Loading...
1994-3944 CN/EX/G/PE Street Address Category Serial # Name Description Plan ck. # Year recdescv s PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 [619] 259 -8212 FAX [619] 259 -4812 WAYNE A. PASCO R.C.E. 29577 May 20, 1994 PE 585G1 `, SAY 2p 199 City of Encinitas 505 So. Vulcan Avenue%`�� Encinitas, CA 92024 Attn: Craig Tackabery RE: LANG RESIDENCE GRADING PLAN - HYDROLOGY Dear Mr. Tackaber : y The purpose of this report is to address the surface water runoff as it is impacted by the proposed grading as shown on the grading plan for the "Lang Residence ". The grading project as ro osed is situated P P ► on the north side of Athe Street, approximately 100 PP y feet east of Neptune. Athena Street is a crowned street surfaced with AC, with a 4 to 6 inch AC berm on the northeast edge of pavement. The offsite drainage area upstream from the proposed grading consists of the northeast 10 feet of Athena Street. (See Exhibit "B" attached). The AC berm effectively conveys any storm flows southeast, past the subject property. Since offsite drainage is not impacted by the proposed grading project, the hydrology calculations included herein address pad and roof drainage only. The total 100 year storm runoff from the proposed pad is 0.39 cfs (see calculations attached). The storm water will be discharged onto a rip -rap energy dissipator per S.D.R.S.D. D -40 with No. 3 backing 0.6 feet deep, 5' wide by 5' long, with one layer of woven filter fabric (see rip -rap size chart and fireflow velocity calculations attached). The lower limits of the proposed grading extend to elevation 64.5. The line of inundation by the 100 year flood is represented on a map at the City of Encinitas as the 56.5 foot contour. City /PE585G1 May 20, 1994 Page 2 It is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering that the drainage system as shown on the grading plan for the "Lang Residence" is sufficient to intercept, contain and convey Q100 to an appropriate point of discharge. Also, the grading as proposed will not be impacted by the 100 year line of inundation mentioned above. If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact us. very truly yours, _ PASCO ENGINEERING INC. FE 0 $$ R / �c E A. p Wayne Pasco, President O LAJ RCE 29577 rn NO.29577 ' MS /WP /js EXP- 3 /-�jS f Enclosures`% C /m . OF CAt1V��� Ld Q OZ _ LL � Z O I- Z O UwQ F_ W (if fr V 0-i I / w U J O I - V) 3 m Q U) I w m ::D F- I m 00 w 111 It ti� a Q Z a 0 U Z) Z z O 41, U' Q x 0 F— U m O li ` ca 0 O L A gy p` ` G U I. x N W Q Z 0 ( I .2�/ t - D ~ w w � a r I ` � �w U o'!� �� L- Ct N N F- w� w w V ' 1OZ wQm d OZ \ /'OZ N X > �j N U r W s ( ` o W CO `moo / ` 3� ^a oov� Ln \ z � u z 00 ap CD I / cn N� 2 ��� X 0n � 3 / 'w Q Z W Q` 0. Q n 1= J . / LZL/ a p O f � o N G'= ?W-•.3 �' 4 ' _ ^ .�l O'ZL 00 ` z M'1.L0'Z8 % O9'� ox -,w w ° �I roz ° { r y _ 1 1 Q /° Y �, co co �t Ln o lkmaa j l Q �t9 �►U' _3ao Q °a m Qa r 1 r,� Z)V,oz n) $" 31tE0i65 °6EN w� �w 'l 3LC wQ 3L: L;_ a r' fi Y "1 �5 ya i � > '�'" � Tt� K �'" . i 1�'v �^� , � �'� � n ` v � •� � � �rY ^fit" ,� y ' �, •L y'w *. �, �,}� �«,. 'w" � .i m ,,e• ` x.� ".'�`��` ix� #,p t t L 7:y ,, K h �"� y # � w r y ♦ t< .-;,a+ . r � �.`'�` i . � 1 r \ �M� ..,�,�"•` ,� �!, �, pa rr• �, �� � "- �'k��;t� /¢ ,. FAIR NO er' �. �+ . �,,.' `& .rw,". o i l , - of �" A >, l X4 � �.y _ '�"' 4 •+, I 6 ,;� V� �� • 1 fi at ,, ML.: j €• R " \4`r 4.. 11t ..\ `t - Y a!y M1 " ±� vo 1 y r1b ~ �', , I� ,'., YY+''•a'..0 ��'a r"`` +fiy -t w �M +� $ a ±7�`a « ydi' mA S. t �y �S; aY [(JF } f� J It mow:` ��aalkhf. ?si ..1tt r, r_'•"� • t «k .. R ` .,YR' i+►"" _ ., 'iy rµ , �.• .+1 s • CVs - "" +�^aik ?^ki..r��s� 1`,.� ' .��+ 2 fl � ,„, a ^�!'"` ry � ^ ��... ` e "rt ', ..,k .- �� � .. '.: t 4a'� L � t f� i�t.� 3 .�k r �+,� .a' 1 M.. � 'ir +at�►an #�C !�w� �� ,, �• t � ,,.e.7k; ._,fie! O P !'fit , AW �y '- • .�, .; ,�5:� ✓, : � !#� .'. � ,� y � , '� ' , "a *< EMU t },+,w�a� �l 'y`y,,:.�a'pr '�.. -. r � .r „ -4w t F ,,• C. e st � ` 3 ..r`t .�,�� �i'��.+�� s�� � �;�1� � y. ^ R ! � f9 §' t ' 4 ��' y vs.�' 4 -"$ :!S yt� >¢, 1.: ?�•„ t , ``�� ^� t • Tt°" � sf '`� 4 7 =. U � qs, a n i; y1 4 F. • t, fi rt s 'r?r t P tk k +`rc� w . 1 Ik✓'" :ti "�i�,• ,.o-s / t .� x ,t`"i�9.,,t�'� 114* 1 �, y ^�`T' .t.�a t �" � .� } 4 yr. � $��i °' ' �, r, � t t • ..• � `° d'p '� 4 ate;,._ t1 = T ' o R �7 N ;� � "� : ,,,�,. e ♦ J �� * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982 -92 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.3A Release Date: 3/06/92 License ID 1388 Analysis prepared by: Pasco Engineering, Inc. 535 North Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA. 92075 Ph. (619) 259 -8212 fax: (619) 259 -4812 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. * LANG PE 585G * 100 YEAR STORM. COMPOSITE "C" VALUES USED. * SEE EXHIBIT "A ". * 5 -2 -94 MS ****************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FILE NAME: 585A.DAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 16:41 5/ 2/1994 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6 -HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.500 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ .95 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"- VALUES USED NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- » »> RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS ««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8250 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW - LENGTH = 57.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 69.04 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 67.15 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.89 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 2.506 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 5- MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.587 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ .22 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ .22 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- » »> COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA ««< » » >USING COMPUTER - ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON- PRESSURE FLOW) ««< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 3.0 INCH PIPE IS 1.0 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 16.0 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 67.15 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 56.60 FLOWLENGTH(FEET) = 10.00 MANNING'S N = .012 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 3.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ .22 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) _ .01 TC(MIN.) = 5.01 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- » » >DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 5.01 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HR) = 6.58 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = .04 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ .22 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 21 » » >RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS « «< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW - LENGTH = 30.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = .30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 6.901 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 5.351 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ .00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .00 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ .00 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 3.00 IS CODE = 1 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- »» >DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE « «< » » >AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES « «< ----------------- - - - - -- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 6.90 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HR) = 5.35 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) _ .00 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ .00 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH /HOUR) (ACRE) 1 .22 5.01 6.578 .04 2 .00 6.90 5.351 .00 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH /HOUR) 1 .23 5.01 6.578 2 .19 6.90 5.351 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) _ .23 Tc(MIN.) = 5.01 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .04 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- » » >COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< » » >USING COMPUTER - ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON - PRESSURE FLOW) ««< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.5 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.0 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 56.60 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 56.00 FLOWLENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = .012 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ .23 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) _ .28 TC(MIN.) = 5.29 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 1 » » >DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE« «< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 5.29 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HR) = 6.35 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) _ .04 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE .23 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ------------------------------- *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7430 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 30.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = .30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.520 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 5-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) .07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) .02 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) .07 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< ---------------- - - - - -- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 5.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.59 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = .02 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE .07 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 .23 5.29 6.353 .04 2 .07 5.00 6.587 .02 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 .30 5.00 6.587 2 .30 5.29 6.353 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) .30 Tc(MIN.) = 5.29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) .06 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) ««< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 3.0 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.1 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 56.00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 55.60 FLOWLENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = .012 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) .30 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) .22 TC(MIN.) = 5.51 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< -------------------- - - - - -- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 5.51 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.19 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = .06 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE .30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 7.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE = 21 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6930 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 40.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 57.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = .40 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 4.633 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 5-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) * 09 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) .02 TOTAL R .09 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 7.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 5.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HR) = 6.59 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) _ .02 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ .09 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH /HOUR) (ACRE) 1 .30 5.51 6.190 .06 2 .09 5.00 6.587 .02 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH /HOUR) 1 .38 5.00 6.587 2 .39 5.51 6.190 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) _ .39 Tc(MIN.) = 5.51 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .08 * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 6.00 TO NODE 8.00 IS CODE = 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- » » >COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA « «< » » >USING COMPUTER - ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON- PRESSURE FLOW) « «< ------------------------------- ------ DEPTH OF FLOW IN 3.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.3 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 9.7 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 55.60 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 53.00 FLOWLENGTH(FEET) = 13.00 MANNING'S N = .012 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 3.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ .39 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) _ .02 TC(MIN.) = 5.53 --------------------------- - - ---- END OF STUDY SUMMARY: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) _ .39 Tc(MIN.) = 5.53 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .08 ----------------------------- ------- END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS TABLE 2 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) I DEVELOPED AREAS URBAN Coeffic C Land Use Soil Types I Residential; A B C D _. Single Family .45 ..50 .55 Multi -Units .45 .50 .60 ..70 Mobile homes .45 .50 .55 .65 Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45 Comme rc i a] (2) 80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 ,85 ' Industrial (2) .80 .85 .90 90% Impervious r i i j� NOTES; ( soil type from Appendices IX -C1 thru IX -C4. I I (2 )Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervious- ness values of 80% or 90 %, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example; Consider commercial property on D soil. Actual imperviousness = 50% f Tabulated imperviousness = 80 t' 1 Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 0.53 i Iv -A -9 APPENDIX IX -B Porto IVA III I0 A M \ \� \���, j q� _77' 171, A I ) 'cost, �.ountry B A Q U I T Q.S ���lT ��ty I ��� v,Q����o +.! 33 AV N 3 0 t \ROadsid W( c ®r P M ?-N , �� �� .�. i /iJ� Tr Par ? W lit LG� �� n U��,? y ./ 00• - �1 (1� IT , I' I SI (\ H + ? �. ;�. (:� —� ''lJ)I ��� '�: l l� �'` � \I /1 : ' = S ql 11 ` \ l,._�Z I ' I \ "r Z 7 3 OF�'v i� Ij 5- 1 ' I I�JUn�� �'�1. � �,�,w �� _. �� :,• V•`.� • ltl 1 o �t 1 ii � ' -r)1,1 � ,- � v 1 ',/ � , l" V j �c i j l: <<� \ I. 11i \Illrn�rr)+;I,I, \ 1� �` k t (V VN It # Water .'a ri � \ \ \��� ) `,, %/ � 9�. � -irlf l \ /i �� A \ � \ \11 r �1V' 1• "AN. � � �� �:�;���� � '�. � �i l I ��� ��� l - 1 ' rr (� /i i� ��` i \V � 1 I • � �'I � r '�i, .a1�; • � Il. ' i �I �}) ^� �� � r ` v ` �� ( 11 � ' � �` 1 ' � � ��`� V.i lit i flip lk P \ `c, • /�\� -c�� •. >` o•'�' • � •• \ � -� / 1 , \ ` 1 r / \� \I t_ a ,i� \\ �� I �\ � I '1 J\'�1• m 0 ;�' � ` . 1\ �N • i� , M M f � + \ ��: l z � • p� tom_ ( I Ili 1 � I � L % U t R ' \% Ir.��, v ><A��� � •' r. �•: 1', , I '.� � . � .��•' � �� � I'�� I..,M;.� � u ` F ,, >,1300 1 � , I ,� (a ZN:f l � t pirk� � n`, \`� � -:� 1 � 9�•�' ,i; .� It i ' 1 lu ' 1 n� + 1C� 1 �i '`� �`I ! i �JC - 7 CC w rai er, -- -- --- U 'am I i f. Encinl Beach:'�, V Count Park . :w -D N L1 iR .- V 7 nX wo� — il V M .l _ _,' NO • �� • U Ir �I I 111 .. ,Yr9 f ���� , I I1 , �I 1 ` �'T r ' IVIII G arden ,%�'�,'AS dil M V, 11 1 K nty Park K Co \ I � `,' o_ � ��:�' •«.•�) �,r�'> 1,1 (i'i:J � 1 \ `,� - --"' I�/ I �� :II �II I ! \ �� \\� '' �\( V 4--L Jl,,,_: ��` 1�0 / ! �� � 17srr�il� l: - — 7 �'v � �- �� l� � • v, -jr- C I P1,2 =I- 4 1" MOONLIGHT L TATU 11E if Acl, �S A jA r CE f it Encin c itasli a a, \ r •I T I . I + 1 _I -C ;r h��\ �'� t �` ;r O �'%�.� I�•t• I �>va( • II •I �\ � I i, J qq k l Cre�t� "1 1 -� \ \ uE�t I n r 4 _ C f r. 1 �1■ u l.. 1 4 \) I Iran U \ (BM 9 ... \'� I. l yl` o-O _ JIB - 0) t :�C�e t �.ft i � ii - . 1 I'n� �../ L , JL L Encinitas S an =ic&�,, r { , ' *,�, Zt, ,f',. 6y '�� r r. Y 7 1+ ' MIC• ;. ? 4Y y LeE�� �' �l?{�yY �'� , '�t f ,l , u-0:' w t �Kt'P> l . r;� rr.�.� r �,J, ! - ��g t ,..' t t�Y t i .1`11< - � • . t �! „' 1•,� Vt� - I!, t ^"r� �I r ' �• .. t � �'ti � / �i , � i r+ 'tr / ..';l r '.a 4y% � �' ! t,.^ S + R ,�' "ti � , �r F � "}t;: At �� r•6r�-:J•,( l f ±'r:r r •r�•9tYY y�, . �„ ` l - \ t �J" �r� Y •" I:lr n`„ ",YC' 4 . 1 ?'k9 ¢^" , a .. *rc,• :, d�, Sy °`,'! ' t IS a 1 a '" r , �x � J� � ` .'� .� t ...v � !� •� �`4e. !' s�; wt� .� 4 i ti.� �` i •' ^ IC' „ '+ {�0. t. t''t,' G E c� !? c 4, Ir 'h' r _ �_ yE rra ;ty:7l1 H 1'd . -MIC 1,� <CsB,.. \ ".1 1� `,, � bF },. � �F � trt�: f �'� k cif a '�'` - ` r �,� �n. � cx�u t,:;' X11 .77, � �'+ `fi.� ID2. �F„ e ,t rl /i /.. �t .m ACSBn t A P Y, , x >✓t` , +. s. r , C'�i`n�ii,. K .. c t rt. � c CSD au y.ytp, `, •.: � {Yr C�ta. !�1u r t HuE O \ U'. r � 'v �'i .r'•M1 \ v',Pt Vr;r�'��1 SbG� ' ' �'�,•r J y � __ r � — �_ *rr 1.r)�pr � `°Litt �,r ��k +(, 1�'t r �k y - fi t �,k ` t{ •, a , )/ '\ � y �, ui"e � s yre + `+ � `✓.,r�GaF — x V•Y ,�i, .}+. 5 r f„ ,.fir: �',�•� fi �. %t a iii '• i y I�, + r� v � ' '� ""rv! '_ i 5 , i l i`�.� ,� t � ii "K rvt ! + �ft y ���.� y a s., NOW - r' 7° • . , �. _A y t , ., f -058 �'�.r�a � v' Tf �7' r /I � �! ��tt' r ���k'r�r, •t t;( '1f•r` '. �}m,��:. .. 7 ,r� �{ .4� rkl` t:" s�, •r:x+ —? II h ° Y! i . r }��, �+ i. 3 �'.a �< ! w t FA•i12 � ?GOU 4d s't1 , ',� A Y,OSn w'i a CZo t• `. 7�'." r K.E` .�` it { •.>.:\ ....r!••y FN'1> it. 4.1-r" .tv n nr ,`�,'t' �:s N- f'�l ,�,`�'f' 'r .& ,. {• v�l R 91 j i .7 .,rd� f%n.4 - , , r i.[� Y. ' /•', "� �, 1! y�A:.`�' ,� { r���1 \ • "g' y y .:1 a�� r ! y. �iNt � �.� ,�_' t , .w .. :: , ._� —�`'• n�k::.. P�� _- ` , r �f 1 lY�y{ t A ""* t+�-1.1� .GfT ,. �����9 {�, � •�� 4 ^_ r r�� -•+ ��~ w"^+.� ��ti *c '. - .,rr�ri, P �~ n : ` `IJ. ,, +fw�.a J,�L� ,� � ?., ;�, � r , ,,� � �"�,•; 4 r� .aJ" (fit ✓r e:�c�s �1'� \.. -3�rjf�' }� >•t�Pf�c„}>�"- t t°.✓ A % CsD ��4 s. ff I . y: fYVakv "fit^ S ,v , Ct ti t -. .�� "•.,, -:>< _ ? ar .n .,t"t•'"f4 t�:. 7 1.� .`,,� .,+ :P r: y-I, "7'+tir �,t�. .7.;+c;:13. r'- ,, : ti,�'" , 'a � r. r.! 1 r rd � �,k. y � ; •y�'. J( r � fi ,1� .r±: '^"=.3;t4 c ', .r 1�. • , �„` .,:, +: rtaG3F +.. r .,r ,.. ;k`,.`QOF 3t , Fr. t ! rr";; x 2 - t`yy't ti I LeDZ r l iar .1• Y'� �?? / .� kr ;a+, `:, ,i aj , iC k � �3Lt C 1 ,, +^ : -. n •�,lr?: �. 3t1 r �,., .:d' ,.� > lVF ^ UG` . ^ ,.1,t ,� 'iS�'.•r o •'h* '"',. .� � �.,. », ��c^° ": tr ( <?�'S�t3 {• d ��, _ � k ,. �, { ��" �� ^; h.. � � a" � • fi „R� l�k'r -r�.$ 3', �.+V�'x� . � ti �.. ^> y, 1' � � rfi: + `t' tr1 ' �'1 l ':�'• h � 3 F �E C�� 4 . '•r'� . ' a '�_• +� � + - Wt� p },, ,fib . ';S' ,V � l;ik �`* i'; ��..,r.:. in �r , � '� t ar ��' � ; ' � }� !�' 'F., c k , www �"+rt��k(t`,a!'. �''n' w�1 tFQ CfB Fig "+w.'Tt}.i:•,^ri':.,r t' ti: y ? �' CsC '— {`�_- x �r.^G • ;:'� � • ��` 1 � "�'f � .o cs fi t MI� w i. CSD ',��.� •� ��. pJS�ti'�t t y ^'MIE •t ,'� tRuG't i. ,ttrxcrr"�ex•:,��'a.ntl'.< z.r t. u.a..:+ne,�ry c. . a �.k. Xta.,•A.^ "a.. , �� { y fD � j•j �, ,;•�' r: e�tt k ' , i M �ti r.�' � , r l�. ��y -e }{ <rn , , t ��t,,,s y ;�'�� m {, T: �CSD r } tr. n y a V�*Y`'?',a` 1 r • 'p" t ,*,. r• �� a' `(L t { ` t �,�i'• � w. `� ri'; d . ;, p 7�E��• •�-� p • h i!„! fhh ',(1!'� t . ' "+.t'" ��e 1 � �f a �'' S.r "�6'; }at�1� j s` F ` ;, .j� �' G . i . ✓' . ��,., r �a R . t a z , • ' A a p x r >. �F' D � . r `,�• •.. # @cf5 > t RUG, �� - t bE At f'''4.Y �j:� r , .!x ' n • i't / y - j i . 'fih 11 ' ri l a � a P f� • �` • Y� ,t y _ ,�' c . j ,ear �� , w., , 5 ' rT G1 y fi �. .�- u Y>,.- ,�y r ,.r> a t6Y7t . +fits'' ` ,'4j .?, • •4,� * `?: :JJ11 r tc C a lve t{ MIE 1 '" 7 F yy r��q ti? MIE a a 4 t A SS. r �t wSbC�w YC c ;. Jr" u ?' LeD2 R J..fr1C 1 �'�- r �' 1�.� • t t n •. ., 1 )# r 4 Ct-.t . t� N r nr. ��,.q>Jt: t ,r+`'f� •.MIE °^ t . ,•� }' �j.`5dt t tom r 'a:T• Z�t� A Y\CG�`I•,�. t > t ,. "� 7 �� t rl. �i "�, tl', ✓ � {E 4 1 1 a } ,'i `rr �:� .j�s' ' y r apt,•: � �` { -� • ��j tr'.ey L � { »':{ ��,'� �.• .. ^( r � , `4 •bra �'. � . r ., t rrt � tF Y,� .. ^,c � � ��� , d� t' '.: � � }::l � 1 � i..a 1 t t• ,;. �. SY d a `+�rt 4tE7 .. l,., r d 'Q'...'r'• . i v °LEUGp,DI rS .�� , t 7, .5 ' M, r� « r "'�.� '' �.R s�• "{^ aCb,. �Q u ;F� , r, t �`.r.Y ,D?i*',i -�a a r ij �D2 �} .�, j� �r� ti�'h� ,� t r ��. ,, , �;�if�p *?,iFa• '' � � r ' '•� P,tE��'� �Fi�G "t tr t 9��t!T�•+.,�'4";:� :,� ti �"'.�"' 1ti�,,Cv,; }� �'rt a�� 2 ` r� r'.j & t . � .0 �h v �+N ,, f�� ta;�'.� tt � X' � 'j � � � a{ � � ,y�i,ga' "' � '� � 4 tr �� � rJ• t A.� t{ , n' y C• $k'''ty c t , .� yt' ,i. �' t�.t' !'2 't 't# 'bart "q '�'Yh, r MIC ' > r • G �rf 1�. ` t' , dL;,,s P �a +�tuG� ' "?J nA?�, l • t� • .Js t LOSS - ! r ' L tts � � ' `� r � f .fl t at- i� . � r.:. �`� 4 t � , . 4 ery. r•r a + '4t 'yV` • t � �.t j' III �^ � t, ^1 1T ,�M �� t`1 ��i" � . � r`�` or % d¢ ��'�" "1 '�� +t x`l f'� � - M.��" � � , �' ii..l2a'� (� � �_. •{ � � r I t � �' � . . ;. xs m• 8 { R < 1 1(ttyk Cf6 r a aJ r , c � ��� '! •t ;'� ' �n ��1'•��. �; ..+r�� `'h'NC1l� � 'S� �da` yH^ „i . i.s � , 4 w'��"" t yy k t 9 Ct)B +..�,( t a , iiT h t� fi .., � CS D k,l' � C'� t`"3�+, '� 5�\ r r.. ,ti. •. 3l rk,Y 1 .` t ,r �, r ela ! n •� ; A•: 3 a4 r 1 �. } Sri t r t -# rr.j ` C. L 1 Y b t t R �4r L, r ' !k �• Yc' i� � �":c -�_ '� r�,4 ''i•' .>n:��y t t�.�ia'k - +x t ` �`Y � ` q! V Cr a � < , �3 r �' + t +� ' �Ji� �Y���� '1, . s i ��! � rrk ti � � r�• e� tf A 4 � t "t ocveylw.x.it+� �4k,,$ e�" �, + . �',� ` ,. '� ,r, ' � � !� a° r M l; X t { l � l!i„ 7, +`x ;,C!J�2� 4 M C �'j �'�y��ly ' ?d'@•Z'r"`...r�y -# t � • �' t , - ,fjit a <� CR• .! w' x .L , .� 3'• r . r ) ,y�n.1^.t t o t r '' { �' fx�e { - , A { +a ,t': ��tE, �. ;;�+ {?,* �,i,'� ' j•n "� , ,' 1,b� �r s� ( h s # 1 ,� } ( • i ;�{ � j c r� c , �E, � `` t � �'> ' „ 7 "�1 s °^•� t a 1 , � sy`� �p �' .: Jf+ 4 , i °�' 4 �� r �"�.� n t '.' �' j" � � �+, �: t7� t ,: �' 'j•' • CfC + .e ��t rw , M^ J. .: + CbC �<. 4 l t1i X �f,� F + � ? 4P'. �• �'S { fi'. y Y ;k(H .:�..., k ;Y• V � �T i ��i ti. ,. r l + (� ✓ •. c �" �} � � 4 °tf, +M {, h' G <M✓ ,, "cnteY.i yi t " G iH 'r^ ra a 6, • ! 1'<�+ t ` � , 9 �� x �����? x� ��,,�„ •'�"�' .,. � �x 1 � �`�t�� ���t � � ; _ gy ,� � � r �° l '� 1 r� �. rk � ( ; Y7ak vrr .: }tf. ! «. yr .,� » ,,. a 'Yt • a t � e a, ^ 11 � , n ° 1' t` f � � t _ r• t �taL 4 wrtr b t 'h'+. y W (..�1...( �, ' �\ ��� 7�T ' R � , � •yr SC�_ Ag' r 7��2'� e' �� - CSD� tt t: c�, a t r tl t W } _ + r 'C t "•hk>.wf 1Ri +'K Y r: t � y a�•� � .•. J+ �, f C \ t!�' � t t '•, rk ,� $rG . Li ,.;. � � u C• .,...".,.. �. � w � t w yF1J `! � ny�� " w"k.A. `e �� r w "�. �� d n , r �•t� ,�«f '(" � ..' y r t , k t1 �'>x \ ' � li �, ♦ :F#•^n Wr 4 K � ( �Y a T. � { C yw 3 tyy,a CbD : wC4C Je� x Eu r _ er na «Lp`t :L r.. Y' S Ft✓ t t ��" \ + x { ;, (.. 4 t t t r, u 1t * as 1 f� ? fZUC( � >t+r t•( - is t t fi t•., 5.. , :� E ?C /' a , M t ,(�� t ':kr. Y, .� , � j I _` � �.�� � ,8t 1 t � N - t' C�" f C�p ^ q' z t `f � ram' •t ' tt Y �� t -sue rrG t✓ � p (J C'. lint` n rf7 Cwr { 11t'3{`Vx CbB CGE ra'><a' ' t t• I C <. `rS, },_,,,, 5'( ttt ra a ,. t 'M tl�,r at �r e - ,t •�wL' c3� t t�sD:_ t . d�F�Y h � o• J LvF3 r� rc + fi1� $ � „U•F'. 1 ,l•'71�.! -r 1�' �• j 11� '� 1 :F ( i� � �y C$D f � '.1' '1"„• 4 R / i Y� r i �r x•' vT : C: C � LG , - y "yvr� � t t ,OOr a �14. AF j r` Nr � }.f e+�� LVF3�x } r ,. j M.>�',s> �`'+:' �rn• � � ��. , ,Th fi n,+ „�' x ,5�'',�.....,. 1 '!4 J �� a �� ary� tG'sD2f'- �f"' x t, d iif S I� q 4 Y' R4C jr j� y ' ro fr : ' P1M v ! " ;5• � � '�.,+. t i A rM1 {� 7 7 .. +iy+ r;.7 � � - n C �Y 45 •j < Y ^t•� t ' r tt• lt �f f '.;s�''si" EN�l� .r. S i Yal ,t'r� , 6� 1?y { fi a ` k' > r f j 1 17 - " } � :..., s. �t'F'. • "f Y , .., a f,51t 4 ` Lr1 LL .,�J j i r h fi . k Ir,„ t ` x t a �t4Yt u ! > ��r .Cf(3 .� (I i�'C.« C t 1 tVk t '4" +1t .6Pc^5,�_ O i �•� ' '�i• kf a< , , , et r t F , t� C�(��,t � :, `a � 9 •s fr' N_ r ti . �G ,7 I�r �� ••� � 4 � ,., �yt,..M1A as; r �y� r l ii a t !i' � i<. +? � +r ! CQC r .y n 7 v ^� � �•� k x� IC4 1 t,ti iF( 1 \ fB Y zs r y �l S I % I E L .� ' �' r �t V . I C 9' ; S u �,: 1 t?'.ct r ��• � 1 r •s r� , � � { r > 't` "� � • 1p k l t. �q� r � U 'f� p�,,` {Y. ✓ ll�l.t , ��+ '," j t ; �, �� � Nikl i:� .+;'}, � V' � ` �� { tt.�w "' ,,/ lr.F� •„••� � �{ s ' '� ' 'r' r t '�1. �', , TABLE 11.- -INTIH PRETATIONS FOR LAND MANAGEMENT -- Continued E Map Soil Limitations for symbol Hydro- Erodibility conversion y logic from brush to group } grass LfE Las Flores -Urban land complex, 9 to 30 percent slopes: Las Flores------------------------ - - - - -- D Urban land----------------- - -- - -- D LpB Las Posas fine sandy loam, 2 to 5'percent slopes---- - - - - -- D Moderate 2 - - -- LpC Las Posas fine sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slo es---- - - - - -_ Slight. p LpC2 Las Posas fine sandy loam, 5 to 9 ercent slopes D Moderate 2 - - -- Slight. eroded. P P D Moderate 2 - - -- Slight. LpD2 Las Posas fine sandy loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes, D Moderate 2 - - -- eroded. Slight. LpE2 Las Posas fine sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, D Moderate 1--- Slight. eroded. LrE Las Posas stony fine sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent D Moderate 1 - -- Moderate. slopes. rE2 Las Posas stony fine sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent D Moderate 1 - -- Moderate. slopes, eroded. rG Las Posas stony fine sandy loam, 30 to 65 percent D Severe 1 - - - -- Moderate. slopes. 'SE Linne clay loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes------------ - - -- -- C Moderate 2 - -- Moderate. sF Linne clay loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes--------- -- - - - --- C Severe 1 - - - -- Moderate. u Loamy alluvial land -- ---- ---- - - - --- B Severe 16 - - -- Slight. vF3 Loamy alluvial land - Huerhuero complex, 9 to 50 percent slopes, severely eroded: Loamy alluvial land ---- -- --- ----- ---- --- - -- D Severe 1 - - - -- Severe. Huerh -- - ------- ---- --- --- --- -- - --- -- D Severe 1 - - - -- Severe. Id 9ade land------------------------ - - - - -- D ilC farina loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes ----- A _ Severe 2 - - - -- S light. IlE farina loam coarse sand 9 to 30 percent slopes A Severe 2 - - -- Slight. inA Iecca coarse sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes -------- B Severe 16 InB viecca coarse sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes - - - - - -- B Severe 16 foA Mecca sandy loam, saline, 0 to 2 percent slopes---- - - - - -- B Severe 16 A2 ecca fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, eroded - - - -- B Severe 16 IrG fetamorphic rock land ------ ------ ----- D Severe 1 - - - -- Severe. IvA Pottsville loamy coarse sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes - - - - -- A Severe 2 - - - -- Slight. 4/ 1vC Iottsv le loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes - - - - -- A Severe 2 - - - -- Slight. 4/ WD Ott sville loamy coarse sand, 9 to 15 percent slopes - - - -- A Severe 2 - - - -- Slight. 4/ LYA Iott sville loamy coarse sand, wet, 0 to 2 percent D Severe 2 - - - -- Slight. 4/ slopes. hC Olivenhain cobbly loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes ------------ D Severe 16 - - -- Slight. hE Olivenhain cobbly loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes ----------- D Severe 16 - - -- Slight. Oh Olivenhain cobbly loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes---- - - - - -- D Severe 1 - - - -- Moderate. kC Olivenhain -Urban land complex, 2 to 9 percent slopes: Olivenhain-------------------- - - - - -- D Urban land--------------------- - - - - -- D kE 01ivenhain -Urban land complex, 9 to 30 percent slopes: Olivenhain------------------- - - - - -- D Urban land------- - - - - -- ------ ---------- ---- - - - - -- D eA Placentia sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-------- - - - - -- D Severe 9 - - - -- Slight. eC Placentia sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes-------- - - - - -- D Severe 9 - - - -- Slight. P C2 Placentia sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes, eroded - - - - -- D Severe 9 - - - -_ Slight. P D2 Placentia sandy loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes, eroded - - - -- D Severe 9 - - - -- Slight. P A Placentia sandy loam, thick surface, 0 to 2 percent D Severe 16 - - -- Slight. slopes. P C Placentia sandy loam, thick surface, 2 to 9 percent D Severe 16 - - -- Slight. slopes. P Playas -------------- ----- ----- - - - - -- D Moderate 2 S e footnotes at end of table. 3 .ry 0 Lp < am CD POMA CN 14 c all - { o a p < IZI < V W i 0 Lr% _a L H o U x c C a ° - Q I a _ ..._ - •- Co _ --^ - - — r Q < h - 0 Lo ,J M p 0 O :Z l4 _J R < U N O� M i < U < 0 O UJ O u o D < K LOj i A O LU J O U c] Lt._ f m • I za N N I J U 44 a I I -A -7 ��. /.. � .n I i � / % v L '� • `� o ur CD CD _-�°— / . *.. X u1 CD __ co • J I C�i ✓� �w =� °_ - - _: 0 co I? o �\ Z F o u, O G co p w J _ Nr_ o � p a o w N Of - - ¢ G U U C) w o w .7 0 2 U q � M U } N O U F - a: Y_ 0. 0 U4J J M • p� u Ll [G.. H w . G o ' F a G • U W a . I I - A• -13 ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982 -92 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 3.1A Release Date: 2/17/92 License ID 1388 Analysis prepared by: PASCO ENGINEERING 535 NORTH HWY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA. 92075 PHONE: (619) 259 -8212 FAX (619) 259 -4812 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 9:26 5/ 3/1994 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * PIPEFLOW VELOCITY CALCULATION * LANG PE 585G * 100 YEAR STORM * NODE 8 EXHIBIT "A ". * 5 -3 -94 MS ****************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** > >>PIPEFLOW HYDRAULIC INPUT INFORMATION«« - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PIPE DIAMETER(FEET) _ .500 PIPE SLOPE(FEET /FEET) _ .2000 PIPEFLOW(CFS) _ .39 MANNINGS FRICTION FACTOR = .024000 ---------------- - - - - -- CRITICAL -DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CRITICAL DEPTH(FEET) _ .32 CRITICAL FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) _ .132 CRITICAL FLOW TOP- WIDTH(FEET) _ .481 CRITICAL FLOW PRESSURE + MOMENTUM(POUNDS) = 2.87 CRITICAL FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 2.966 CRITICAL FLOW VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) _ .14 CRITICAL FLOW HYDRAULIC DEPTH(FEET) _ .27 CRITICAL FLOW SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET) _ .45 -------------------------- NORMAL -DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NORMAL DEPTH(FEET) _ .18 FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) _ .07 FLOW TOP- WIDTH(FEET) _ .482 FLOW PRESSURE + MOMENTUM(POUNDS) = 4.83 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 5.978 FLOW VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) _ .555 HYDRAULIC DEPTH(FEET) _ .14 FROUDE NUMBER = 2.863 SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET) _ .74 ID 'O .9 .0 J J I 1 y ul N rn m O c _ a c d L o- > L 2 7 �p i - ^- M C? U' m co Q�O'v= CL CL C n- C F !- + q c L N m V N U E .0 N g x en v m+ p c N m rn L m C m q g L - m ut C t q O t m - UO�+ v O O 0 h p <L O. N N r \ \( Q \ N U © L^ N O O Y ^ v �n ° p + x- r N U p 0 0 0 0 c G 4 Y O. c o n c N1 c .t2 T L L q m L U N - U (n C N N N h z Q 4 '' ° Lo � c� r q N >. 04 6 I O o G, U of U rn I J 0-2 I \ O q I CD + � N E -_ L p �K �. N � fr co I I ( N pp m m� m\ 1 W C% - m n O O O _ b In b in 44 a 4- O t ' in O E - q N ^ O c 'S O q ul of rn x 1 1 I q _ 1[l O +- u > >.L a ONO �„ N m me in u,2 * m lo L L L O N - d 7 c X. 0 Z O O q U m d a+- 4 W h- O O- 2 0. - U N c I N> d .- tr - H O u O q LLJ 0 t . H .t N 7 q O m W L N 2 m < U q C a N i - d' W p r N _ _ O O - O'O U t m q q F- Cv L �. - `C' N O fn N C I c m - >-lo m < \O I I I E rDU L q W J - F - O -- X E U O 6 C7 U - J] m c 01 01 S) U U O = O q c s � O q O C p t- c o o :_ + + c' N c O c c O 7 c p U u1 o 1 © °_ = c -- -t- v U C O o I '�' - 2 O d m W to U 4 0- 'Q q O p •i- > H c 0 H In O h — .-. o _ p -- LN'0 to - N N 0 t 1 1 4- m do �p O L U q } c L G ] N - 1 •t O O m O a v a O Z 4 n 0 0 0 0 Od�.ada o m 1+ U 4 N N ° �N U U.N f- ,'- I - ' 1 .. ..,...� - - - � . ° 0 < = S L < N U < d 1 5-C 1 T REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ' ATHENA STREET SUBDIVISION ATHENA STREET ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 1 1 PREPARED FOR: 1 MR. PHIL LANG ' 223 EL CAMINO DEL NORTE OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA 92024 PREPARED BY: 1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120 Providing Professional Engineering Services Since 1959 S -C SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA T SOIL & TESTING, INC. ' 6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120 P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160 -0627 619-280-4321, FAX 619- 280 -4717 April 28, 1994 ' 2p 1994 . Mr. Phil Lan '" Lang °SCS &T 9411081 1. 223 El Camino Del Norte ���:�� �,•�`'`� # Report No. 1 Olivenhain, California 92024 SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Athena Street Subdivision, Athena Street, ' Encinitas, California. Dear Mr. Lang: In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. The findings and recommendations of our study are presented herewith. In general, we found the site suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in the attached report are followed. If you should have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained in ' the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, ' SO ERN ALIF RNI O L & TESTING, INC. r ; Daniel B. Adler, R. .E. #360 n R. High, C.E.G. A7 DBA:JRH:mw `S -�EREp ' cc: (2) Submitted h � B. q (4) Pasco Engineering �' NO. 1297 N It N0. 36037 CERTIFIED -i ' EXP. 6-30-98 ENGINEERING y GEOLOGIST I I It �� �F - 9 1f qjf OF CAI��� tic TABLE OF CONTENTS ' PAGE Introduction and Project Description. ,,,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , ,, 1 Project Scope 1 ' Findings ...................... ............................... 2 Site Description ................. ............................... 2 General Geology and Subsurface Conditions 3 Geologic Setting and Soil Description . ............................... 3 Tectonic Setting .............. ............................... 3 Geologic Hazards ................ ............................... 4 ' General 4 Geologic Hazards Category ....... ............................... 4 Groundshaking ............... ............................... 4 Surface Rupture and Soil Cracking ... ............................... 5 ' Landsliding ................. ............................... 5 Liquefaction................. ............................... 5 Tsunamis 5 S e i c h es.................... ............................... 5 Groundwater 5 Conclusions and Recommendations 6 ' General 6 Loose Surficial Soils ......... ............................... 6 ' Collapsible Terrace Deposits .... ............................... 6 Grading ........................... . Site Preparation 6 Surface Drainage , , 7 ' Earthwork 7 .............:.... ............................... Grading Plan Review 7 Slope Stability .................. ............................... 7 ' Foundation Recommendations 7 General 7 Reinforcement 8 Settlement Characteristics 8 ' Expansive Characteristics 8 Foundation Excavation Observations 8 Slabs -on -Grade 8 Interior Concrete Slabs -on -Grade 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ' PAGE Exterior Slabs -on -Grade 9 Earth Retaining Walls .............. ............................... 9 Foundations 9 Passive Pressure .............. ............................... 9 ' Active Pressure ............... ............................... 9 Subdrain Observation .......... ............................... 10 t Backfill ................... ............................... 10 Factor of Safety ............. ............................... 10 ' Limitations ..................... ............................... 10 Review, Observation and Testing ..... ............................... 10 Uniformity of Conditions .......... ............................... 10 Change in Scope ................ ............................... 11 Time Limitations 11 Professional Standard ............. ............................... 11 ' Client's Responsibility ............ ............................... 11 Field Explorations ................. ............................... 12 ' Laboratory Testing ................ ............................... 12 ' ATTACHMENTS ' FIGURE Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page 1 ' PLATES Plate 1 Plot Plan Plate 2 Unified Soil Classification Chart Plates 3 -7 Pit Logs ' Plate 8 Grain Size Distribution Plate 9 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Expansion Index Test Results Plate 10 Direct Shear Test Results ' Plate 11 Single Point Consolidation Test Results Plates 12 -13 Slope Stability Plate 14 Weakened Plane Joint ' Plate 15 Retaining Wall Subdrain Detail APPENDICES A - References B - Recommended Grading Specifications- General Provisions < S � SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA T SOIL & TESTING, INC. 6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120 P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160 -0627 619- 280 -4321, FAX 619 - 280 -4717 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ATHENA STREET SUBDIVISION ' ATHENA STREET ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential project to be located adjacent and east of Athena Street, in the City of Encinitas, California. The site location is shown on the vicinity map provided as Figure Number 1 on the following page. ' It is our understanding at the site will be developed to receive v S p seven residential structures. The building ' at the southwestern corner of the site will be built first; the others at a latter date. The structures will be two stories high and of wood -frame construction. Some of the structures will have masonry retaining ' walls up to ten feet high. Shallow foundations and conventional slab -on- grades floor systems are anticipated. Exterior masonry retaining walls up to six feet in height are also proposed. Grading will ' consist of cuts and fills extending to a maximum approximate depth of six feet from existing grade. Cut and /or till slopes will be constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) inclination to a maximum height of ' approximately 14 feet. To assist in the preparation of this report, we were provided with a subdivision preliminary grading plan, a southwestern lot preliminary grading plan and a topographic map, all undated and prepared by Pasco Engineering. The site configuration, topography and approximate locations of our subsurface explorations r are shown on Plate Number 1 of this report. ' PROJECT SCOPE ' The investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples, laboratory testing, analysis of the field and laboratory data, research ' of available geological literature pertaining to the site, and preparation of this report. More specifically, the intent of this analysis was to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction. i - I I,� AV sm a I �,Ewc 'j • S e, b A R I ►VOt/'C ':r• a ------ - - --}- `EU I ' a — I — -- F - - - -- -- I \ 1 st EL - -- - - - - -- �-- - - -- �� aeAM- r..r % — —� -- ---- - - -� -- I I or sr� o KAcmsT r IVY uoaru+or -- - - -- - -- I - - - -- O I n.nanw -- + ow it I I AV a S cnwr w+. 31 I >� - - -- — - -- I SEA �" 3 v sl r • I I r+r e FN + SOUT14ERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL ' SOIL A TEST 1 N G, INC. BY. DBA DATE: 04 - - JOB NUMBER: 9411081 FIGURE N0. 1 SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 2 b) Evaluate b laboratory tests the pertinent y y p rt ent engmeermg properties of the various strata which will ' influence proposed development, including their bearing capacities, expansive characteristics and settlement potential. ' c) Describe the general geology at the site including possible geologic hazards which could have an effect on the site development. d) Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading and provide design information regarding the ' stability of cut and fill slopes. e) Address potential construction difficulties and provide recommendations concerning these problems. t) Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structures anticipated and develop soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design. FINDINGS SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is an irregular shaped residential lot located between the southwestern terminus of Basil Street and Athens Street, in the City of Encinitas, California. The site covers approximately one acre and is bounded by residential property on the northwest and southeast, Athena Street on the southwest, and an alley and Basil Street on the northeast. Topographically, the site slopes moderately to the northeast at an overall inclination of approximately 8 to 1, horizontal to vertical. Elevations on site range from approximately 66 feet (MSL) at the southwest corner to 42 feet (MSL) along the northeasterly property line. Small cut slopes, less than about four feet, exist in the northerly portion of the site and ' are associated with the previous improvements. Masonry lock retaining walls which range u Y g g P to ' approximately six feet in height, are located in the northerly to northeasterly portion of the site. Drainage is accomplished via sheet flow to the northeast. Vegetation is comprised of landscaped trees, shrubs, ' lawn grasses and ice - plants. A single - family residential structure, detached garage and associated retaining walls, masonry block walls and asphalt paved driveways are located in the northerly corner of the site. Both overhead and subsurface utility lines service the existing improvements via the utility lines located along the alley. - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 3 e GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The subject site is located in the Coastal Plains ' Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is underlain by the Quaternary -age terrace deposits, associated colluvium, residuum and artificial fill. A brief description of the soils encountered on site are ' presented below. Five exploratory pits were excavated on the site. The artificial fill encountered on site appears to range ' up to approximately three feet in thickness and consists of silty sands derived from cuts made on site for the previous improvements. The colluvium /residuum encountered was comprised of topsoils and ' slopewash which varies from approximately three feet to 4.5 feet thick. This material was found to be a loose, moist, medium brown to reddish brown, silty sand. The colluvium /residuum is underlain by the terrace deposits. The terrace deposits consist of medium dense, moist, light reddish brown, silty sand. However, in Test Pit Number 5 the terrace deposits were found to be in a loose to medium dense condition to a depth of six feet. The terrace deposits are generally moderately porous. ' TECTONIC SETTING: No faults are known to traverse the subject site but it should be noted that much of Southern California, including the San Diego County area, is characterized by a series of Quaternary -age fault zones which typically consist of several individual, en echelon faults that generally strike in a northerly to northwesterly direction. Some of these fault zones (and the individual faults within ' the zone) are classified as active while others are classified as only potentially active according to the criteria of the California Division of Mines and Geology. Active fault zones are those which have shown conclusive evidence of faulting during the Holocene Epoch (the most recent 11,000 years) while potentially active fault zones have demonstrated movement during the Pleistocene Epoch (11,000 to 2 ' million years before the present) but no movement during Holocene time. Active fault zones in the region that could possibly affect the subject site include the Rose Canyon, Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough and San Clemente Fault Zones to the west, the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault Zones to the northeast, and the Agua Blanca and San Miguel Fault Zones to the south. i - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS GENERAL: The site is located in an area which is relatively ree of potential geologic hazards. Y P g g Hazards such as tsunamis, seiches, liquefaction, and landsliding should be considered negligible or nonexistent. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS CATEGORY: The subject site does not exist within a Special Studies Zone as designated by the State of California nor the County of San Diego. GROUNDSHAKING: The most likely geologic hazard to affect the site is groundshaking as a result of movement along one of the fault zones mentioned above. The maximum bedrock accelerations that would be attributed to a maximum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest portion of selected fault zones that could affect the site are summarized in the following Table I. TABLE I Rose Coronado San San Fault Zone Canyon Elsinore Bank Jacinto Clemente Distance to Subject Site 4 26 18 48 52 (Miles) Maximum Credible Earthquake 7.0 7.5 7.3 7.8 7.5 (Richter Magnitude) Maximum Bedrock Acceleration 0.58 g 0.22 g 0.27 g 0.13 g 0.09 g from MCE Maximum Probable Earthquake 6.5 7.3 7.0 7.5 7.3 (Richter Magnitude) Maximum Bedrock Acceleration 0.52 g 0.19 g 0.23 g 0.11 g 0.07 g from MPE SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 5 Probable roundshakin levels at the site could g g d range from slight to moderate depending on such factors as the magnitude of the seismic event and the distance to the epicenter. It is likely that the site will experience the effects of at least one earthquake during the life of the proposed structure. Design accelerations are commonly a fraction (usually two - thirds) of peak bedrock accelerations. SURFACE RUPTURE AND SOIL CRACKING: It is our opinion that no active or potentially active faults are present at the subject site proper so the site is not considered susceptible to surface rupture. ' The probability of surface rupture or soil cracking caused by shaking from distance sources is considered nominal for the subject site. LANDSLIDING: The terrace deposits which underlie the site consists of medium dense, silty sands which have relatively strong shear strengths. It is our opinion that the potential for gross, deep - seated slope failure to affect the site is considered low. LIQUEFACTION: The materials at the site are not considered subject to liquefaction due to such factors as soil density and lack of groundwater. TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis are great sea waves produced by a submarine earthquake of volcanic eruption. Due to the site's elevation, it is not considered subject to tsunamis. SEICHES: Seiches are periodic oscillations in large bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays, or reservoirs. No such large bodies of standing water are located in an area that could possibly affect the subject site. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered within the excavations on site and no major groundwater related problems are anticipated to affect the site. However, it should be recognized that minor groundwater seepage problems may occur after development of a site even where none were present before development. These are usually minor phenomena and are often the result of alteration of the permeability characteristics of the soil, and alteration in drainage patterns and increase in arrogation water. It is further our opinion that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an individual basis if and when they develop. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 6 CONCLUSIONS O CLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In general, no geotechnical conditions were encountered which would reclude the development of the P P site as presently proposed, provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. The main geotechnical conditions affecting the site development as presently proposed are the presence of relatively deep compressible surface deposits (topsoil, colluvium and terrace deposits) and the collapse potential of some of the underlying terrace deposits. Each of these conditions is described herein. LOOSE SURFICIAL SOILS: The loose surficial deposits extend to a maximum depth of about six feet. These deposits are considered unsuitable in their present condition for the support of settlement- sensitive improvements and will require removal and replacement as compacted fill. This condition will also affect property line retaining wall footings due to the site preparation limitations f resulting from the property line. COLLAPSIBLE TERRACE DEPOSITS: Some of the terrace deposits underlying the surficial soils were found to be collapsible upon saturation. In order to mitigate this condition it is recommended that all terrace deposits within five feet from finish pad grade be removed and replaced as compacted till. In addition, increased foundation and slab -on -grade reinforcement is recommended. GRADING SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation should begin with the demolition of existing improvements and the removal of the resulting debris as well as existing vegetation and deleterious matter. Existing topsoils colluvial and loose terrace deposits underlying proposed fill areas and settlement - sensitive improvements should be removed to firm natural ground (exterior patio and driveway areas included). Based on our findings, it is anticipated that maximum removal depth will be about six feet. In addition, any terrace deposits within five feet from finish pad grade should be removed. Removal limits should be five feet beyond the perimeter of the improvements or to property line, whichever is less. The soils exposed at the bottom of the excavations should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 90 percent as determined in accordance with ASTM D- 1557 -78, Method A or C. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE: It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away from the proposed structures and the top of slopes. Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to foundations. Rain gutters are recommended. Rain gutters should be connected to appropriate drainage devices. EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special ' site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, structural fill and till should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill within five feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D- 1557 -78, Method A or C. I GRADING PLAN REVIEW: The grading plans should be submitted to our office for review in order to ascertain that the proposed development scheme is in substantial agreement with the assumptions of this report. SLOPE STABILITY 1 Proposed cut and fill slopes will be constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Maximum anticipated height for cut and fill slopes is approximately 14 feet. It is our opinion that said slopes will possess an adequate factor -of- safety with respect to deep- seated rotational and surficial failure (see Plates Number 12 and 13). However, due to the sandy characteristics of the on -site soils, proper landscaping and surface drainage is necessary to control surface erosion. It is recommended that the engineering geologist observe the proposed cut slopes during construction to ascertain that no unforeseen adverse conditions are encountered. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL: Shallow foundations may be utilized for the support of the proposed structures. The footings should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent finish pad grade. A minimum width of 12 inches and 24 inches is recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. A bearing capacity of 2000 psf may be assumed for the recommended foundation configuration. This value may be increased by one -third when considering wind and /or seismic forces. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 8 Footings t ngs located adjacent to or within slopes should be extended to a depth such that a minimum distance of seven feet exists between the footing and the face of the slope. Retaining walls in similar conditions should be reviewed by this office. REINFORCEMENT: Both exterior and interior continuous footings should be reinforced with at least one No. 5 bar positioned near the bottom of the footing and at least one No. 5 bar positioned near the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and /or differential settlements for the proposed structures may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor cracks normally occur in concrete slabs and foundations due to shrinkage during curing or redistribution of stresses and some cracks may be anticipated. Such cracks are not necessarily an indication of excessive vertical movements. EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: The prevailing foundation soils were found to be nondetrimen- tally expansive. The following recommendations reflect this condition. FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATIONS: All foundation observations should be observed by a representative from this office prior to the placement of forms and /or reinforcing steel. SLABS -ON -GRADE INTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS -ON- GRADE: Interior concrete slabs -on -grade should have a thickness of four inches and be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 18 inches on center each way. The bars should bend down at least 12 inches into the perimeter footings and should be positioned at mid - height in the slab. For slabs -on -grade underlain by retaining wall backfill, the reinforcing bar spacing should be decreased to 12 inches on center each way for a distance of at least ten ' feet away from the backfill daylight line. The slab should be underlain by a four - inch - blanket of clean, poorly graded, coarse sand or crushed rock. This blanket should consist of 100 percent material passing the half -inch screen and no more than ten percent and five percent passing #100 and #200, respectively. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen barrier should be placed over the sand or rock layer. To allow for proper concrete curing, the visqueen should be overlain by at least two inches of sand. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 9 EXTERIOR SLABS-ON-GRADE: Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of four inches. Walks or slabs exceeding five feet or more in width should be reinforced with 6 "x6 " -W 1.4xW 1.4 (6 "x6 "- 10/10) welded wire mesh and provided with weakened plane joints. Any slabs between five and ten feet should be provided with longitudinal weakened plane joints at the center lines. Slabs exceeding ten feet in width should be provided with a weakened plane joint located three feet inside the exterior perimeter as indicated on attached Plate Number 14. Both traverse and longitudinal weakened plane joints should be constructed as detailed in Plate Number 14. Exterior slabs adjacent to doors and garage openings should be connected to the footings by dowels consisting of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 24 -inch intervals extending 12 inches into the footing and the slab. EARTH RETAINING WALLS FOUNDATIONS: The foundation recommendations provided in the preliminary foundation recommendations section are also applicable for retaining walls. However, for property line retaining walls a bearing capacity of 1000 psf should be used. PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passive pressure for footings founded on compacted fill may be considered to be 3SO pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This pressure may be increased one -third for seismic loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to soil may be assumed to be 0.35 for the resistance to lateral movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the friction should be reduced by one - third. The upper six inches of soil should not be considered when calculating passive pressures for exterior walls unless the wall abuts a slab -on- grade. For property line retaining walls where the subject site grade is retained the passive pressure should be assumed to be 150 pcf. In this case the upper 12 inches of soil adjacent to the footing should not be considered when calculating passive pressures. ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active soil pressure for the design of unrestrained earth retaining structures with level backfills may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 36 pounds per cubic foot. For restrained walls an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pcf may be assumed. An additional 15 pcf should be added to said values for 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) sloping conditions. These pressures do not consider any other surcharge loads. If any are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil pressure. This value assumes a granular and drained backfill condition. Waterproofing specifications and details should be provided by the project architect and should be reviewed by this office. A typical wall subdrain detail is provided on the attached Plate Number 15. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 10 SUBDRAIN OBSERVATION: It is recommended that all subdrams be observed by this office prior to backfill placement. BACKFILL: All backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Expansive or clayey soils should not be used for backfill material. The wall should not be backfilled until the masonry has reached an adequate strength. FACTOR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of the allowable soil bearing pressure, do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design to prevent the walls from overturning and sliding. LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and specifications. Such plans and specifications should be made available to the geotechnical engineer and engineering geologist so that they may review and verify their compliance with this report and with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code. It is recommended that Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. be retained to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to verify compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect P P p tour best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and /or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the geotechnical engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary. - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 11 CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of an changes in the project scope r r Y g P J p o proposed site grading so that we may determine if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. TIME LIMITATIONS The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards -of- Practice and /or Government Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations where our borings, surveys, and explorations are made, and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations be based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not be responsible for the interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be performed by us, or by our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of Mr. Phil Lang, or his representatives to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the structural engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further his responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. - SCS &T 9411081 Aril 28 1994 P Page 12 FIELD EXPLORATIONS Five subsurface explorations were made P at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number 1. The excavations were logged on April 5 and 13, 1994. These explorations consisted of hand dug test pits dug by the client. Test pit logging and sampling was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology personnel. The subsurface explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the following Plates Number 3 through 7. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate Number 2. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. Disturbed and undisturbed samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed is presented below: a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. b) MOISTURE - DENSITY: In-place moisture p o sture contents and dry densities were determined for representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in -place moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the pit logs. SCS &T 9411081 Aril 28 1994 P Page 13 I c) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined from representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 8. S I d) COMPACTION TEST: The maximum dry density and optimum y y moisture content of a typical soil as determined in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM Standard Test D -1557- 78, Method A. The results of this test are presented on Plate Number 9. e) EXPANSION INDEX TEST: An expansion index test was performed on representative sample of soil likely to be present at finish grade. The test was performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The sample was brought to optimum moisture content then dried back to a constant moisture content for 12 hours at 230 ± 9 degrees Fahrenheit. The specimen was then compacted in a 4- inch - diameter mold in two equal layers by means of a tamper, then trimmed to a final height of 1 inch, and brought to a saturation of approximately 50 percent. The specimen was placed in a consolidometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, a total normal load of 12.63 pounds was placed (144.7 psf), and the sample was allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample was allowed to become saturated, and the change in vertical movement was recorded until the rate of expansion became nominal. The expansion index of the sample tested is reported on the attached Plate Number 9 as the total vertical displacement times the fraction of the sample passing the #4 sieve times 1000. CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 1 -20 very low 21 -50 low 51 -90 medium 91 -130 high Above 130 very high f) DIRECT SHEAR TEST: A direct shear test was performed to determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample having r a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and a saturated moisture content. The shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The results of this test are presented on the attached Plate Number 10. - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Page 14 g) CONSOLIDATION TESTS: Single point consolidation tests were performed on selected "undisturbed" samples. The consolidation apparatus was designed to accommodate a 1 -inch high by 2.375 -inch or 2.500 -inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by a brass ring. Porous stones were placed in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore fluid during testing. Selected loads were applied to the samples and the resulting deformations were recorded. The percent consolidation is reported as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original sample height. The test samples were inundated to determine their behavior under the anticipated loads as soil moisture increases. The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 11. r SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES I. COARSE GRAINED, more than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel - oFt re than half of sand mixtures, little or no ' coarse fraction is fines. larger than No. 4 GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sieve size but sand mixtures, little or no smaller than 3 ". fines. GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded (Appreciable amount gravel- sand -silt mixtures. of fines) GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel -sand, clay mixtures. SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravelly More than half of sands, little or no fines. coarse fraction is SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly ' smaller than No. 4 sands, little or no fines. sieve size. SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded (Appreciable amount sand and silty mixtures. ' of fines) Sc Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. II. FINE GRAINED, more than half of material is smaller ' than No. 200 sieve size. SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey- silt -sand ' mixtures with slight plas- ticity. Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to less than 50 medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays or low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high ' greater than 50 plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. — Water level at time of excavation CK — Undisturbed chunk sample ' or as indicated BG — Bulk sample US — Undisturbed, driven ring sample SP — Standard penetration sample or tube sample SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL SOIL S TESTING, INC. BY: DBA DATE: 04 -25 -94 ' JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No. 2 1 - Z ri CL O PIT NUMBER 1 Z W z z~ W W 1 �� W� WWN y Q O_ IL 0 ELEVATION < N < L* W W I.- Z Go Cc a y W _< 1 p t a o a z o z w d < < v DESCRIPTION v O p 2 v D: p 0 v 1 SM TOPSOIL /COLLUVIUM, Brown, Moist Loose SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND 1 i 2 ' 3 Grading into Dark Brown CK 1 4 BAG SM TERRACE DEPOSITS, Light Red Humid Medium 1 5 Moist Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, Dense Porous CK 115.6 5.6 Pit Ended at 5.5' i i 1 i 1 1 1 1 � SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL ' SOIL -, a. T ESTING LOGGED Mr: JRH DATE LOGGED 04 -05 -94 , INC. 1 l ion NUMSER: 9411081 PLATE NUMSER: 3 Z ri CL O } ' F . ; < PIT NUMBER 2 z W W y W- u, c W W O ~ O ELEVATION t �- < Ln W W v F Z ' �� N O D a y W < p a 0-0 2 02 Wa O a DESCRIPTION <� v 0 C � a � O U SM TOPSOIL, Brown, SLIGHTLY Moist Loose SILTY SAND 1 2 BG 3 ' 4 Contact Varies From 3.5' -4.5' BG SM TERRACE DEPOSITS, Light Red Humid Medium 5 CK Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND Dense Moist 6 Pit Ended at 5.5' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL T Soil_ a TESTING, INC LOGGED sr: JRH DATE LOGGED: 04 -05 - ' 1 JON NUMBER: 9411081 PLATE NUMitI!= 4 94 F W = CL .; � < PIT NUMBER 3 i cr i i go W o ' = W 210 W = W f 2 2 >_ W -j w a ELEVATION < o �� p O a y� �< <� cc ° o DESCRIPTION p U 0 SM TOPSOIL /COLLUVIUM, Brown to Moist Loose Dark Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY 1 SAND ' 2 ' 3 CK 4 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS, Light Red Humid Medium CK Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, Dense Porous Humid to t 5 Moist CK 110.7 6.9 ' 6 Pit Ended at 5.5' r v- S OUTHERN CALIFORNIA 'wOJECT ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL LOGGED sr: JRH 8011. a TESTING, INC DATE LOOOEO: 04 -05 -94 ' JON NUMDER 9411081 'LATE Nuuggns 5 W = CL < PIT NUMBER 4 z W z? L W W Z W 3 W W h Z ^. M F- � G ~ O 16 ELEVATION < �" < 22 W W �"' W ~ v G < w< < <0cr O a 2O G W v DESCRIPTION v C p v v 0 SM COLLUVIUM, Brown, SLIGHTLY ' Y Humid Loose SILTY SAND 1 2 Moist ' CK Loose to Medium 3 Dense 4 Grading into 5 CK SM TERRACE DEPOSITS, Light Humid Medium Brown to Light Red Tan, Dense SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, Upper ' 6 6 Porous Pit Ended at 5.5' �� SOIL & TESTING, INC. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL LOGGED sr: ORH DATE LOGGED 04 -05 -94 T ' l jos NUMBER 9411081 PLATE NUMBER: 6 W Z CL } ' -= u PIT NUMBER 5 Z CC w w y _ W o_ O 16 ELEVATION < Lp W W I.. Z y a0 p O a N W <V ' C ` CL � CO } 1O G IL co < v DESCRIPTION Q O 0 v O 0 v ' SM FILL, Brown, SILTY SAND Moist Loose 1 SM TOPSOIL /COLLUVIUM, Brown, Humid Loose SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, Lots of and 2 CK Roots to 4' Moist* 3 SM TERRACE DEPOSITS, Brown to Humid Loose ' BG Red Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY and 4 CK SAND, Highly Weathered Moist* 5 CK SM Red Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY Humid Loose to SAND, Weathered and Medium 6 Firm at 6' Moist* Dense Pit Ended at 6' *South and West Sides of Pit are moist, North and North- ' east Sides are Humid �� SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FJOB CT ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL o sr: JRH T SOIL. & TESTING, INC DATE LOGOEO: 0 4 -05 -94 ' MBER 9411 081 PLATE NUMBER, 7 ' cf 'SCALE CORRECTION' 0 • • °o N O " O m N N W� J O W O N N N PI N • O iS O O .... .... .. .. .... .... .... .... 7, ... CY W o N N y W o a W ! E J Z N N W n N O N N N w ........ .... .... .... .... .... ........ - J o S Q V Z Z No m .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... � a o z _ n _ - ............................ .. .. .. N J � W n LO M . ... .. .. .. .. .... .... .... .... .... .. .. ... _ ' N .... .... .... .... .... .... .. .. .... .... .... 0 d' N O N 06 CL m M m °o W I m N 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . v I N n O � O � a p � W f0 � 10 N • • 'f N O PERCENT FINER ' � CQ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL T SOIL AND TESTING BY: DBA DATE 04 -25 -94 ' JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No . 8 i ' MAXIMUM DENSITY A OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D1557 -78 METHOD A Maximum Optimum SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Densit Moisture (pcf) Cont (• /.) P2 @ 2' -3' Brown, Slightly Silty Sand 130.3 8.7 1 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS SAMPLE P2 @ 2'-3' 1 CONDITION Remolded INITIAL M.C. (° /.) 8.1 INITIAL DENSITY ( 116.5 ' FINAL M.C. (•/.) 14.0 ' NORMAL STRESS(PSF) 144.7 EXPANSION INDEX 0 1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL SOIL A TESTING, INC. BY: DBA DATE: 04 -25 -94 JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No. 9 ■■■■■ II■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■MEN ■■■■ t t■■■■ t■■ ■ ■ ■t ■tt ■t ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■t ■ ■ ■t ■tt� ■■ ■t ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■t ■ ■■t ■ ■t ■t ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■t ■ ■■ /fit ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■t ■t ■ ■ ■■ ■ ma■ 11 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■/ % mmoollommomm ■ ■NN�■W ■tNW■N ■ SOUTHE ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL , • SOIL & TESTING, INC. �DATE: 04-25-94 •= '� 1: 1 SINGLE POINT CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULT SAMPLE NO. P1 @ 5.5' P5 @ 5' - INITIAL MOISTURE, % 5.6 6.9 - INITIAL DENSITY, PCF 115.6 110.7 - % CONSOLIDATION BEFORE WATER ADDED 1.5 2.3 - % CONSOLIDATION AFTER WATER ADDED 2.6 3.5 - FINAL MOISTURE, % 12.7 14.4 - AXIAL LOAD, KSF 2.58 2.58 <* SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL > SOIL A TESTING, INC. BY: DBA DATE: 04 -25 -94 ' JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No. 11 SLOPE STABILITY CALCULATIONS Janbu's Simplified Slope Stability Method \.C(p _ WH CTan FS _ Ncf ( C ) Assume Homogeneous Strength Parameters throughout the slope , fr ( °) C(psf) W_( cf) Incl H (ft) FS 34 150 127 2:1 20 21 Where: 0 - Angle of Internal Friction t C - Cohesion (psf) W = Unit weight of Soil (pcf) H = Height of Slope (ft) FS = Factor of Safety <4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL > SOIL A TESTING, INC. Br: DBA OATS: 04 -28 -94 ' JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No. 12 SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY SLOPE SURFACE z / ie eo a � / / a _ ASSUMED PARAMETERS z - DEPTH OF SATURATION = 3' a =SLOPE ANGLE= 2 6.6 ww= UNIT WEIGHT OF WATER = 62.5 ST- SATURATED UNIT WEIGHT OF SOIL = 135.5 0 = APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 34 c = APPARENT COHESION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 150 ps f FS = c + T TAN 0 = c + (IT - Xwl z COS a TAN 4 T ITz SIN a COS a FS = 1.7 SOUTH CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL SOIL A TESTINa,I sr: DBA DATE: 04 -28 -94 io NUMBER. 9411081 Plate No. 13 �� AL TRA v SE JOINTS LO NGITUDIN AL CONTROL CONTROL JOINT JOINTS W (ft) TRANSVERSE 3' CONTROL W /2 JOINTS 4 L 3' W (ft) - JOINT 3' W/2 W/2 SPACING SLAB ON GRADE 10 FEET OR GREATER IN WIDTH SLAB ON GRADE 5 FEET TO 10 FEET IN WIDTH NOTE: 1.'W" SHOULD NOT EXCEED 15 FEET. 2. JOINT PATTERN SHOULD BE NEARLY SOUARE. TOOLED OR SAWED JOINT *T /4 REINFORCEMENT *T/2 PER REPORT (2 MIN. COVER) *T *T = TW -KNESS PER REPORT CONTROL JOINT DETAIL NO SCALE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL �SQ BY: DBA 04 -28 -94 T SOIL &TESTING, INC. DATE: JOB NUMBER: 9411081 Plate No. 14 1 - I I ' I% SLOPE MINPAUM 6' Mi. ' 6"M WATERPROOF BACK OF WALL PER .. °. ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS ' c ° • 3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK OR MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT o' •o GEOFABRIC BETWEEN ROCK AND SOIL . 0 12a . TOP OF GROUND • , • ? OR CONCRETE SLAB o' c• ° 6' MIN: o • ° MINIMUM 4 INCH DIAMETER ' PERFORATED PIPE RETAINING WALL SUBDRAIN DETAIL NO SCALE ' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ATHENA STREET RESIDENTIAL SOIL & TESTING, INC. my: DBA DATE: 04 -28 -94 ' roN NUMNER: 9411081 Plate No. 15 ' - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix A, Page 1 REFERENCES Abbott, P.L., Editor, 1985, "On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County," San Diego Association of Geologists Guidebook. Anderson, J.G.; Rockwell, T.K. and Anew, D.C., 1989, "Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region," Earthquake Spectra Volume 5, No. 2, 1989. ' Jennings, C.W., 1992, "Preliminary Fault Activity Map of California," California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File No. 2 -92 Kennedy, M.P., 1975, "Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California," California Division ' of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200. Kennedy, M.P., S.S. Tan, R.H. Chapman, and G.W. Chase, 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting, San Diego Metropolitan Area, California; California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report ' 123. Mualchin, L., Jones, A.L., 1992, "Peak Acceleration from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California (Rock and Stiff -Soil Sites)," CDM &G Open -File Report 92 -1. ' San Diego Count General g y e al Plan, Seismic Safety Element, Part V Adopted January 9, 1975, Amended April 24, 1991. ' Weber, F.H. Jr., 1963, Geology and Mineral Resources of San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, County Report 3. ' Wesnousky, S.G., 1986, "Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazards in California," Journal of Geophysical Research Volume 91, No. B12, pp 12,587 to 12,631, November 1986. - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix B, Page 1 ATHENA STREET SUBDIVISION, ATHENA STREET, ENCINITAS RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS ' GENERALINTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, ' preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report ' and /or the attached Special provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be ' used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer. ' OBSERVATION AND TESTING Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical ' Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that my may provided his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provided these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions ' not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading operations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations. ' If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as ' questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc.; construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall ' recommended rejection of this work. Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following ' American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix B, Page 2 Maximum Density Optimum Moisture Content - ASTM D -1 Y P D-1557-82 ' Density of Soil In -Place - ASTM D- 1556 -64 or ASTM D -2922 All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL i All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from ' unsightly debris. After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree ' of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in -situ density of at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density. When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent ' formational soils. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1 -1/2 times the equipment width, whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (20 percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter ' than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. ' Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 ' feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described procedure should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the ' Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities no to be abandoned should be ' brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. 1 SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix B, Page 3 PP g ' All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the ' requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on ' the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and /or a qualified Structural Engineer. ' FILL MATERIAL Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of ' vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient tine material to till the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils ' with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL ' Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow ' the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. ' When the structural fill material includes rocks no rocks will be allowed ton n all nest and a voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended ' g p m the Special Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non- ' structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the ' - SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix B, Page 4 Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates g p that a particular layer is at less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. ' Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot rollers hall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, till slopes at a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over- built and cut -back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry density or the degree of compaction specified ' in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surficially stable. Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes ' to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from i the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report. If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer. CUT SLOPES ' The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading„ these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper ' than the allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. SCS &T 9411081 April 28, 1994 Appendix B, Page 5 ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and ' compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified degree of compaction. ' SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials ' can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural ground, compacted fill, and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29 -C. OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil over 6 inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of ' placement of such material is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required. . .. . }, . � t i ' I", ,� 'Y. I - I I . I I 1 '-' I , nn J Q �d . , I k y ' , , , . , 11 I L VON 31VId L M L M VON 80f i` . // 11 I - - 7 .-- r'+ . a l . ,41.1 stub vo 'Hwje WNW 101., V66t "ZZ•V :31VO QlP /b9Q :A8 t I , 3..tns . , 1 tUt AI/MH91H ON SES ' NOSIAMOnS 133H1S. VN3Hlb 4 , ,. ,. I -, - , � 1' IDNILl33NION3 OOSdd 4 m 0NI 0NI,LSF1Z : PTIOS .� 31yaS ON VIi�i?.I03IWD NX3HJLf14S ddW X1!NIDIn ,, w " �[ . . - ,,:. v . 1. I 1.11, ,d Ls\A I . _ . -I - r .,; ' Sa @ 0 0 ' S S 0 0 ' .�3'I3 rQ�l �02id a�3'I3?i I e ,if � -; i �. � NOlIV30 I lid 31VWiXOHddt/ IS NO1 n .LS �S � 1 - 1. ,. d I'ItlO OS 0 @ 6 T Hart SOx / SOx SXatt2iS: MG'I3 S z 3 Z dtla M32iaS '• ° _' AID , '.'�,,� � j� 1 ,j ; ., . aZ.LStIZd NZ 6 Hon02i�iS QtIH SZ SS3a0�t Qx.'lOtio 3HS MO'I3Q ' �; ,� *- , i � ! � �1 I'll I - O ti0a /' S 6 6£- £ yam, S "�, I .1 I-- I . .L3 S 0 X4S xZIZIS,tl QK02i'IItC2i Z3 S xS Za £ tl 3 t d X3 i �A � I - . f-� -0 I - 1, -� I I . 3Pi 3HS 30 i�I ' Z3 5 ' Z 3Att ta'I11A 30 Z / a 34 �i la b 6 b t ,I , ,'1 -- - .n 4 _..JUG N # _ 7 11 � ' sxa �z 3HS, 34 'II1t2i ZStt3 3HS, d0 3 Z3 9 T T 9 £ Z off ZHOIZ ►►,:., ' , _., ` - - -- T E ' 3 5334 .LSOd : 3HZ �IO2i3 �t1M'TItt2i 'IttHoIS d x Za 5 0 � . . � . - , �"18 G � t . v v� n3� 33 tl�KttS 9 dOS sS02i0K ttICIt10n3Z BL6 So '., i L.� ,' � y � \ ' ., coEt n oo3za x�ts ao xsxnoa �, , n 11 114 _ _.*" to © z i . �' ' ' x3A2iAS aZ3Ia K 30 - Zns3H sx� soH arr� s 6t 4x a xo xMOxs sir �rs�a axoa3x . :111 "I 03x3 0HS s3axvssia ary soxl F _ '. TAI O 2i 3 a 3 I 2I 3 Q 3 H�' H H t�IM ...,r.:i _ _ _ r: _ �, _ . M _ ,: - _; � - - -_ :Y4R K _ , _ _: _ 11 _ 3, r . __ _r,... } 11 _. _ 114-1 w �. _ _ __ - - - - - -- - _ — - - .. fi x. svd JCS 6 8 Z t 3�I4 OxI2i33i�I�t�T3 04_ . . _. nz 1. i .... ,. ,, e� .:.. a ooaos ,. a3S�i330a32Id ]C3AHns OI�I �t2i r: - c:1 - 9 . .. - - .- �- :C0. em� T, _ = -.� C !a I S £ 6T Ox JOaUHH1 dVW OZ JxIamoov vimuoaI'IKO M 11 I t ��17a0,4 H I �r� s2/1 ?t7li -9l p9 , : r • ,, O 3S�LSS �003Ia xKS 34 JCSt�it100 '� BKSIINIOx3 a0 xSla _ — -_ 4' t 11 __.. _ _ 3HS xI E ox slxn xa ss�oo xsnos ao s xoozg T soZ - -- -- O x, _ . -7 H l o d� �.��� - _ �' � wf I 11 ,� 18 3dO8d J Nb� - 1 I Hd S8 W V 6 W 70HNbW d S �I Hd d?�JOd01 S - - � ' i -� -� �i ii I I .1 I _.. _ . t� i �� ,�', �1-11 , -, � t�,-, . � r �d . , ,., � ;,.�, _.,� ..y � � I I I -� \\ �.-- -- - - --1 --- „- _ , I 1� �, � � . I I I ' I - ° —��+ -0 I I , �, I -11 I , I � , i �� ..� , � I � M,< ; \t 7 F\ �\ r , I - ��b2 zr ��< ' ?31 ---- __ -_ __ g! 9 2 �. M, Sl ,ODoOS�Y ,t - I . ri �MOd .. \ _ :i --111-11'�� , _ _. �� - \ `� . • ",- ,5 _ �. ' `'� �,j I r;) r_ �� I- - - I ,,� b , 9 ,, �` � °. -.. - _ _.__ — - .___ ,: _ \ _ ,; i '`� J �' J - ”' t , 1, � �1 � '' ,. , \,,, , I I I �� ly r (. '), ,71,K-9 210*001 ` �.._ ., . . I ,, ; \, I . � I I �r, �' ,�r ,-r,: � . I � "It', ��� „r �”, O ,} o `a 11 1. ; q , - /� / n L 'fi L °; rS -� X0 9 , � . .� 11 � - I r q . . 4 - \ : . I �.:- I - r . I I I I . 1 9 -a�� r� r) I 11 , "I. - � -1 I � I . I . 1 � I . I . . 1 . , It 'r, ' ., � . I � I ,. I .1 . 11 I . 11 , -'1- _- �. I I . . q - . . -, ,��% '1� I I . " I I . I . lt,,,� I., , . ,. .- I I , q '. I -:'1­�`., _ � --, � ; r I ---� . \ "'�< '- " I - - , � � " - � "-�� 03-e-x � - ,0 , "'�, , "", "'��, , � I "�-,' " ,-'� . ; . Q) . - ,-/-�,--, N*--� , I I :,: - "I I I � 1 - I -j- " I . I -)- ------� , ) , ., I � �'r - . . r " r I : r t '' I � I I I I -L� �, �I I I I . .� �� . x ct� � I . 1. � �'� ,r ���­-� r '' ' ''t I I � ': ''I 'NN, '1�1 I I .1 ... ' . 'I" I I I " " "I "�,�- I I ; - - � I `� O$ _ ' I I . I • - -10 . _ J - .. - �� I . e� ' ' _ v �, A I t ,, , �' � - - -, ''I I . I , ; _ "*�� /? i (11 0� '65. I . "', "' , S/� \ ;. r , 11 U �� 1, i G Q p� ,` ' ' ; -�t" "�, � ",��, . '. I ' " i I .. ��.. ,a r_ '� x . 4 �- �.� LMT �s o ,y. (, { _ . 11 . _. _F;..__. '�,� _ ca rte. � . , _ -__ _ _ .. . ____.... .cam L, -1 —_ (JIB o� /T1 ` i /� m �, 1 C��_ .. I,C _., ' �, �� � z --, �, �� 1 k 11 I 11r, . ,. -_ 'h ,; . �..'� 1 `' ___. it A `, "�- '� ,�, `. .. . MR' - - 11 1, .r ,',,,., 11 . ��� �OCa'SS 9 �., _.__ . __ ri.. 2� �.� r r: I I , . -, - - , -, I . 1. " , , ":�'� 11 � ,, - , I I - . I � I , .-I , . r � I I , � 1� , �. 1 OS Nil 11 .. (t. I I , 11 - .: � - �1­ 1 � � - I li� J `s '�j ,-'i- 11 I - - 1;,:� � ,. � I I I � -, .- I I , I "'�� I N G � "" 97 9 m 1 0. � � �- - # N Ile . �y ....,..,- ._._. -,.., _ * 0 L { iL -J I . 11. 2 �E� ` , ,,,r �a� -- , �� 45 - � \ ,� �� r / . I q � , � -� - ", "I.- ti -- r�_ 0 . J �" o�, �, .. / '*-�--� --,� r . r � I , " I " �.� 1, 1, , I ,� I I .. I . I . . I \ Z!i� - ---- j I ) zn) ,. I . � I 4 - 1�� �Q -�� 1, I, '- r `� f r I I r � I - � I . . I . . 'Q j 2 , 0i / q r� , - ,,� , , , �� / / i " . 9 p ,y ,_ _ rD �� � , rp Os : ,� 11%4 / 4 , � I i . � I I � r', I �'� "r�­��--' " M4 as � -M a �' .. of � J 11 r , `� 5� o d 4 4,7 . �u s / I 11 It 11 I f, n �'� �' '`. 69 � , -- / I . "I" ,,, I . � I /� �� r. 41� z " 1 � --j- I :1- - I I I I � - � I ". - . � - I �,; I �� i rn � � 1, - �,�_ - �,'' z �- I - 1 I I I .. . � I � .o'� �r o � o�-- �' -� „z� ,�� �, . I I I - � � I ttr _- p w '�- S / , d r, . � I i , I I I � �, - � . . I q , . / - , I . , I I I � , I . 1�� �.� ,.... . �- --<<, . r _ 11 �, I � 11� o I I ” ,,:: �- I �, : ��L - � r . , , . � ,�, , ,,, � I I I . ' r r 1: I A I 1 "� •�;? \ ''r L , I . . �, - 1- 4 1 r . � -, I - . � I q I : � -"� , � � I I -r . � . t I-, " '­ I . n �; iy `.� - M �, r � -�,t- I I I r I . . I - 6 l, _ .__ _. - - .� ;; . O i. ,9 0 .c :. ,.. V - ., _ 11 �p ,� X � w. o �� �� /J�, �- 10 3 A - a � UU „t 11 w 11 w �,, - `� b' o I u �, . . 11 r . -oz ,74 ,,,� Q 'Z C 1 6 ? � l -- x y O� - .� --I _. z ���SII v ., v �. N/ n 11, , :, .. �s r , ' I ,� i / 31 11 11 ,:t - - , �I S r, p .� . '� -- , r, I .- .w:: . __ 1 �} s - a: ,,'`� �0, �• .. � . `'/ / w i r �::� I 11 , . . , 11. . , , , , .: . ,,. , :. , . . , i _ { F 1 _ .- a:. '33 _ ".'.,4- ,- 0, -.. - t, .l " + —.—:.. - . ...•.: — .- ' .'r .Y.: -1 —_ . ..;. .'.:.: w — . h.. T. r--r.r.N— v. . .. :•M r -,. . .e — ,. t w , . — ,. a, - • '