The URL can be used to link to this page

2009-10210 GLine: 09"A3 /IX -/i Eniffinecarinfi, Ave. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING CLIENT: LATTIN PROJECT: LAT 409 -U DATE: 24 MAY 2009 MR. JAMES LATTIN 246 Neptune Ave. Encinitas, CA. 92024 Subject: Soil Update Report for the Proposed Residential Lot located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 254- 230 -43) Reference (a): Site Specific Soil Investigation Report by B & B Engineering, Inc., dated 3 May 2007. Dear Mr. Lattin: Pursuant to the requirements of the City of Encinitas, we have completed our site inspection and our review of Reference (a) for the subject parcel. On 2 May 2009, a representative from our fine visited the site in order to evaluate the general surface soil conditions relative to the proposed construction. Locations of our Field Exploratory Test Pits are shown on Enclosure (1), the Log of these pits are detailed on Enclosure (2) and the Compaction and Expansion Test Data are depicted on Enclosure (3). Based on our visual inspections and observations in the field and our review of Reference (a), the following conclusions were derived: Other than minor erosion, the general overall surface soil conditions do not appear to have changed significantly since the preparation of Reference (a). It is our opinion that the designed pad area may support the proposed residential structure and the conclusions and recommendations found in the Reference (a) shall be considered still valid. However, the over- excavation operation shall extend across the entire lot and the existing retaining wall backfill soils and drainage shall be evaluated for compliance with current codes. Reference (a) shall be modified to reflect any updated provisions that pertain to this project as set forth in the 2007 California Building Code. No geotechnical conditions were encountered which would preclude the development of the site. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations found in Reference (a) and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. 161 1 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081.5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 9454221 Lat 409 -U SEISMIC DESIGN For seismic design purposes, the "Site Class D" can be used for the soils underlying the subject site, and the procedures outlined in the 2007 California Building Code, CBC, (Sections 1603 -A and 1613 -A - EARTHQUAKE LOADS) should be used for calculations of the seismic coefficients for structural design. The civil /structural engineer should consult with the project geotechnical consultant if additional geotechnical information is needed for the seismic design. No active faults are known to exist within or near the site. The Rose Canyon Earthquake Fault (Type B) is located approximately more than 10 kilometers from the site. The property is not located within an area designated as a special studies /earthquake zone under the Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Zone /Special Studies Act. The Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. B & B Engineering Inc. and Associates appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact us. X 38623 fXn it 2 Sincerely, X� Stephen B. Peter RCE 38623 Expires 3 -31 -11 161 1 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945 -4221 7� 2 0 I APN 259 _23CL —.3F APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD EXPLORATORY TEST PIT PLOT PLAN Owner MR. JAMES LATTIN Address 135 WEST JASON STREET ENCINITAS. CA P.N. LAT 409 -U /l f• /L Kiiiliucerbul, lzic Late M2Y -09 I Enclosure ( 1 ) J 4) fArAvAi E igineerin i. r LOG OF TEST PITS EXCAVATED:-3-12-2007 BACKHOE CASE 580 M PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W=2' L = 27' D=10' SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET DATUM CLIENT: JIM LATTIN PROJECT:LAT 307- 409 -U DATE: 5104109 MEAN SEA LEVEL TP- 1 GEOLOGICAL = < = o DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND CLASSIFICATION LL a O m a w m a 22 ENGINEERING CLASSIFICATION AND TEST DATA: DESCRIPTION w m w w LL , DESCRIPTION M- D -O (RC) ARTIFICIAL FILL 5 DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND QaF DRY, LOOSE 10 4 TERRACE DEPOSITS 5 RUST -BROWN SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, LOOSE 10 10 BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' FORMATIONAL RUST - TAN - ORANGE SILTY SAND 15 DRY TO DAMP, MEDIUM DENSE BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' 20 NO WATER, NO CAVING 15 20 PIT DIMENSION IN FEET SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET W =2' L =25' D =10' Mm ARTIFICIAL FILL DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND QaF DRY, LOOSE 4 TERRACE DEPOSITS 5 RUST BROWN SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, LOOSE 10 10 FORMATIONAL RUST TAN ORANGE SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, MEDIUM DENSE BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' NO WATER, NO CAVING 15 20 Enclosure ( 2 ) (D I ii ismonccrinq. 111C. Client. JIM LATTIN Project. LAT 307- 409 -U Date. May -09 Test No Test Date Test Location Test E1 /Depth Soil Type Dry Density, pcf Moisture, % Relative Retest Field Opt Compaction o. 1 3/12/07 TEST PIT - 1 2' A 91.5 123.5 2.5 10.0 74 2 3/12/07 TEST PIT - 1 3' A 101 2 123.5 2.2 10.0 82 3 3/12/07 TEST PIT - 1 5' B 1013 122.5 8.3 9.5 83 4 3/12107 TEST PIT - 2 2' A 99.33 123.5 5.4 10.0 80 5 3112/07 ITEST PIT - 2 3' A 94.53 123.5 7.9 10.0 77 6 3/12/07 TEST PIT - 2 5' B 977 122.5 22 9.5 80 COMPACTION CURVE DATA SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY MOISTURE % PP A. DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND TP -1 @ 3' 10.0 123.5 B. RUST -BROWN SILTY SAND TP -1 @ 4' 9.5 122.5 C RUST- TAN - ORANGE SILTY SAND TP -1 @ 10' 10.0 114.0 EXPANSION POTENTIAL 1 to 20 = Very Low EXPANSION INDEX = 0 (NON EXPANSIVE POTENTIAL) TP -1 3' 21 -50= Low 51 -90 = Moderate 91 -130 = High 131 + = Critical COMPACTION AND EXPANSION TEST DATA ENCLOSURE (3) APPLICATION NO. ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION JOB SITE ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION SAMEt /-,4 U Nj% /vEPT L)NE A�E: MAILING ADDRESS r 6AJIA <� CI M, STATE, ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NO. CIVIL ENGINEER INFORMATION -)w LARC; 5)ITC(Z x iks<-oL NAME 6-�-5 /V. VVV I01 09 JIf- _A ADDRE S �[ n+A v',r4cfl q?c71:�Sq�2,2 CITY, YATE, ZIP TELEPHONE NO. t3eII Ii.- 091nni ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. z-2 CONTRACTOR INFORMATION NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NO. STATE LICENSE NO. & TYPE SOILS ENGINEER INFORMATION 6R G^NC,ImcEaj IJL NAME 16 -Q 5D. MCc=&Sr D2. -41-28S A� ST ., CITY, STATE, ZIP TELEPHONE NO. REGISTRATION NO. DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE mu 6N A qfk(l} %V'Y' L--�o 'r-- CASE NO. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED PRINT NAME TELEPHONE NO. - ------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW PLANNING CASE NUMBER L/ 2S — 066 �j �J FOR GRADING PLANS: OK FOR PLAN CHECK PtANNER I:kioskhandouts /Eng /Eng. Dev. App FOR FINAL MAPS /PARCEL MAPS FINAL MAP PARCEL MAP DATE BONDING COST ESTIMATE FOR: GRADING PLAN 133 W. JASON STREET ENCINITAS, CA PREPARED FOR: JAMES LATTIN PE 1717 PREPARED BY: PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 (858) 259 -8212 DATE: APRIL 23. 2009 Allto-Alqhl 4361- W1111h.M MACK I RCE 73620 I DATE D ECE[ WE D APO 2 32009 ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS C W No.73620 s E xp iZ 31 -10 u EXHIBIT "A" PE 1717 133 W. JASON STREET GRADING PLAN BOND ESTIMATE CITY OF ENCINITAS ITEM OTY UNIT a UNIT PRICE TOTAL GRADING: EXCAVATE & EXPORT 200 CY @ $27.50 $5,500.00 IMPROVEMENTS 4" SEWER LATERAL I EA @ $1,335.00 $1,335.00 V WATER SERVICE 1 EA @ $2,478.00 $2,478.00 PAVING 3,400 SF @ $1.75 $5,950.00 CLASS II BASE 3,400 SF @ $1.00 53,400.00 TRENCH RESURFACING 60 SF @ $5.50 $330.00 EROSION CONTROL FIBER ROLLS 150 LF @ $2.25 $337.50 CONST. ENTRANCE/ TIRE WASH 400 SF @ $5.25 $2,100.00 HYDROSEEDING 3,200 SF @ $0.20 $640.00 GRAVELBAGS 100 EA @ $1.10 $110.00 SILT FENCE 100 LF @ $1.60 $160.00 SUB TOTAL= $22,340.50 10% CONTINGENCIES= $2,234.05 GRAND TOTAL= $24,574.55 r- m:MyFax -Rose Realty To: Fw: 8800287561tattln attention Jason (18582594812) CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY CHICAGO TITLE /SAN DIEGO 2365 NORTHSIDE DRIVE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 9210B Regarding: W. JASON STREET ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Mi Dated as of: September 30, 2008 CrdarNo.: 880028756-P05 at 7:30 AM or a report hat 8 Ishpreparetlttonlssue, policy uso tale hos ss insurance as of theddateh herein, or policies Abe s any reaso b1o59any dale 4 nhor encumbrence not shown or refel red toes aniexcept on�laere n or noI excluded homs overage pursuant to the pnmed Schedules, Conditions and Sllpulauons Or Conditions Of saui policy forms The printed Exceptions and Exclusions Irom the coveryage end Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set mount of insurance is than thatse[ forth In tOheaa bficaploln clausee au a bh able maders shat bararlhitated at thehopt on Dt A and ALTA omen n ability for certain coverages Po{ cles of TNe Insu Sance which establish al Deductible Arrmunt and a MazlmumplDol alBLlmft bt Li ages are also set ronh in Attacnment One. Copies of th0 policy Corms should be rmd. They are available from the office ahlch Issued this report . y This report r and any supplements or ry Is ass mad hereby. Ilf itl de E derhatt l' liability be ass -Imed (prior to the issuance isunce 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 pD11cy(s) of Chicago Tille Insurance Company. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to herein and the exceptlons and exclusions set forth In Attachment One covered report nder re terms of the 1pltlel nsurraynceppolicy and Should betcapefullye onsidere notice of matters which are not Itsi alrl lleortaneto note that at this 911mi s aN report title to he written representation as to the condition of title and may not The form of Policy or Policies of Lille Insurance contemplated by this report Is: CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATIDN STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASOOCIATION LOAN POLICY (6-17 -2006) Visit Its On The Web: ChicagDTtfe com Title Department CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 2365 NORTHSIDE DR. X600 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 (619)521 -3400 Fax: (619)521 -3629 Sheila Hollander Title Officer FM:MyFax- Rose-Realty To:Fw: 88002875611att1n attention Jason (18582594812) 19:03 1 0f091OBG MT -04 Pg 03 -01 SCHEDULE A Your Ref: Ordcrt4O: 880028156 POS t, vered by [his The estate Or interest in the land hereinaflcr described or retcrmdlo co reForl is: A FEE AS TO PARCEL 1* BELON AS TO PARCEL 2 AN BASEMENT MORE FULLY DESCRIBED 2. Ti0c to said estate Or interest at the date hereof isvestcd in: JAI4ES R. LATTIN, AN UptARRIED MAN SUBJECT TO STEM NOS. 9 AND 10 OF SCHEDULE B' t. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of California, County of SAN DIEGO and is described as follows' SEE ATTACHED DESCRIPTION Fm:MyFax -Rose' Realty To: Fw: 88002875611att1n attention Jason (18582594 8 7 2) 19:0310109108GNIT-04 Pg 04 -01 DESCRIPTION Nags I Ordcr NO. 880028756 PARCEL 1: THE SOUTHERLY 132.50 FEET OF THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 13 COUNTY 0 BSAHCDIEGOF SOUTH COAST PARK UNIT NO. 4, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF STATEO F REICORDER OF SAN AN DIEGOO COUNTY, JULY 20, 3927• DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT L3 LYING WESTERLY OF THE EASTERLY 40.00 FEET OF SAID LOT 13; OF SAID LOT 14 LYING EASTERLY OF THE WESTERLY 60.00 TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION FEET OF SAID LOT 14, PARCEL 2: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD, PUBLIC UTILITY, AND PURPOSES INCIDENTAL THERETO OVER, UNDER, ALONG AND ACROSS THE WESTERLY 20.00 FEET OF THE EASTERLY FEET OF THE NORTHERLY 130.00 FEET OF LOT 13, IN BLOCK 1 OF SOUTH COAST PAARK RK UNIT NO. 4, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COL14TY OF 6.AN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 2049, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JULY 26, 1927; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL I. Fm:MyFax - Rose - Realty To:Fw: 8B00287561lattin attention Jason (1 858 2 59481 2) W Pam I SCHEDULE B Your Ref'. 19:03 1 010910 8GMT -04 Pg 05-01 ()rdc[ NO: 880028156 P05 �t the date hereof exceptions t0 coverage in addition 10 the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in the policy At h ienatcd on the face page of this Report would be as fn110wa: TO DL INCLUDING ANY ASSES COLLECTED WITH YET DUE 1, PROPERTY TAXzS'FISCAL YEAR 2008 -3009 'CHAT ARE A LIEN NOT YE LEVIED FOR THE pR 2. THE LIEN OF SUPPLEKENTAL OR ES ASSHSS1tFl7T5 OF CHAPTER T3 -5 OPPART 2, " ANY �E PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 0. 5, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLES 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY (Colo1EN RESULT WITH SECTION LT OF OF AS A THE REVENUE AM CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ND OR ASASRESULT THE TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE VESTEE NAMED IN SCHEDULE A; OF CHMIGES IN OWNERSHIP OR NEW CONSTRUCTION OCCURRLNG PRIOR TO DATE OF 20LICY. S FOR THE FISCAL YEAR SHOW" 9ELOW ARE PAID. FOR INFORMATION 3. PROPERTY TAXH PURPOSES THE A140UNTS ARE: FISCAL YEAR: 2007 -2008 1ST INSTALLMENT: $736.48 PAID 2ND INSTALLMHNT. $136.48 PAID EXEMPTION: $NOT SHOWN 19004 CODE AREA: ASSESSMENT I10 . 254 - 230 -' -3 4, WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN HY THE LIC RECORDS. PUB EASRMENTS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS, PIPELINES, DRAINAGE AND /OR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES 'THERETO OVER' UNDER. ALONG AND ACROSS RANTED AliD/OR RESERVED IN THE EASEMENT PARCEL(6) HEREIN DESCRIBED AS G VARIOUS DEEDS OF RECORD. AFFECTS: PARCEL 2 6 EASE[4HNT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BZLDW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS RESERVED N A DOCUMENT [ND REPRESENTATION IS V1AD6 AS TO THE PRESENT OWNERSHIP OF SAID EASEMENT) PURPOSE: POLE LINES AND PIPE LINES L RECORDED: SEPTEMER 2, 1943 IN 800K 1558, PAGE 77 OF OFFICIA RECORDS AFFECTS: THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. 7. COVENANTS' CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIGNS BUT R, omITTING ANY RELIGION, SEX,ISEXUALR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR' Fm:MyFax - Rose - Realty To:Fw: 88002875611attln attention Jason (1 8582 59481 2) Pugc 2 PO5 v, =.. SCHEDULE B (continued) Your RcE: 19:03 10109108GMT -04 Pg 06-01 ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STAT'VS. DISABILITY, HANDICAP. NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF INCOME, AS S£T FORTH IN APPLICABLE ID STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SFORTH IINTHE DDCU4IENT RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW AS RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 2, 1943, IN BOOK 1558, PAGE 77 OF OFFICIAL ,RECORDS B. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED To: DONALD E. BALSLEY AND JANET 14. BALSLEY, HUSBAND AND WIPE, AS JOINT TENANTS PURPOSE: ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY RECORDED: OCTOBER 13, 1959, IN BOOR 7930, PAGE 596 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AFr EC75: THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAIRD AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. 9. THE EFFECT OF A DEED TRANSFER TAX: $A7JOUST 2 {, 2004 DATED: GRANTOR: JAMES R. LATTIN, AN ILNMuAR ED ELAN GRANTEE: WILLIAM K. LATTIII, A MARRIED MAN AS HIS SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY RECORDED: NOVShIBER 1B. 2004, AS FILE NO. 2004- 1093015 OFFICIAL RECORDS DEFECT: SAID DEED RECORDED WITH AN INCORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTLCN 10 THE EFFECT OF A DEED TRANSFRA TAX: $AUGUST 29, 2004 DATED: GRANTOR: SHARI R. LATTIN, A MARRIED WOMAN GRANTEE: WILLIAR K. LATTIN, A MARRIED MAN AS HIS SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY RECORDED: 11OVEM8ER 18, 2004, AS FLL.E NO. 7004- 1093016 OFFICIAL RECORDS DEFECT: SAID DEED RECORDED WITH THE INCORRECT LSOAL DESCRIPTION 11. A DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE AN INDEBTEDNESS IN THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT SHOWN BELOW Fm:MyFaz - Rose'Realty To:Fw: 8800287561lattln attention Jason (18582594912) 19 0310109108GAIT-04 Pg 07 -01 Paec 3 OrdCr N0' 880028756 PO5 AMOUNT: DATED: TRUSTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: RECORDED: ORIGINAL LOAN NUI,TBHR: AFFECTS: SCMDULE B (continued) Your RCL $300,000.00 AUGUST 24, 2004 WILLIAM H. LATTTN, A MARRIED MAN AS HIS SOLE AND 92DARATE PROPERTY COMPANY, A FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION ,LAMES R. LATTIN, AN UNMARRIED MAN DECEMBER 7, 2004, AS FILE NO. 2009 - 1.148992 OFFICIAL RECORDS NOT SHOWN A PORTION OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN. WHEN NOTE: M 19 TO BE IF THIS IITBEWILL REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING 98 HOURSCFROIORTTOLTHENCLIO INSURANCE, ISSUED, ESCROW: (1) ORIGINAL NOTE (2) ORIGINAL DEED OF TRUST (3) SIGNED REQUEST FOR FULL RECONVEYANCE IF T EEDPPICBA AB NOTE AS RIGIBDLHD ED OUR TRUS PLEASE CONTACT YOUR IF THE BENEFICIARY UNDER SAID ABOVE- KENTIONED DEED OF TRUST ZS A TRUST THEN THE FOLLOWING ADDITICNAL ITEMS WILL BE REQUIRED: III A COPY OF THE TRUST INSTRUMENT CREATING TILE TRUST REFERENCED IN SAID DOCUMENT AND ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO COPY IS (2) A VERIFICATION OFATHE TRUST ?LS ITE MAY T HAVE T BEEN AMENDED. THAT IT IS IN FULL FORCE ANO EFFECT AND THAT IT HAS N01' BEEN RBVORED OR TERMINATED. IF A DEMAND IS SUBMITTED BY AN AGENT OF THE BENEFICIARRY, AND THAT DEMAND IS D PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF THE PROMISSORY NOTE, IN LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OWE WE ADDITION TO THOSE ITEMS DESCRIBED ABOVE, WILL ALSO REQUIRE A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE BENEFICIARY STATING THAT THEIR AGENT IS AUTHORIZED TO SUBMIT A DEMAND FOR LESS THAN IS OWED BY THE BORROWER. 12 BYMATTERS IRYI F THE BE DIESLONEPOSS POSSESSION PTHEREOF_ OR SURVEY OF SAID LAND OR END OFSCHEDULE B rr Fm:MyFak - Rose'Reaity To:Fw: 8800287561lattln attention Jason (18582594812) 19:0310109108GNIT-04 Pg OS-01 SCHEDULE ntinued B ) Pagc + Your RcC OidcrNo: 8BD02B756 P05 v NOTE NO. 1: 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 Do EXIST, MIAYY O AFFECT THE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBE SAID LAND, BUT WHICH, IF ANY TITLE OR IMPOSE LIENS OR ENCUMDRAMICES 7AERE014. P.ARTIE5: ALL PARTIES (NOTE: THE STATEI4ENT OF INFORMATION IS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE SEARCH AND EXAMINATION OF TITLE UNDER THIS ORDER. t� ANY ALC COMPLETED STATEMENT OF SEARCH MATT13RE THAT ARE INDEXED BY NAME ONLY, PANTY IN THE ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN MATTERS WHICH INFORMATION ASSISTS THE COM APPEAR TO INVOLVE THE PARTIES BUT IN PACT AFFECT ANOTHER PARTY WITH THE SAME OR ES ENTTTALIMAND WILL BE KEPT STU'nICT'LyCONFIDENTIAL, O THISI FIOLE.�TION I6 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 PAS BEEN LOCATED ON THE ATTACHED MAP. THE USE OF A STREET ADDRESS OR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER CREATES AN UNCERTAINTY AS TO THE CORRECT LE3AL DESCRIPTION FOR THE LAND IVJOLVED IN YOUR ED ON THE MTRANSICTION- PLEASE REVIEW THE MAP. IS THE CORRECT LAND ATC+UV OI TE SLAND ORT FI_ THAT OCATED ONHE MAP YO SHOULD MMEDIIALY ADVIEYOUR ILE OLAND CCER OR ESCROW OFFICER. NOTE NO. 3: Tile 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. s NOTE NO. 4: THERE ARE NO CONVEYANCES AFFECTING SAID LAND, RECORDED WITHIN TWENTYFOUR (24) MONTHS OF THE DATE OF THIS REPO NOTE NO- 5: IF A COUNTY RECORDER, TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, ESCROW COMPANY, TA7E AGENT PROKER, REAL ES DOCUMENT OR DEED RTO ASSOCIATION NY PERSONPAOCSTDIFORNIA LA A REAL ESTATE REQUIRES THAT THE DOCUMENT PROVIDED SHALL INCLUDE A STATEMENT REGARDING ANY UNLANFUL RESTRICTIONS- SAID STATEMENT IS TO Be IN AT LEAST 14 -POINT SOLD FACE TYPE AND MAY BE STAMPED DN THE FIRST PAGE OP ANY DOCUMENT PROVIDED OR INCLUDED AS A COVER PAGE ATTACHED TO THE REQUESTED DOCUMENT. SHOULD A PARTY THIS TC TRANSACTION P£� THAT FITS THIS ATEGORY THE ATEMMTIS TO INCLUDED IN THE KANNER DESCRIBED. NOTE: IF THIS COMPANY IS AEGUESTED TO DISBURSE FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH THIS TRANSACTION, CHAPTER 599, STATUTES OF 1989 MANDATES HOLD PERIDD9 FOR CHECKS DEPOSITED TO ESCROW ORCERTIFIED CHECKS AND TELLER'S L CHECKS IS ONE PERIOD FOR CASHIER'S CHECKS, Fm:MyFax - Rose'Realty To:Fw: 880028756112tt1n attention Jason (18582594812) 19:0310109108GMT -04 Pg 09-07 SCHEDULE B eave s (continued) V. . RrF OldcrNO: 890028756 PBS "'- -- BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DAY DEPOSITED. OTHER CHECKS REQUIRE A HOLD PERIOD FROM THREE TO SEVEN EUsINESS DAYS AMER THE DAY DEPOSITED. Nth Fm:MyFax -Rose Realty To:Fw: 8800287561lattln attentlon Jason (18582594812) 1 jo l wy 9460 8002/60/01 NP 4 a g6�s- �o ° e Q z�F o c a z P� m o �s In N Ip N O A c x n 0 Y N 9 0 L r O 19:031=9108GMT -04 Pg 10-01 g.V SZ V:dS - sdew 9SL8Z0088 234 -2J y�y(p� q(y/�QT��f� y��:<IGR9�e�Pfa19 /„lU TOfl 1M[��M6VW��i I Ofl 0V10M tlm�VMf3.1 u�l um fA�PIY W a I NNEPTTuNC a grQa =n i^po ®/ I O Z ALLEY Q O C e tXl 5D 2[J (OLD HIGHWAY 101) COAST HIGHWAY 101 N S � N ©, a r CO In S N � A 0, V N rg'�. vnan> � C o _ a N C 1.O i N a grQa =n i^po ®/ I O Z ALLEY Q O C e tXl 5D 2[J (OLD HIGHWAY 101) COAST HIGHWAY 101 N S � N ©, a r CO In S N � A 0, V N rg'�. Fm:MyFax • Rose Realty To: Fw: 8B00287561(attin attention Jason (1 85825 94 81 2) 19:03 10109108GAIT-04 Pg 11 -01 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 previousyt transaction, and the date or apprroximate date that the escrow closed involved in the 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 obligaiiult 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. June 4, 2009 James Lattin 246 Neptune Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Permit issuance requirements for: Application 10210 -G 133 W. Jason St. APN: 254- 230 -43 This letter summarizes the requirements for pulling your Engineering Permit for drawing 10210 -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 oackage at the time the applicant comes in to pull the Permit. Partial submittals of any 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 10210 -G Provide 2 copies of "Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation for the Proposed Residential Lot located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas. CA (APN: 254- 230 -43)", prepared by B &B Engineering, Inc. and dated May 3, 2007, AND the update letter titled "Soil Update Report for the Proposed Residential Lot located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA (APN: 254 - 230 -43)" prepared by B &B Engineering Inc., dated May 24, 2009 Provide 2 copies of the Resolution of Approval for 08 -069 CDP (File /Inspector). (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 for Bonding Purposes dated May 11, 2009 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: (a) Security Deposit for Grading Permit 10187 -G: in the amount $67,518.5 5 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 past securities, bonding or the required format of securities please contact Debra Geishart at 760 - 633 -2779. (3) Pay non - refundable fees as listed below: Fee Type _ _ Amount _ Grading Inspection $3,375.93 NPDES Inspection (Grading)-__ $675.19 Flood Control $861.00 The grading and improvement inspection fees are calculated based on 5% of first $100,000.00 of the Approved Engineer's cost estimate for purpose of fee determination of $136,131.00 dated May 20, 2009 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 Work to be Done A General Engineering any & all C-8 Concrete apron/curb/gutter/ramp/sidewalk C -10 Electrical lighting/signals C -12 Grading & Paving any surface, certain drain - basins /channels C -27 Landscaping planting /irrigation /fencing & other amenities C -29 Masonry retaining walls C -32 Parking &Highway Improvement signage /striping /safety C -34 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 project securities is initiated automatically by the City after submission of satisfactory as -built drawings to the City and approval by the project Engineering 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 plans require a construction 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 -2567 or visit the Engineering Counter at the Civic Center to speak with an Engineering Technician. S k, Assistant Civil Engineer cc Will Mack, PLSA Engineering Inc. Debbie Geishart, Engineering Technician File Enc Application Requirements for Proof of Insurance Security Obligation Agreements (various) APPLICATION NO. ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION JOB SITE ADDRESS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. Zs�f - Z3j�3gSoN SHEET PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION SAMFS 4 A-7 JA\,l Nj%AVTL)NF ME MAILI ADDRESS IAS CITY. STATE, ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NO. CIVIL ENGINEER INFORMATION AfjC r.AN,1 5J ; TF(Z - ASSOe- NAME 63`5 N. VW IQ , t)/r-r = A ADDRE S Ag .LA q2U %S `6S 2594'U2 CITY, TATE, ZIP 'TELEPHONE NO. kC REGISTRATTON NO NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NO. STATE LICENSE NO. & TYPE REGISTRATION NO. DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE 1 . Ila mills .ICI : •� M 4 `lttL4tJi' L.-F`) CASE NO. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED PRINTNAME ------ - - ---- -- --- - -- --- - ------- -- ------------ - - - -- TELEPHONENO.-- --- - - - --- -- - --- -- PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW PLANNING CASE NUMBER 02 — C)C q f FOR GRADING PLANS: OK FOR PLAN CHECK PPrANNER I:kioskhandouts/Eng/Eng. Dev. App FOR FINAL MAPS /PARCEL MAPS FINAL MAP PARCEL MAP DATE FINANCIAL INFORMATION Acceptable forms of posted surety for permitted projects within the City 100% of total cost estimate must be secured 1. Letter of credit 2. Cash 3. Certificate of Deposit 4. Faithful Performance Bonds • Grading /Private Improvement Permit — maximum of 80% of total cost estimate, remaining 20% must be liquid (cash, CD or letter of credit) • Public Improvement Permit — up to 100% Faithful Performance bond 5. Labor and Materials Bond — deferred Monumentation only, up to 100% Three types of Improvements & Associated Security Obligation agreements to be secured 1. Public Improvements 2 Private Improvements (grading, private street improvements, private sewer; 1 Public Sewer Improvements 4. Deferred Monumentation — may be secured using liquid form or up to 100% Labor and Materials bond. Securities of form 1 -4 above may be released as partial or full release. Partial release = 75% upon rough grade approval: both inspector and soils engineer must authorize rough grade approval Full release of security requires inspector approval and approval of as -built drawings by Engineering department AND completion of warranty period if public improvements. All improvement projects require 25% of the bond to be held for a one -year warranty. For CD's Amounts must be 75% and 25% of the total required bond amount. to the m16711 on all documents and all PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING , LAND PLANNING + LAND SURVEYING PLSA 1717 August 20, 2009 City of Encinitas Engineering Department Ann. Steve Nowak 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: Grading Plan for 133 W. Jason Street (DWG. 10210 -G) This letter has been prepared to clarify the amount of impervious area proposed for the project located at 133 W. Jason Street, which should be used to determine the flood control fees that will be assessed with the building permit. The total amount of existing impervious area located onsite prior to construction was determined to be 1,800 sf. The total anticipated amount of impervious area that will be located onsite after construction is complete was estimated to be 2,900 sf. The net increase in impervious area as a result of the project, excluding rooftops and patio areas, is approximately 1,100 sf. If you need any additional clarification regarding this issue, please do not hesitateAo call me. A illiam Mack, P.E. p,�}G � 6 CC: James Lattin 535 N Coast Highway 101 Ste A Solana Beach, California 92075 1 ph 858.259.8212 1 fx 858.259.4812 1 plsaengineering.com City of Encinitas May 19, 2009 Mr. Jim Lattin 246 Neptune Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Grading plan application 10210 -G 00 g -OG� C /O'o Jim, As part of the grading plan review for application 10210 -G, a site visit was conducted by myself. During this site visit, it was noted that the existing retaining wall on the adjacent property to the West is in poor shape and appears to be failing. The grading plan submitted shows that the house, garage, and accessory unit are proposed in an area that could result in possible health, safety, or property losses if the wall were to further or completely fail onto your proposed structures. For this, the Engineering Department will not approve any building permits for these structures unless they are moved from this potentially hazardous area or a second retaining wall is designed and constructed adjacent to the failing wall to mitigate this possible hazard. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at 760 - 633 -2867 or snowak@ci.encinitas.ca.us. Sincerely, Steven Nowak Assistant Civil Engineer City of Encinitas Tel 760/633 -2600 FAX 760/633 -2627, 505 South Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92024 TDD 760/633 -2700 - _ City of Encinitas June 3, 2009 James R. Lattin 133 W. Jason Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: NOTICE OF VIOLATION OF THE GRADING ORDINANCE Dear Resident: In response to a citizen's complaint, a review of your property has resulted in this letter to inform you of a violation of the Municipal Code. The retaining wall shown above requires a permit. The 2006 International Building Code, as adopted by the City of Encinitas, indicates when building, plumbing, mechanical and/or electrical permits are required. When these standards are compromised the quality of health, Irfe and welfare is placed in jeopardy. When these violations are brought to the attention of the City. we are obligated to correct the situation both from an engineering and liability risk management standpoint. Section 105.2 Work Exempted from Permit, states, " A building permit shall not be required for the following: 4. Retaining walls which are not over 4 feet in height measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall, unless supporting a surcharge or impounding Class I, II or IIIA liquids." The picture illustrates the existence of a surcharge and therefore the wall requires a permit. The removal of the wall would remove the lateral forces on the existing wall and is therefore not authorized. Engineering is currently processing a grading plan (10210 -G) for this site. The plan proposes the removal of the unpermitted wall and the construction of a wall per the San Diego Regional Standard Drawings. This action will mitigate the situation of the unpermitted wall; however, if you stop during the permit process or cease work prior to the completion of the work described on your plan, then this violation will be reactivated and this matter will be referred to Code Enforcement and the City Attorney for their initiation of civil proceedings. If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 633 -2778. Sincerely, Greg Shie s, P.E. Field Operations Cc: Peter Cota - Robles, City Engineer Joan Kling, Code Enforcement Mike Valles, Inspector Tel 760/633 -2600 FAX 760/633 -2627, 505 South Vulcan Avenue. Encinitas, CA 92024 TDD 760/633 -2700 Date: ' o5 City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Assume Responsibility - New Soils Engineer Drawing Number: 10210 -G Project Name: 133 W. Jason St. In accordance with Section 23.24 -360 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, please be advised that in reference to the above stated plans, we have reviewed all prior reports and /or plans and work performed by B &B Engineering Inc., and that we concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and are satisfied with the work performed. We assume all responsibility as Soils Engineer, for these plans and agree to all terms stated in+ the Soil Engineer's Certificate shown on plans 10210 -G as of 23 J O PJ 0 n (date). Georg n9 Na• G02no Date) ,R.-Aff Earl %neer%/ /I/. // /G: CIVEL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING CLIENT: JIM LATTIN PROJECT: LAT 609- CHG -ENG DATE: 19 JUNE 2009 CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA. 92024 Attention: Engineering/Inspection Departments Subject: Geotechnical Consultant of Record for the Project located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 254230 -43) Reference (a): Our Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation Report dated 3 May 2007. Gentlemen: This letter serves as formal notification to the City of Encinitas that B & B Engineering, Inc., is hereby releasing our responsibility as the Geotechnical Consultant of Record for Grading Plan No. 10210 -G and for all geotechnical supervision of the subject project as of the date of this document. Respectfully submitted, FTemlz ephen B. Peter RCE 38623 Expires 3/31/11 -I- 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081.5471 Ph. (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945 -4221 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES - OL LNb:M1LER. tii: < LAND PLANNING - LAND SLRVLrING January, 7, 2010 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 PLSA 1717 RE: ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICATION FOR GRADING PERMIT NO. 10210 -G. LOCATED AT 133 & 133 A, SO. JASON ST. The grading Plan permit number 10210 -G has been performed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shown on the attached "As Graded" plan. Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms to the approved grading plan and that swales drain a minimum of I% to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Development, Source Control; and Treatment Control Best Management Practices as shown on the drawing and required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part It were constructed and are opera o pal, together with the required maintenance IR (i �ql Engineer of Record QQ� GREGG Fy IN G. Mack RICE 73620 Date 1 7 110 n W 3 No. 7+6 0 1 Exp., 0 Verification by. the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility: Engineering Inspector 535 N Coast Highway 101 Ste A Solana Beach, California 92075 1 ph 858.259.8212 1 fa 858.259.4812 1 plaaengineering.com W5.01 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT cityOf Capital Improvement Projects :/ District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL T0: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit No. U Name of Project / ;Y-r< S Z A-/, r` Name of Developer Site Location (�?T 1'Y , J-104-0'� S� , :(address:.: - ..number ...streetname . —' ... . . ;.- - .1•1-r - :�...suix) dov .(bldg) . J have.Jnspected the grad' :at thesubjectsjte and. ave.v ified certification of the pad : by' the .Engineer of Work, � d�� ~� and ce�tion of still .'. compaction by the Still dated —— �? I am hereby satisfied that the.rough- grading has ben completed in: :accordance:with, ;the:approved� c :i• plans -and specifications, Chapter 23:24-of the Municipal Code; and any other applicable errgirreering 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 Permit(s) and legal occupancy, I need to be further advised so that I can verify that final grading (i.e., finished precise grading, planting and Irrigation) has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. ?Ctorl (Date) (Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only if appropiatel 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. ISG /field3.doc 1 TEL 760633 -2600 1 FAX 760 -633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Endnim, California 920243633 TDD 760-6633 -2700 4� recycled paper 0� D ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects City Of District Support Services 7 °' E Field Operations Encinitas Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering UGH GRADING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Grading Permit No. L Name of Project lzeni,4 S Name of Developer Srij,L•�^ site rotation /330 (address ...number ... street name ...suffix) lloU - 'fbldgJ The proposed grading of the subject site -will require construction of: retaining walls that are also building wails. The inspection of the site retaining walls is to be done by the Field-operations Division of the Engineering services Department. However, the inspection of the building retaining walls is to be done by the Building Inspection Division of the Community Development Department. Therefore, Issuance of the necessary Building Permit is requested in order to facilitate the completion of rough grading. NO INSPECTIONS BEYOND FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATION ARE TO BE PROVIDED BY BUILDING INSPECTION UNTIL A NOTICE OF ROUGH GRADING APPROVAL, WITHOUT CONDITIONS AND SIGNED BY THE ENGINEERING INSPECTOR, IS RECEIVED. FRAMING IS PROHBITED. (Signature of Engineering inspector) !Date! (Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only if appropiate) (Date) Reierence: Building Permit No. _ .. Special Note Submit this form, if completed, to counter staff merely by placing a copy of it in both engineering technicians' in- boxes. Please remember to do a full tough grading approval and submit that paperwork, when completed. Office staff will handle the appropiale reductions in security, if any, and coordination with Building Inspection. Thank you. 1SG /field2.doc 1 hf 70- 633 -2600 t FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, Ca ifomia 92024 -3633 Too 760 -633 -2700 � recycled paper City of Encinitas 505 Snuth Vulcan .Avenue Encino", Califamu 92024 -3633 Tel 760 -633- 2600•Fax 760 -943 -2226 TDD 760- 633 -2700. ws,w.ci.encinitas.ca.us Field Clearance to Allow Occupancy TO: Subdivision Engineering Public Service Counter FROM: Field Operations Private Contract Inspection RE: Building Permit No. _ -- Name of Project N3,-4rnc-r e!t 4 Name of Developer AY A t� �&e I have inspected the site at / 33 W . 4-4 cen address ..number street name suffix and have determined that finish (precise) grading (lot no.) (bldg. no.) and any other related site improvements are substantially complete and that occupancy is merited. . A iYZZC/�� -L .9 61 Signature of Engineering Inspector Date Signature of Senior Civil Engineer, only if appropriate Date Reference: Engineering Permit No. /eZ OAV / Special Note: Please do riot sign the 'blue card" that is issued by Building Inspection Division and given to the developer. You are only being asked to verify field conditions. Office staff still has the responsibility to verify that compliance with administrative requirements is achieved, typically payment of impact fees or execution of documents. Return this form, if completed, to counter staff by dropping it in the slot labeled 'Final Inspection' . Also, please remember to do final inspections on the related engineering permits and return that paperwork, if completed. Thank you. Fire Building Planning Engineering Sa vim_ GEORGE E. HAWES, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 2900 ADAMS ST SUITE A440 • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA • 92504 • (951) 354 -7403 a� TO /f'1 � &- }Iy FIELD INSPECTION REPORT FROM ( 7Z�2 rZ67C l ' /�Y7.k.11- 1�S�/� J'�� / r \ SUBJECT SOLI ( D A�� ( ova/ — V► �".+I�Li / (57" c—r ) MESSAGE �il =�!_ J S� I DATE 7.kr sir -�T7 )J / A-A TinJ1--, 77-/r' cr- I I At- k 4- l 11 klY P i ^/ -Mc- S� �e-,A- 6 Avid �e /ZA'l C 41 SIGNED I V O CORRECTION {7r l DATE SIGNED c 6�-D F� 7 17r2o1 AZ-r SDL' C 1 ri CAT70j4 5 • EA5 L"-?-'3 6/s,/ T %`E. -S E TZ-!i,7 41 SIGNED I V O CORRECTION {7r l DATE SIGNED c 6�-D F� GEORGE E. HAWES, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ,' 2900 ADAMS ST., SUITE A 440 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 • (951 ) 354 -7403 aF Mr. Jim Lattin December 22, 2009 246 Neptune St. Encinitas, California 92024 SUBJECT: Road Bearing Residential Development at 130 W. Jason St. Encinitas, California I have observed the grading an performed limited testing of the sub -grade in the access road area on the subject property. The soil is fine Sand typical to the area. The soil within the utility trenches was compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Based on my field testing, observations and knowledge of the area it is my professional opinion the roadbed within the easement is sufficient to support 80,000 pound loads on dual axle, quad tire trucks; such as fire trucks. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions or require further information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectfully Submitted, r a Geo4te E.f Hawes This official stamp is in Registered Civil Engineer blue ink; otherwise a copy. State of California C034779 expires 9/30/11 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING ♦ LAND PLANNING ♦ LAND SURVEYING January, 7, 2010 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 45�dv.4e, PLSA 1717 RE: ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICATION FOR GRADING PERMIT NO. 10210 -G. LOCATED AT 133 At 133 A, SO. JASON ST. The grading Plan permit number 10210 -G has been performed in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan or as shown on the attached "As Graded" plan. Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms to the approved grading plan and that swales drain a minimum of I% to the street and/or an appropriate drainage system. All the Low Impact Development, Source Control; and Treatment Control Best Management Practices as shown on the drawing and required by the Best Management Practice Manual Part 11 were constructed and are opera 'o al, together with the required maint?anc e Engineer of Record / William G. Mack RCE 73620 Date I I I 7 I JILT) W 3 No. 716 °C Exp0,-') Verification by the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature hereon and will take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility: r Engineering Inspector Date 6 535 N Coast Highway 101 Ste A Solana Beach. California 92075 1 ph 858.259.8212 1 fa 858.259.4812 1 pisaeogintering.com /Arx• /r Enol' iiiccrholl, CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING L ENT: LATTIN _ JI LAT 409 -U A : 24 MAY 2009 MR. JAMES LATTIN 246 Neptune Ave. Encinitas, CA. 92024 Subject: Soil Update Report for the Proposed Residential Lot located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 254- 230 -43) Reference (a): Site Specific Soil Investigation Report by B & B Engineering, Inc., dated 3 May 2007. Dear Mr. Lattin: Pursuant to the requirements of the City of Encinitas, we have completed our site inspection and our review of Reference (a) for the subject parcel. On 2 May 2009, a representative from our firm visited the site in order to evaluate the general surface soil conditions relative to the proposed construction. Locations of our Field Exploratory Test Pits are shown on Enclosure (1), the Log of these pits are detailed on Enclosure (2) and the Compaction and Expansion Test Data are depicted on Enclosure (3). Based on our visual inspections and observations in the field and our review of Reference (a), the following conclusions were derived: Other than minor erosion, the general overall surface soil conditions do not appear to have changed significantly since the preparation of Reference (a). It is our opinion that the designed pad area may support the proposed residential structure and the conclusions and recommendations found in the Reference (a) shall be considered still valid. However, the over- excavation operation shall extend across the entire lot and the existing retaining wall backfill soils and drainage shall be evaluated for compliance with current codes. Reference (a) shall be modified to reflect any updated provisions that pertain to this project as set forth in the 2007 California Building Code. No geotechnical conditions were encountered which would preclude the development of the site. All grading shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations found in Reference (a) and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. 161 1 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945 -0221 / /.C• // Biigiiiccriui�. /nc. Lat 409 -U SEISMIC DESIGN For seismic design purposes, the "Site Class D" can be used for the soils underlying the subject site, and the procedures outlined in the 2007 California Building Code, CBC, (Sections 1603 -A and 1613 -A - EARTHQUAKE LOADS) should be used for calculations of the seismic coefficients for structural design. The civil /structural engineer should consult with the project geotechnical consultant if additional geotechnical information is needed for the seismic design. No active faults are known to exist within or near the site. The Rose Canyon Earthquake Fault (Type B) is located approximately more than 10 kilometers from the site. The property is not located within an area designated as a special studies /earthquake zone under the Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Zone /Special Studies Act. E The Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. B & B Engineering Inc. and Associates appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact us. ■ `�� ,1 Sincerely, Stephen B. Peter RCE 38623 Expires 3 -31 -11 ■ J ■ ■ 2 161 [-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fen: (760) 945 -0221 i y N74 T as gp R . M O A V6:Y Ana n o A f Wti� ro CcI A °(4 � A A Mm O N i -,rr) 5 ' ^°r'�, r60. n. eunuHc 254- -230 _ APN` ,.mmmmvv 254 ,2J L ;F. APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD EXPLORATORY TEST PIT PLOT PLAN Owner MR. JAMES LATTIN Address 135 WEST JASON STREET ENCINITAS, CA A P N 254- 230 -43 Project I LAT 409 -U Date May -09 Enclosure (1 ) Q� / /it -/! Bugineerinq, Nile LOG OF TEST PITS EXCAVATED:_3 -12 -2007 BACKHOE: CASE 580 M PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W=2' L = 27' D=10' SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET nnTI Inn CLIENT: JIM LATTIN PROJECT:LAT 307- 409 -U DATE: 5/04/09 ..0 x.11 TD A PIT DIMENSION IN FEET W=2' L = 25' D=10' SURFACE FI FVATInN IN GFCT TP- 2 ARTIFICIAL FILL DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND GEOLOGICAL ? p w DRY, LOOSE CLASSIFICATION a. O it a w i ENGINEERING CLASSIFICATION AND TEST DATA: DESCRIPTION 5 w w y y DESCRIPTION M- 0 -O (RC) ARTIFICIAL FILL DRY TO DAMP, LOOSE DARK BROWN FINE- MEDIUM SAND QaF 10 DRY, LOOSE FORMATIONAL 4 RUST TAN ORANGE SILTY SAND TERRACE DEPOSITS 5 DRY TO DAMP, MEDIUM DENSE RUST -BROWN SILTY SAND BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' DRY TO DAMP, LOOSE 10 10 15 FORMATIONAL RUST - TAN- ORANGE SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, MEDIUM DENSE BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' NO WATER, NO CAVING 15 20 PIT DIMENSION IN FEET W=2' L = 25' D=10' SURFACE FI FVATInN IN GFCT TP- 2 ARTIFICIAL FILL DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND QaF DRY, LOOSE 4 TERRACE DEPOSITS 5 RUST BROWN SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, LOOSE 10 10 FORMATIONAL RUST TAN ORANGE SILTY SAND DRY TO DAMP, MEDIUM DENSE BOTTOM OF TEST PIT @ 10' NO WATER, NO CAVING 15 20 enclosure ( 1 ) i 8n4pinccriuq, Luc. Client: JIM LATTIN Project: LAT 307 -409 -U Date: May -09 Test No Test Date Test Location Test E1/Depth Soil Type Dry Density, pct Moisture, % Relative Retest Field Maximum Field Upt, Compaction o. 1 3/12/07 ITEST PIT - 1 2' A 91.5 1215 2.5 10.0 74 2 3112/07 ITEST PIT - 1 3' A 101.2 123.5 2.2 10.0 82 3 3/12/07 ITEST PIT - 1 5' B 101.3 122.5 8.3 9.5 83 4 3/12/07 ITEST PIT - 2 2' A 99.33 123.5 5.4 10.0 80 5 3/12/07 ITEST PIT - 2 3' A 94.53 123.5 7.9 10.0 77 6 3/12/07 ITEST PIT - 2 5' B 97.7 122.5 2.2 9.5 80 COMPACTION CURVE DATA SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY MOISTURE % 0 A. DARK BROWN FINE - MEDIUM SAND TP -1 3' 10.0 123.5 B. RUST -BROWN SILTY SAND TP -1 4' 9.5 122.5 C. RUST - TAN - ORANGE SILTY SAND TP -1 @ 10' 10.0 114.0 EXPANSION INDEX = D NON EXPANSIVE POTENTIAL EXPANSION POTENTIAL 1 to 20 = Very Low TP -1 Q 3' 21 -50 = Low 51 -90= Moderate 91 -130 = High 131+ = Critical COMPACTION AND EXPANSION TEST DATA ENCLOSURE(3) f CIVIL, GEOTECIINICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING LIENT: LATTIN OJECT: LAT 307 -INV ATE: 3 MAY 2007 MR. JAMES LATTIN 246 Neptune Ave. 7JU 62009 Encinitas, CA. 92024 Subject: Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation for the Proposed Residential Lot located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 254- 230 -43) Dear Mr. Lattin: Pursuant to your request, we have completed our site inspection, soil sampling, and our laboratory testing for the subject parcel. On 12 March 2007, a representative from our firm visited the site in order to obtain soil samples and to evaluate the general surface soil conditions relative to the proposed construction. Based on our visual inspections and observations in the field, and our laboratory test results, the following conclusions were derived. It is our opinion that the subject lot may support the proposed residential structure. However, the conclusions and recommendations found in the latter part of this report shall be incorporated in the design plans and specifications. SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is a rear flag lot located on the southerly side of Jason Street in Encinitas. The property is bounded on all sides by single family residences with an access driveway along the easterly side of the lot fronting on Jason Street. The site topography consists of a relatively flat lot falling from the west to east at approximately 1% to 3 %. At the time of this investigation, the lot was partially covered with low lying grasses and native vegetation. FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING On 12 March 2007, a field investigation was performed at the subject site. This investigation consisted of the excavation of 2 test pits dug with a backhoe. As the test pits were advanced, the soils were visually classified by our Field Engineer. Undisturbed and bulk samples, as well as in -place density tests, were obtained at various depths representative of the different soils horizons. All samples were returned to our laboratory for detailed testing. 161 ]-A SO. N ELROSE DRIVE 0285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945.4221 Lat 307 -inv A direct shear test was made with a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rate of strain is 0.05 inches per minute. The machine is so designed that tests may be performed ensuring a minimum of disturbance from the field conditions. Saturated, remolded specimens were subjected to shear under various normal loads. Expansion tests were performed on typical specimens of natural soils. These tests were performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Book of ASTM Standards. SOIL CONDITIONS As indicated by our observations during this exploration, the site is underlain with approximately 5 feet of topsoil material consisting of dry-damp, loose, tan- rust -brown porous sand and silty sand with some roots. Underlying the topsoil materials, to an observed depth of 10 feet below the existing surface, we encountered formational materials consisting of damp, dense to very dense silty sands. GRADING All grading shall be performed in accordance with the applicable recommended grading specifications contained in this report and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. On the basis of our investigation, development of the site as proposed is considered feasible from a soils engineering standpoint provided that the recommendations stated herein are incorporated in the design of foundation systems and are implemented in the field. Site preparation should begin with the removal of all trash, debris, and other deleterious matter. These materials, as well as vegetative matter, are not suitable for use in structural fills and should be exported from the site. Any subsurface structures such as cesspools, wells, or abandoned pipelines, which are uncovered during the grading operation, shall be removed or backfilled in accordance with the requirements of the City of Encinitas. All on -site earth materials are considered suitable for the support of the proposed structures. However, prior to construction, the upper 5 feet of loose surface soils occurring at the site shall be removed to a depth where firm, dense native soils are encountered. This can be accomplished during the rough grading operation by over - excavating the upper 5 feet of the surface soils, ripping the exposed bottom surface to a minimum depth of 12 inches, and recompacting the soil to the design grade. The limits of over - excavation and recompaction shall 2 161 [-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE 8285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fu: (760) 945 -4221 i //.�• // Bni/ineerinfl, Are. Lat 307 -inv extend a minimum of 5 feet outside the proposed upper perimeter building foundations. The depth of removal is anticipated to be approximately 5 feet below the existing surface, however the depth may vary and the bottom of the excavation shall be verified for competency by our field engineer prior to backfilling. All structural fill shall be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557 -01 or equivalent. Site drainage should be dispersed by non - erodible devices in a manner to preclude concentrated runoff over graded and natural areas in accordance with the City of Encinitas requirements. In general, the existing native sandy soils encountered in test pit #1 at 3 feet are considered to have a non - expansion potential according to our Expansion Index test results (EI= 0) as shown on Enclosure (2). Additional foundation and slab requirements are not considered necessary in regard to soil expansion, however, the finish grade soils shall be evaluated for expansion potential upon completion of rough grading. It is anticipated that the building footings may experience less than 1 inch settlement with less than %2 inch differential settlements between adjacent footings of similar sizes and loads. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS According to published information, there are no known active or potentially active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the subject site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture at this site is considered low. There are, however, several faults located within a close proximity to this site that the movement associated with them could cause significant ground motion. The following table presents the distance of major faults from the site, the assumed maximum credible earthquake magnitudes and estimated peak accelerations anticipated at the site. The severity of ground motion is not anticipated to be any greater at this site than in other areas of San Diego County. SEISMICITY OF MAJOR FAULTS ' MAXIMUM MOMENT SLIP RATE FAULT/TYPE DISTANCE MAGNITUDE(RICHTER) mm/year Rose Canyon (B) > 5 km < 10 km 6.9 1.5 Elsinore -Julian Seg(A) 28 mi. 7.1 5 San Jacinto - Borrego Seg(B) 51 mi. 6.6 4 San Andreas- South- Seg(A) 75 mi. 7.4 24 K 161 1 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE 0285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 9454221 / /•� /� 6iII / %ucc� %UI /, /iii: Lat 307 -inv The following information is presented relative to the subject site and Seismic Zone 4 per the California Building Code, C.B.C.: (z) Seismic zone factor = 0.4 Table 16 A -I (Na) Near- source factor = 1.0 Table 16 A -S (B) Seismic source type = B Table 16 A -U (Sd) Soil profile type = Sd Table 16 A -J (Ca) Seismic coefficient = 0.44 Na Table 16 A -Q (Cv) Seismic coefficient = 0.64 Nv Table 16 A -R (Nv) Near source factor = 1.0 Table 16 A -T LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Liquefaction analysis of the soils underlying the site was based on the y consideration of various factors which include the water level, soil type gradation, relative density, intensity of ground shaking and duration of shaking. Liquefaction potential has been found to be the greatest where the ground water level is shallow and loose fine sands occur within a depth of 50 feet or less. These conditions are not present within the site area and, therefore, the potential for generalized liquefaction in the event of a strong to moderate earthquake on nearby faults is considered to be low. FOUNDATIONS For foundation design purposes, the following earth pressures were calculated based on our Shear Test Results (Enclosure 1) from test pit #I at a depth of 3 feet below the existing surface and based on a foundation depth and width of 12 inches: (Dark brown fine to medium SAND) Shear Test: Cohesion = 104 psf; Angle of Friction = 34° Allowable Bearing Value = 1850 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure = 35 pcf Passive Lateral Resistance = 400 pcf At -rest Pressure = 55 pcf Coefficient of Friction = 0.25 Expansion Index = 0 (Non- expansive) These values are for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one -third (1/3) for seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. These design bearing values are in accordance with the California Building Code. 4 1 161 I -A S0. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081.5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945-4221 US -11 Bui/iaecriuq, Luc. Lat 307 -inv The surface soil was tested for sulfate content by Clarkson Laboratory and M Supply, Inc., on March 23, 2007. The results of this test indicated that the water soluble sulfate content of the soil was found to contain 0.002% per California Test 417 (see Enclosure 3). Therefore, per the 2001 California Building Code, Type II cement with a maximum water- cement ratio of 0.50 and a minimum concrete strength (f c) of 2500 psi should be used for concrete in contact with on- site earth materials. RETAINING WALLS An equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf may be used for design of retaining walls with level backfill and 55 pcf for 2H:1 V sloping backfill. These figures are based on a drained condition and use of granular backfill having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater. If the native soils are used as backfill, the equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf (level) and 55 pcf (2H:1 V slope) for active conditions and 55 pcf (level) and 75 pcf (2H:1 V sloping) for at -rest conditions can be used. For the design of a unrestrained retaining wall, such as a cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may be used. For a restrained retaining wall, such as a basement wall or restrained wall corners that are not free to rotate (and cannot undergo the movement required to develop the active conditions), the at -rest pressure should be used. This must be determined by the design civil /structural engineer. The retaining wall should be provided with a subdrain system. Option 1 (granular backfill), a "burrito' type subdrain system consisting of a 4 -inch diameter perforated pipe, PVC, Schedule 40, ABS SDR35, or equivalent, placed Mperforations down, surrounded with one cubic foot per foot of 3/4 -inch sized crushed rock which is entirely wrapped with a filter fabric, Mirafi 140NC, or equivalent can be used. The wrapped filter fabric should be overlapped a minimum of 12- inches on top. Option 2 (native earth material backfill), a "chimney" type subdrain should be installed. The "chimney" type subdrain is similar to the "burrito' type subdrain, with the addition that the crushed rock portion (about 12- inches wide at the bottom) is to be extended up to about 1 to 2 feet below the top of the retaining wall against the back of the wall stem. An Equivalent backdrain system such as AQUADRAIN 10 Subsurface Drainage Composite and AQUADRAIN 100BD High -Flow, Based Drainage Composite or Miradrain 6000 or 6200, or equivalent, can also be used as an alternative. 5 161) -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE 11285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945.4221 I Lat 307 -inv Proper outletting must be provided for the subdrain. The installed subdrain must be inspected and approved by the City inspector and/or the geotechnical consultant prior to backfilling behind the retaining wall. Unless a proper subdrain system is provided, a higher equivalent fluid pressure (to include potential water pressure) must be used for design. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS Building Foundations shall be sized and constructed in accordance with the recommendations found in the latter part of this Report. For foundation design purposes, an allowable bearing strength of 1450 psf may be assumed for all continuous or spread footings founded in dense native soils compacted to 90% relative compaction per ASTM D 1557 -01. Foundation dimensions shall be determined upon the completion of rough grading and verified in writing by our field representative prior to placing concrete. It is recommended that the continuous perimeter foundations and concrete slabs for a light weight, wood framed, stucco type structure founded on the native soils shall be constructed and reinforced in accordance with the following minimum design criteria: a. The continuous perimeter foundations shall extend a minimum depth of 18 inches and a minimum width of 15 inches into the compacted fill soils for a two story structure and a minimum depth of 18 inches and a minimum width of 15 inches for a single story. The continuous foundations shall be reinforced with at least four No. 4 steel bars, two bars shall be placed 3 inches from the top of the foundation and the other bars shall be placed 3 inches from the bottom. As an alternative to the 4 steel bars, the contractor may substitute two No. 5 steel bars, one top and one bottom. b. Footings which span from native cut material to compacted fill soils, where applicable for a transition lot, shall be reinforced with a minimum of one additional No. 5 steel bar top and bottom to control potential differential movement extending 10 feet on either side of the daylight line. No. 3 rebar ties at 12 inches on center shall be used for the construction of this grade beam to help control potential differential movement. c. Footings placed on or adjacent to the top of cut or fill slopes shall have a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet from the bottom edge of the footings to the ' face of the slope, for slopes less than 20 feet in height. For slopes greater than 20 3 161 1 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE 4285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) J45 -3150 Fax: (760) 945422 Lat 307 -inv feet, a horizontal distance of H/3 shall be used where H = height of slope, but need not exceed 40 feet maximum. (See attachment A). d. All concrete slabs shall be a minimum of full 4- inches in thickness, and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 steel rebars at 18- inches on center both ways and placed in the center of the slab. The steel bars shall be wire tied to the perimeter foundation steel and bent downward into the foundations at 18- inches on center to a depth of 3- inches from the bottom. In order to minimize vapor transmission, an impermeable membrane (ie: 10 mil visqueen) shall be placed over 2- inches of sand, gravel or crushed rock. The membrane shall be covered with 2 inches of sand to protect it during construction and the sand should be lightly moistened just prior to placing concrete. All concrete used on this project shall have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi unless otherwise increased on the Building Plan. e. Interior concrete slabs shall be provided with saw -cut joints spaced at a maximum of 10 feet on center each way within 24 hours after the pour and the saw -cuts shall be 1/4 of the slab thickness. It is imperative that the drainage system around the proposed structure shall be designed and implemented to provide positive drainage away from all buildings in order to preclude moisture intrusion into the subgrade soils beneath the building foundations and slabs. f. Exterior slabs for hardscape, pool decks, walkways, patios, etc. shall be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 steel rebars at 18 inches on center each way. The reinforcing steel shall be placed in the upper 1/3 of the slab and held in place with concrete chairs. All hardscape slabs and sidewalks shall be founded on a minimum of 4 inches of clean, poorly graded, coarse sand, gravel or crushed rock. If imported soil materials are used during grading to bring the building pad to the design elevations, or if variations of soils or building locations are encountered, foundation and slab designs shall be reevaluated by our firm upon the completion of the rough grading operation. LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this Report are based in part upon the data obtained from the test pit excavations performed on the site and our experience and judgement. The nature and extent of variations between the rl 161 ]-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 9454221 / /.�• // Bui�iuc�riiii /, /iii: Lat 307 -inv test pits may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to re- evaluate the recommendations of this Report. Findings of the Report are valid as of this date; however, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they be due to natural process or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this Report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this Report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one year. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of buildings are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this Report are modified or verified in writing. This Report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or of his representative to ensure that the information and the recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the project Architect and Engineer and are incorporated into the plans. Further, the necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. It is recommended that our Engineer be provided the opportunity for a general review of the final design plans and specifications for this project in order that the recommendations of this report may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. It is also recommended that our Engineer be provided the opportunity to verify the foundation and slab construction in the field prior to placing concrete. (If our Engineer is not accorded the privilege of making these reviews, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations). The Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. E 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA. CA 92081.5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 9454221 /�.IK• /L Buginecriuii, file. Lat 307 -inv B & B Engineering Inc. and Associates appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact us. i i'2� 38F i� eku r C Sincerely, tephen B. Peter RCE 38623 Expires 3 -31 -09 161 I -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945 -3150 Fax: (760) 945.4221 Direct Shear Test Results 50 1. .. 5. C. 5.0 2.5 N 2.0 do Is do i 0.5 do do 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 25 5.0 0.5 40 4.5 50 Confining Pressure (ksf) 1 INTERNAL COHESION FRICTION INTERCEPT SAMPLE DESCRIPTION ANGLE(DEG.) (PSF) TP1 @3; -A DIRK BRN F•M SAND REMOLDED TO 90% OF M.D.) Shear Strenath at 34 104 0.2 inches of Deformation SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA B&B ENG (LAT 307) S tT SOIL &TESTING BY: JJS /GBF DATE: 4/3/2007 JOB NUMBER: 0712032 APPENDIX II -10 5 e ■Shear Strength at 0.2 inches of Deformation s ON _Ei.1GL- OSC)2E. I ) _Ei.1GL- OSC)2E. I ) �b-7. --- -- -�.- . SAMPLE WT.(Btfora) + TARE . .. SAMPLE WT. (Before) 9 .: r. NMI WET SAMPLE WT, = Li Z-� 9 .- REMARKS: EXPANSION INDEX ... . OFF imam L A B O R A T O R Y Telephone (619) 425 -1993 Fax 425 -7917 R E P O R T Establishbd 1928 C L A R K S O N L A B O R A T O R Y A N D S U P P L Y I N C. 350 Trousdale Dr. Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 www.clarksonlab.com A N A L Y T I C A L A N D C 0 N S U L T I N G C H E M I S T S Date: March 23, 2007 Purchase Order Number: Sales Order Number: 87765 Account Number: B&B To: *---------------------------- ---------------- - - - - -* B 6 B Engineering 1611 -A SO. Melrose Drive #285 Vista, CA 92081 Attention: Dennis P. Beard Laboratory Number: 502254 Customers Phone: 760 - 945 -3150 Sample Designation: Fax: 760 - 945 -4221 *------------------------------------- Five soil samples received on 03/21/07 marked as follows: ANALYSIS: Water Soluble Sulfate California Test 417 Sample SO4% - - - - - -- --- - -- - -- Matsubara Mat 307 Inv. TP- 1 @1 -41A <0.001 Forbes For 307 TP- 1 @ -2 -3' 0.013 Hackbart Hac 307 TP- 1 @2 -12' 0.045 ' Lattin Lat 307 Inv. TP- 1 @3' -A 0.002 Lattin Lat 307 TP- 1 @10' -C 0.002 Note: < Is the symbol for less than. 4a au Tor res FOc.i -ns, jur- C31 FIGURE IBA -I -1 2D01 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE FACE OF FOOTING TOP OF SLOPE FACE OF STRUCTURE TOE OF Hl3 BUT NEED NOT H SLOPE EXCEED 40 FT, (12192 mm) MAX. H12 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 15 FT. (4572 MM) MAX. FIGURE 19A -1.1- SETBACK DIMENSIONS ATTACHMEN' ' A GEORGE E. HAWES, PROFESSIONALIGENGI7V E�R 2900 ADAMS ST, SUITE A 440 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 • (951) 354 -7403 a� Mr James Lattin 246 Neptune Ave. Redlands, California 92373 SUBJECT: Compaction Testing New residence at 135 Jason Street Encinitas, California 92024 APN 254- 230 -43 June 29 2009 Ref: Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation;" 135 west Jason st., Encinitas, CA (apn: 254- 230 -43) P.N. LAT 307 -INV; dated 3 MAY 2007; By B&B Engineering, Inc.: (BBI) Enclosed is the rough grading compaction report for the subject property. The report presents a summary of the observations and compaction testing of the fill placed during rough re- grading activities. Field testing and observations indicate the compaction of the soil was performed in accordance with recommendation made in the referenced BBI report. Based on our observations and filed testing the soil should perform satisfactorily for the expected usage. The included findings and recommendations have been derived in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practice in the fields of soil mechanics, foundation engineering. This Warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. The opportunity to be of continued service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions or require further information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectfully Submitted, George YE. fFawes Registered Civil Engineer State of California c034779 expires 9/30/09 A No. C0347'79 This official stamp is in blue ink; otherwise a copy. INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, tests were performed on the backfill placed during the rough re- grading operations. This report presents a summary of the observations and testing services provided. The site was initially investigated by B &B Engineering, inc.(BBI) of Vista, California; and issued an Investigation report, dated 3 MAY 2007; with a Update report, dated 29 MAY 2007. These report were used as the basis for grading and foundation recommendations. Proposed Development The site is proposed to have two new residential structures constructed on it; one single family residence and detached garage. These structures will consist of a wood framed buildings founded on a continuous perimeter footings with slab -on -grade foundation system. 121M 1142163.7 I Project was accomplished in accordance with project specification and is subject to review by the City of Encinitas. Preparation of Existing Ground The observations and test results indicated that the grading was performed in a method consistent with the project specifications. In accordance with the BBI report; the soil under the proposed building extending 5 feet beyond its limits were over - excavated to a depth of 5 feet; deeper in selected areas if the exposed soil was found to be too soft or moist. The exposed soil was then scarified. This soil was then moisture conditioned and compacted to meet project specifications. Fill Placement Fill, consisting of on -site were placed and moisture conditioned as necessary to achieve proper compaction; a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum. FIELD TESTING Field density tests were performed using the sand cone method (ASTM D1556) or surface sampler. The test results are shown on Table 1. The approximate locations of the field density tests were within the over - excavation limits. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was used as a basis for assessing the proper maximum density value to employ for a given density test. Check points were performed as necessary to verify the visual classification and aid in the selection of the proper maximum density values. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory Maximum Density /Optimum Moisture Content The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture contents evaluated in the laboratory were utilized during grading. The following table presents the value used from laboratory testing performed as part of the investigative reports by BBI (MAY 2007). Soil Description Fine Sand Brown to dark brown (on -site) Unified Soil Class Sp Maximum Dry Density (PCF) 123.5 Optimum Moisture Content M 10.0 The soil is currently being tested for sulfate and chloride content; pH; resistivity; and expansion potential. The B &B report indicate the soil has a non expansive potential, with an expansion index (EI)of 0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the field observations and test results, it is my opinion that earthwork construction was performed in accordance with the regulations of the City of Encinitas and within job specifications. The natural soil has been over - excavated, the structure should be founded entirely on fill materials. The foundation and floor slab are to be reinforced in a manner to minimize flexibility creating a stiff foundation system. The foundation recommendations found in the BBI reports (MAY 2007) are considered sufficient, as such may be used without change. Additional Grading If any further fill placement or trench backfill occurs after the date of the last inspection or test, the geotechnical engineer should be notified. This report is limited to the earthwork performed between June 24 - 26, 2009, the date of our last inspection and testing of compacted soils. The work has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the purpose. The soil was over - excavated to relatively firm soil. This soil was compacted. The subsequent fill soil was also compacted. The soil was reported (BBI; MAY 2007) to have an non expansion potential; and a sulfate content of 0.002 %. These values are considered consistent with findings in the area and can be used for design. LIMITATIONS The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with contemporary principles and practices in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty or guarantee is either expressed or implied. Only a portion of the subsurface soils and conditions were evaluated or observed and the conclusions are based upon an interpretation of the soil conditions encountered in the field tests. Conclusions are also based on the assumption these findings do not vary appreciably in the adjacent areas. However, minor variations may occur; should soil conditions significantly different be encountered in the future; an assessment of the impact on subsequent recommendations should be made. All future grading and fill placement should be performed under the inspection and testing of a soils engineer. TABLE I SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING building pad for Proposed Residential structure 135 W. Jason St. Encinitas, California APN 254- 230 -43 ----------------------------------------------------------------- TEST FIELD LABORATORY DEPTH COMPACTION NO. Dry Moisture Dry Moisture OF Density Content Density Content TESTS Field Req'd (pcf) (%) (pcf) M (FT)* ----------------------------------------------------------------- upper pad 1 104.7 1.4 123.5 10.0 -5 85 90 2 111.9 10.9 123.5 10.0 -411 91 90 3 108.9 5.9 123.5 10.0 -5 89 90 4 120.0 7.5 123.5 10.0 -4 98 90 5 122.0 9.2 123.5 10.0 -4 99 90 6 119.0 9.4 123.5 10.0 -3 96 90 7 121.3 9.0 123.5 10.0 -3 98 90 8 119.0 9.0 123.5 10.0 -2 96 90 9 114.6 7.5 123.5 10.0 -2 93 90 10 113.7 10.9 123.5 10.0 -1 92 90 11 117.1 9.2 123.5 10.0 FG 95 90 12 110.8 10.0 123.5 10.0 -4 90 90 13 118.5 9.2 123.5 10.0 -4 96 90 14 117.4 8.9 123.5 10.0 -3 94 90 15 115.3 10.9 123.5 10.0 -2 93 90 16 111.9 11.0 123.5 10.0 -2 91 90 17 112.1 9.3 123.5 10.0 -1 91 90 18 113.4 10.9 123.5 10.0 FG 92 90 19 114.3 7.5 123.5 10.0 FG 93 90 20 115.3 7.9 123.5 10.0 FG 94 90 * Depth below rough grade elevation; see attached plan FG finish grade 33 W JASON STREET -- PROPOSED LIMIT OF WORK,- - ' AT EDGE OF E�S€MENT - -- �( - -J�f EP 69.18 9.27 EX EP 68.92 WIDE EASEMENT FOR ROAD,—` BLIC UTILITY, AND PURPOSES CIDENTAL THERETO IN FAVOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. ISTING EP DRIVEWAY r, _c+� ..n -- 6929 -1 tr FL -70.0- 1 r EG1oRDS. t; R i+ SLINED ALE 40 LF -TRACK LINE. STING SHED BE REMOVED STAIRS )ING PLANS FL =73.3- — I@FG =76.00 OF -6 -76 00_- CLEANOUT AT 90 • BEND-IN N + LATERAL RECYCLED WATER NOTE: AS REQUIRED BYSDWA; D.URVVG THE DR -OUGHT _ RESPONSE LEVEL 2 C0NDITf_0N pE(7LA.9ED ON MAY 27, 2009 THE SITE SHALL BE REQUIRED TO USE REC WATER FOR GRADING ACTIVTTIES UNTIL O Y WISE NOTIFIED. EXISTING BUILDING FL 69.10 PORTION OF DRIVEWAY EXCEEDING 14% GRADE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH PCC " APN: 254 - 230-30 PORTION OF PROPOSED ROCKLINED EXISTING BMP SWALE / .28- FL 90 2% MIN SITE WALL AQ LF / TO BE REMOVED _ ` - IST,ING_ RE- YNI-W $y�r 75 0 - FL =71.0 . l4 ' MAX HEIGHT) BW@EX =71.64 F S15'024Ji E 132.50' FL =74.0 20' 10% 6.4% - FG -75.0 -- - -_ -•� F 75.0 -' r I"I • r PROPOSED GAMAGE W1 :P, i ACCESSORYUNITABOVE - '—� ••e•e E ; 0 It 080 , f e / i� v t\ r C ,* FROPMED SINGLE FAMMYRESIVENCE ► 0 " r • i Ie e LOT i� e r L1! mNOE E. "^VMS. PN RIAL EN MEN F- <. +� 2900 Adams SMSM, Suft A440 • Ri mlde. CA 92504 • r�sT- Cam' . � � �� a� SC�IZ ✓s��1"�j , r 0 EX. "000 FENAC —X - -- X FG =75.0 • 1 2• .0 i k s g4SSLINED -SNP S -LINH BF -WAAK 7a4cKLOT 1: RN: Z —? - WTCHED AREA BMP TREATMENT NOT TO BE MOC THE PERMISSIDI OF ENCINITAS rulacr_7c nn +' a + v t\ r C ,* FROPMED SINGLE FAMMYRESIVENCE ► 0 " r • i Ie e LOT i� e r L1! mNOE E. "^VMS. PN RIAL EN MEN F- <. +� 2900 Adams SMSM, Suft A440 • Ri mlde. CA 92504 • r�sT- Cam' . � � �� a� SC�IZ ✓s��1"�j , r 0 EX. "000 FENAC —X - -- X FG =75.0 • 1 2• .0 i k s g4SSLINED -SNP S -LINH BF -WAAK 7a4cKLOT 1: RN: Z —? - WTCHED AREA BMP TREATMENT NOT TO BE MOC THE PERMISSIDI OF ENCINITAS rulacr_7c nn g4SSLINED -SNP S -LINH BF -WAAK 7a4cKLOT 1: RN: Z —? - WTCHED AREA BMP TREATMENT NOT TO BE MOC THE PERMISSIDI OF ENCINITAS rulacr_7c nn GEORGE E. HAWES, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 2900 ADAMS ST SUITE A440 • RIVERSIDE, CALIFOR - 3 a� D� TO �'{�../�( JUL € I ECTION REPORT FROM L�l- -1 TTLCJ[�r E GINEERING SERVICES SUBJECT CITY OF ENCINDS 1. DATE MESSAGE f& C I WN / / - ( J PIA l lr-A 6 f IT n />lr� 1 J /?4 iii I.! 1,A I / ' i 114) A I,h Tc v 271 v i r3 n rz.aTz+, -f P A TL Sa // G4..I,n s xi /,v T C SIGNED DATE SIGNED GEORGE E. HAWES, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 2900 ADAMS ST, SUITE A 440 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 • (9511354_7403 a� Mr James Lattin June 29 009 246 Neptune Ave. D Redlands, California 92373 tE Q SUBJECT: Compaction Testing 9' New residence at JUN 135 Jason Street a}CES Encinitas, California 92024 APN Ref: Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation; 135 west Jason st., Encinitas, CA (apn: 254 - 230 -43) P.N. LAT 307 -INV; dated 3 MAY 2007; By B &B Engineering, Inc.: (BBI) Enclosed is the rough grading compaction report for the subject property. The report presents a summary of the observations and compaction testing of the fill placed during rough re- grading activities. Field testing and observations indicate the compaction of the soil was performed in accordance with recommendation made in the referenced BBI report. Based on our observations and filed testing the soil should perform satisfactorily for the expected usage. The included findings and recommendations have been derived in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practice in the fields of soil mechanics, foundation engineering. This Warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. The opportunity to be of continued service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions or require further information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectfully Submitted, Ge Register State of expires ed Civil Engineer California c034779 9/30/09 No. Comm This official stamp is in blue ink; otherwise a copy. INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, tests were performed on the backfill placed during the rough re- grading operations. This report presents a summary of the observations and testing services provided. The site was initially investigated by B &B Engineering, inc.(BBI) of Vista, California; and issued an Investigation report, dated 3 MAY 2007; with a Update report, dated 24 MAY 2007. These report were used as the basis for grading and foundation recommendations. Proposed Development The site is proposed to have two new residential structures constructed on it; one single family residence and detached garage. These structures will consist of a wood framed buildings founded on a continuous perimeter footings with slab -on -grade foundation system. IM'AM6011 0Y..i:1 Project was accomplished in accordance with project specification and is subject to review by the City of Encinitas. Preparation of Existing Ground The observations and test results indicated that the grading was performed in a method consistent with the project specifications. In accordance with the BBI report; the soil under the proposed building extending 5 feet beyond its limits were over - excavated to a depth of 5 feet; deeper in selected areas if the exposed soil was found to be too soft or moist. The exposed soil was then scarified. This soil was then moisture conditioned and compacted to meet project specifications. Fill Placement Fill, consisting of on -site were placed and moisture conditioned as necessary to achieve proper compaction; a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum. FIELD TESTING Field density tests were performed using the sand cone method (ASTM D1556) or surface sampler. The test results are shown on Table 1. The approximate locations of the field density tests were within the over - excavation limits. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was used as a basis for assessing the proper maximum density value to employ for a given density test. Check points were performed as necessary to verify the visual classification and aid in the selection of the proper maximum density values. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory Maximum Density /Optimum Moisture Content The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture contents evaluated in the laboratory were utilized during grading. The following table presents the value used from laboratory testing performed as part of the investigative reports by BBI (MAY 2007) Soil Unified Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Description Soil Class Density (PCF) Content (%) Fine Sand Sp 123.5 10.0 Brown to dark brown (on -site) The soil is currently being tested for sulfate and chloride content; pH; resistivity; and expansion potential. The B &B report indicate the soil has a non expansive potential, with an expansion index (EI)of 0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the field observations and test results, it is my opinion that earthwork construction was performed in accordance with the regulations of the City of Encinitas and within job specifications. The natural soil has been over - excavated, the structure should be founded entirely on fill materials. The foundation and floor slab are to be reinforced in a manner to minimize flexibility creating a stiff foundation system. The foundation recommendations found in the BBI reports (MAY 2007) are considered sufficient, as such may be used without change. Additional Grading If any further fill placement or trench backfill occurs after the date of the last inspection or test, the geotechnical engineer should be notified. SUMMARY This report is limited to the earthwork performed between June 24 - 26, 2009, the date of our last inspection and testing of compacted soils. The work has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the purpose. The soil was over - excavated to relatively firm soil. This soil was compacted. The subsequent fill soil was also compacted. The soil was reported (BBI; MAY 2007) to have an non expansion potential; and a sulfate content of 0.002 %. These values are considered consistent with findings in the area and can be used for design. LIMITATIONS The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with contemporary principles and practices in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty or guarantee is either expressed or implied. Only a portion of the subsurface soils and conditions were evaluated or observed and the conclusions are based upon an interpretation of the soil conditions encountered in the field tests. Conclusions are also based on the assumption these findings do not vary appreciably in the adjacent areas. However, minor variations may occur; should soil conditions significantly different be encountered in the future; an assessment of the impact on subsequent recommendations should be made. All future grading and fill placement should be performed under the inspection and testing of a soils engineer. TABLE I SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS ROUGH GRADING building pad for Proposed Residential structure 135 W. Jason St. Encinitas, California APN 254- 230 -43 ----------------------------------------------------------------- TEST FIELD LABORATORY DEPTH COMPACTION NO. Dry Moisture Dry Moisture OF Density Content Density Content TESTS Field Req'd ----------------------------------------------------------------- (pcf) M (pcf) M (FT)* upper pad 1 104.7 1.4 123.5 10.0 -5 85 90 2 111.9 10.9 123.5 10.0 -411 91 90 3 108.9 5.9 123.5 10.0 -5 89 90 4 120.0 7.5 123.5 10.0 -4 98 90 5 122.0 9.2 123.5 10.0 -4 99 90 6 119.0 9.4 123.5 10.0 -3 96 90 7 121.3 9.0 123.5 10.0 -3 98 90 8 119.0 9.0 123.5 10.0 -2 96 90 9 114.6 7.5 123.5 10.0 -2 93 90 10 113.7 10.9 123.5 10.0 -1 92 90 11 117.1 9.2 123.5 10.0 FG 95 90 12 110.8 10.0 123.5 10.0 -4 90 90 13 118.5 9.2 123.5 10.0 -4 96 90 14 117.4 8.9 123.5 10.0 -3 94 90 15 115.3 10.9 123.5 10.0 -2 93 90 16 111.9 11.0 123.5 10.0 -2 91 90 17 112.1 9.3 123.5 10.0 -1 91 90 18 113.4 10.9 123.5 10.0 FG 92 90 19 114.3 7.5 123.5 10.0 FG 93 90 20 115.3 7.9 123.5 10.0 FG 94 90 * Depth below rough grade elevation; see attached plan FG finish grade 3.3 W. JASON SflREET PROPOSED LIMIT OF WolwK — " AT EDGE OF EASEMENT" FX EP 69.18 9.27 EX EP 68.92 i INSTALL SEWER WIDE EASEMENT FOR ROAD, CLEANOUT BLIC UTILITY, AND PURPOSES AT 90' BEND -INS CIDENTAL THERETO IN FAVOR LATERAL/ THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. FL ISTING EP DRIVEWAY RECYCLED WATER NOTE: AS REQUIRED BY SDWD; DURING THE DROUGHT _ RESPONSE LEVEL 2 C0NDM- 0Nl?ECLA9D ON MAY 27, 2009 THE SITE SHALL BE REQUIRED TO USE REC� WATER FOR GRADING ACTIVITIES UNTIL O WISE NOTIFIED. EXISTING BUILDING FL 69.10 PORTION OF DRIVEWAY EXCEEDING 14% GRADE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH PCC - _ - APIN. 254 -- 230-30 PORTION OF PROPOSED ROCKLINED EXISTING BMP SWALE SITE WALL 4 F TO BE REMO EXISTINS BETA N _ — ' I i (4' MAX HEIGHT) BW@EXv 75.0 - FL - 71.0 FL =74.0 BW @EX =71.64 .90 ( S15 '02.51 E 132.5x0 G - Ft 69.20 2% MIN ` } 10% z•— — — t - - - -� 69.29 SETBACK LINE--, FS= 72.��2' n FL =70.0 o FS =72.5. N % FL =72.8 I 'O ECG. / 1 N M SEINED � ALE 40 LF - - -2 -TRACK LINET STING SHED BE REMOVED STAIRS )ING PLAi,S FL =73.3- - - I @FG =76.00 OF-G- 76.08 = — �•� PROPOSED GARAGE V�/ ON N' OR :1 O n ' Sol / /. �j pE V. HAVA", iOEMIWIML EM90MEEA E- 3 i 2900 Adams Suva, Suite A440 • Fliwm de, CA 92504 • r� -s'T' Cam' - i � � , m�ov.2 X0,477CD A) \ f 1 EX. WOOD FENCE �r74 5 ' TW @FG =75.32 3W @EX =75.32 X EX. CHAIN \1� C LINK FENCE 1 EDGE OF PA fEDG go r• i / %✓ v ' ,. i 5.5% APN254-23OL43 PROPOSED SRVC&E ;0- FAMMYRESIDENCE js 52;OLD LOT i MIC S Enflineeriiii /, /ue: CIVH., GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALM ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN • LAND SURVEYING • SOIL TESTING CLIENT: JIM LATTIN PROJECT: LAT 609- CHG -ENG DATE: 19 JUNE 2009 CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 S. Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA. 92024 Attention: Engineering/Inspection Departments Subject: Geotechnical Consultant of Record for the Project located at 135 West Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. (APN: 254230 -43) Reference (a): Our Limited Site Specific Soil Investigation Report dated 3 May 2007. Gentlemen: This letter serves as formal notification to the City of Encinitas that B & B Engineering, Inc., is hereby releasing our responsibility as the Geotechnical Consultant of Record for Grading Plan No. 10210 -G and for all geotechnical supervision of the subject project as of the date of this document. Respectfully submitted, ephen B. Peter RCE 38623 Expires 3/31/11 ;rte , :._. 4- 1611 -A SO. MELROSE DRIVE N285, VISTA, CA 92081 -5471 Ph: (760) 945.3150 Fax: (760) 945.4221 Date: ,3 - 05 City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Assume Responsibility - New Soils Engineer Drawing Number: 10210 -G Project Name: 133 W. Jason St. In accordance with Section 23.24 -360 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, please be advised that in reference to the above stated plans, we have reviewed all prior reports and /or plans and work performed by B &B Engineering Inc., and that we concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and are satisfied with the work performed. We assume all responsibility as Soils Engineer, for these plans and agree to all terms stated iin± the Soil Engineer's Certificate shown on plans 10210 -G as of Z3 ,d CAN 107 (date). Date) PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING + LAND PLANNING+ LAND SURVEYING June 29, 2009 City of Encinitas Engineering Services Permits 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 JUN 2 9 � PE 1717 Re: Engineer's Pad Certification for Grading Plan No. 10210 -G To Whom it May Concern: Pursuant to Section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for the above referenced plan. As the Surveyor of Record for the subject property, I hereby state that the rough grading for this project has been completed in substantial conformance with the approved plan and requirements of the City of Encinitas, Codes and Standards. 23.24.310(B). The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified and shown on the approved grading plan: Pad Elevation Pad Elevation Location Per Plan Per Field Measurement Main house 75.0 75.5 Garage 72.5 73.2 23.24.310(B)5. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes has been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan. If you should have any questions in reference to the information listed above, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, O lAl'lD 7G' Joseph PLS 5211 o LS 5211 Gjjjnnn�' Yuhas, Principal Land Surveyor * Exp. 081301;1 Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, Inc 535 N Coast Highway 101 Ste A Solana Beach. California 92075 1 ph 858.259.8212 1 fx 859.259.4812 1 plsaengintering.com 15L'i lMl .ommvlI_Z LL'Y 505 S. VULCAN AVE. ENCINITAS. CA 92024 GRADING PERMIT PERMIT NO.: 10210GI PARCEL NO. : 254- 230 -4300 PLAN NO.: 10210G JOB SITE ADDRESS: 133 W. JASON ST CASE NO.: 08069 / CDP APPLICANT NAME JAMES LATIN MAILING ADDRESS: 246 NEPTUNE AVE PHONE NO.: 760 -846 -1913 CITY: ENCINITAS STATE: CA ZIP: 92024 - CONTRACTOR : OWNER /BUILDER PHONE NO.: 760 - 846 -1913 LICENSE NO.: LICENSE TYPE: ENGINEER : B & B ENGINEERING P NE O.: 760- 945 -3150 PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 6/16/09 PERMIT EXP. DATE: 6/16/10 PERMIT ISSUED B . INSPECTOR: BEN OLIVER ---- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS ------------------ 1. PERMIT FEE .00 2. GIS MAP FEE .00 3. INSPECTION FEE 3,375.93 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00 5. NPDES INSPT FEE 675.19 6. SECURITY DEPOSIT 67,518.55 7. FLOOD CONTROL FE 861.00 8. TRAFFIC FEE 00 9. IN -LIEU UNDERGRN .00 10.IN -LIEU IMPROVMT .00 11.PLAN CHECK FEE .00 12.PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00 -- ----------------------- DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------------- - - - - -- '=MIT ISSUED TO VERIFY PERFORMANCE OF GRADING AND DRAINAGE PER APPROVED PLAN 10210 -G. OWNER TO MAINTAIN TRAFFIC CONTROL PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS OR CITY APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN. LETTER DATED 6/4/09 APPLIES. - - -- INSPECTION ------- --- - - - - -- DATE - INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - -- INITIAL INSPECTION COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION FINAL INSPECTION L � 1 i�J I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING ANY PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT S-fGRATOE I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF TO THIS APPLICATION. DATE SIGNED 'oliz,1 -al 76'0 ?se �7_i97 PRINT NAME�� TELEPHONE NUMBER CIRCLE ONE:1 1. pWNER 2. AGENT 3. OTHER , CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT DATE: / PROJECT NAME: `- �11 n' PROJECT NUMBER STREET LOCATION: I33 Gr)QFn,.� PERMIT NUMBER::�/1d2 /D6I CONTRACTOR: r171L p/ TELEPHONE: �. ,,,�P o� C/i •G'n� 12�� w�i'/l� - En�i ry waA � < < h &A[ � r � � � C�a r ✓1 f'c A ! AO �i, ) ,l� ^ - lG hs %S / f r �' -✓LZ w1 a 1 i p, 1, L..4 L C,Gr� ia, rri. , C -� w.yl � 5�'• `� j, r � 10� �svru7••.r �Cr_12 T /Y A J, 45 ""r,/ J/ " No 9 ,lac S 'I It y s a4z i% r m1/4429 HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC CALCUL * C E pU rl For U iAPR 2' 2009 133 W. JASON STREET ENCINITAS, CA 92024 EwG��sER�ti�` • [AU INr. ?. Prepared For James Lattin 246 Neptune Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 PE 1717 PREPARED BY: PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A QpOFESS /p4�` SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 q` GREGG F (858)259 -8212 .P 9iy 2G cc z DATE: 4 -22 -09 No. 73620 Exp. IZ-3/ -/� 2F C PE # 1717 6 :08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION DISCUSSION ................................................ ..............................A CONCLUSION............................................... ..............................B 100 YEAR EXISTING AND POST IMPROVEMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS ....................... ..............................0 PRIORITY TREATMENT SWALE CALCULATIONS ...........................D INFILTRATION TRENCH VOLUME CALCULATIONS .........................E APPENDIX.................................................... ..............................F Runoff Coefficient Table Isopluvials Intensity Duration Curve Hydrology Node Maps PE # 1717 &08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 A. DISCUSSION The purpose of this report is to analyze the storm water runoff produced from the 6 -hour 100 year stone event for the existing and post - development condition of the residential lot located at 133 W. Jason Street, Encinitas, CA. Existing Conditions The existing site consists of a vacant lot bounded by residential development to the east, south, and west, and a private road and utility easement to the north that provides access to W. Jason Street. In the existing condition, the entire site drainage is directed to the north and ultimately discharges onto W. Jason Street. The peak flowrate for the 100 year 6 hour storm event was determined to be 0.90 cfs in the existing site condition based on the rational method hydrology calculations which can be found in Section C of this report. Post - Development Conditions The proposed development consists of a single family residence, a separate accessory unit, along with typical driveway and drainage improvements. In the proposed condition, runoff from the site will ultimately discharge onto W. Jason Street as it does in the existing condition. The peak flowrate for the 100 year 6 hour storm event was determined to be 1.26 cfs for the proposed site condition based on the rational method hydrology calculations which can be found in Section C of this report. A 40 ft long rocklined BMP Swale located between the driveway and the east property line, and a 40 ft long grass lined bmp swale located to the north of the proposed accessory unit have been proposed to provide priority stormwater treatment for the project. Please refer to section D for priority bmp sizing calculations. In order to mitigate for the 0.36 cfs increase in peak flow, an SO ft long infiltration trench has been proposed along the driveway to act as a stormwater detention device. Please refer to section E for required infiltration basin volume calculations. Methodology and Results The hydrologic model used to perform the hydrologic analysis presented in this report utilizes the Rational Method (RM) equation, t =CIA. The RM formula estimates the peak rate of runoff based on the variables of area, runoff coefficient, and rainfall intensity. The rainfall intensity (I) is equal to: I= 7.44xP6 xD -0 .64' Where: I = Intensity (in/hr) P6 = 6 -hour precipitation (inches) D = duration (minutes — use Tc) PE # 1717 6 :08 PM 4122/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W Jason Street PE 1717 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: VNIT47 -3 Q = CIA 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 munber. The existing and post - improvement runoff coefficients, used to analyze both conditions, were determined by using weighted "C" average. For the proposed development the runoff coefficient utilized for the hydrologic analysis of the project site varied based on the area where the immediate underlying subsurface had low infiltration rates and areas where the underlying subsurface had higher infiltration rates. After discussing the characteristics of both the soil and the proposed CTPB with the soils engineer, a runoff coefficient of 0.35 was used to for top layer and a runoff coefficient of 0.80 was used for the underlying soils layer. Weighted runoff coefficients can be found in section C of this report. B. CONCLUSION Based on the information and calculations contained in this report it is the professional opinion of Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates. that the drainage system as proposed on the corresponding Grading Plan will function to adequately intercept, contain and convey Qioo to the appropriate points of discharge. PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 C. 100 YEAR PRE AND POST DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 trtrs ssttrrttrt »tis »sittttatattttttirtasersetf etturtaartat arrttssttrttittrt RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982 -2008 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 15.0 Release Date: 04/012008 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: tttssstssstkttttttt »trim DESCRIPTION OF STUDY •••••rkttsrttsittttttttkrk t HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS • 133 W. JASON STREET t ENCINITAS, CA ittttttrrttrtttiittfftifittitttitatttttttttttitrktttttttttttttttttittittti FILE NAME: 1717.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 11:36 04222009 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 &HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.400 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C "- VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER- DEFINED STREET - SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET- CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER - GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT - /PARK - HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FF) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.01810.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW -DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow -Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)s(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (Fr•FT /S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* I BEGIN PRE DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS I I I I irttstrtsi ttitsttttaaatatartrastrtrtitssrrrsrrrr trrrstrirsttirsttstrttaaa aar PE # 1717 6 :08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 » » >RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): RESIDENTIAL (4.3 DU /AC OR LESS) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT =.5200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC 11) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW- LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 78.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET)= 73.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 5.00 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 6.106 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCHMOUR) = 5.559 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.52 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.18 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.52 a» anti i i ii H tH tkaH NN Na at t tMrlak MNq t iaR a ait a iN riaa raa *Rata rata a s a FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 52 » »>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW« «< » » >TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET)= 73.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET)= 65.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 135.00 CHANNEL SLOPE= 0.0593 NOTE: CHANNEL FLOW OF 1. CFS WAS ASSUMED IN VELOCITY ESTIMATION CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 0.52 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC)= 3.65 (PER LACFCD/RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.)= 0.62 Tc(MIN.)= 6.72 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 1.00 = 235.00 FEET. iittttitiit!♦ arrrkiikiittl ttt!l attriirrrrtttttt •ltitritkataaataaaaakiratttra FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.001S CODE = 81 » » >ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.225 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): RESIDENTIAL (4.3 DU /AC OR LESS) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT =.5200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA- AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.5200 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) - 0.41 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TC(MIN.) = 6.72 END PRE DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS I BEGIN POST DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS I I atrrttrsttitraara rasa•*** ittitwrwaawiiil w!l trrtartwtrttrtsrtttwwttrwsaiaka• FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 21 » » >RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS« «< "USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): RESIDENTIAL. (14.5 DU /AC OR LESS) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT =.6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL. SUBAREA FLOW- LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 78.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET)= 74.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.90 PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OFFLOW(MINJ= 4.780 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 94.50 (Reference: Table 3 -111 of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5- MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.07 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.30 # ti#ktM #Nk +iHtittt+p tit NttttgNt4tktkkk ## #tti +t tttH tttt NitNN Nt Nt FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 52 » »>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< » » >TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA« «< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET)= 74.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET)= 68.40 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 95.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0600 NOTE: CHANNEL FLOW OF 1. CFS WAS ASSUMED IN VELOCITY ESTIMATION CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 0.30 FLOW VELOCIT'Y(FEET /SEC) = 3.67 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TTME(MIN.)= 0.43 Tc(MIN.) = 5.21 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 2.00 = 195.00 FEET. N i t i t i• g p t k � ## t t• tt t tt t i N t t t i t t N N Y /N t I t I t I H t• ti k• M k k t• tt ♦ H+H i H q FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 2.00IS CODE = 81 » » >ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW ««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.157 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): RESIDENTIAL. (14.5 DU /AC OR LESS) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT =.6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC I])= 0 AREA- AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.6700 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.91 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.20 TC(MIN.) = 521 •+• ptt•s t1• ststsrsiris+• ts•• ts» skst• tk# t• t+ +tss »tsttsstsssii+ +ssstgsttt• FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 51 » »>COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW« «< » » >TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET)= 68.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET)= 65.00 CHANNEL LENGTH T14RU SUBAREA(FEET) = 80.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0425 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 3.00 "Z" FACTOR = 4.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.045 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.25 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.680 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): RESIDENTIAL (14.5 DU /AC OR LESS) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT =.6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.27 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 1.92 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.18 TRAVELTIME(MIN.)= 0.69 Tc(MIN.) = 5.91 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.15 AREA- AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.670 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.26 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.18 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 1.90 PE # 1717 6 :08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 1.00 = 275.00 FEET. I END POST DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS I I I I END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TC(MIN.) = 5.91 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.26 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS PE # 1717 6 :08 PM 4/22/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 D. PRIORITY TREATMENT SWALE SIZING CALCULATIONS PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4/22/2009 85TH PERCENTILE PEAK FLOW AND VOLUME DETERMINAT Modified Rational Method - Effective for Watersheds < 1.0 mil Note: Only Enter Values in Boxes - Spreadsheet Will Calculate Remaining Values BMP Rocklined Swale 85th Percentile Rainfall = 0.67 inches (from County Isopluvial Map) Developed Drainage Area 1 0.15 jacres Natural Drainage Area = 1 0.00 jacres Total Drainage Area to BMP = 0.15 acres Dev. Area Percent Impervious % Overall Percent Impervious = 1 % Dev Area Runoff Coefficient = Nat. Area Runoff Coefficient = 0.67 035 Runoff Coefficient = 0.67 Time of Concentration = 6.0 minutes (from Drainage Study) RATIONAL METHOD RESULTS Q = CIA where Q = C= 1= A= V = CPA where V = C= P= A= Using Developed Area Only C= 1= P= A= Q= V= 85th Percentile Peak Flow (cfs) Runoff Coefficient Rainfall Intensity (02 inch /hour per RWQCB mandate) Drainage Area (acres) 85th Percentile Runoff Volume (acre -feet) Runoff Coefficient 85th Percentile Rainfall (inches) Drainage Area (acres 0.67 0.2 inch /hour 0.67 inches 0.2 acres 0.02 cfs 0.01 acre -feet Rocklined Swale Design Spreadsheet Given: Design flow 0.02 cfs Residence time (req) 9 minutes Trapezoid Channel Design Parameters y 0.25 feet t 3 feet w 0 feet z 4 ft/ft A 0.375 sq ft Find Qmax of channel Q= (1.49/n) ' A ` RA(2 /3) " SA .5 n 0.04 s 0 01 ft/ft (long. Slope) r 0 142857 ft Q= 0.381732 cfs Required Length of Channel: L =vt Therefore: L= 28.8 S Height = Peak flow rate, cfs r d Find Velcoity in channel V =Q /A Therefore: V = 0.053333 fps W Diagram of Swale Variables Used in Spreadsheet 85TH PERCENTILE PEAK FLOW AND VOLUME DETERMINATION Modified Rational Method - Effective for Watersheds < 1.0 mil 1 Note Only Enter Values in Boxes - Spreadsheet Will Calculate Remaining Values BMP Grasslined Swale 85th Percentile Rainfall = 0.67 inches (from County Isopluvial Map) P = 0.67 inches Developed Drainage Area = 0 15 acres Natural Drainage Area = I 0.00 jacres Total Drainage Area to BMP = 0.15 acres Dev Area Percent Impervious % Overall Percent Impervious = 1 % Dev. Area Runoff Coefficient = 0 67 Nat. Area Runoff Coefficient = 0.35 Runoff Coefficient= 0.67 Time of Concentration = 675 minutes (from Drainage Study) RATIONAL METHOD RESULTS Q = CIA where Q = C= 1= A= V = CPA where V C= P= A= Using Developed Area Only 85th Percentile Peak Flow (cfs) Runoff Coefficient Rainfall Intensity (0.2 inch /hour per RWQCB mandate) Drainage Area (acres) 85th Percentile Runoff Volume (acre -feet) Runoff Coefficient 85th Percentile Rainfall (inches) Drainage Area (acres C = 0.67 1 = 0.2 inch /hour P = 0.67 inches A = 0.2 acres Q = 0.02 cfs V = 0.01 acre -feet Grasslined Swale Design Spreadsheet Given: Design flow 0.02 cfs Residence time (req) 9 minutes Trapezoid Channel Design Parameters: y 0.25 feet t 3 feet w 0 feet z 4 ft/ft A 0.375 sq ft Find Qmax of channel Q= (1.49/n)'A`R^(2/3)'s ^.5 n 0.02 s 0.01 ft/ft (long. Slope) r 0.142857 ft Q= 0.763464 cfs Required Length of Channel: L =vt Therefore: L= 28.8 — Height Peak flow rate, cfs SS1 S V rd Find Velcoity in channel V =Q /A Therefore: V = 0.053333 fps M Diagram of Swale Variables Used in Spreadsheet HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 E. INFILTRATION TRENCH VOLUME CALCULATIONS PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4122/2009 HYDROLOGY STUDY - PE 1658 INFILTRATION TRENCH VOLUME CALCULATIONS Post Development Runoff— Pre Development Runoff = 1.26 cfs — 0.90 cfs = 0.36 cfs Detention Volume = (2.65)(Q)p,s1(Tc) post(60) - (2.65)(Q)P,c(Tc)pm(60) = (2.65)(1.26)(5.91) (60) - (2.65)(0.90)(6.72) (60) = Required Volume = 1184 ft3 - 962 ft' = 222 ft3 ACTUAL DETENTION VOLUME: TOTAL LENGTH (L)= 80 LF WIDTH (W)= 3 FT AVG DEPTH (D)= 2 FT VOID RATIO (e)= 0.5 DETENTION VOLUME (V) = L x W x D x e V= 240 CF HYDROLOGY STUDY for 133 W. Jason Street PE 1717 F. APPENDIX PE # 1717 6:08 PM 4/22/2009 San Diego County Hydrology Manual Date: June 2003 Table 3 -1 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR URBAN AREAS Section: 3 Page: 6 of 26 Land Use I Runoff Coefficient "C" NRCS Undisturbed Natural Terrain (Natural) Low Density Residential (LDR) Low Density Residential (LDR) Low Density Residential (LDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) High Density Residential (HDR) High Density Residential (HDR) Commercial/Industrial (N. Com) Commercial/Industrial (G. Com) Commercial/Industrial (O.P. Com) Commercial/Industrial (Limited 1.) Soil % EVIPER. A B C Permanent Open Space General Commercial 0.80 0.81 Office Professional/Commercial 0.83 0.84 Limited Industrial 0.83 0.84 General Industrial 95 0.87 0.87 n R7 n 0* 90 10 20 25 30 40 45 50 65 80 80 85 90 0 .25 0.84 0.32 0 .38 0.41 0.45 0.51 0.54 o.sa 0.67 0.77 0 .77 0.80 0.84 0.20 0.30 0. Residential, 1.0 DU /A or less 0.27 0.36 Residential, 2.0 DU /A or less 0.34 0.42 0. Residential, 2.9 DU /A or less 0.38 0.45 0. Residential, 4.3 DU /A or less 0.41 0.48 Residential, 7.3 DU /A or less 0.48 0.54 0 Residential, 10.9 DU /A or less 0.52 0.57 0 Residential, 14.5 DU /A or less 0.55 0.60 0' Residential, 24.0 DU /A or less 0.66 0.69 0 Residential, 43.0 DU /A or less 0.76 0,78 Neighborhood Commercial 0,76 0.78 0. 35 0. 41 46 49 0. 52 .57 .60 .63 .71 0 .79 79 0.82 0. 85 0.85 *The values associated with 0% impervious may be used for direct calculation of the runoff coefficient as described in Section 3.1.2 (representing the pervious runoff coefficient, Cp, for the soil type), or for areas that will remain undisturbed in perpetuity. Justification must be given that the area will remain natural forever (e.g., the area is located in Cleveland National Forest). DU /A = dwelling units per acre NRCS = National Resources Conservation Service 3 -6 0* 90 10 20 25 30 40 45 50 65 80 80 85 90 0 .25 0.84 0.32 0 .38 0.41 0.45 0.51 0.54 o.sa 0.67 0.77 0 .77 0.80 0.84 0.20 0.30 0. Residential, 1.0 DU /A or less 0.27 0.36 Residential, 2.0 DU /A or less 0.34 0.42 0. Residential, 2.9 DU /A or less 0.38 0.45 0. Residential, 4.3 DU /A or less 0.41 0.48 Residential, 7.3 DU /A or less 0.48 0.54 0 Residential, 10.9 DU /A or less 0.52 0.57 0 Residential, 14.5 DU /A or less 0.55 0.60 0' Residential, 24.0 DU /A or less 0.66 0.69 0 Residential, 43.0 DU /A or less 0.76 0,78 Neighborhood Commercial 0,76 0.78 0. 35 0. 41 46 49 0. 52 .57 .60 .63 .71 0 .79 79 0.82 0. 85 0.85 *The values associated with 0% impervious may be used for direct calculation of the runoff coefficient as described in Section 3.1.2 (representing the pervious runoff coefficient, Cp, for the soil type), or for areas that will remain undisturbed in perpetuity. Justification must be given that the area will remain natural forever (e.g., the area is located in Cleveland National Forest). DU /A = dwelling units per acre NRCS = National Resources Conservation Service 3 -6 - Ouration Hours Directions for Application: (1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr and 24 hr amounts for the selected frequency. These maps are included in the County Flydmlogy Manual 00, 50, and 100 yr maps included In the Design and Procedure Manual). (2) Adjust 6 hr precipitation (if necessary) so that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of the 24 hr precipitation (not applicaple to Desert). (3) Plot 6 hr precipitation on the right side of the chart. (4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the plotted lines. (5) This line is the intensity- duration curve for the location being analyzed. Application Form: (a) Selected frequency 50 year g IN P6 = 3 in.. P24 = 5.5 P6 = 54.5 %(2) P24 6.o E: (c) Adjusted p6(21= 3 in. 5.0 0 (d) tx = 20 min. 4.s 4.0 (e) I = 3.2 in. /hr. 3.5 Note: This chart replaces the Intensity - Duration- Frequency 30 curves used since 1965. 25 2A 1.5 10 1- Mon I 1.5 2 2.5 3. 3.54'45 I I _i.. i.. - __. __ I I _ I . 5 I __ 5.56 I I 9 2.63 3.95 5.2: 6.59 7.90 9.22-10.54 11.86 13.171 14.49 15.81 7 212 3.18.4 24 530 6.36 1.42 6-48 *5 9.54 . 10.6011 66 12 7. 10 1.68 2 53.337 4.21 .05 5.90'_6.74 7.58 8.42 9.27 10,11 15 1.30 1.95.259 3.24 389 454 5.19 584639. 7.1317.78 20 1.08 1.62 2 15 2.69 3.23 377 4.31 4_.85 S.J9 x_5.93 6.4fi 25 0.93 1 40 1 87. 2.33 2.80 3.27 3.73 _ 4 20 4.67 6.13 1 5.80 30 0.83 124'1.66 2.07 2.49 2.90* 3.32. 3.73 4, 15 4.56 4.98 40 0.69 1.03; 1.38' 172 207 2.41 276 3 10 3.45 _'. 3.79 4.13 50 0.60 0.90 1.19 1,49 1.79 2.09 2.39 2 -69 2.98 3.28 3.58 60 0.53 0.80: 1.06 1.33 1.59 1.86 -2.12 _ 2.39 2.65 2.82! 3.18 90 041 0 61: 0.82 1.02 1.23 1 43 1.63 1.64 2.04 225 245 120 0.34 0.51.. 0.68 0.85 1 02 1.19. 1.36 1.53 t 70 1.87 2.04 150 0.29 0 44 0.59 0.73 0.88 103 1.18 132 1.47 1.62 ; 7.78 _ 180 0.26 0.39 0.52 0.65 0 78 0.91 1_04 118 1.31 1.44 1.57 240 0.22 _0.33 043 0.54 0.65 076 0.87 0.98 1.08 1.19 1- 300 0.19 0.28 0.38 0.47 056 0,G6' 0.75 - 085 _ 0.94 I ... 1.13 360 0.1 7 0.25 033 0.42 0 W 0 58 0.67 075 0 84 0 92 100 Intensity- Duration Design Chart - Example 3 -2 POST DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGY MAP pPOFE55I AEG_ yNM PASCO LARET SUITER w XH. , 6zH m s EgH. 1zlal�m A &ASSOCIATES CIVIL EXGIHEERIXBttAXH PU NINOrLAHH SHRVEYIHG `f7q�' CIVIC b 335 N - Highway 10L Sm A S01ava Hwch, CA 92873 CF CA11F ph 858.2399213 1 4 030.259.98121 le p aevg4eeNVSwm a�5 APP A. DATE EEPERENCES HATE BENCE ARK SCALE PLANNING & BUILDING 0E41ggg e.. - - -? °"°w, er- M�«w a. APPROVALS CITY OF ENCE41TAS ]ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO. DESCRIPTION: PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF RECOMMENDED APPROVED POST OEVELORAENT HYORb_GGV MAP FOR OF END.- 42 HDRI�DNAL , =,a _ - DATE: EE: E — 133 W. JASON STREET _._._.._ ..... - -__. DATUM: NAVD BB ELEVATION - 16- VERTICAL _N /A - - DATE: R.C.E. N0. ]3620 WILLIAM GREGG MACK EXP. f2 -31 -f0 DATE: -- GATE: _ A.P.N. 6254- 2i0 -43 Ar�nn.wo4 >2vxmR _ -- SHEET 1 OF 2 PP nn