feet at the eastern portion of the lot. We anticipate the new residence will be founded on footings bearing on recompacted fill material. Removals and undercuts should extend a minimum of 5 feet (or to a distance at least equal to depth of fill removals, whichever is greater) beyond the footprint (including patio columns, etc.) of the proposed structures and settlement sensitive improvements. Where this condition cannot be met it should be reviewed by the Engineering Design Group on a case by case basis. Removal depths should be visually verified by a representative of our firm prior to the placement of fill. A subgrade drain may be installed at building undercuts, as determined in the field at the time of grading. Undercut subgrade should be sloped at a minimum of 1 % to the new drain, and the drain should be sloped at a minimum 1 %to an acceptable daylight outlet. Refer to Canyon Subdrain Details in Appendix B of this report. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Califomia ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEGTECNNGL.GNIL. MUCTUM GGNSULT/ S Page No. 2 Job No 084403 -1 4. Fills All fill and backfill should be brought to approximately +2% of optimum moisture content, and re- compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557 -91). Surficial, loose or soft soils exposed or encountered during grading (such as any undocumented or loose fill materials) should be removed to competent material. Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. If the import of soil is planned, soils should be non - expansive (EI <30) and free of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. Where new foundations extend across a retaining wall backfill wedge footings shall be deepened through fill to competent sandstone. 5. Slopes Permanent cut slopes may be cut to a face ratio of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Permanent fill slopes shall be placed at a maximum 2:1 slope face ratio. All temporary cut slopes shall be excavated in accordance with OSHA requirements. Subsequent to grading planting or other acceptable cover should be provided to increase the stability of slopes, especially during the rainy season (October thru April). FOUNDATIONS We anticipate that the proposed foundation system for proposed house will utilize slab on grade floor system and continuous shallow perimeter foundations. The following design parameters maybe utilized for new footings extended to recompacted fill. Footings bearing in competent materials may be designed utilizing maximum allowable soils pressure of 2,000 psf. Seismic Design Parameters: Seismic Design Parameters: Site Class D Sos (g) 1.013 So, (g) 0.590 Bearing values may be increased by 33% when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 3. The following parameters should be used as a minimum, for designing fooling width and depth below lowest adjacent grade: Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEORCNNCG CVL SI XnJ"L LO^KUL7A 5 Page No.3 Job No OB4403 -1 No. of Floors Supported Minimum Footing Width Minimum Footing Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Grad 1 15 inches 18 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches 24 inches Footings may be deeper in the field to extend to competent sandstone profiles. This condition should also be noted on project structural plans. 4. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two #4 bars at the bottom (3 inches above the ground). For footings over 30 inches in depth, additional reinforcement, and possibly a stemwall system will be necessary. This detail should be reviewed on a case by case basis by our office prior to construction. 5. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and be reinforced with a minimum of #4 bars at 12 inches o.c. in each direction (3 inches above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. 6. For footings adjacent to slopes, a minimum 12 fool horizontal setback in material or properly compacted fill should be mainlained. A setback measurement should betaken at the horizontal distance from the bottom of the footing to slope daylight. Where this condition can not be met it should be brought to the attention of the Engineering Design Group for review. 7. All excavations should be performed in general accordance with the contents of this report, applicable codes, OSHA requirements and applicable city and /or county standards. 8. All foundation subgrade soils and footings shall be pre- moistened a minimum of 18 inches in depth prior to the pouring of concrete. CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE Concrete slabs on grade should use the following as the minimum design parameters: Concrete slabs on grade of the building should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches (5.5 inches at garage and driveway locations) and should be reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches o.c. placed at the midpoint of the slab. All concrete shall be poured per the following: Slump: Between 3 and 4 inches maximum Aggregate Size: 314 - 1 inch Air Content: 5 to 8 percent Non - Moisture Sensitive Areas: Compressive Strength = 2500 psi minimum. Moisture Sensitive Areas: Water to cement Ratio - 0.45 maximum Compressive Strength = 4,000 psi minimum (No special inspection required for water to cement ratio purposes, unless otherwise specified by the structural engineer) Moisture retarding additive in concrete at concrete slab on grade floors and moisture sensitive areas. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECIMICAL. CWC S UCTRAL CMSULTMT5 Page No. 4 Job No. 084403 -1 In moisture sensitive areas (i.e. interior living space where slab vapor emission is a concern), the slab concrete should have a minimum water to cement ratio of 0.45, generally resulting in a compressive strength of 4,000 psi (non - special inspected). This recommendation is intended to achieve a low permeability concrete. 3. All required fills used to support slabs, should be placed in accordance with the grading section of this report and the attached Appendix B, and compacted to 90 percent Modified Proctor Density, ASTM D -1557. 4. For all interior slabs, a uniform layer of 4 inches of washed, clean sand (Sand Equivalent> 50, decomposed granite is generally not acceptable) is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a visqueen layer (15 mil) should be placed mid - height in the sand bed to act as a vapor retarder. The visqueen layer should lap a minimum of 6 inches, sealed along all laps per manufacturers recommendations, and extend down the interior edge of the footing excavation a minimum of 12 inches. 5. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. 6. All subgrade soils to receive concrete flatwork are to be pre- soaked to 2 percent over optimum moisture content to a depth of 18 inches. 7. Brittle floor finishes placed directly on slab on grade floors may crack if concrete is not adequately cured prior to installing the finish or if there is minor slab movement. To minimize potential damage to movement sensitive flooring, we recommend the use of slip sheeting techniques (linoleum type) which allows forfoundation and slab movement without transmitting this movement to the floor finishes. 8. Exterior concrete flatwork and driveway slabs, due to the nature of concrete hydration and minor subgrade soil movement, are subject to normal minor concrete cracking. To minimize expected concrete cracking, the following may be implemented: • Concrete slump should not exceed 4 inches. • Concrete should be poured during "cool' (40 - 65 degrees) weather if possible. If concrete is poured in hotter weather, a set retarding additive should be included in the mix, and the slump kept to a minimum. • Concrete subgrade should be pre- soaked prior to the pouring of concrete. The level of pre- soaking should be a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches. • Concrete maybe poured with a 10 inch deep thickened edge. Flatwork adjacent to top of a slope should be constructed with a outside footing to attain a minimum of 7 feet distance to daylight. • Concrete should be constructed with tooled joints or sawcuts (1 inch deep) creating concrete sections no larger than 225 square feet. For sidewalks, the maximum run between joints should not exceed 5 feet. For rectangular shapes of concrete, the ratio Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOVECMIC .OwL. SMMMML CON ULTMITS Page No. 5 Job No. 084403 -1 of length to width should generally not exceed 0.6 (i.e., 5 ft. long by 3 ft. wide). Joints should be cut at expected points of concrete shrinkage (such as male comers), with diagonal reinforcement placed in accordance with industry standards. Drainage adjacent to concrete flatwork should direct water away from the improvement. Concrete subgrade should be sloped and directed to the collective drainage system, such that water is not trapped below the flatwork. The recommendations set forth herein are intended to reduce cosmetic nuisance cracking. The project concrete contractor is ultimately responsible for concrete quality and performance, and should pursue a cost - benefit analysis of these recommendations, and other options available in the industry, prior to the pouring of concrete. RETAINING WALLS Site retaining walls are anticipated at the front walkways. These retaining walls shall be founded on a uniform building pad. In consideration of the stepped condition of the front slope and the proposed retaining wall configuration, at the time of site grading it can be determined in the field if the retaining wall system shall be deepened to cut sandstone, or undercut. Retaining walls up to 6 feel may be designed and constructed In accordance with the following recommendations and minimum design parameters: Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report, and should maintain minimum footing depths outlined in 'Foundation" section of this report. 2. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material with low potential for expansion (E.I. X50) will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. Based upon our field investigation onsite soil may be utilized as retaining wall backfill, to be confirmed in the field at the time of site grading. 3. For sloping backfill, the following parameters may be utilized: Backliill Sloping Condition 2:1 Slope 1.5:1 Slope Active Fluid Pressure 50 pcf 65 pcf Any other surcharge loadings shall be analyzed in addition to the above values. 4. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed for an at rest soil pressure of 65 psf. 5. Retaining walls shall be designed for lateral forces due to earthquake, where required by code, utilizing the following design parameters. The peak ground acceleration at the subject site is estimated using California Geological Survey Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page, with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years. For the subject site the peak ground motion is estimated to be 0.302 g. For design purposes, peak acceleration may Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Calffomia ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP O OMCNN GL C M, STNNLiU"L CONSM7MTS Page No. 6 Job No. 084403 -1 be reduced by 0.5 (Reference No. 3), to obtain a design horizontal ground acceleration value, which for this site is equal to 0.1528 (ka). General engineering practice recognizes the Mononobe -Okabe /Seed - Whitman equation for the calculation of additional lateral earth pressure. The resultant seismic load should be applied as an inverted triangular distribution from the bottom to top of wall. The resultant force should be applied at a distance of 0.6 times the height (H) of the wall above the base. For yielding walls (designed utilizing active pressure coefficient), which are not restrained, the seismic load may be determined as follows Yielding Walls: PIE= (3/8) k, (gamma) H2 Where : kH 0.152 g ; gamma =unit weight of soil For restrained walls (designed utilizing at rest pressure coefficient) which are restrained from movement, the seismic load may be determined as follows Non- Yieldinq Walls: PIE= k„ (gamma) H' Where : k„0.152 g ; gamma =unit weight of soil Retaining wall designs for sites with a hydrostatic pressure influence (i.e groundwater within depth of retaining wall or waterfront conditions) will require special design considerations beyond the scope of this letter. 6. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf. This value assumes that the soil being utilized to resist passive pressures, extends horizontally 2.5 times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than 2.5 times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available horizontal length. 7. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive earth pressures above. B. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. 9. All walls shall be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards contained in the "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail ", Appendix D. The waterproofing elements shown on our details are minimums, and are intended to be supplemented by the waterproofing consultant and /or architect. The recommendations should be reviewed in consideration of proposed finishes and usage, especially at basement levels, performance expectations and budget. If deemed necessary by the project owner, based on the above analysis, and waterproofing systems can be upgraded to include slab under drains and enhanced waterproofing elements. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTEC� Civil. MLICVl CMSLLT/ Page No. 7 Job No. 084403 -1 10. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section of this report. Backfill shall consist of soil with a very low expansion potential, granular, free draining material. 11. At moisture sensitive locations, i.e. basement walls /building retaining walls, cast -in -place concrete retaining walls should be considered in lieu of masonry retaining walls for moisture intrusion purposes. 12. Retaining wall backfill zone shall be detailed to reduce moisture intrusion. Detailing of the retaining wall shall include both french drain at the base of the stem to collect subsurface water. SURFACE DRAINAGE Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative and will play a critical role on the future performance of the dwelling and improvements. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to foundation walls, or tops of slopes. The ground surface surrounding proposed improvements should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the structure in all directions, with a minimum slope of 2% for a horizontal distance of 7 feet (where possible). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Area drains and retaining wall backdrains shall not be tied to the same drainage system. Roof gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the new and existing structures and tightlined to the area drain system. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Area drains should be kept free of debris to allow for proper drainage. Over watering can adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions. Irrigation should be limited to only the amount necessary to sustain plant life. Low flow irrigation devices as well as automatic rain shut -off devices should be installed to reduce over watering. Irrigation practices and maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems are an important component to the performance of onsite improvements. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of all drainage systems should be inspected. Problems such as gullying or ponding should be corrected as soon as possible. Any leakage from sources such as water lines should also be repaired as soon as possible. In addition, irrigation of planter areas, lawns, or other vegetation, located adjacent to the foundation or exterior flat work improvements, should be strictly controlled or avoided. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by our investigation of the project area. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be verified in the field during construction. The following items shall be conducted prior /during construction by a representative of Engineering Design Group in order to verify compliance with the geotechnical and civil engineering recommendations provided herein, as applicable. Moser Development Page No. 8 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 0844031 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP cror[cMII cmr. s Kniwa ca+w«urrs 1. Review of final approved structural plans prior to the start of work for compliance with geotechnical recommendations. 2. Attendance of a pre - grade /construction meeting prior to the start of work. 3. Testing of any fill placed, including retaining wall backfill and utility trenches. 4. Observation of footing excavations prior to steel placement and removal of excavation equipment. 5. Field observation of any "field change" condition involving soils. 6. Walk through of final drainage detailing prior to final approval. The project soils engineer may at their discretion deepen footings or locally recommend additional steel reinforcement to upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during site observations. Engineering Design Group assumes no liability for structures constructed utilizing this report not meeting the above Observation and Testing protocol. Before commencement of grading the Engineering Design Group will require a separate contract for quality control observation and testing. Engineering Design Group requires a minimum of 48 hours notice to mobilize onsile for field observation and testing. MISCELLANEOUS It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. All of the above can induce movement that frequently results in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the exploratory test pits. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed structure; however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soils profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed. Therefore, no warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the investigation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Man -made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state of the art knowledge and /or legislation, are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes. Therefore, this report for the specific site, is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information in this report be Moser Development Page No. 9 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP aOT CHWAL Mt.s UCT CMSULTI incorporated into the plans and /or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions, be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, ENGINEERING -DESK OUP Erilln E`Ais' f r California RCE k65122 OQ�E No. "05122 Ep. 0/30/17 Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GWMCI M. CML STRUCTURAL CWSMTAM Page No. 10 Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT City Of Capitol Improvement Projects District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit NO. /o 30 % /A4 e ew — 04 f tqpyt C e� Name of Project 7,3S p �.r /�c Name of Developers A-1 A�t, t Age t� 4crt ' n Site Location !address ...number ...streetname ...suffix! goU !bldg) I have inspected the grading at the subject site and have v ified certification of the pad by the Engineer of Work, I ej • dat*d /t? — /O and certification of soil compaction by the Soil Engineer, dated — f —�j; I am hereby satisfied that the rough grading as b en ca ple a in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, Chapter 23.24 of the Municipal Code, and any other applicable engineering standards and specific project requirements. Based on my observation and the certifications, I take no exception to the issuance of a 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 Permjt(s) and legal occupancy, I need to be further advised so that I can verify that final grading fi.e., finished precise grading, planting and irrigatio7 has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Q, ala- (Signature of Engineering Inspector) (Signature of Senior Civif Engineer, only if appropiate) 1 ate) 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 /field3.doc 1 TEL 760-6633 -2600 I FAX 760 -633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue. Encinitas, (:alifornia 92024 -3633 Too 760633 -2700 0 recycled paper City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Meme Encinitas, Califamia 920243633 Tel 760 - 633 -2600 • Fax 760 -943 -2226 TDD 760 -633 -2700 - xN� .ci.cncinitas.ca.us Field Clearance to Allow Occupancy TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Building Permit No. n � -- 0! � � I Name of Project 111105uz erf /J(yt C- C' Name of Developer 42& du G &a S Z3 z Fire Building Planning Engineering I have inspected the site at 5 F JGWLw��E /Acte r,, _ address...number street name suffix and have determined that finish (precise) grading (to—t no%J— (bldg. no.) and any other related site improvements are substantially complete and that occupancy is merited. Signature of Engineering Inspector Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only B appropriate Reference: Engineering Permit No. 10 3 0 9 7 Date Date C�. 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 held 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. ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP IY Y:OY�Y.4[MPKt (LY.IFf n;l 2121 MgnYei Road San Ma Date: November 1. 2010 92069•(760) To: Wanda Moser 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA. 92026 Re: New Residence to be Located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue. Encinitas, CA Subject: Compaction Report INTRODUCTION J In accordance with your request and authorization we have provided limited earthwork observation and compaction testing services during the rough grading at the above referenced site. The results of our quality control and compaction testing operations are summarized below. As we understand the proposed improvements onsite include a new residential duplex. GRADING OPERATIONS For the purposes of this report the proposed residence is assumed to face east. The existing pad consisted of a single family house. The limits of the building pad, as determined by the project contractor, were removed and recompacted to within 5 feel of the proposed building pad area. The building pad area was undercut to a depth of 3 feet to competent sandstone material. The undercut areas were ripped and moisture conditioned. In the area of the front site retaining walls, wall subgrade was excavated down to competent sandstone material. Onsite soils was placed and recompacted to approximate pad elevation. Rough grading at the subject site was conducted during October 2010. Onsite soil was utilized as graded fill. Prior to recompaction soils were cleaned of vegetation and other debris and moisture conditioned. Onsite soil consisted of slightly silty sands. Based upon our visual observation onsite soils possess potential for expansion in the low range. Soil was moisture conditioned with a fire hose and placed utilizing a D4 dozer. During the undercut process an abandoned vertical seepage and septic tank were found. The septic tank was removed and the seepage pit was filled with a cement slurry and capped with a 7 ft. x 7 ft. x 12 inch thick concrete cap. The cap was held approximately 3 feet below anticipated bottom of footing. The location of the abandon pit is located on Figure 3. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS The contractor should pre -soak the foundations and slab subgrade to 2% over optimum to a depth of 18 inches below adjacent grade prior to the placement of capillary break and visqueen. Project No. 084350 -1 Z Q0081MOSER. WANDA- DAN, 0843501\REPORTS. LETTERSICOMPACTION REPORT.wpd FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING Limited field density tests were performed in accordance with D2922 (Nuclear Gauge Method). Our test results indicate that, in the locations tested, soils have been compacted to at least 90% relative compaction, as determined by ASTM D1557, (Procedure A). The reported test results are representative of the soil conditions at the locations tested. Our observation and field density testing methods are in accordance with normally accepted procedures. The accuracy of the relative compaction values are subject to the precision limitations of the ASTM test methods. The accuracy of the maximum dry density determination (ASTM D1557) is discussed in the 2003 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Volume 04.08, entitled, Soil and Rock: Building Stones. Variations of relative compaction values should be expected, laterally and vertically, from actual test locations. TESTING SUMMARY In general, it is our opinion, based on the placement procedure and the test data collected, the fill soils tested, at the locations tested, were compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557- 91, Procedure A). If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with the necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Sincerely, ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP � •FOrttt% • I � d rw, 63122 EKp 09/30/2011 Erin Rist California RCE# 65122 Attachments: 1) Table 1 & 2: "Laboratory and Field Test Results" 2) Figure 1: `Approximate Location of Compaction Tests" Project No. 084350 -1 Z UOMMOSER. WANDA- DAN, 084350- 11REPORTS. LETTERS=MPACTION REPORT wpd LABORATORY AND FIELD TEST RESULTS TABLE NO 1 Laboratory Test Results SOIL SOIL TYPE MAXIMUM DENSITY OPTIMUM U.S.C.S. TYPE RELATIVE COMPACTION (°/a) (PCF) MOISTURE CLASSIFICATION ( #) 123.6 93 (%) 2 1 ONSITE- brown slightly 129 9% SW -SM 95% silty sands 10 -26 -10 F.G. 1 TABLE NO. 2 Field Test Results TEST NO. DATE ELEVATION (ft.) SOIL TYPE ( #) DRY DENSITY (PCF) FIELD MOISTURE (%) RELATIVE COMPACTION (°/a) 1 10 -26 -10 -1 1 123.6 93 96% 2 10 -26 -10 F.G. 1 122.7 10.4 95% 3 10 -26 -10 F.G. 1 122.4 9.3 95% NEwc Nit c- A.9 Au FY APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF COMPACTION TESTS (NOT TO SCALE) PROJECT NAME MOSER RESIDENCE PROJECT ADDRESS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE EDG PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 084350 -1 2121 Montiel Road. San Marcos, CA 92069 1 Phone: (760)839-7302 Fax: (760)480-7477 October 28, 2010 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS 573 Second Street pp �p initas, CA 92024 U V (760) 230 -6025 (760) 230 -6026 �' ` t10V 1 2010 CLS #768CS RE: Pad Certification for Grading Permit No. 10309 -G 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, CA To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for the above referenced property. 1 hereby state that the rough grading for the following pads are in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards. 23.24.3 10 (B). The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified and shown on the approved grading plan. An additional 8 '/2" (0.71') of base and concrete slab will be added to the existing pad for the proposed house. Plan pad elevations are finished floor (given on plan) minus the 0.71' of base and concrete. If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, ..x Ie.*- If/l/10 Steven R. Jones, R.C.E. 65!1_)4 Date COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS, INC. Finished Floor Pad elevation Pad Elevation Elevation Per Per Per Grading Plan Grading Plan Field Measurement House Pad 1 76.25' 75.54 +/ -75.6' House Pad 2 74.50' 73.79' +/ -73.8' Garage Pad 73.50' 72.79' +/ -72.7' If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, ..x Ie.*- If/l/10 Steven R. Jones, R.C.E. 65!1_)4 Date COASTAL LAND SOLUTIONS, INC. ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP mmmnx srn s sn:Yrvu: swum: I @4wltllLL [Cwl'!4!t�:n;(R'Y _ 2121 Montlel Roatl, San Marcos, California 92069 • (760) 8397302 • Fax: (760) 480 -7477 • www.designgroupca.com 1 U E `'F° 15 2010 LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS J PROPOSED NEW DUPLEX q LOCATED AT 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG Project No. 084350.1 August 20, 2008 PREPARED FOR: Wanda J. Moser 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA 92026 ENGINEERING MDESIGN GROUP �fOAMiY fM 1 WJCM4 [[K:'.lM; OA: pY�Y i (pNiapq:p:NT:v 2121 Montiel Road. San Marcos. California 92069 • (760) 639 -7302 • Fax: (760) 480 -7477 ' www.designgroupca.com Date: August 20, 2008 To: Wanda J. Moser 1008 Deodar Road Escondido, CA 92026 Re: Proposed New Duplex to be Located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas. California Subject: Geotechnical Investigation and Report In accordance with your request and our Work Authorization and Agreement dated April 4, 2008, we have performed a limited subsurface investigation of the subject site for the proposed residential development. The findings of the investigation, earthwork recommendations and foundation design parameters are presented in this report. In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. If you have any questions regarding the following report please do not hesitate to contact our office Sincerely, ENGINEERING DE ay , ' Erin E. Rist California RCE #65122 No. 65122 1 Exp.9/30/200, /- IN. /. OF CONTENTS Page SCOPE........................................ ............................... 1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................ ............................... 1 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................ ............................... 1 SUBSOIL CONDITIONS ........................... ............................... 1 GROUND WATER ................................. ............................... 2 LIQUEFACTION .................................. ............................... 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........... ............................... 3 GENERAL................................. ............................... 3 EARTHWORK.............................. ............................... 3 FOUNDATIONS ............................ ............................... 4 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE ............... ............................... 6 RETAINING WALLS ......................... ............................... 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE ....................... ............................... 9 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING ...... ............................... 10 MISCELLANEOUS ............................... ............................... 10 FIGURES Site Vicinity Map ......................... ............................... Figure No. 1 Site Location Map ........................ ............................... Figure No.2 Approximate Location of Test Pits ........... ............................... Figure No. 3 Test Pit Logs ........................ ............................... Test Pit Nos. 1-3 APPENDICES References .............................. ............................... Appendix A General Earthwork and Grading Specifications ............................... Appendix B Testing Procedures ....................... ............................... Appendix C Retaining Wall Drainage Detail .............. ............................... Appendix D SCOPE This report gives the results of our limited geotechnical investigation for the property located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue in the City of Encinitas, California- (See Figure No. 1, "Site Vicinity Map ", and Figure No. 2, "Site Location Map "). The scope of our work, conducted to date, has included a visual reconnaissance of the property and surrounding areas, a limited subsurface investigation of the property in the area of proposed improvements, field analysis, soil testing and preparation of this report presenting our conclusions and recommendations. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property appears to be a rectangular shaped lot located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue in the City of Encinitas, Califomia. The site is bordered to the north and south by similarly developed residential properties, to the west by an alley and to the east by Newcastle Avenue. The general topography of the site area consists of moderately sloping foothill and hillside terrain. The topography of the site itself generally slopes gently descending from east to west. At the time of this report the site is developed with an existing single story residence. Based upon our conversations with the project architect and review of the preliminary site plan we understand that the proposed improvements will include the following: 1. Demolition of the existing residence and detached garage. 2. Construction of a new residential duplex founded on slab on grade floors. FIELD INVESTIGATION Our field investigation of the property consisted of a site reconnaissance, site field measurements, observation of existing conditions on -site and on adjacent sites, and a limited subsurface investigation of soil conditions - Our subsurface investigation consisted of visual observation of 3 test pits in the general areas of proposed construction, logging of soil types encountered, and sampling of soils for laboratory testing. The locations of our test pits are given in Figure No. 3, "Approximate Location of Test Pits ". SUBSOIL CONDITIONS Materials consisting of topsoil and fill soil underlain by weathered and competent sandstone were encountered during our subsurface investigation of the site. Soil types are described as follows: Topsoil /Fill Topsoillfill soils consist of dark brown to brown, dryto slightly moist, medium dense slightly silty to silty sands with roots in the upper 3 feet. Toposilffill and weathered sandy materials found in the upper 3 feet below adjacent grade of the area of improvement are not suitable for the support of structures or settlement sensitive improvements In their present state. Topsoil and fill soil onsite generally classify as SW -SM according to the Unified Classification System, and based on visual observation generally possess potentials for expansion in the low range. Moser Development Page No, 1 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No, 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP G OU4 NKC .CNIL. ST UCTV LL CONSULTAWS Sandstone Sandstone was found to underlie fill onsite. Sandstone materials consisted of rust brown, moist to very moist, dense, slightly silty to silty sandstone. Sandstone materials are considered suitable for the support of overlying fill soils, structures and structural improvements, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Sandstone classify as SW -SM according to the Unified Classification System, and based on visual observation and our experience possess potentials for expansion in the low range. For detailed logs of soil types encountered in test pit excavations, as well as a depiction of observed locations, please see Figure No. 3, "Approximate Location of Test Pits" and Test Pit Logs Nos. 1 -3. GROUND WATER Ground water was not encountered during our subsurface investigation of the site. Groundwater is not anticipated to be a significant concern to the project provided the recommendations of this report are followed. However, in our experience groundwater conditions can develop where no such condition previously existed. Proper surface drainage and irrigation practices will play a significant role in the future performance of the project. Please note in the "Concrete Slab on Grade" section of this report for specific recommendations regarding water to cement ratio for moisture sensitive areas should be adhered. The project architect and /or waterproofing consultant shall specifically address waterproofing details. LIQUEFACTION It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults in the Southern Califomia region. However, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, granular soils underlain by a near - surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Because of the dense nature of the soil materials underlying the site and the lack of near surface water, the potential for liquefaction or seismically- induced dynamic settlement at the site Is considered low. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and current design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. Moser Development Page No. 2 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GE0MGHNICAL.CIV4. S* UM WNSaTMTS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In general it is our opinion that the proposed construction, as described herein, is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided that the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. Unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the upper 3 to 3 1/2 feet at the locations investigated are not suitable for the support of settlement sensitive improvements in its present stale. Based upon our conversation with the project architect and owners we understand the proposed site development will consist of approximately 3 feet of cut in the front portion of the property and 3 feet of fill along the rear portion of the property. We anticipate a removal and recompaclion of unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site, anticipated upper 3 to 4 feet below existing adjacent grade. Removals shall be conducted as described in the Earthwork section below. The following recommendations should be considered as minimum design parameters, and shall be incorporated within the project plans and utilized during construction, as applicable. EARTHWORK Site grading is anticipated to include the removal and recompaction of unsuitable soil profiles and undercutting of the building pad to a depth of at least one foot below deepest footing. 1. Site Preparation Prior to any grading areas of proposed improvement should be cleared of surface and subsurface debris (including organic topsoil). Removed debris should be properly disposed of off -site prior to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing structures, or other improvements which extend below the undercut depths noted, should be filled and compacted using on -site material or a non - expansive import material. 2. Removals Fill /unsuitable soil profiles found to mantle the site in our test pit excavations, upper approximately 3 to 4 feet, are not suitable for the structural support of buildings or improvements in their present state. In general grading should consist of the removal of unsuitable soil to competent subgrade materials, scarification of subgrade to a depth of 12 inches, and the re- compaction of fill materials to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Excavated fill materials are suitable for re -use as fill material during grading, provided they are cleaned of debris and oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter (oversized material is not anticipated to be of significant concern) and are free of contamination. 3. Transitions Any structural sensitive improvements should be constructed on a uniform building pad. The Moser Development Page No 3 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTEONNK& GNIL. STNNCMR CCN LTU S entire building pad should be undercut a minimum depth below adjacent grade of 3 feel, or to a minimum of 12 inches below deepest footing. We anticipate a minimum of 2.5 feet below adjacent grade. Based upon our test pit excavations we anticipate minium removals of 3 feet along the western portion of the lot and 4 to 4.5 feet at the eastern portion of the lot. We anticipate the new residence will be founded on footings bearing on recompacted fill material. Removals and undercuts should extend a minimum of 5 feet (or to a distance at least equal to depth of fill removals, whichever is greater) beyond the footprint (including patio columns, etc.) of the proposed structures and settlement sensitive improvements. Where this condition cannot be met it should be reviewed by the Engineering Design Group on a case by case basis. Removal depths should be visually verified by a representative of our firm prior to the placement of fill. A subgrade drain may be installed at building undercuts, as determined in the field at the time of grading. Undercut subgrade should be sloped at a minimum of 1 % to the new drain, and the drain should be sloped at a minimum 1% to an acceptable daylight outlet. Refer to Canyon Subdrain Details in Appendix B of this report. 4. Fills All fill and backfill should be brought to approximately +2% of optimum moisture content, and re- compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557 -91). Surficial, loose or soft soils exposed or encountered during grading (such as any undocumented or loose fill materials) should be removed to competent material. Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. If the import of soil is planned, soils should be non - expansive (EI <30) and free of debris and organic matter. Prior to importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. Where new foundations extend across a retaining wall backfill wedge footings shall be deepened through fill to competent sandstone. 5. Slopes Permanent slopes may be cut to a face ratio of 2.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). Permanent fill slopes shall be placed at a maximum 2:1 slope face ratio. All temporary cut slopes shall be excavated in accordance with OSHA requirements. Subsequent to grading planting or other acceptable cover should be provided to Increase the stability of slopes, especially during the rainy season (October thru April). FOUNDATIONS We anticipate that the proposed foundation system for proposed house will utilize slab on grade floor system and continuous shallow perimeter foundations. The following design parameters may be utilized for new footings extended to recompacted fill. Footings bearing in competent materials may be designed utilizing maximum allowable soils pressure of 2,000 psf Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOtEONNI L,CI SMUOTUR LONSULTMITS Job No, 084403 -1 Seismic Design Parameters: Seismic Desfon Parameters: Minimum Footing Width Site Class D SDS (9) 0.761 SDI (g) 0.422 Bearing values may be increased by 33% when considering wind, seismic, or other short duration loadings. 3. The following parameters should be used as a minimum, for designing footing width and depth below lowest adjacent grade: No. of Floors Supported Minimum Footing Width Minimum Footing Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Grad 1 15 inches 18 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches 3 18 inches 24 inches Footings may be deeper in the field to extend to competent sandstone profiles. This condition should also be noted on project structural plans. 4. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two #4 bars at the bottom (3 inches above the ground). For footings over 30 inches in depth, additional reinforcement, and possibly a stemwall system will be necessary. This detail should be reviewed on a case by case basis by our office prior to construction. 5. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and be reinforced with a minimum of #4 bars at 12 inches o.c. in each direction (3 inches above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. 6. For footings adjacentto slopes, a minimum 12 foot horizontal setback in material or properly compacted fill should be maintained. A setback measurement should be taken at the horizontal distance from the bottom of the footing to slope daylight. Where this condition can not be met it should be brought to the attention of the Engineering Design Group for review. 7. All excavations should be performed in general accordance with the contents of this report, applicable codes, OSHA requirements and applicable city and/or county standards. 8. All foundation subgrade soils and footings shall be pre- moistened a minimum of 18 inches in depth prior to the pouring of concrete. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOMC NICAL. CNIL.SMUCTU"L CONSULTANTS Job No. CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE Concrete slabs on grade should use the following as the minimum design parameters: Concrete slabs on grade of the building should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches (5.5 inches at garage and driveway locations) and should be reinforced with #4 bars at 18 inches o.c. placed at the midpoint of the slab. All concrete shall be poured per the following: Slump: Between 3 and 4 inches maximum Aggregate Size: 3/4 - 1 inch Air Content: 5 to 8 percent Non - Moisture Sensitive Areas: Compressive Strength = 2500 psi minimum. Moisture Sensitive Areas: Water to cement Ratio - 0.45 maximum Compressive Strength = 4,000 psi minimum (No special inspection required for water to cement ratio purposes, unless otherwise specified by the structural engineer) Moisture retarding additive in concrete at concrete slab on grade floors and moisture sensitive areas. In moisture sensitive areas (i.e. interior living space where slab vapor emission is a concern), the slab concrete should have a minimum water to cement ratio of 0.45, generally resulting in a compressive strength of 4,000 psi (non - special inspected). This recommendation is intended to achieve a low permeability concrete. 3. All required fills used to support slabs, should be placed in accordance with the grading section of this report and the attached Appendix B, and compacted to 90 percent Modified Proctor Density, ASTM D -1557. For all interior slabs, a uniform layer of 4 inches of washed, clean sand (Sand Equivalent > 50, decomposed granite is generally not acceptable) is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a visqueen layer (15 mil) should be placed mid - height in the sand bed to act as a vapor retarder. The visqueen layer should lap a minimum of 6 inches, sealed along all laps per manufacturers recommendations, and extend down the interior edge of the footing excavation a minimum of 12 inches. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. 6. All subgrade soils to receive concrete flatwork are to be pre - soaked to 2 percent over optimum moisture content to a depth of 18 inches. Brittle floor finishes placed directly on slab on grade floors may crack if concrete is not adequately cured prior to installing the finish or if there is minor slab movement. To minimize potential damage to movement sensitive flooring, we recommend the use of slip sheeting techniques (linoleum type) which allows for foundation and slab movement without transmitting this movement to the floor finishes. Moser Development Page No. 6 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOMCHN CAL. CML, STRUCTURAL CONSULTAN 8. Exterior concrete flatwork and driveway slabs, due to the nature of concrete hydration and minor subgrade soil movement, are subject to normal minor concrete cracking. To minimize expected concrete cracking, the following may be implemented: • Concrete slump should not exceed 4 inches. • Concrete should be poured during " cool" (40.65 degrees) weather if possible. If concrete is poured in hotter weather, a set retarding additive should be included in the mix, and the slump kept to a minimum. • Concrete subgrade should be pre- soaked prior to the pouring of concrete. The level of pre- soaking should be a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches. • Concrete may be poured with a 10 inch deep thickened edge. Flatwork adjacent to top of a slope should be constructed with a outside footing to attain a minimum of 7 feet distance to daylight. • Concrete should be constructed with tooled joints or sawcuts (1 inch deep) creating concrete sections no larger than 225 square feet. For sidewalks, the maximum run between joints should not exceed 5 feet. For rectangular shapes of concrete, the ratio of length to width should generally not exceed 0.6 (i.e., 5 ft. long by 3 ft. wide). Joints should be cut at expected points of concrete shrinkage (such as male comers), with diagonal reinforcement placed in accordance with industry standards. • Drainage adjacent to concrete flatwork should direct water away from the improvement. Concrete subgrade should be sloped and directed to the collective drainage system, such that water is not trapped below the flatwork. • The recommendations set forth herein are intended to reduce cosmetic nuisance cracking. The project concrete contractor is ultimately responsible for concrete quality and performance, and should pursue a cost - benefit analysis of these recommendations, and other options available in the industry, prior to the pouring of concrete. RETAINING WALLS Retaining walls up to 6 feet may be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations and minimum design parameters: Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report, and should maintain minimum footing depths outlined in "Foundation" section of this report. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material with low potential for expansion (E.I. <50) will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. Based upon our field investigation onsite soil may be utilized as retaining wall backfill, to be confirmed in the field at the time of site grading. 3. For sloping backfill, the following parameters may be utilized: Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECNNIU0.. CMI. 59WQONM CONSULTANTS Page No. 7 Job No. OB4403 -1 8ackfill Sloping Condition 2:1 Slope 1.5:1 Slope Active Fluid Pressure 50 pcf 65 pcf Any other surcharge loadings shall be analyzed in addition to the above values. 4. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, they should be designed for an at rest soil pressure of 65 psf. 5. Retaining walls shall be designed for lateral forces due to earthquake, where required by code, utilizing the following design parameters. The peak ground acceleration at the subject site is estimated using California Geological Survey Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page, with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years. For the subject site the peak ground motion is estimated to be 0.302 g. For design purposes, peak acceleration may be reduced by 0.5 (Reference No. 3), to obtain a design horizontal ground acceleration value, which forthis site is equal to 0.152g (kH). General engineering practice recognizes the Mononobe -Okabe /Seed - Whitman equation for the calculation of additional lateral earth pressure. The resultant seismic load should be applied as an inverted triangular distribution from the bottom to top of wall. The resultant force should be applied at a distance of 0.6 times the height (H) of the wall above the base. For yielding walls (designed utilizing active pressure coefficient), which are not restrained, the seismic load may be determined as follows Yielding Walls: PAE= (3/8) k. (gamma) H' Where : kH =0.152 g ; gamma =unit weight of soil For restrained walls (designed utilizing at rest pressure coefficient) which are restrained from movement, the seismic load may be determined as follows Non - Yielding Walls: PAE= kH (gamma) H' Where : kH =0.152 g , gamma =unit weight of soil Retaining wall designs for sites with a hydrostatic pressure influence (i.e groundwater within depth of retaining wall or waterfront conditions) will require special design considerations beyond the scope of this letter. 6. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf. This value assumes that the soil being utilized to resist passive pressures, extends horizontally 2.5 times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than 2.5 times the heighlof the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction in available horizontal length. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive earth pressures above. 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP MOMCNNI XIM,SIAUCTII CONSULTN Page No. 8 Job No OB4403 -1 8. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. All walls shall be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards contained in the "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail ", Appendix D. The waterproofing elements shown on our details are minimums, and are intended to be supplemented by the waterproofing consultant and /or architect. The recommendations should be reviewed in consideration of proposed finishes and usage, especially at basement levels, performance expectations and budget. If deemed necessary by the project owner, based on the above analysis, and waterproofing systems can be upgraded to include slab under drains and enhanced waterproofing elements. 10. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Earthwork" section of this report. Backfill shall consist of soil with a very low expansion potential, granular, free draining material. 11. At moisture sensitive locations, i.e. basement walls /building retaining walls, cast -in -place concrete retaining walls should be considered in lieu of masonry retaining walls for moisture intrusion purposes. 12. Retaining wall backfill zone shall be detailed to reduce moisture intrusion. Detailing of the retaining wall shall include both french drain at the base of the stem to collect subsurface water. SURFACE DRAINAGE Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative and will play a critical role on the future performance of the dwelling and improvements. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond against or adjacentto foundation walls, or tops of slopes. The ground surface surrounding proposed improvements should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the structure in all directions, with a minimum slope of 2% for a horizontal distance of 7 feet (where possible). Area drains or surface swales should then be Provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of water. Area drains and retaining wall backdrains shall not be tied to the same drainage system. Roof gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the new and existing structures and tightlined to the area drain system. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Area drains should be kept free of debris to allow for proper drainage. Over watering can adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions. Irrigation should be limited to only the amount necessary to sustain plant life. Low flow irrigation devices as well as automatic rain shut -off devices should be installed to reduce overwatering. Irrigation practices and maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems are an important component to the performance of onsite improvements. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of all drainage systems should be inspected. Problems such as gullying or ponding should be corrected as soon as possible. Any leakage from sources such as water lines should also be repaired as soon as possible. In addition, irrigation of planter areas, lawns, or other vegetation, located adjacent to the foundation or exterior flat work improvements, should be strictly controlled or avoided. Moser Development 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Callfomia ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP UMCM Cw Crvw MUCTUML Co SULT r S Page No. 9 Job No. 084403 -1 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by our investigation of the project area. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be verified in the field during construction. The following items shall be conducted prior /during construction by a representative of Engineering Design Group in order to verify compliance with the geotechnical and civil engineering recommendations provided herein, as applicable. 1. Review of final approved structural plans pdor to the start of work for compliance with geotechnical recommendations. 2. Attendance of a pre- gradelconstruction meeting prior to the start of work. 3. Testing of any fill placed, including retaining wall backfill and utility trenches. 4. Observation of footing excavations prior to steel placement and removal of excavation equipment. 5. Field observation of any "field change" condition involving soils. 6. Walk through of final drainage detailing prior to final approval. The project soils engineer may at their discretion deepen footings or locally recommend additional steel reinforcement to upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during site observations. Engineering Design Group assumes no liability for structures constructed utilizing this report not meeting the above Observation and Testing protocol. Before commencement of grading the Engineering Design Group will require a separate contract for quality control observation and testing. Engineering Design Group requires a minimum of 48 hours notice to mobilize onsite for field observation and testing. hi16Yd4WW_1IkTX&11,rK It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. All of the above can induce movement that frequently results in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior bdttle slab finishes. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the exploratory test pits. The recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed structure, however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soils profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed. Therefore, no warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the investigation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Man -made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state of the art knowledge and /or legislation, are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes. Therefore, this report for the specific site, is subject to review and not considered valid after a period of one year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. Moser Development Page No. 10 2358 Newcastle Avenue. Encinitas, California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECRRIC CN STRUCNR CCMMTMn It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and/or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions, be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. Moser Development Page No. 11 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas. California Job No. 084403 -1 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECNNICAL. CML, 5TgUCTUML CONSULTAI SITE U APPROXIMATE SITE VICINITY PROJECT NAME MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 12358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS. CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER 084350 141411.74 V] APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION PROJECT NAME I MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 1 23M NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER CIVIL, 084350 I 21211 Phone: FIGURE re s . in 'All Ti15� le AAA -. _ e, SL AM O G Q 111ErM � MIl � n \ 1 �pp1 � Idle � Iilff ` MLL 0f � 9 \° mij •r : a '` roe \•' \ �•�.utii a SITE ■ nr �^ mIrz urnw euw + V] APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION PROJECT NAME I MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 1 23M NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER CIVIL, 084350 I 21211 Phone: FIGURE �d no c J I� Tp NO I ® TP1 - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PITS PROJECT NAME MOSER DUPLEX PROJECT ADDRESS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVENUE, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EDG PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS 084350 2121 MonBel Road. San Marcos, CA 92069 3 Phone: (760)839-7302 Fax: (760)480-7477 Project Name: Moser Duplex TEST PIT LOG NO. 1 EDG Project Number: 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 4 Location: See Figure No. 3 Sheet 1 of 1 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, California Date(s) August 8, 2008 Total Depth: 3 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIL /FILL: SW -SM Level: Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes Elev. 2.7 - 3.2 feet SANDSTONE SW -SM Excavation Hand Dug Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty Method: sands. Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0- 2.7 feet TOPSOIL /FILL: SW -SM Dark brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense, slightly silty sands with roots. 2 2.7 - 3.2 feet SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: Z:@MMMOSER. WANOA -DAN, 0e435bnREPORTS. LEttEMTEST PR LOG -I.Md Project Name: Moser Duplex TEST PIT LOG NO. 2 EDG Project Number: 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 5 Location: See Figure 3 Sheet 1 of 1 7 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Califomia Dates) August 8. 2008 Total Depth: 3.5 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIUFILL: SW -SM 7 Level: Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes Elev. 3 -3.5 fl. SANDSTONE SW -SM Excavation Hand Dug Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty Method: sands. Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0 -3 ft. TOPSOIUFILL: SW -SM 7 i8 Dark brown, dry to slightly moist, medium dense, silty sands with small roots. 2 3 -3.5 fl. SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, slightly silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: 2 t - Qi g 4 z - 5 7 i8 Z:Q IVCSER, WAN0A -0AN.01!A3M - -iV EPnRTS. LETTERS \TEST PIT LOG-i.wca Project Name: Moser Duplex Total Depth: 3.5 feet Groundwater TEST PIT LOG NO. 3 EDG Project Number. 084350 -1 FIGURE NO. 6 Location: See Figure 3 Sheet 1 of 1 Logged By: 2358 Newcastle Avenue, Encinitas, Califon a Approx. Surface Date(s) August 8, 2008 Total Depth: 3.5 feet Groundwater None Excavated: TOPSOIL /FILUWEATHERED SANDS: SW -SM /SC Level: Logged By: ER Approx. Surface Backfilled Yes Elev. medium roots. Excavation Hand Dug 3 -3.5 ft. SANDSTONE SW -SM Method: Rust brown to grey, moist, dense, silty sands. Soil Type Depth Material Description and Notes UCSC Sample 1 0 -3 ft. TOPSOIL /FILUWEATHERED SANDS: SW -SM /SC Dark to rust brown to grey, dry to slightly moist, loose medium dense, silty to slightly clayey sands with small to medium roots. 2 3 -3.5 ft. SANDSTONE SW -SM Rust brown to grey, moist, dense, silty sands. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION: Zi NSMSER, WANOA -DAN. 08435PUREPORTS. 1- MERS\TEST P? LOG -3"d APPENDIX -A- /_1 »4.U7K M REFERENCES 1. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. Landslide Hazards in the Southern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California. Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 33, 1995. 2. California Geological Survey, Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. 3. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Fault- Rupture Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 1990. 4. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Rupture Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 1990. 5. Day, Robert W. "Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering Design and Construction." 1999. McGraw Hill. 6. Engineering Design Group, Un- published In -House Data. 7. Franklin, A.G. and Chang, F.K. 1977, "Permanent displacements of Earth embankments by Newmark sliding block analysis, Report 5, Miscellaneous Paper, S 71 -17, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vickburg, Mississippi." 8. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. 9. Ploessel, M.R. and Slossan, J.E., 1974 Repeatable High Ground Acceleration from Earthquakes: California Geololgy, Vol. 27, No. 9, P.195 -199. 10. State of California, Geologic Map of California, Map No:2, Dated 1977. 11. State of California, Fault Map of Califomia, Map No:1, Dated 1975. 12. Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) Seismology Committee, 2006. "Macroseminar Presentation on Seismically Induced Earth Pressure ". APPENDIX -B- GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 General Intent These specifications are presented as general procedures and recommendations for grading and earthwork to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These general earthwork and grading specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report and shall be superseded by the recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these specifications, as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading plans. 2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes, at least 24 hours in advance, so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. No grading operations should be performed without the knowledge of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor shall not assume that the geotechnical consultant is aware of all grading operations. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, recommendations in the geotechnical report, and the approved grading plans not withstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than recommended in the geotechnical report and the specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction should be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557. -1- 3.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots and all other deleterious material should be removed or properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, governing agencies and the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. In general, no more than 1 percent (by volume) of the fill material should consist of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be allowed. 3.2 Processing: The existing ground which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. 3.3 Overexcavation: Soft, dry, organic -rich, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be overexcavated down to competent ground, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. For purposes of determining quantities of materials overexcavated, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. 3.4 Moisture Conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 3.5 Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed, screened of deleterious material, and moisture- conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. -2- 3.6 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, at least 2 feet into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches should be excavated into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 should be benched or otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 3.7 Evaluation of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe -of -fill benches, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. 4,0 Fill Material 4.1 Genera l: Material to be placed as fill should be sufficiently free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed as recommended by the geotechnical consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 42 Oversize: Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Oversize disposal operations should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade, within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction, or within 15 feet horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. -3- 4.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be given to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the proposed import materials. 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 5.1 Fill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and previously evaluated to receive fill, in near - horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 5.2 Moisture Conditioning. Fill soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 5.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture - conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (unless otherwise specified). Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and uniformity of compaction. 5.4 Fill Slopes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the fill out to the slope face would be at least 90 percent. -4- 5.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests of the moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill soils should be performed at the consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. In general, the tests should be taken at approximate intervals of 2 feet in vertical rise and /or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils. In addition, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately one test should be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and /or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. &0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems, if recommended, should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials should not be changed or modified unless recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade depending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the survey, prior to commencement of filling over the subdrains. 7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the geotechnical consultant (as necessary) during grading. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation, overexcavation, and refilling of cut areas and /or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e., stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recommended. 8.0 Quantity Determination For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated during grading and /or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. -5- MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING & DRAINAGE DETAIL dag. THIS DETAIL REPRESENTS THE MINIMUM WALL DRAINAGE AND (NOT TO SCALE) WATERPROOFING APPLICATION TO SATISFY THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN Naw OF THE RETAINING WALL THE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN �.- AND SPECIFICATION OF THE WATERPROOFING ASSEMBLY. fldarel;•1Z11l I o fa;(+O RETAINING WALL (CONIC OR CMU) WALL FOOTING WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED BACKFILL D 90% MIN. RELATIVE COMPACTION 1 O HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER a MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WITH PROTECTION BOARD :I — HE Lr ICE ° (ABOVE MIRADRAIN) MASTIC NOT TO BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT _I� �H �'' a MIRADRAIN (OR EQUAL) INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS ti� J ® OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING MIRAFI FILTER FABRIC W/ 6' LAP WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED BACKFILL D 90% MIN. RELATIVE COMPACTION 1 O HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WITH PROTECTION BOARD :I — HE Lr ICE (ABOVE MIRADRAIN) MASTIC NOT TO BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT _I� �H �'' 3 3 MIRADRAIN (OR EQUAL) INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS ti� J ® OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING MIRAFI FILTER FABRIC W/ 6' LAP O 314' GRAVEL (1 SF / FT) O6 4' DA PERFORATED DRAIN LINE (SCH 40 OR EQUIV.) PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN 2 X GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET - EXACT PIPE LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY SIZE CONSTRAINTS OPROPOSED SLOPE BACKCUF PER OSHA STANDARDS OR, PER ALTERNATIVE SLOPING PLAN, OR PER APPROVED SHORING PLAN ® 4'x4' (45') CONCRETE CANT 0 ETG/WALL CONNECTION (UNDER WATERPROOFING) OFOAM PROTECTION BOARD BELOW GRADE & W PROTECTION BOARD ARV GRADE PER MFR SPECIFICA71ON cc Fro _.11,1 MANUFACTURER'S CERTIFIED INSTALLERS ONLY. APPLICATIONS TO BE CONFIRMED BY MANUFACTURER'S REPRESWATIVE PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS JOB NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE 112 1 WNT6 no /ED -7477 SIDE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL EXISTING GROUND SURFACE FINISHED SLOPE FACE PROJECT 1 TO 7 LINE , / FINISHED CUT PAD FROM TOP OF SLOPE TO OUTSIDE EDGE OF KEY = ------ - - - - -- - , _lih It ,I _ — 2__COMPACTERI_ ___ OVERBURDEN OR == s UNSUITABLE __ ' _'- - - -- PAD OVEREXCAVATION DEPTH -J- _ - - - - -- MATERIAL -- I /AI= AND RECOMPACTION MAY BE - -_ '�Fg3 -?___ ' _ RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BENCH BASED ON ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. I I 1s' MIN. I COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MIN. LOWEST MATERIAL AS EVALUATED KEY DEPTH BENCH BY THE GEOTECHNICAL (KEY) CONSULTANT NOTE: Subdrain details and key width recommendations to be provided based on exposed subsurface conditions KEY DEPTH I STABILITY FILL / BUTTRESS DETAIL OUTLET PIPES —4' Q NONPERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY. 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY l:o 2"t'" I In rr_ = gr_rrr2% MIN. {_r_ = MIN. KEY WIDTH AS NOTED ON GRADING PLANS 15' MIN. SEE T- CONNECTION B' MIN. DETAIL OVERLAPS k. 3/44- 1 -1 12' CLEAN GRAVEL (3101ft. MIN.)_ 4' 0 NON - PERFORATED FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140H OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)* SUBDRAIN T ' I B' MIN COVER '.� 4' PERFORATED PIPE 45% miti 4' MIN. BEDDING CH DETAIL —BACK CUT 1 :1 OR FLATTER BENCH SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL LOWEST SUBDRAIN SHOULD BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET PERFORATED �fF4 `EACHMSIDE PIPE I I NON - PERFORATED CAP OUTLET PIPE f�=� T— CONNECTION DETAIL *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4'- 1.1/2' GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size % Passing 1" 100 3/4" 90 -100 3/8" 40 -100 N0. 4 25 -40 No. 8 18 -33 No. 30 5 -15 No. 50 0 -7 No. 200 0 -3 Sand Equivalent >75 NOTES: For buttress dimensions, see geotechnical report /plans. Actual dimensions of buttress and subdraln may be changed by the geotechnical consultant based on field conditions. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain pipe should be Installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be Installed SUBDRAIN TYPE- Subdrain type should be Acrylontrlle Buladlene Slyrene (A.B.S.). Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125,SDR 32.5 should be used for maximum fill depths of 35 feet. Class 200,SDR 21 should be used for maximum fill depths of 100 feet. , i CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS — EXISTING GROUND SURFACE BENCHING e' MIN. OVERLAP 3140- 1.1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL (9113/ft. MIN.) IMPACTED REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE BELOW SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAILS FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE �e' MIN. OVERLAP (M1RAF1 140N OR APPROVED 1 1 / EQUIVALENT)* i' 8' MIN. B' MIN. 1'_ .1 / COVER - :t COVER i a , I! 3/4'- 1-1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL 4' MIN. BEDDING (9ft 3 /tt. MIN.) -8' d MIN. ' *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE PERFORATED MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF PIPE 3/4'- 1 -112' GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL DESIGN FINISH SUBDRAIN GRADE - - - -- - TRENCH SEE ABOVE 15' MIN 5'MIN PERFORATED S' 0 MIN. PIPE NONPERFORATED 8' 0 MIN. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size Pa55inq 1" 100 3/4° 90 -100 3/8" 40 -100 No. 4 25 -40 No. 8 18 -33 No. 30 5 -15 No. 50 0 -i No. 200 0 -3 Sand Equivalent > 15 Subdrain should be constructed only on competent material as evaluated by the geotechnicel consultant. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrain pipe should be Installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be Installed. SUBDRAIN TYPE — Subdrain type should be Acrylonitrlle Butadiene Styrene (A.B.S.). Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125,SDR 32.5 should be used for maximum fill depths of 35 feet. Class 200,SDR 21 should be used for maximum fill depth■ 01 100 feet. . '1 KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS FILL SLOPE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE PROJECT t TO 1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL BENCH 2' MIN—�i KEY LOWEST DEPTH BENCH (KEY) FILL - OVER -CUT SLOPE REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL EXISTING -- i'- -_�__- - ----- �! GROUND SURFACE _ -_ BENCH =_2 TA19. = = _ 2 LOWEST UNSUITABLE MIN. BENCH MATERIAL KEY (KEY) DEPTH CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE----,,,�� f i CUT - OVER -FILL SLOPE PROJECT I TO 1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO COMPETENT MATERIAL t II= 3' MIN. 2' MIN.' LOWEST KEY OEPTH BENCH (KEY) CUT SLOPE (TO BE EXCAVATED / PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) BENCH ,REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL NOTE: Back drain may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant based on actual field conditions encountered. Bench dimension recommendations may also be altered based on field conditions encountered. ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL SLOPE FACE FINISH GRADE 'AMAX_ �pYERSIZE WINDROW � __ _ GRANULAR 901E (S.E.? �O) TO 9E DENSIFIED IN PLACE BV FLOODING DETAIL TYPICAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW 1) Rack with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches should not be used within 10 feet vertically of finish grade (or 2 feet below depth of lowest utility whichever is greater), and 15 feet horizontally of slope faces. 2) Rocks with maximum dimensions greater than 4 feet should not be utilized in fills. 3) Rock placement, flooding of granular soil, and fill placement should be observed by the geotechnical consultant. 4) Maximum size and spacing of windrows should be in accordance with the above details Width of windrow should not exceed 4 feet. Windrows should be staggered vertically (as depicted). 5) Rock should be placed in excavated trenches. Granular soil (S.E. greater than or equal to 30) should be flooded in the windrow to completely fill voids around and beneath rocks. APPENDIX -C- V . ) LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES Direct Shear Test Direct shear tests are performed on remolded and /or relatively undisturbed samples which are soaked for a minimum of 24 hours prior to testing. After transferring the sample to the shearbox, and reloading, pore pressures are allowed to dissipated for a period of approximately 1 hour prior to application of shearing force. The samples are sheared in a motor - driven, strain controlled, direct -shear testing apparatus. After a travel of approximately 114 inch, the motor is stopped and the sample is allowed to "relax" for approximately 15 minutes. Where applicable, the "relaxed" and "peak" shear values are recorded. It is anticipated that, in a majority of samples tested, the 15 minutes relaxing of the sample is sufficient to allow dissipation of pore pressures set up due to application of the shearing force. The relaxed values are therefore judged to be good estimations of effective strength parameters. Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of representative samples is evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 29 -2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation. The prepared 1 -inch thick by 4 -inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water for 24 hours or until volumetric equilibrium is reached. Classification Tests: Typical materials were subjected to mechanical grain -size analysis by wet sieving from U.S. Standard brass screens (ASTM D422 -65). Hydrometer analyses were performed where appreciable quantities of fines were encountered. The data was evaluated in determining the classification of the materials. The grain -size distribution curves are presented in the test data and the Unified Soil Classification is presented in both the test data and the boring logs. � I 1 v APPENDIX -D- MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING & DRAINAGE DETAIL slog. THIS DETAIL REPRESENTS THE MINIMUM WALL DRAINAGE AND (NOT TO SCALE) WATERPROOFING APPLICATION TO SATISFY THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN INiFM OF THE RETAINING WALL THE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN AND SPECIFICATION OF 1HE WATERPROOFING ASSEMBLY. TOP OF WALL RETAINING WALL (CONC OR CMU) WALL FOOTING PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS BLDG WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED HACKFILL 90X MIN. RE A77VE COMPACTION � / � O HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WITH PROTECTION BOARD I a BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT MIRADR41N OR ��IILII ,I O EQUAL INSTALLED ( ) PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFlG47IONS OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING MIRAFl FILTER FABRIC W/ 6- LAP ° d a PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS BLDG WHERE APPLIES O COMPACTED HACKFILL 90X MIN. RE A77VE COMPACTION � / � O HLM 5000 INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WITH PROTECTION BOARD I (ABOVE MIRADRAIN) MASTIC NOT TO BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT MIRADR41N OR ��IILII ,I O EQUAL INSTALLED ( ) PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFlG47IONS OVER MASTIC WATERPROOFING MIRAFl FILTER FABRIC W/ 6- LAP a ° O 314' GRAVEL. (1 SF / FT) ©4' OA PERFORATED DRAIN LINE (SCH 40 OR EQUIV.) PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN 2 X GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET - EXACT PIPE LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE CONSTRAINTS OPROPOSED SLOPE BACKCUT PER OSHA STANDARDS OR, PER ALTERNATIVE SLOPfNG PLAN, OR PER APPROVED SHORING PLAN O 4'x4' (45) CONCRETE CANT 0 FTG/WALL CONNECTION (UNDER WATERPROOFING) ®FOAM PROTECTION BOARD BELOW GRADE & UV PROTECTION BOARD ABV GRADE PER MFR SPECIFICA770N ALT LOG47ION MANUFACTURER'S CERTIFIED INSTALLERS ONLY. APPLJCA770NS TO BE CONFIRMED BY MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE JOB NUMBER ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIGURE 212) OWIEL RD SAN UW05, U 92069 (960) 679 -7302 r" (960) 460 -2477 Updated July 15, 2010 April 15, 2010 Wallie and Wanda Moser 2358 Newcastle Ave. Cardiff. CA 92007 Re: Permit issuance requirements for: Application: 10309 -G Case #: 08 -139 CDP /DR 2358 Newcastle Ave. APN: 261 -091 -21 This letter summarizes the requirements for pulling your Engineering Permit for drawing 10309 -G. Your approved plan will remain valid for one year. If the permit is not issued within six months from the date of approval of the drawings, the plans will be subject to review by City staff for compliance with current codes and regulations before a permit can be issued, and changes to the approved plans as well as additional fees may be required. Please read through this letter carefully and contact the City with any questions you may have. It contains information about many requirements that may apply to your project and can make the process clearer and easier for you. In order to obtain the permits to construct the work shown on your approved plans, you will need to satisfy the requirements below. All of the items listed below must be submitted to the Engineering front counter in one complete package at the time the applicant comes in to pull the permit. Partial submittals of anv kind will not be accepted. Your project planchecker will not accept any of the documents listed on behalf of the Engineering front counter staff; all items must be submitted to the front counter directly together and at one time. The correct number of each of the requested documents must be provided; copies of documents submitted to the City during plancheck do not reduce the necessary quantities listed below. (1) Provide 4 print sets of the approved drawing 10309 -G Provide 2 copies of "Limited Geotechnical Investigation and Recommendations Proposed New Duplex Located at 2358 Newcastle Avenue, in the City of Encinitas, California" prepared by Engineering Design Group and dated August 20, 2008. Submit 2 copies of the approved, signed (not draft) Resolution of Approval or Notice of Decision for Planning Case # 08- 139- DR/CDP, to be routed by the City to inspector and file. (2) Post Security Deposits to guarantee all of the work shown on your approved drawings. The amounts of security deposits are determined directly from the Approved Engineer's Cost Estimate generated by your engineer according to a set of predetermined unit prices for each kind of work shown on your plans. You will be required to post security deposit(s) as follows: (3) (a) Security Deposit for Grading Permit 10309 -G: in the amount $54,719.97 to guarantee both performance and labor/ materials for earthwork, drainage, private improvements, and erosion control (b) N/A (c) N/A (d) N/A A minimum of 20% and up to 100% of the amount listed in item(s) 2(a) must be in the form of cash, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or an assignment of account. Up to 80% of the amount listed in item 2(a) may be in the form of auto - renewing Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds issued by a State of California licensed surety company. Up to 100% of the amount(s) listed in item(s) 2(b), 2(c), and /or 2(d) may be in the form of auto - renewing Labor and Materials bonds issued by a State of California licensed surety company. Cash, certificates of deposit, letters of credit, and assignments of account are also acceptable financial instruments. If a certificate of deposit (CD) will be obtained to secure the entire amount(s) listed in item(s) 2(a) and /or 2(b), two separate CD's for 25% and 75% of the amount(s) listed in item(s) 2(a) and/or 2(b) should be obtained in order to facilitate any future partial release of those securities. CD's posted may be of any term but must be auto - renewing and must specify the City of Encinitas as a certificate holder and include a clause that until the City of Encinitas provides a written request for release of the CD, the balance shall be available to the City upon its sole request. The format of any financial instrument is subject to City approval, may be in the owner's name only, and must list the City of Encinitas as a Certificate Holder. For any questions regarding how to post securities bonding or the required format of securities please contact Debra Geishart at 760- 633 -2779. Pay non - refundable fees as listed below: Fee Type - Amount Grading Inspection NPDES Inspection (Grading) 5547.20 The grading and improvement inspection fees are calculated based on 5% of first $100,000.00 of the approved Engineer's cost estimate dated 2 -16 -10 and 3% of the cost estimate over $100,000.00. The NPDES inspection fee is assessed as 1% of the first $100,000.00 of the approved Engineer's cost estimate and 0.6% of the cost estimate over $100,000.00. The flood control fee is assessed at a rate of $0.21 per square foot of net new impervious surface area for driveway and parking areas as created per the approved plan. (4) Provide the name, address, telephone number, state license number, and license type of the construction contractor. The construction of any improvements within the public right -of -way or public easements is restricted to qualified contractors possessing the required state license as listed in the table below. The contractor must also have on file with the City current evidence of one million dollar liability insurance listing the City of Encinitas as co- insured. Additional requirements are described in the handout "Requirements for Proof of Insurance" available at the Engineering front counter. Type Description I Work to be Done A General Engineering I an y& all C -8 Concrete apron/curb/gutter/ramp/sidewalk C -10 Electrical li htin isi nals C -12 Grading & Paving any surface, certain drain- basins/channels C -27 Landscaping plantinglirrigation /fencing & other amenities C -29 Masonry retaining walls C -32 Parking &Highway Im rovement signage /striping /safety C -34 1 Pipeline sanitary sewer /storm drain (5) Permits are valid for no more than one year from the date of issuance and may expire earlier due to expirations of letter of credit and /or insurance policies. (6) This project does not propose land disturbance in excess of one acre and is exempt from the State Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirement. An erosion control plan shall be implemented per the approved grading plan. Preconstruction Meeting: A preconstruction meeting at the project site is mandatory for all projects. The preconstruction meeting may not be scheduled until the Engineering permit(s) have been issued, and the applicant/contractor must give the assigned Engineering inspector a minimum of 48 hours advance notice prior to the scheduled meeting time. Right -of -Way Construction Permit: A separate right -of -way construction permit will be required for any work in the public right -of -way or public easements. Typically, this work may include construction or reconstruction of a portion of the driveway within the public right -of -way, excavation, backfill, and resurfacing to install electric, gas, telephone, and cable television lines, or water and sewer connections. A permit fee of $300.00 per application and a site plan, preferably the work order issued by the public utility, will be required. Contractor license and insurance requirements apply. Permits must be issued at least 48 hours in advance of the start of work. Haul Routes, Traffic Control Plans, and Transportation Permits: These separate permits may be required for your project and are handled by the Traffic Engineering Division. A fee of $250.00 is required for traffic control plans. For more details, contact Raymond Guarnes, Engineering Technician, at (760) 633 -2704. Release of Project Securities: The partial or complete release of oroiect securities is initiated automatically by the Citv after submission of satisfactory as -built drawinas to the Citv and aooroval by the oroiect Enaineerina inspector. Applicant requests cannot be addressed without release aooroval from the oroiect inspector. The processing and release of securities may take up to 4 weeks after the release process is initiated by the project Engineering inspector. Any cash releases will be mailed to the address on this letter unless the City is otherwise notified, and all letters mailed to a financial institution will be copied to the owner listed hereon. Satisfactory completion of Final Inspection certified by the project Engineering inspector is a prerequisite to full release of the Security Deposit assigned to any Grading Permit. A sum in the amount of 25% of the securities posted for improvement permits will be held for a one -year warranty period, and a release is automatically initiated at the end of that warranty period. Construction Changes: Construction changes prepared by the Engineer of Work will be required for all changes to the approved plans. Requests for construction change approval should be submitted to the Engineering Services Department front counter as redlined mark -ups on 2 blueline prints of the approved Drawing. Changes are subject to approval prior to field implementation. Substantial increases in valuation due to the proposed changes may be cause for assessment and collection of additional inspection fees and security deposits. Construction change fees of $200.00 and $350.00 will be assessed for minor and major construction changes, respectively. Construction changes necessitating a new plan sheet will be assessed the per -sheet plancheck and NPDES plancheck fees in lieu of the construction change fee. Construction changes not previously approved and submitted as as -built drawings at the end of the construction process will be rejected and the securities release will be delayed. Change of Ownership: If a change of ownership occurs following approval of the drawing(s), the new owner will be required to submit to the City a construction change revising the title sheet of the plan to reflect the new ownership. The construction change shall be submitted to the Engineering front counter as redline mark -ups on two blueline prints of the approved drawing together with two copies of the grant deed or title report reflecting the new ownership. Construction change fees apply. The current owner will be required to post new securities to replace those held by the City under the name of the former owner, and the securities posted by the former owner will be released when the replacement securities have been received and approved by the City. Change of Engineer of Work: If a change in engineer of work occurs following the approval of the drawing(s), a construction change shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. Two copies of the forms for the assumption of responsibility by the new engineer and the release of responsibility by the former engineer shall be completed and submitted to the City. Construction change fees apply. As- builts: Project as -built drawings prepared by the Engineer of Work will be required prior to Final Grading acceptance by Engineering Services. Changes to the approved olans require a construction change to be submitted to the City prior to field implementation. Construction changes may not be submitted as as- builts at the end of the construction process. This letter does not change owner or successor -in- interest obligations. If there should be a substantial delay in the start of your project or a change of ownership, please contact the City to request an update. Should you have questions regarding the posting of securities, please contact Debra Geishart, who processes all Engineering securities, at (760) 633 -2779. Should you have any other questions, please contact me at (760) 633 -2867 or visit the Engineering Counter at the Civic Center to speak with an Engineering Technician. Sincerely, Steven Nowak Assistant Civil Engineer cc Steven Jones, Engineer of Work Debbie Geishart, Engineering Technician Greg Shields, Senior Civil Engineer Masih Maher, Senior Civil Engineer permittfile Enc Application Requirements for Proof of Insurance Security Obligation Agreements Construction Bond Estimate for: 2358 NewCastle Avenue Grading Plan 10309 -G PREPARED FOR CITY OF ENCINITAS, CA AND Dan Moser 2358 NewCastle Avenue Cardiff, CA 92024 PREPARED BY: Coastal Land Solutions 573 Second Street Encinitas, CA 92024 DATE. July 24, 2009 REVISED 2116/10 Q0.oFESSIp ,tk R. Jo`Y�i(" h 00 N C 65124 OFCA��F� Steven R. WXes, RCE 65124 y -/Y -/o DATE 2358 NewCastle Avenue IMPROVEMENTS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST COST (DESCRIPTION) (LS,LF,CY.ETC) W ($ PER UNIT) ($) EXCAVATE AND FILL (0- 1,000) CY 10 $20.00 $200.00 EXCAVATE AND EXPORT (0.1.000) CY 305 $27.50 $8,387.50 REMEDIAL GRADING (EXCAVATE AND FILL) CY 330 $20.00 $6,600.00 DRAINAGE: 3-6 INCH PVC PIPE LF 152 $20.00 $3.040.00 6" AREA DRAIN EA 6 $150.00 $900.00 IMPROVEMENTS: MASONRY RETAINING WALL SF 200 $29.65 $5.930.00 PLANTERILANOSCAPE TREATMENT BMP SF 650 $2.50 $1,625.00 TURFBLOCK SF 300 $12.00 $3,600.00 6 "X16" PCC FLUSH CURB, G -2 LF 100 $15.00 $1,500.00 Y WIDE PCC RIBBON GUTTER SF 150 $6.00 $900.00 AC PAVING (4" SURFACE) SF 700 $1.75 $1,225.00 CTS PAVING (6" SURFACE) SF 1100 $1.05 $1,155.00 6" PCC DRIVEWAY SF 630 $6.00 $3,780.00 5 112" DG PATH SF 300 $1.00 $300.00 WATER: WTR SERV. PER W -1 (1" W11' x 0.75' METER) EA 2 $2,389.00 $4,778.00 SEWER: ALLEY SEWER LATERAL, PER S -13 (4 "- 40" LONG) EA 1 $1,335.00 $1,335.00 SUB -TOTAL $46,255.50 EROSION CONTROL. ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNITCOST COST (DESCRIPTION) (LS,LF,CY,ETC) (f) ($ PER UNIT) ($) GRAVEL BAGS EA 80 $1.10 $88.00 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SF 200 $5.25 $1,050.00 INLET PROTECTION EA 6 $150.00 $900.00 SILT FENCE LF 240 $1.60 $384.00 HYDROSEED SF 308 $0.20 $61.60 SUB -TOTAL $2,483.60 TOTAL $47,739.10 15% CONTINGENCY $6.980.87 GRAND TOTAL 54,719.97 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Reference: MOSER RELIMINARY REPORT as of: MARCH 14, 2008 at 7:30 AM No.: 880001725 - P01 Regarding: 2358 NEWCASTLE AVE. JUL 28 2009 v I ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA EfiCl'Y DF ENCNSERVICE S In response to the application for a policy of title insurance referenced herein, Chicago Title Insurance Company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a policy or policies of title insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an exception herein or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations or Conditions of said policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Attachment One. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner's Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Attachment One. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report. This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested. The policy(s) of title insurance to be issued hereunder will be policy(s) of Chicago Title Insurance Company. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to herein and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Attachment One of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects and encumbrances affecting title to the land. The form of Policy or Policies of title insurance contemplated by this report is: ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10- 17 -98) AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (6 -17 -2006) Visit Us On The Web: ChicagoTitle. corn Title Department: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 316 MISSION AVE. STE. 121 ESCONDIDO, CA 92025 (760)735 -3120 Fax ACHARD MOORE Title Officer PREFP1 -06/18/07P (760)735 -3131 0 SCHEDULE A Order No: 880001725 P01 Your Ref: MOSER 1. The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is: A FEE 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: WAI,LIE MOSER, JR. AND WANDA J. MOSER, AS TRUSTMANAGERS UNDER AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 11. 1991 SUBJECT TO ITEM NO. 4 OF SCHEDULE B. 3. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of California, County of SAN DI EGO and is described as follows: LOTS 18 AND 19 IN BLOCK 17 OF CARDIFF, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 1298, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 14, 1910. SCHEDULE B Page 1 Order No: 880001725 P01 Your Ref: MOSER At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in the policy form designated on the face page of this Report would be as follows: A 1. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, TO BE LEVIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 -2009 THAT ARE A LIEN NOT YET DUE. B 2. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 -2008 1ST INSTALLMENT: $312.59 (PAID) 2ND INSTALLMENT: $312.59 OPEN PENALTY AND COST: $41.25 (DUE AFTER APRIL 10) HOMEOWNERS EXEMPTION: $NONE CODE AREA: 19006 ASSESSMENT NO: 261- 052 -16 c 3. THE LIEN OF SUPPLEMENTAL OR ESCAPED ASSESSMENTS OF PROPERTY TAXES, IF ANY, MADE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 0.5, CHAPTER 3.5 OR PART 2, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLES 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 75) OF THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE VESTEE NAMED IN SCHEDULE A; OR AS A RESULT OF CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP OR NEW CONSTRUCTION OCCURRING PRIOR TO DATE OF POLICY. D 4. ANY INVALIDITY OR DEFECT IN THE TITLE OF THE VESTEES IN THE EVENT THAT THE TRUST REFERRED TO IN THE VESTING PORTION OF SCHEDULE A IS INVALID OR FAILS TO GRANT SUFFICIENT POWERS TO THE TRUSTEE(S) OR IN THE EVENT THERE IS A LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THE TRUST INSTRUMENT. B 5. RIGHTS OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION. a 6. MATTERS WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY AN INSPECTION OR SURVEY OF SAID LAND OR BY INQUIRY OF THE PARTIES IN POSSESSION THEREOF. G END OF SCHEDULE B x NOTE NO. 1: IF TITLE IS TO BE INSURED IN THE TRUSTEE(S) OF A TRUST, (OR IF THEIR ACT IS TO BE INSURED), THIS COMPANY WILL REQUIRE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL TRUST AGREEMENT INCLUDING ALL EXHIBITS LISTING REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY TRANSFERRED INTO THE TRUST TOGETHER WITH COMPLETE COPIES OF ANY AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS THERETO. THE COMPANY MUST ALSO BE FURNISHED WITH A VERIFICATION OF ALL PRESENT TRUSTEES STATING THAT THE COPY BEING FURNISHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ENTIRE TRUST AGREEMENT INCLUDING ALL MODIFICATIONS OR AMENDMENTS; THAT THE TRUST IS CURRENTLY IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT; AND THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN REVOKED OR TERMINATED. -10m " SCHEDULE B Page 2 (continued) Order No: 880001725 P01 Your Ref: MOSER r NOTE NO. 2 THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS PRELIMINARY REPORT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE ORDER APPLICATION ONLY BY STREET ADDRESS OR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER. THIS LAND HAS BEEN LOCATED ON THE ATTACHED MAP. THE USE OF A STREET ADDRESS OR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER CREATES AN UNCERTAINTY AS TO THE CORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE LAND INVOLVED IN YOUR TRANSACTION. PLEASE REVIEW THE MAP. IS THE CORRECT LAND LOCATED ON THE MAP? IF YOUR TRANSACTION INVOLVES OTHER LAND OR MORE LAND OR LESS LAND THAN THAT LOCATED ON THE MAP YOU SHOULD IMMEDIATELY ADVISE YOUR TITLE OFFICER OR ESCROW OFFICER. NOTE NO. 3: WE WILL REQUIRE A STATEMENT OF INFORMATION FROM THE PARTIES NAMED BELOW IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THIS REPORT, BASED ON THE EFFECT OF DOCUMENTS, PROCEEDINGS, LIENS, DECREES, OR OTHER MATTERS WHICH DO NOT SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBE SAID LAND, BUT WHICH, IF ANY DO EXIST, MAY AFFECT THE TITLE OR IMPOSE LIENS OR ENCUMBRANCES THEREON. PARTIES: OWNER (NOTE: THE STATEMENT OF INFORMATION IS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE SEARCH AND EXAMINATION OF TITLE UNDER THIS ORDER. ANY TITLE SEARCH INCLUDES MATTERS THAT ARE INDEXED BY NAME ONLY, AND HAVING A COMPLETED STATEMENT OF INFORMATION ASSISTS THE COMPANY IN THE ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN MATTERS WHICH APPEAR TO INVOLVE THE PARTIES BUT IN FACT AFFECT ANOTHER PARTY WITH THE SAME OR SIMILAR NAME. BE ASSURED THAT THE STATEMENT OF INFORMATION IS ESSENTIAL AND WILL BE KEPT STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL TO THIS FILE.) x NOTE NO. 4: THE CURRENT OWNER DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR THE $20.00 DISCOUNT PURSUANT TO THE COORDINATED STIPULATED JUDGMENTS ENTERED IN ACTIONS FILED BY BOTH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND PRIVATE CLASS ACTION PLAINTIFFS FOR THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY. L NOTE NO. 5: THERE ARE NO CONVEYANCES AFFECTING SAID LAND, RECORDED WITHIN TWENTY -FOUR (24) MONTHS OF THE DATE OF THIS REPORT. 71 NOTE NO. 6: THERE IS LOCATED ON SAID LAND A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE KNOWN AS 2358 NEWCASTLE AVE., ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA. ry NOTE NO. 7: NONE OF THE ITEMS SHOWN IN THIS REPORT WILL CAUSE THE COMPANY TO DECLINE TO ATTACH CLTA ENDORSEMENT FORM 100 TO AN ALTA LOAN POLICY, WHEN ISSUED. 0 NOTE NO. 8: IF A COUNTY RECORDER, TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, ESCROW COMPANY, REAL ESTATE BROKER, REAL ESTATE AGENT OR ASSOCIATION PROVIDES A COPY OF A DECLARATION, GOVERNING DOCUMENT OR DEED TO ANY PERSON, CALIFORNIA LAW REQUIRES THAT THE DOCUMENT PROVIDED SHALL INCLUDE A STATEMENT REGARDING ANY UNLAWFUL RESTRICTIONS. SAID STATEMENT IS TO BE IN AT LEAST 14 -POINT BOLD FACE TYPE AND MAY BE STAMPED ON THE FIRST PAGE OF ANY DOCUMENT PROVIDED OR INCLUDED AS A COVER PAGE ATTACHED TO THE REQUESTED DOCUMENT. SHOULD A PARTY TO THIS TRANSACTION REQUEST A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENT REPORTED HEREIN PRELMBGB /M /Mbk Page 3 SCHEDULE B (continued) Order No: 880001725 P01 Your Ref: MOSER THAT FITS THIS CATEGORY, THE STATEMENT IS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED. a NOTE: IF THIS COMPANY IS REQUESTED TO DISBURSE FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH THIS TRANSACTION, CHAPTER 598, STATUTES OF 1989 MANDATES HOLD PERIODS FOR CHECKS DEPOSITED TO ESCROW OR SUB- ESCROW ACCOUNTS. THE MANDATORY HOLD PERIOD FOR CASHIER'S CHECKS, CERTIFIED CHECKS AND TELLER'S CHECKS IS ONE BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DAY DEPOSITED. OTHER CHECKS REQUIRE A HOLD PERIOD FROM THREE TO SEVEN BUSINESS DAYS AFTER THE DAY DEPOSITED. NOTE: ANY FUNDING WIRES TO CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY ARE TO BE DIRECTED AS FOLLOWS: BANK OF AMERICA 1850 GATEWAY BOULEVARD CONCORD. CALIFORNIA ABA 0260 - 0959 -3 CREDIT TO CHICAGO TITLE DEPOSITORY ACCOUNT NO. 12351 -50751 FURTHER CREDIT TO ORDER NO: 880001725 ATTN: RICHARD MOORE TITLE OFFICER "I 00 00 (D 0 0 N 6s `O 7 V N a 1 C/I lj H b CONW.1 NEWPo6T AVCNIf OMITOMIT. ] i1 D . L NEWM T 00014 - E $Et 5 OletlaT QEC ]NT. � 3 CW9M SW Ek.1J0 AVfN(,f eJCae- Z1 2169(16 CSFE Slit. 2) •� rpNOM CMOIFr 9VN SET 1E 67-70749 5EE WT. ?) L) T� 2 _ t xirsuvnarluna ...I i 1( ;, 261 -05• SHT I OF 2 I' 40 1�1 �— , , !T"!T'��`W�M{��rAM�{-�! 1WMamiI auto 4T:[IiI17Ef�� JE! W W y�• 0 ©�m E� CE E��CE \ s 'd_• 1 ` '' \ -nis plats for your aid in locating y" htn9 d % / \• vdl .I �d? `• n � with reference to sweets and other parcels. w 5 +' 9s / ) While this plat is believed to be correct, the ,..a ..6 d � � Company assumes no liability for any loss occurring by reason of reliance thereon." N y ale 000 t' MAP 13G9 - POR OP CARDIFF J nr. wr boa nrwno it'll_. _.ws MAP 1299 - CARDIFF 67 iii vaa66 �. loihoa a ROS 10954 13431 NlvAro rot wt 6CN6 r I a., yea Avys m WI CI AUG 2 D 1996 IAN DIM CWN„ A9Ef10N'I nkP el L6, 14 b eHT (y L , `Ml•IIII tlrKY MIN (pL1( 4 ""' ?ryl l\ �[pL 16'pIWE(y. , N_. ___.._... Notice You may be entitled to receive a $20.00 discount on escrow services if you purchased, sold or refinanced residential property in California between May 19, 1995 and November 1, 2002. If you had more than one qualifying transaction, you may be entitled to multiple discounts. If your previous transaction involved the same property that is the subject of your current transaction, you do not have to do anything; the Company will provide the discount, provided you are paying for escrow or title services in this transaction. If your previous transaction involved property different from the property that is subject of your current transaction, you must - prior to the close of the current transaction - inform the Company of the earlier transaction, provide the address of the property involved in the previous transaction, and the date or approximate date that the escrow closed to be eligible for the discount. Unless you inform the Company of the prior transaction on property that is not the subject of this transaction, the Company has no obligation to conduct an investigation to determine if you qualify for a discount. If you provide the Company information concerning a prior transaction, the Company is required to determine if you qualify for a discount which is subject to other terms and conditions. A N- N /14/WAA CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement July 1, 2001 We recognize and respect the privacy expectation of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non - public personal information ( "Personal Information'), and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; • From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; • From our internet web sites; • From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others; and • From consumer or other reporting agencies. Our Policies Regarding The Protection Of The Confidentiality And Security Of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We may also disclose your Personal Information: • to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; • to third -party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and • to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right To Access Your Personal Information And Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Change Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request correction, amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. All requests must be made in writing to the following address Privacy Compliance Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Drive Jacksonville, FL 32204 Multiple Products or Services: If we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. PRIVACY - 10121;'03 AA 9 g S•H 2R g� 630 5 � p deer y 5 BB� p Jill gg� � j58 zo �ypyp a a38e � gpp(t ° o�R� �C "s66 RK ° p .$ V w 2eyFa ea 09 mr o" 0 0 �VW9 Hits SL.-� � :M1 =�o@ Soo �eg��'�� aQOgF e� �o�ao., $a °o $ 6g,� s od��sj Ug3@8 b�� fl ��aQ�o6F�aMs p u n u PHN K oA all- �s �8 yN �Qa N "gam �e r A°. gail °g^e� .32 s B ° p9 B Po To n S v o R oz Us8�Ia to a &S em F R ag NG H o� yo X� P 0 N H a 0 4 ATTACHED ONE (Continued) AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (10- 17 -92) WITH A.L.TA ENDORSEMENT -FORM COVERAGE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following maven are eapntoly excluded farm da overage a that paltry and to Company wileml pry ba ordamage, arms, Wlcilm s fen oreapevseswhich arse by noon of 1. (a) Any law, ordi —of or ,o er.mental regulation (' toting Wt not limited to budding and zoning lams, or ii usecea, or ngumuons) rem riefin& reguhami& prohibiting or misting to (i) the occupancy, we, or enjoyment of the land; (b) the ciaraaer, dimensions or bastion of any imprwemev now or hereafter ererssl on the humid; (w) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimemvans or sm of the land or any Pat¢1 of which the land u or w a pan; or (iv) emimnmmal protremon, or the effect of any aolatm. of mete Iswa, ordma"^• ar gavcrvmcmW regalarom, acept to the extras that a otia of the coloreement thereof or a mow of a defer, lien or encumbramr restating from a violation or alleged viointem affe sing tM lead has bee. recorded in the puthie records at Date of Policy. (b) Any goveratziental police power not excluded by (a) above, rz¢pt to the extent that a cod¢ of the e.¢rase them[ or a sarice of a defer, ties or cermalm as malting from a violation or alleged mismam affecting [a hand has been recorded is the pd0lic records at Date of Policy. 2 Rights of emimemt domain unless notice of the arrase thereof has been rtmrtlest in the public records at Dale of Policy, bur cot adudimg from mverege any salting which La ocxvrred prior to Ihte of Paltry which would a binding on the rights of a purchaser for value wthom keoWetlge. 3. Defects, ft., rea,ism ass, adveOm claims, or othsl oanem: (a) or atcd. sneered, assumed or agreed to by the iasund daimon, (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public reeartls at Date of Policy, ben Imown to the iswed claimant aha am( disclosed in writing to the Compaay by the mauled claimant prior to the date the insured carman, became an Im ord wider the, palry, (c) reacting w on into or damage to to intend dairmav[; (d) attaching or amted subsequent to Date of Polity (vo,pt to the stmt that this policy wsum the priority of the lien of the insured mortgage over any statutory tie. for retrim, labor or mater ad or to the extra, insurance a afforded herein as toe .far, for strer improvement under cnnuruavov or completed at Date of Policy); or (e) retraining W lass or damage wWeh as ild not have been sonamed k the meared c anent had paid Wa for the intend mortgage. 4. Uvenforecabili, of tie lien of the watered mortgage bees. of the inability or failure of the insured at Dare of Policy, or the mentality or failure of any sWVCquent owner or the intleDtetlmv, to mmplywi[h appliaslak doing bnsmm haws of We aside w which to land u situated. S. Invalidity at unem armbitiry of the lies of to insured mangage, as claim thereat which arias out of the rransamoa mden¢d by [a matted mortgage and is based upon usury, or any ca.r coedit pmhdio. car truth w lending law. 6. Any statutory Lim for art oors, Is ter or materials (or the claim of prlonry of any visionary lien for toe., labor or materials over the lien of the inured! monpge) arising from an improvement or work muted to the hand which W contacted for and commend solosequcni to Date of Polity and u not finanmd in whale or in pan by proceeds of the indebted.. secured by to insured moP age which W Date of Polity the maured has advavo,d at is obligated to advamd. 7. Any claim ahiott arim, out of the tnma lion meatW the iWemd of the mortgagee wsund by the, paltry, by reason of the operation of federal han"Ii,., some meabr sty, or similar Qediton' lights laws, that is based on: (i) the tramdion ca sung the incraot at the ensure l mortgagee being deemed a Irauduum mmeyavo, or bandoleer tramfcr. or (u) We Mormvation of to interest of the mawed mortgage as a nrvtt of the applimtion of the doaume, of equitable stuorhinsuon; or (id) the nomination treating the intertvi of the unwed morgagrr bang dermetl a pnhmatW transfer eseept when the preferential uansfer mules from the kiln: (a) to timely afford the wstrumeat of transfer, or (b) of such recorariam to impart entire to a purchase far ndus or ajudpint. or lien sterlifor. The cave polity form may a word to afford rifler, Standard Covdrage or 6trmlod Coverage. la adai... to the above Hminaions from Coverage, the Pso,poo sfrom Craeragew a Standard Cwdrage polirywill also include flee following PxalKwas from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE Thu polity, dom cot mermen against bs or damagf (and the Companyamll cot pay owns, anorneys' fees or apensn) which mine, by reason at 1. Tram or atomwmen which n not shown w fearing lime by the nmrda of any sang s mhonty that levies tare or assessmema o. real property or by the public records. Pmaedirip by a public agency which may malt in taxes or atoesme ila, or millers of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the moot u of such agency or by the public Moods. 2 Any Id. , nghs, mMrexu or Jaime which are not wawa by the public records but which could be asanained by at uuperion of the tad or which may he asserted by persons in powetomm thereaf. 3. wasemeas, lieu or evcvmbaance, or claim- thereof, cot ahown h"M public remNa. 4. Dumepanan, con0ds w boundary lion, shortage w am. cnrvachmevts, as ivy other bra which a mired saavrywoWil disclose, and which n not shown by We public, rearms. 5. (a)Unpadented retain g claims; (b) msembow or exceptions in patents or in Ara authoraing the sommot thereof (e) cater rights, claws or udc to enter, whether or not the matte. accepted under (a), (b) or (e) art shown M the public nmra. 2006 AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (06- 17 -06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The foliavnng rotten see apnssly aseduded ram the avenge of this fotiry, and the Company will not pay bas of damage, men, W moneys' fns, or apensa that mdse by Mum. of 1. (a) Any haw, ondinamce, permit, of gmwemmental mphtam (iwudimg those Ming to building and roving) denridw& regalat m& pmhibhin& or MWdwg to (i)theomapa ey, um, or enjoyment of the Land; (u) the abarada darresons, or laastain of any impmvcmmt eroo ed oa the Use; (iii) the snhdamarom of land; or (iv) environmental Prof....: or the effect of any molum. of three lam. ono avm, or gavemmentak ",dam.. This 13xdmio. 1(a) does cot modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) A, foana eentat patio, poaer. Thu P dsdamn t(b) dm not modify or boi, the avenge pafroded made, Cr cooed Risk& 2 Ripw of eminent domain. Tuts Fkratun doe cot modify or hmn the mvxrage prwitled under Covered Rule] or & 3. Def eats, liens, emalmbrmm. adverse rlWms, or other mitten (a) neared. saffemd. mantra, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) rim Kriowv to the Company, not nmrded in the Public Records at Date of Pokry, but Known m the Intoned Clamant and not ai elosed w writing ro the Company by the Instead] Oaimaet prior to the ate the Insnd Claimant became an Insured under the, policy, (c) maturing to m bto or tlamage m the Insured Claimaer: (d) anaching or masted soaequent to Date of Potiry (however, this don not modify or limit the avenge provided under Covered Ride 11, U. or 14); or (e) resulting in low or damage that wnuW not bare been swarmed 9 the Insured Claimant bad paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. UoWodsxabihry of the lien of the loured Manpge beasae, rib the wabiLip' ar lailvrc of ass Insured to comply with appli whir dowg4rustress Wan o1 the Hair when the Lm is amated. S. birthday or mml.R itiry m whole or m pan of the Ion of the Inrmred Mortgage eat arise aim of the trammetwn "faced by the Iaund Manage aml u aced rip.. usury or any onaume r aed;t protemon or truth-w leading law. 6. Any claim, by reason of Me operation of federal baskrupery, state insolvency, or similar exertion nghs laws, teat the tra <ion creating the Imm of the Insured Mortgage, is (a) a hauaWem comeyance or fnuduleat transfer, or (b) a pmfcmWal Mosher for any reason mm stated in Covered Rink U(b) of aria potiry. 7. Any hen an the Title for nal estate times at animated by gmemmevtal authority and ¢fated or asachmg hetwee. Date of Polity and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Rrotdr. This Exclusion don cot codify or limit We arrvenge provided under Coend Auk I I (b). The (ford Pohey fore may s issue] to afford caber Ssvtlud Camrvge or fhtended Conrage. In addduon to the above 1]dusioa from Coverage. the E.Pa oa from Coverage w a S[inald Coverage poticywiR also mclutic the foWrrmg Pxapuons from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE TN+potiry don of insure agawas Iws or damage (antl to Campa.ywill amt pry mvis. at[orap fen or cope.) that arse by tftoom of 1. (a) Tastes or warmmmu that art not ahowo m misting lien by the remnW of any tsaing authoriry that levies tarn or assevmew on real property, or by the Pmlic Remra: (d) proceedings by a ptmlic agency, that may twlit in tam or sdmwMh mw, or mtim of smch proaedwg,wather ar em shown by the Marra of wmagevry or by the Pubes RemNx 2 Amy hao , ngbn, warms, or claims that art of shawm by to Ptdtic Records but that mWd be ascenmad by an mspc ©an of the Lvd or than may he asserted by person in possession of to 1-and. D(CCVRG2 - M/29/07 AA 3. Easements, liens or encmmhraem, or cl-mt mereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any emsoarhnteW, eammbma, vialadom.wriazicm. or adverse curawmana affecri.g the Due that would he dimlmsed by m aceunte and complete land suave, of to Land and not shown by the Public Rccdab. 5. (a) Unpatenteci mining claim, (b) mo-fahow or mrs,ptwns in patens or in Ads intimating the muamas hereof (c) water, rights, claims or uric to wWer. whether or not the matters ampted ,miler (a), M), or (c) art thoam by me Pobbc Rcmrda. Page 2 s s u N E °R •: � a: �� _a yBeg Ile gg @@ e � � g a s °R P3 aC Hai ilp -q n a �u B 9. �ggaI8 M•G 9 Y g gg cg'-° AK seR F B o aic �? °x �° a oa n v > n 26 jil g aP P3 a P`og 'g 6.9 5 ElP yE- i _g9_g R n „g ^a5�sag�a Eq 5o ea_eC �v fi ��pqo spPyggg. tla. has 6 8 s s a g s6' �Ra I M t Zq o EEaa y o oQ no gz 0 tz N 0 0 r. s F �o�8s� a � ge'S'dga66�z €,� =oE�Ea 6 pp q g ��0$g�2r'g.RA. RR�gRtgaeea�g RSB Pe a - Eli F."911H gga ,s €g�6d R' 6kaS �IZ38w.B��g� R €S gt °s ^X HfigS'5 � RIP! V. cm EgBeR� - 7 Q•O•sa a �. 65pgv o y a m ^ o � 4 A O 158�' m a R �F s`� v; e gg eBa�sfull 6a6 ° B �jGPO'.].0 has 5r 9 N °O555^� °S $ o aF�g^ a °��,� 8oe 3 n i o �.. 56.6 v ? a 9$ .8 fr i C4 k� C o� o� 3 oz c� F Q S 8 0 ATTACHMENT ONE (Continued) CLTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10-22 -03) ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10- 22 -03) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Fnaptiom m Schedule B. You are WE inauEnd against loss, mats, attorveyi fen, and eapenaea reaching from 1. Gwvvmmal police power, and the exmrnce or violation of any law or gowmment trillion Knowing of the tabu,, regulation. Thee inWdes ordimnota, law and En,pEbtawa mmemmg: 4. Rutz: a. building a that arc meatcd, allowed, or agreed to by Yau, ehmhcr or WE they appear in the Public I. zoning Records; c Lm use I. that am 1Cman m You at the Policy Date, but not m U1, unless they appear in the Public d. impoo ments no Lod Record, at the POticy Dam; E. land division a that result m no Ins to YOU; or t enviroomeoml ptectie. d. that firrt yr after the Policy Date This don Out limit the coeage drsarDed in Covered This 12iduston does not appy to viourlom or the enforcement of then maven Y notice or the Rule T, U, 22, D, N or25. violation or enforcemenr appears m the Public Records at the Policy Date. Thu Faclueon Wets S. Future m payvalm for Your Tntle. not limit the coverage dermdcd m Crntred Rut 14,15,16, 17 or ga. 6. lad of a n lot: 2 The failure Or Your exec., nmct ore, or any, part of them, m be mmtru¢ed in accoreb. a. m any Land oumr]e the era epedhcaly d13crlLCd and referred to m paagrph 3 of with applicable building codes. Thu Exclusion does WE apply to vivlatnv of building codes Srheduk A; and ff make of the violamn appears m the Public Reconit at the Potiry, Date. b. an Mans, alleys, or wererways that touch the Lm. 3. The nghr to take tM land by mndercrong it, ...I— his Padueoo don cot limit the coverage deambed Lo Covered Rik ll or 1& a. mince of aerdaing the nght appears m the Public lie cols a, the Policy Moe; or or ss b. the taking happened before the Policy Date am a binding on You if You bough[ the Lnd LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS Yom insurance for the follnning Covered Ruts a limited on the Ownett coverage Statement a follawa: For Covered Rid 14,15.16 and 1& Your Deductible Amount and Om Marimum Dalhtr limit of Liahiliry shown m Schedule A The dedntlrhle amamts and mmmum dollar limits shoam our SchetlWe A aEn a follow: oar Matlmam Dina Yom DcducWleAmomt Limit of Lebitiry Covered PT 14: I.M of Policy Amount or smam.00 5250(3.00 (attachment, as lea) Cove dRit 15: 1.0096 o1 Po1syAmounl or =,M.m S5.w.w ( >hirhevers less) Cowmd Rut l6 1.0096 o1P.L yAmount =,W ar L5.o m (whicMer s lea) Covered Rid, 1& 1.00% of PotiryAmaum ssm.w or ss (whichever or m) ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY (30 -13-01) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The foLLoutng .11. are epmay excluded form the revenge of the potty and the Company nill WE pry Los or damage, matt, attomeys frea orepeores which true by mane oh L (a) Any W, ordinance or gvwmmentat mgulahoo (including but Out limited to inning lava, ordmama, or regulations) merictn& regvlztmg, probrbiarg o Entering to (i) the omrpamy, ore, or enjoyment of the Lad; (u) the character. dimeunm or location, of any, reprmementa hour or bereafter erected our the Iand; (m) a septa m. m ownership or a change a the (1imemiom or arw of the lam or arty parcel of which the Iand u or w a part; Or(or) erouncouaul Protection- orthe effect of any viviatlon O1 rhea Lana. such.— or agabriom, except to the stem that a mtiee of the enforcement thereof Or mtim of a defer, Ben or enaambnnce Enauling from a violation or allepd ..Iitm. affecting the Lnd has beet recorder] w the Public Records M Date of Policy. This rxcluebut don rot Limit the cwenp pmvi led under Covered Rely 1 ;13,14, and 16 of this polity. (b) Any gEonjobacurej police poser not excludN by (a) above, except to the event that e not. of be eardse thereof or a moo, of a direct, lien or etevmbnnce tooling from a violation or alleged violation affecting the Lahr] has here. recorded in the Public Recot it at Date or Policy. Thu oucluaioe don not hunt tae mvemge provided under Covered Ruts I3. 13,14, am 16 of the policy. 2 Pb h i of eminent domain utdess orrice of the aerase therm( h o hen. recorded lo the Public Record, at Date Or Potiry, but WE adading from omeap any taking which hat occurred prior m Date of Policy arhrch would b , binding on the rights of a purchaser for slue without Kmw1Mp. 3. Def eat, lien. <mvmbnmea. ativerx clarma ae.urr a at rric (a) exem ed, mffettd, assumed or agreed to by the !mused CI®ant: (b) tar Kaown to de, Company, not ¢corded m the Puhtic Records at Date of Potiry, but Known to the Inured Csimaot and not disclosed 0 urn ung to the Company by the lurured (1°;n ilia prior to the date the Insured (lIuru nr become an Insured under the policy, (c) reMdbng in m loo damap to the Inured Climenf (d) attaching or cater] Madelpa[ to Date of Policy (LIES paragraph (1013 WE timer the oowap provided under Covered Ritb & 16. 1& 19, M. 21, 22, Z3, W. 25 aid 26): or D(CCYRG4 - W /29/0] M (e) t13uloo, to Ina o1 damap which coo Old eat have been smrained r] the featured LTauvant W paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. UneeforceablBry of the hen of the loured Mortgage because of the whitely or failure of the Imuad at Date of Polity. or the notably or failure of any aWVegmnt owner of the imentedaea, to comp" t], applicable, doing businee, Ww of the Mate iv which the land u minted. 5. Invatdity or unetforccabWty of the lien of the Insurzd Moopp, or claim thereof, when ars13 cam of ,be, transaction entlevcetl by the in,uEnd Mortgage am u hoed upon usury. Except a provided in Covered Rik P, or any mmumer credit protection or truth lo tending law. 6. Real property none or a nciecenm of aby giro moicetal authority which become alien on the land subsequent to Date of Policy. Thar exclusion don not limit the orange provided underCovered MM, 7,8(e)andM 7. Any claim of invalidity, mcaforvabiLry or sd, of pmnry of the Into of the loldred Mortgage as to adancv or conciliation. made after the Testified has Knowletlge that the ,unee shown in schedule A u no loogcr We owner of the evate or tmcrat oawmd by the policy. The ad.. don cot bind the coverage provided m Covered Rut & & Lad of priority of the lien of the Inured Mortpga as to each am every advance made One Date Of Potiry, and all barren, charged thereon, owe tiem, encombances and other marten affecting Ite WIe, the mne. &,rhich are Known to the Insured at: (a) The time of the advance: or (b) The time a modiftcam. a made to the mums of We lnsured Mongap which obaeg13 the Mae of interert charged, J the ram of imereM a grater as a taint of the modification turn a would have been before the mmihcatiea The exclusion don WE hour the revenge provider] in Covered Riot & 9. The failure of the rehidemul nructun, or any portion thereof to haw been comtrueEW before, on or after Date of Potiry in accordance with applicable bottling codes. Thu evolution don WE apply to violanom of building codes if notice of the violation ppean in the Public RemNa at Dine of Policy. Page 4 HYDROLOGY REPORT For Moser Residence 2358 Newcastle Drive City of Encinitas, California PREPARED FOR: Mr. Moser 2358 Newcastle Avenue Encinitsas, CA 92024 PREPARED BY: Coastal Land Solutions 573 Second Street Encinitas, CA 92024 (760) 230 -6025 DATE: July, 6, 2009 Revised: 10 -22 -09 No. 05124 cVy. '?-30- 10-22 —09 R. Jones, RCE 65124 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Executive Summary 1.0 Introduction 1 -1 Existing Conditions 1.2 Proposed Project 1.3 Summary of Results and Conditions 1.4 Conclusions 1.5 References 1.6 Methodology 2.0 Introduction 2.1 County of San Diego Criteria 2.2 Runoff coefficient determination 2.3 Hydrology Model Output 3.0 Pre - Developed Hydrologic Model Output 3.1 Post - Developed Hydrologic Model Output 3.2 Detention Volume Calculation 3.3 Table 3 -2 — Maximum Overland Flow Length & Initial Al Time of Concentration Soil Hydrologic Groups A2 Rainfall Isopluvials (100 -year Rainfall Event — 6 hours) A3 Rainfall Isopluvials (100 -year Rainfall Event— 24 hours) A4 Figure 3 -1 (Intensity — Duration Design Chart — Template) A5 Figure 3 -7 (Manning's Equation Nomograph) A6 Existing Condition Hydrology Map (pocket) Proposed Condition Hydrology Map (pocket) \\Server1\6CLS SHARED FILES \CLS Job Files \CLS#768 MOSER(NEWCASTLE AVE)1HYDRM9 -1 -09 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 3:33 PM 1 012 212 0 0 9 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction This Hydrology Study for 2358 Newcastle Avenue has been prepared to analyze the hydrologic characteristics of the existing and proposed project site, and determine the existing condition offsite hydrologic characteristics that are conveyed through the proposed project site. This report intends to present the methodology and the calculations used for determining the runoff from the project site in both the pre - developed (existing) conditions and the post - developed (proposed) conditions, as well as the offsite areas, produced by the 100 year 6 hour storm. 1.2 Existing Conditions The proposed project property is located on the west side of Newcastle Avenue, north of the intersection of Dublin Street, in the City Encinitas, as shown on the vicinity map below. VICINITY MAP The existing site includes a single existing residential structure and detached garage. In addition to the existing residential structure and garage, the site currently consists of a driveway, retaining wall, and miscellaneous other hardscape. Drainage from the existing site is primarily conveyed in a westerly direction across the project site. C: \Documents and Settings \Sean\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \0LKA0 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 11:49 AM 9/7/2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 1.3 Proposed Project The intent of the proposed project is to construct two (2) attached single - family residence's (twin home), driveway, landscape, hardscape, and walkway areas. The proposed development consists of the construction of improvements to the project site, which includes construction of the above described site improvements as well as the proposed removal of the existing residence. The project will also include grading to facilitate removal of soil to accommodate the new structure, and to create areas suitable for the construction of all site improvements. The drainage of the proposed development will be facilitated by overland sheet flow, including area drain inlets and all associated piping. The storm drain system also incorporates the design and use of a grass or landscape BMP that will serve to convey runoff from the site over a pervious surface prior to discharge from the site. The lawn and yard area east of the proposed residence will serve as a detention area to detain additional storm water runoff produced by the developed conditions. It will also serve to treat storm water runoff. The proposed residences will also direct most of the roof runoff to the detention area. 1.4 Summary of Results Hydrologic analysis of the pre - developed and post - developed conditions of the proposed project site is included in this report as section 3.1 and 3.2 respectively. The following summarizes the peak discharges at the single point of discharge that resulted from performing hydrologic analysis of the project site in both the proposed developed and existing condition: The project site hydrologic models for both the pre- and post - developed conditions encompass a total area of 0.136 acres and consists of two sub - basins. C\Documents and Settings\Sean�Local SettingsJemporary Internet Files\OLRAMCLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 11 49 AM 9/7/2009 Existinq Conditions Deve lo ed Conditions Q cfs Tc min Area acres Volume c Q cfs Tc min Area acres Volume c 100 -yr 0.47 5.80 0.136 706 072 5.12 0.136 1014 The project site hydrologic models for both the pre- and post - developed conditions encompass a total area of 0.136 acres and consists of two sub - basins. C\Documents and Settings\Sean�Local SettingsJemporary Internet Files\OLRAMCLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 11 49 AM 9/7/2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 1.5 Conclusions As stated in section 1.4, the project site hydrologic models for both the pre- and post - developed conditions encompass a total area of 0.136 acres. The models consist of two sub - basins. Evaluating the two models, the proposed development will increase the amount of runoff from the project site at node 7. The changes are primarily altered due to the decrease in time of concentration and increases in impervious surface. The existing site has 20% impervious surface and the proposed site has 75% impervious surface. The yard area east of the proposed residence will serve as a detention area and store the additional storm water produced from the developed conditions. The detention area is able to store up to 390 cubic feet. Additional storm water volume that the proposed development creates is 308 cubic feet. The detention area will be drained by two 3" pvc storm drain pipes. The storm drain pipes outlet at the sideyard, allowing storm water to be treated over denses lawn /landscaped areas before sheet flowing offsite. Storm water discharged from the proposed development will be conveyed over sidewalk, grass and landscape BMP areas and then discharge to the alley at the westerly property limits. The proposed system will provide storm water collected in the area drain system the opportunity to be treated within a proposed grass /landscape BMP. The proposed storm drain system will safely convey the entire 100 -year peak flow generated by offsite and onsite runoff. C \Documents and Settings\Sean \Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \OLKAMCLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 11 :49 AM 9/7/2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 1.6 References "San Diego County Hydrology Manual ", revised June 2003, County of San Diego, Department of Public Works, Flood Control Section. C. \Documents and Settings \Seanlocal Settings%Ternporary Internet Files \OLKAMCLS 768 HYDRO 9 2_09.doc CLS# 866 11:49 AM 9/7/2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Introduction The hydrologic model used to perform the hydrologic analysis presented in this report utilizes the Ration Method (RM) equation, Q =CIA. The RM formula estimates the peak rate of runoff based on the variables of area, runoff coefficient, and rainfall intensity. The rainfall intensity (1) is equal to: I= 7.44xP6 xD -064s Where: I = Intensity (in /hr) P6 = 6 -hour precipitation (inches) D = duration (minutes — use Tc) Using the Time of Concentration (Tc), which is the time required for a given element of water that originates at the most remote point of the basin being analyzed to reach the point at which the runoff from the basin is being analyzed. The RM equation determines the storm water runoff rate (Q) for a given basin in terms of flow (typically in cubic feet per second (cfs) but sometimes as gallons per minute (gpm)). The RM equation is as follows: Q = CIA Where: Q= flow (in cfs) C = runoff coefficient, ratio of rainfall that produces storm water runoff (runoff vs. infiltration /evaporation /absorption /etc) I = average rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the Tc for the area, in inches per hour. A = drainage area contributing to the basin in acres. The RM equation assumes that the storm event being analyzed delivers precipitation to the entire basin uniformly, and therefore the peak discharge rate will occur when a raindrop that falls at the most remote portion of the basin arrives at the point of analysis. The RM also assumes that the fraction of rainfall that becomes runoff or the runoff coefficient C is not affected by the storm intensity. I, or the precipitation zone number. In addition to the above Ration Method assumptions, the conservative assumption that all runoff coefficients utilized for this report are based on type "D" soils. 2.2 County of San Diego Criteria As defined by the County Hydrology Manual dated June 2003, the rational method is the preferred equation for determining the hydrologic characteristics of basins up to approximately one square mile in size. The County of San Diego C. \Documents and Settings \Seanlocal Settings \Temporary Internet Files \0LKA0 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9 2 09 doe CLS# 866 11 49 AM 9!712009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue has developed its own tables, nomographs, and methodologies for analyzing storm water runoff for areas within the county. The County has also developed precipitation isopluvial contour maps that show even lines of rainfall anticipated from a given storm event (i.e. 100 -year, 6 -hour storm). One of the variables of the RM equation is the runoff coefficient, C. The runoff coefficient is dependent only upon land use and soil type and the County of San Diego has developed a table of Runoff Coefficients for Urban Areas to be applied to basin located within the County of San Diego. The table categorizes the land use, the associated development density (dwelling units per acre) and the percentage of impervious area. Each of the categories listed has an associated runoff coefficient, C, for each soil type class. The County has also illustrated in detail the methodology for determining the time of concentration, in particular the initial time of concentration. The County has adopted the Federal Aviation Agency's (FAA) overland time of flow equation. This equation essentially limits the flow path length for the initial time of concentration to lengths of 100 feet or less, and is dependent on land use and slope. 2.3 Runoff Coefficient Determination As stated in section 2.2, the runoff coefficient is dependent only upon land use and soil type and the County of San Diego has developed a table of Runoff Coefficients for Urban Areas to be applied to basin located within the County of San Diego. The table, included at the end of this section, categorizes the land use, the associated development density (dwelling units per acre) and the percentage of impervious area. For the existing development the total number of dwellings is 1, and the total developed lot area is roughly equal to 0.136 acres. The existing site has a dwelling unit per acre (DU /A) ratio of 7.3, and soil type D. The runoff coefficient is based on the weighted C value and is a percentage of impervious surface where impervious surfaces C =0.90 and pervious surface C =0.45. 20% of the existing site is impervious. The weighted C value for the existing condition is C =0.55. For the proposed development the total number of dwellings is 2, and the total developed lot area is roughly equal to 0.136 acres. The proposed site has a dwelling unit per acre (DU /A) ratio of 14.5, and soil type D. 75% of the proposed site is impervious. The weighted C value for the proposed condition is C =0.79 2.4 Detention Volume Determination An assumption of the Rational Method is that discharge increases linearly over the Tc for the drainage area until reaching the peak discharge as defined by the RM formula, and then decreases linearly. A linear hydrograph ca be developed for the peak flow occurring over the Tc. However, for designs that are dependent C \Documents and Settings \Sean\LOcal Settings \Temporary Internet Files\0LKA0 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09. doc CLS# 866 11 49 AM 9(7!2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue on the total storm volume, it is not sufficient to condisder a single hydrograph for peak flow occurring over the Tc at the geginning of a 6 hour storm event because the dyrograph does not account for the entire volume of runoff from the storm event. The volume under the dyrograsph is equal to the rainfall intensity multipolied by the duration for which that intensity occurs (Tc), the dranage area(A) contributing to the design location, and the runoff coefficient (C) for the drainage area. For designs that are dependant on the total storm volume, a hydrograph must be generated to account for the entire volume of runoff from the 6 hour storm event. The hydrograph for the entire 6 hour storm event is generated by creating a rainfall distribution consisting of blocks of rain, creating an incremental hydrograph for each block of rain, and adding the hydrographs from each block of rain. This process creates a hydrograph that contains runoff from all the blocks of rain and accounts for the entire volume of runoff from the 6 hour storm event. The total volume under the resulting hydrograph is equal to the following equation (Eq. 6 -1, of the San Diego County Hydrology Manual) VOL =CP6A Where, VOL = volume of runoff (acre- inches) P6 = 6 hour rainfall (inches) C= runoff coefficient A =area of the watershed (acres) C. \Documents and Settings \Sean\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fdes\0LKA0 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9 2_09.doc CLS# 866 11:49 AM 9/7!2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 3.0 Hydrology Calculations 3.1 Pre - Developed Hydrology Calculations Flow across the initial subarea nodes 10 to 9: Weighted C = 0.90 (Area impervious) + 0.45 (Area pervious) (Total Area) C= 0.90 (1224 s.f.) + 0.45(4772 s.f.) 5996 s.f. C =1102 + 2147 5996 s.f. C= 0.55 A, 0-9 = 0.11 acres s(CA) = (0.55)(0.11) = 0.06 L= 100 ft (per Table 3 -2, Maximum Overland Flow Length & Initial Time of Concentration, of the Hydrology Manual). S = (80.30 - 73.50)/100 = 6.8% Ti = 5.57 minutes (Table 3 -2, Hydrology Manual) P6 = 2.6 inches 1100 = 6.38 in /hr Qnode 9= E(CA) 1= (0.06)(6.38)= 0.38 cfs Flow from node 9 to 7 (Natural valley channel flow): L= 20 ft (Channel Length) S = (7150- 72.20)/20 = 6.0% V = 4.0 fps (Mannings Equation Nomograph, Figure 3 -7) T, = 20'/4.0 fps = 5 seconds = 0.1 minute To = T, + Tt = 5.57 +0.1 = 5.80 minutes C Oocuments and Settings \Sean \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \0LKA0 %CLS 768 HYDRO 9_2_09.doc CLS# 866 11:49 AM 9/7!2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue 1'100 = 6.38 in /hr Qnode 7 = E(CA) I= [CAnode 10 -9 + CAnode 9 -7 ] 1'100 = [(0.06)+ 0.55(0.026)] 6.38 = 0.47 cfs 3.2 Developed Condition Hydrology Calculations Flow across the initial subarea, nodes 10 to 8. C = 0.63 (Table 3 -1 of the Hydrology Manual for single - family residential, 14.5 dwelling units per acre (DU /A) or less, Type D soil) Weighted C = 0.90 (Area impervious) + 0.45 (Area pervious) (Total Area) C= 0.90 (4525 s.f.) + 0.45(1471 s.f.) 5996 s.f. C =1102 +2147 5996 s.f. C= 0.79 A10 -8 = 0.10 acres Y_(CA) = (0.79)(0.10) = 0.079 L= 100 ft (per Table 3 -2, Maximum Overland Flow Length & Initial Time of Concentration, of the Hydrology Manual). S = (80.50 - 74.00)/100 = 6.5% Ti = 5.07 minutes (Table 3 -2, Hydrology Manual) P6 = 2.6 inches 110o = 6.78 in /hr Qnode 8= Y_(CA) 1= (0.079)(6.78)= 0.53 cfs Flow from node 8 to 7 (landscape /hardscape channel flow): L= 32 ft (landscape and hardscape) C.\Documents and Settings \Sean\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\0LKA0 \CLS 768 HYDRO 9 2_09. doc CLS# 866 11 :49 AM 9/7/2009 HYDROLOGY REPORT for 2358 Newcastle Avenue S = (74.00- 72.20)/32 = 5.6% V = 20 fps (Mannings Equation Nomograph, Figure 3 -7) Tt = 32710 fps = 3.2 seconds = 0.05 minute Tc = T; + T1 = 5.07 +.05 = 5.12 minutes I'loo = 6.74 in /hr Qnode 7 =I(CA) I = [CAnode 10 -8 + CAnode 8 -7 ] I'l00 = [0.079 + 0.79(0.036)] 6.74 = 0.72 cfs 3.3 Detention Volume Calculation Pre - Developed Volume: Volume = CP6A (Equation 6 -1 of the San Diego County Hydrology Manual) V =0.55 x 2.6 inch x .136 acres x (43560 sf /acre)(ft/12inchs)) V= 706 c.f. Developed Volume: Volume = CP6A (Equation 6 -1 of the San Diego County Hydrology Manual) V =0.79 x 2.6 inch x .136 acres x (43560 sf /acre)(ft/12inchs)) V= 1014 c.f. Detention Volume V = V (Developed) — V( Pre - Developed) V= 1014 c.f. — 706 c.f. V= 308 c.f. C \Documents and Settings\Sean\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLKAWLS 768 HYDRO 10_22_09 (2).doc CLS# 866 3 '41 PM 10/22/2009 EX, - PROP: San Diego County Hydrology Manual Section: 3 Date: June 2003 Page: 12 of 26 Note that the Initial Time of Concentration should be reflective of the general land -use at the upstream end of a drainage basin. A single lot with an area of two or less acres does not have a significant effect where the drainage basin area is 20 to 600 acres. Table 3 -2 provides limits of the length (Maximum Length (Lm)) of sheet flow to be used in hydrology studies. Initial T; values based on average C values for the Land Use Element are also included. These values can be used in planning and design applications as described below. Exceptions may be approved by the "Regulating Agency" when submitted with a detailed study. Table 3 -2 MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH (LM) O_ mT1Tr A i Tnuc nTi f nNClWNTR ATK1N (T,1 Element' DU/µ Acre 4.5 %v 1% 2% 3% 5% 1HT, Lm Ti LM T; LM T; Lm T, Lm T; Lm Natural 50 13.2 70 12.5 85 10.9 100 10.3 100 8.7 100 6.9 LDR l 50 12.2 70 11.5 85 10.0 100 9.5 100 8.0 100 6.4 LDR 2 50 11.3 70 10.5 85 9.2 100 8.8 100 7.4 100 5.8 LDR 2.9 50 10.7 70 10.0 85 8.8 95 8.1 100 7.0 100 5.6 MDR 4.3 50 10.2 70 9.6 80 8.1 95 7.8 100 6.7 100 5.3 MDR ,7.3 50 9.2 65 8.4 80 7.4 95 7.0 100 6.0 100 4.8 MDR 10.9 50 8.7 65 7.9 80 6.9 90 6.4 100 5.7 100 4.5 MDR 14. 50 8.2 65 7.4 80 6.5 90 6.0 100 5.4 100 4.3 HDR 24 50 6.7 65 6.1 75 5.1 90 4.9 95 4.3 100 3.5 HDR 43 50 5.3 65 4.7 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.4 100 2.7 N. Com 50 5.3 60 4.5 75 4.0 85 3.8 95 3.41 100 2.7 G. Com 50 4.7 60 4.1 7S 3.6 85 3.4 90 2.9 100 2.4 O.PICom 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 100 2.2 Limited 1. 50 4.2 60 3.7 70 3.1 80 2.9 90 2.6 ]00 2.2 General 1. 50 3.7 601 3.2 70 2.7 80 2.6 90 2.3 1 100 1.9 'See Table 3 -1 for more detailed description 3-12 Ch 1) 62) County of San Diego cr Hydrology Manual Soil Hydrologic Groups s m 3 c J Y6 Legend ed1 amps Om, A - Omw9 a we G�o OWtl.rrnwa LJI O�Y U�MIWY -- cis GIS N m 70 1 0 7 rMa CAS-) County of San Diego Orange Hydrology Manual county, 33-W !3r -Mln� v Riverside County . ........... x� ....... CIO r QA % Rainfall Isopluvials 100 Y� Rainfall Event - 6 Houn . . '+ . ....... ..... '%.. ........... ..... ... I ....... ... .......... C, arm \• arm 0 .. .......... 46 % W . ... ...... (0 V 0 ............ 0 32-45' A GIs GIS : . I . ........ e x C N W+ 32'317 32*30' 3 0 3 Mlle e5mil!!T! CAS-) CA-) County of San Diego Hydrology Manual O—mn e g 3830 County Riverside County AANC93EL % Rainfall Isopluvials WIN ............... V.• ..... ....... i0o Yeu RaInfin Ewnt - 24 Hour ........ ....... .............. . .. % 3rw 331W ...... 3 V. ...... TE 0 ... (P74 q.5) ........ A-4& =-w — arm 'dt. t GIS P f "JL,3 I c e X 3r3- 1 0 3 110111m CA-) b•39 '.', 1 ■. �►., �n�umIN11NIUIIIAIAAIIN ■��aa�aa■N■NI ��rN Vii: 111111RIIDIIIIIIIIIIIN�N ■■■elaal ®��■■ - - \ v�. ��et�a��i��i �:\ ��: is111N11Bllllllllull ►�p11NIlYll1111111�1 ■�ea� ■INaI■■e■eee EQUATION . I IIIIIIIIII�� 1 7 44 P6 D-0,645 11 . ��11�l�i.Ilihii�C;� ��II;;o,!!IN ■■ ' I� - �11�. lai.�ll..Iln.I�i..Nnll..Iile,, lllRle ®Mlle .•• ��\ •1 IN. 1111�a1111�.! a, 'al IIIeI1 "IU .Ni�.!li,.l�l!m,.lnl�ll� '1 ''11'h''Iii'N ■e®ee® . . ►.11110 ihllllu��m��llrllln,!I��, ''1 'lIH ''11111 'Oj'Uli'IU' "Ily1 �" 11■I • �Ilidwslr.l� ,■o M 1646 I'IItI V'iii� iiry!�I III MEN 1 Il�oa��l!!��I�u1111 � 411N , %- � �� 1,=11: . . . ; �w■■ ■■� ■ ■�■■Illllfla■fll� ��IIIIfl��111111N III�NIIIIiiN11111� ■i.�1111NI11�i ". ®■111 1•— \— \■R�II \�iali�li !�\ ' ' a■ �N■■■ �ullua■ �lulu�\ alllanlw ,!IEIIIAII►�■lllle��;lnwn ■ e�eeI111Y® IIIIII�M1► `.1eI1111I1Il�lel�i'�"i:!0�i:41 SIYINIIIIfl�llllllllnlllflllllii !!�Illllil��ilu'lllii�!!I �INIRIIIIANIIIgIIIIIIIIIIYIIIIIIIIVia o��l�!!Il�in�a ®I�I�IIII�BII�II IIIIUIII�nIIIIIIIII��rMEN ' iEErs Ilill'I;;.:..a,e ■i sui ::�1 C:. IHWI � (j�Q� 11 -1® `� ® MI6, lulr; E ErrOY. y s!a!=s=s: MM.NIIMInnI•Y.. {e�h�lus( ..1 :YI::YI.Y•i uul! •e(}ita�1py a...I n.n.H �e��w�Nrurxun. nnunmruu .uuunumwuamlw�auurr"nnn.: oerl , o xnn.nniHnIWUM. is uul smogs r • uurw_ nnn•W: Inl, oimunuuulrnmurrinnnnmwiilrul 111 M111 iiiliriill 6111 INHIN I Nfilllll BM qC' 5.57�,;n , 5, Sown PROP : 5, 07) S. 1 Z I,- • Intensity - Duration Design Chart - Template CAQ EQUATION: V = 1.49 Ris s", n 02 Manning's Equation Nomograph ('a (j) t I is U K L' 3 -7 0.2 r au 0.3 0 16 30 F04 001 0.10 0.09 F[ 1 0.0B 0.5 20 /1 c Q dQ 0.07 0.06 0.6 0.05 0 0 D 0.9 0.9 002 0.03 1.0 \O 0.02 \ B 0.03 a � 7 G j 8 6 g 004 001 0 009 O C 2 5 U N ' = 0008 0007 U FJ /.' �g \ t Z 0.05 a a 2 O J 0.006 = o L) O < �/. 006 W 0.005 3/ O Q' 0107 O.00gD pOj S 3 O.OB 6 0 003 4 0.09 0.002 5 2 010 6 7 B 0.001 9 009 .00 0.0008 10 1 0 02 0.0007 0.9 O 006 0.8 00005 0.7 0.0004 06 03 0.0003 20 05 04 GENERAL SOLUTION SOURCE: USDOT, FHWA, HDS -3 (1961) Manning's Equation Nomograph ('a (j) t I is U K L' 3 -7 PROPOSED RUNOFF CONDITIONS w3 I --------------------------------- LLJ 0 ro W io s. SEC 8010 1 I ✓� I W O 54.5 Ot`i 9'22'50 "E 119.97' i \ 1\ I 1 EL =72.20 EL =74.00 i w-6 f w X13------------------------------ I EXISTING RUNOFF CONDITIONS I I I', � �1�1�1� !�1\�11�1�1�1ll11111111�Y� I wI I w w IJ Q I A \ \ \ 1 I I \ N11 { 5 \\ 9 \♦ \ T'E \ 1A 19f .96' lI I I I l I I i I I II I 1 W � QJ J Iz z 730 EL 7I 3.50 EL =80.30 EL= 12. - L =2� I I - /L=105 -6.81. 5 =6% 9 9'22'50'E 119.97' /