2000-6604 G CITY OF ENCINITAS
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT SECURITY OBLIGATION AGREEMENT
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:
That I /we [�LG��/` /5� Principal
held and firmly bound unto the City of Encinitas, a municipal
corporation, in the Cou ty of San Diego, State of Cal'fo ia, i
the sum of � - ou LJvA �J/ _ 5�
($ ) in the f rm of
e 119
deposit with the City Finance Officer (per Receipt ## on
to be held by it until this obligation becomes void annd f any
the conditions herein are breached, to be applied by the City of
Encinitas to satisfy any damages suffered and pursuant to the
provisions recited hereinafter.
The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that whereas the
above named Principal has agre d ro_ide ce tain improvements
for the property known as � -�
En Permit No. in accordance with
✓fit /Z G�V`/ - -- _ __
dated
and is required by the City Code to
give a security to guarantee the performance and the completion of
said improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, if the said Principal shall well
and truly perform all the work specified in said agreement, then
this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full
force and effect. In addition, this security shall be conditioned
upon the Principal's full compliance with all terms and conditions
of the required Engineering Permit including any condition
specifying a time limit; and further conditioned upon full
compliance with all provisions of the ordinances and standards of
the City of Encinitas.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said rincipal has hereunto set his hand,
this day of
r' cipa
Business Address
BO /03 /PWl -21wp5 8 (01/18/93 -11)
PAYMENT BOND CERTIFICATE
Automatic Renewal, Non - Negotiable
Office of Account: LA COSTA Certificate Serial Number: 0929009108
Account Number: 0929009108 Amount Deposited 552,993.00
On January 09, 2001, Fifty Two Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Three And 00/100 Dollars was deposited for 032 Days by EISCHEN,
CATHERINE E (Depositor) and is payable to CITY OF ENCINITAS on February 10, 2001 (the Maturity Date), upon presentation of this
certificate, properly endorsed. This deposit will earn interest at the rate of 02.700% compounded daily using a 365 -day year, for an annual
percentage yield of 02.740 %. Interest will be paid to the Depositor At Maturity. If this Certificate is not presented for payment on the
account's Maturity Date or within 10 days after that date, the deposit will be renewed for a like term at the interest rate in effect on the
account's Maturity Date.This Certificate is not transferable.
If all or any part of this deposit is withdrawn before the account's Maturity Date, the amount withdrawn may be subject to an early withdrawal
or compensating fee.
FORM 03117 -OASIS (F.REV.5 /93) - - --
AUTHO D SIGNATURE
C I T Y OF E N C I N I T A S
ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
505 S. VULCAN AVE.
ENCINITAS, CA 92024
GRADING PERMIT
Cc 97 -2 t9
PERMIT NO.: 6604G
sass: asss sssss asssaasssssssssssssssssssss: ssssaassssassms sasssssassasssasmsss:
PARCEL NO. 264-241 -1600 PLAN NO.: 6604 -G
JOB SITE ADDRESS: 1102 DOUBLE LL. RANCH RD.
APPLICANT NAME DOYLE (CATHERINE E.)
MAILING ADDRESS: 5817 BUCKNELL AVENUE PHONE NO.: 760- 603 -904
CITY: LA JOLLA STATE: CA ZIP: 92037 -6907
CONTRACTOR : R & R CUSTOM BUILDING /ENGINEERING /DESIGN PHONE NO.: 800 - 951 -991
LICENSE NO.: 712475 LICENSE TYPE:
ENGINEER : K & S ENGINEERING PH NO.' 619 - 296 -556.
PERMIT ISSUE DATE: 1/12/01
PERMIT EXP. DATE: 1/12/02 PERMIT ISSUED BY:
INSPECTOR: TODD BAUMBACH
------ --- ---------- - - - - -- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS --------- -------------------
1. PLAN CHECK FEE 1,400.00 4. INSPECTION DEPOSIT: .00
2. INSPECTION FEE 2,650.00 5. SECURITY DEPOSIT 52,993.00
3. PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: .00
------------------- - - - - -- DESCRIPTION OF WORK ------------------------- - - - - --
EARTHWORK /STORM DRAINAGE /DRI;VEWAY /EROSION CONTROL FOR PROPOSED SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING IN TRACT 97- 219 -1. DIRT: 1,800CY CUT /FILL. DRAIN: 609LF
PIPE /16EA INLET /2EA CLEANOUT /3CY RIP - RAP /665LF DITCH /3CY CULVERT. LETTER
DATED JAN 05 2001 APPLIES. PROTECT -IN -PLACE PUBLIC TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS.
- - -- INSPECTION ---------- - - - - -- DATE -- -- - - -- INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE - - --
INITIAL INSPECTION
COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED
ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED
ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION
FINAL INSPECTION
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE
INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATI
LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING AND GRADING, AND THE PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS OF
ANY PERMI ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS APPLICATION.
X--- // 'Z/ol
SIGNATURE DATE SIG ED
u i we E E/ Is - 0 &0
PRINT NAME T LEPHONE NUMBER
CIRCLE ONE: OWNS 2. AGENT 3. OTHER
K &S ENGINEERING
Planning Engineering Surveying
May 22, 2001
050
Mr. Todd Bomback Q L
City of Encinitas
Engineering Service Permits
505 South Vulcan Avenue 1I0"INEER1 40SEW1
Encinitas, CA 92024 � :NCINITAs
Re: Engineer's Pad Certification for Grading Permit Number 6604 — GR
Mr. Bomback:
Pursuant to section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby
submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for Lot 3 of Map Number 13791. As the Engineer
of Record for the subject project, I hereby state all rough grading for this unit has been
completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of
Encinitas, Codes and Standards.
23.24.3 10 (B) The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified and shown
on the approved grading plan:
Pad Elevation Pad Elevation
Lot No. Per Plan per Field Measurement
3 205.30 205.33
23.24.3 10 (B) 1. Construction of line and grade for all engineered drainage devices
and/or retaining walls have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with
the subject grading plan.
23.24.3 10 (B)5. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes have been
field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan.
23.24.3 10 (B)6. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad
drainage have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject
grading plan.
The benchmark used for this certification was OC -0073, elevation 119.476.
PRO
Sincerely, ���CP_MqLs Ss�o
2
aural eis, P.E.
c q(1Ft�lN \A'�'
7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 100 • San Diego, California 92108 • (619) 296 -5565 Fax (619) 296 5564
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE: ► Z, 9 /o
PROJECT NAME: E t'5c..h e.j - je st `c(eoce PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: 1 1:�x,blc LL Pc ( - PERMIT NUMBER: &("Og6
CONTRACTOR: 4f �u S7i7n1 B u ► c-►tcS TELEPHONE:
ty pt Rt• GoN onl S►Te: tcLbU�/h. S tL� Fot�
ITEm (,oyE'R.EA. " AiUO o%--�T DA-TeQ t t9 /o
/1 A b( ►TZFM j� NoT�• 13c),- CctIQ-er'f - aocl
r Gc air
betyr Lu mp e7z c i" 66L rw -
�� CoN� ia�u5h 6.radr- Lo'll 'OE C7«Ie1-► 7b Do �
A'Nd fy L N rOfF77oN5 - U �A o ti1(o T �j W ED
Tt�l ;Z( - M .
1 / 2 q o l i l% ILAyG r3E6; Cu MAK. "">4_7 Faz F - 1 LL
L.
S ope W 71N E,qy c SoL,lh Corner o -r
prz�ject -r sPoCP lb - r�n o, srW. j2 jLLes.+ Grczue(
- be ,olaccd AT D1w o e ff G . ozuebM--1 A.C.
ra,v►PQd in (^rent a-r- A • x cca(ed 6eorge
dm -h• Ste r>^ 1/a lu GS aro Lim k;- d e j,C_r C-">& lc�c
r¢rnu� C,ce.CLcd ga.x.,el lG -� S L- -t See
W1/►L/ F7QE kqe e en4-- 1� - ,, {-k Oe-i Ec O� W-e- O/W
whe.� P cL;,n , 5how i J 1v ttr+r S�zi� . j ald Di
o a e( ✓1ti u5 r Lie Ide G(Cae'► a►� a (( f7 .
► ZS a I Ke yw� c or► h' its 'f'a be G uq in a Q5 (er L d i rccfi`on ctlonc
u L-o D lQ alc rL5 rxr etn w�tQr -�ae� t ef��s
ha.�e beon , abane(on ee(. o tK -n9 Ue) u s LL6 ( 'f no+-c .
r tlo a / ?A/ 1
t3dFW& ,�3AGC PILLED 4A(,,O Corrr r9n/O �iu
�ol�G 7x+,e1A16 SRj 6oZ6v-s ,BE'GrjAj Cur 5 z � -
C� Flu r-pA r7u- 649LV5.
1 3o a/ u C a✓ti 75�u c
be m a r n c vZa - C" goes
5lo Wbi� 7 0roSreSS,--q
11 34 U ) •r' OF G (.CTS I h U4 • A-t L eL4 ► - p 12 t P center Or pac
zL j ro ,;fe; pQrrw t -J° kd -b c4� out tarn or ro w.
pA 2ecLi Lall ter- ' o.� 3LAck 13wtN D t� Etc
asKed 1-0 �e G.� ,Ic4 deep ►000��,ds d Si7� A-aa.1E
Ap
6 6k N o rp �5 /Y1�rtu>> gfc eyle� 1�ew1�av1 r!c. c�•k -
Z f 5 01 Somme D,,zr ep- po(zT& Ta m 61 -c.o 5 LA FitL.. 6N GA e-1 .
LAnid Ft t - l - GL.ob ifD TD . EZ an ns 0 Tb �2 urs.>< Tarn o,2 2ow -
2,6� A�2T 8amJ& e5too2mb 71D -SAx1 /ltA,ecos G�},htlJ ALL rOA� • 7h l./
I- rc.(. Pt07T F„AlISH ?�90iIr j Arco Er - 12 �umf ]arrx�2zaw .
77?W,r - AR 77Z4t4rA4�, 6RaJ6Z, our avm 5n?'WF- 7 h_Ar- A-C 66 207
I'S Qua 4(aeLY� • �N,O 4 h e I'rC �,-a r'( iS be,' G�ri►/Cn i %�fD .
m14429 l74t;"s stL t f, l)
✓h d5-f- be -�'h�. 1 -Ab Z.1-4 4117 s� .
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: 'TELEPHONE:
2 - 7 - ai S77It 654p61e
SC "Eb U4 £;!2
Ooud / t ZC 4 5 - m e e�
c�pEr� tot
F�o�r, T�iE �nrt,t�ucy .9c c�5s
TJ o 2 E�Z 0AJ iTF 7, 1.4f "' Fi LZ- d /t VO 7 A16
,$Lb ES AL 50
2 -20-6/ %ivtP02�Y> 2��Su�!/ Z /(o � �9 - 55• 4GL� bN �fR�
6"E7` It-76e OG U /oL.•'t3��N
Witt 6e7 � C�E� "�m�2lLo,W IF a,
Z -21 -o1 u� c as c ea.•, tr vn uG'S .
3 -5 -0! ivtpor '•,� �app'�9 m�i tr,�a� . �v o r ac•iv; ,
3 - �u� c-AST coin o� - ,D�-.� s 82ow AiTZ,v ou4.
E os T 72
Gr � k-Pd �o�/ •{/j �a/�Q Q �So�� � f m oo r 7�h �,� s'w� %e
b/e L(_
a fee
Nouuo Farts o lGu
/he-�`
9 ✓Qdi n -Sr1%,i1 04 'Y-- n 6ft
lie / U Om
Pt
%n az
w ee� Cl�ant� t' ,o - ,- A 04 cpc calf PGrI� ,
,; 54 et. f r blow cl, CCI� /
• �2( 0 Ol �L�C,NT e ftX -77yE( S6-1,44-fg 6X �}T 71' f .v US
o� Aio Di 76AlE5 14W,0 �26y LUaa` l
/yaw o ea`ue SogFk c01
llo Fu rn /, Ve6u
.319-6/ o FaR ,9C77v� 3/AI69 1119' 7
StoPF5 9RE 6el(NU lgQ&,gW ANQ pCr9N7� .
S oM5 con, nae- a.� / qn �rri�q
-12 - o l �w l &hook 6&W6 /iu571 aizi /l[ o O iN&:;z l4Gn4
ow d �n5 �ea�. ' ct hes WeYe ha dv c�viifc
enoblo ,4L So , /li o l�,rlS in bra,( rnusf /�ha fGGi PCi h �q, �
,016m . /a," 40 ca c( AV ✓'e- * nsjoec —b b l ��e
- l$ - 0 1 � „0 n e ��� o✓! /llo +G t-. `L �2Jt' /'L- S .
wGylr jafiu
m14429
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: 'TELEPHONE:
rl -- / -o l flp raw c aS / re a - /t> o,
new ?t
-/v e"isure i efi i)em rb." Q tdGtt,�i i3 SGheddetl
invt w
u she a,l a a � �c o.
jo IQce Conc�tf�
mo t- Q-ol u0-5 r -owde-
ate/ ra fat/ ocu i C$zr .So �c s at2)''
9..r! hr.lC ii+ rec at/ r -or
F. M. S R&rlo C crnev - T�t•ey a raw o(�f21� i^
corr4er ) aac '1l qra.4i 5; ec. roc,. brsw Q.-kh
(ozw, offan w at k rl , ole> i C ll? - rrw.. hoc aC s(o
The ad cif recavl( �cceic,�d l v 4 S rsjecW caoit 17 did
�6 / /ow �oVC� - f��r)�'? 71
SZ3 -ol p.4D C��T 'Q� ��• CG,u Djnt9L. aA0iA/ls /SSUE�
OV,6 C 7?Q<YiG r5 FiitttSffE�
CUj,vWr t-o en sStA4$ . w TdNy 2s3o,
Amt ItAler - t d R*y n6f rneet - - 2W-r. Bee-xrsc 7 erP 407
AV w gar race a�� �tfc we%5 /- ne/s�- be /Z ... bars
3 f/ �� O .0 • � r s
5' waG�s mus¢ /be GcfiS Q col -- '. ot�r� a,
7
a 7V D
�►
p 1-,0 , l i ar- l Y`/ /� ncMc r o elc . -
aG /ed won eoel burn . � e alva -02 2+� a ad• SCI�fM�
hid Ca ?"C( res c� e•
7- /a E 72>, Scsrg oG is ax SrRZfeWe .4 /aTooan,
�T 7 =o .r►
Ahc oC -A Okce 4 e
- G(ioP I mp "-e in reccilrP a srh�lc A- �e
/ - /5 -oL i'Iltf on b Qckb�» P 51 ! - /�c/„rA/ 6~41-7eof �!
a Prom Ift no See Pror �c /l(4no
m14429
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: TELEPHONE:
zmlW f?Z / b e du of zZed ccal tcoT -
a 2. At ,qC�. !.� a�., el.t�c , rovy �-"
h /S C O WC.- Zle /QC'M /W i. or Z
7 -25- Re&l v- re/�ac ed 4nd dii vcc /ade af� 9 eu G ��-
sp .
7 Zoo O/ EllMi¢E D / IU DU6 OUY' hl 6*15F. J r"M -
4 a to � L��7r�x�, �r/D T�►,ob� .
,QQ3 ^ X5. -96-- 'AIM 4 �V5,770AJ -
r
73o - oi DI 1) SE Po'j -eq ' 7 7 E/r� j2c rocl .,/i54
A • E 41tl LOO K> S G5 .
7 3/ or es, J� 517E 7v SELl 1wo b1w - r 0417: D w 0-,C.
A G,�/ ,`y' �3.ec�m F7�t/ , ��'�2 /F�� • Z8 da�iS
� L e 6 Ma� / W
8 �ZO -o� ..Sow E G ,Pi9 O occ vre a �n c e ir, a r• v�wa�- 7St e.
o d d; , e5 have beew saw cot' of side
A re, a4c tQi a /x er A. x cu ((.*
llgc+-rnoU . -1 0.4led o-)
•ta�t:6 . s a,el di ' es twee r f lar co/ ems, ev . s • de a� 111w
,.3 lvee a cup!! call Lame /C wooe / o pe
efl&A 0-el
QG� 'fDy / S c� llaN+ �o� / �Qp �
,� /8 -OI �a ,¢g77 ✓� � SINGE ! 9/�. sled �P,o�c/ S e�t1S
eVelyoead 04 � / /71¢,g" . Sec Pvec7 #eot..
-72> 4h-ao( .
m14429
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
April 9, 2001
Project No. CE -6170
Mr. & Mrs. Eischen
2844 Esturion Place
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject: Report of Certification of Compacted Fill Ground
Proposed Single Family Dwelling and Guesthouse
Lot No. 3 of Map 13791
Double `L' Ranch
Olivenhain, California
Dear Mr. & Mrs Eischen:
In response to your request, the following report has been prepared to indicate results of soil
testing, observations, and inspection of earthwork construction at the subject site.
Testing and inspection services were performed from January 25, 2001 through April 4, 2001.
Briefly, our findings reveal filled ground has been compacted to a minimum of ninety percent
(90 %). Therefore, we recommend construction continue as scheduled.
SCOPE
Our firm was retained to observe grading operations with regard to current standard practices
and to determine the degree of compaction of placed fill.
Grading plans were provided by K & S Engineering of San Diego, California.
Grading operations were performed by Mike Lloyd of Fallbrook, California.
Reference is made to the following soils reports prepared by our firm:
1.) "Preliminary Soils Investigation" dated August 31, 2000
2.) "Post Tension Slab and Foundation Design Criteria" dated January 3, 2001.
P. O. BOX 302002 * ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 * (760) 480 -1116 FAX (760) 741 -6.568
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -6170
Page 2
Approximate locations and depth of filled ground and extent of earthwork construction covered
in this report are indicated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch ".
Grading operations were performed in order to create a level building pad to accommodate the
proposed dwelling, guesthouse and tennis court. Should the finished pad be altered in any way,
we should be contacted to provide additional recommendations.
The site was graded in accordance with recommendations set forth in our previously submitted
soils reports.
The site was graded to approximately conform to project plans. Actual pad size and elevation
may differ. Finish grade operations are to be completed at a later date.
LABORATORY TESTIN G
Representative soils samples were collected and returned to the laboratory for testing. The
following tests were performed and are tabulated on the attached Plate No. Three.
1. Optimum Moisture/Maximum Density (ASTM D -1557)
2. Expansion Potential Test (FHA Standard)
3. Direct Shear (ASTM D -3080)
SOIL CONDITIONS
Native soils encountered were sandy- clays. Fill soils were imported and generated from on -site
excavation.
The building sites contained a transition from cut to fill. However, cut areas located within the
building area were over excavated a minimum of 3 feet and brought to grade with compacted
soil. Over excavation was carried a minimum of 5 feet beyond the exterior building perimeter.
Hence, no consideration need be given this characteristic.
Due to blending of imported soil with native soil, low to high expansive soils exist at finish
grade. The expansion index of on -site soils varied between 16 and 108.
The key was approximately 20 feet wide, a minimum of 9 feet in depth, and inclined into the
slope. During earthwork construction, native areas to receive fill were scarified, watered, and
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -6170
Page 3
compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90 %) of maximum density. Subsequent fill soils
were placed, watered, and compacted in 6 inch lifts. Benches were constructed in natural ground
at intermediate levels to properly support the fill. To determine the degree of compaction, field
density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D -1556 or D -2922 at the approximate
horizontal locations designated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch ".
A tabulation of test results and their vertical locations are presented on the attached Plate No.
Two entitled "Tabulation of Test Results ". Fill soils found to have a relative compaction of less
the ninety percent (90 %) were reworked until proper compaction was achieved.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Continuous inspection was not requested to verify fill soils are placed in accordance with current
standard practices regarding grading operations and earthwork construction. Therefore, as
economically feasible as possible, part-time inspection was provided. Hence, the following
recommendations are based on the assumption that all areas tested are representative of the
entire project.
1.) Compacted fill and natural ground within the defined building areas have
adequate strength to safely support the proposed loads.
2.) Slopes may be considered stable with relation to deep seated failure provided
they are properly maintained. Slopes should be planted with light groundcover
(no gorilla ice plant) indigenous to the area. Drainage should be diverted away
from the slopes to prevent water flowing on the face of slope. This will reduce the
probability of failure as a result of erosion.
3.) In our opinion, soil liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur due to the
following on -site soils conditions:
A). Groundwater was not encountered at the time of grading.
B). Loose compressible topsoils were removed to firm native ground and
recompacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90 %) of maximum dry density.
C). The dense nature of the formation underlying the site.
D). On -site soils possess relatively high cohesion characteristics.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -6170
Page 4
4.) Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a
minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade, will have an estimated
allowable bearing value of 1200 pounds per square foot.
5.) Footings located on or adjacent to slopes should be founded at a depth such
that the horizontal distance from the bottom outside face of footing to the face of
the slope is a minimum of 8 feet.
6.) Plumbing trenches should be backfilled with a non - expansive soil having a
swell of less than two percent (2 %) and a minimum sand equivalent of 30.
Backfill soils should be inspected and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent
(90 %).
7.) Unless requested, recommendations for future improvements (additions,
pools, additional grading, etc.) Were not included in this report. Prior to
construction, we should be contacted to update conditions and provide additional
recommendations.
8.) Completion of grading operations was left at rough grade. Therefore, we
recommend a landscape architect be contacted to provide finish grade and
drainage recommendations. Drainage recommendations should include a two
percent (2 %) minimum fall away from all foundation zones.
9.) Large recreational slabs, such as tennis courts, will incur slab cracking.
Therefore, to reduce the probability of cracking from excessive subgrade
movement of expansive soils, we recommend the slab be designed more
stringently. In our opinion, a post- tension slab performs well with regard to
expansive soils conditions if properly designed.
POST - TENSION SLAB AND FOUNDATION
It is our understanding foundations will consist of a post- tension slab system. Therefore, the
following post tension design criteria was calculated on clay soils located within the foundation
bearing zone. Calculations were determined by laboratory tests on representative soil samples,
and Standards 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Code, Section 1815 thru 1818. The design
should be performed by a licensed Structural Engineer engaged in this type of design and who
has a minimum of 5 years experience.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE -6170
Page 5
1). Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum
of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable bearing pressure of
1200 pounds per square foot.
2). On -site soils were found to have an expansion index of 108.
3). Em Center Lift = 5.3' (Edge moisture variation distance)
Em Edge Lift = 2.6' (Edge moisture variation distance)
Yin Center Lift = 3.21" (Max. differential soil movement)
Yin Edge Lift = 0.78" (Max. Differential soil movement)
4) Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to placing concrete. They should be
kept in a very moist condition or at a moisture content exceeding optimum moisture
content by a minimum of three percent (3 %).
Prior to pouring of concrete, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. should be
contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for compliance to those set forth.
UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATION
In the event foundation excavation and steel placement inspection is required and/or requested,
an additional cost of $170.00 will be invoiced to perform the field inspection and prepare a
"Final Conformance Letter ". If foundations are constructed in more than one phase, $120.00 for
each additional inspection will be invoiced.
It is the responsibility of the owner and/or his representative to carry our recommendations set
forth in this report.
San Diego County is located in a high risk area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake resistant
projects are economically unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable
and we assume no liability.
We assume the on -site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel
other than our own, It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction
operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by
CAL -OSHA and/or local agencies.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -6170
Page 6
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
North County. De P pF E S S/p N Fl. R ,q ,/
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. ��Q� oP� ��'�i `QC)
No. 713 z
U Exp. 9/30/01 M
7z l.E irk_ C*' T E C HNC r��P
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli q�F OF
President Registered Civil 93
Geotechnical Engineer 000713
RKA :paj
cc: (3) submitted
NORTH COMITY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESTING
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, NO SCALE
GUESTHOUSE and TENNIS COURT
DOUBLE LL RANCH ROAD
OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA
i iti °h i O X27 TEST
` 29
37 5 23
/
TEST
3
/ir 0
�, TE i
, r / 9��
" " \ C39 8
35 �, 8
ti
TESL ; =
TEST LOCATION SKETCH
PROJECT No. CE -6170
PLATE No. ONE
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS
Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of
Location Location % Dry Wt. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction
1 01/25/01 See 190.0 19.9 109.7 I 91.5
2 Plate 192.0 21.1 110.7 I 92.4
3 One 194.0 19.5 110.1 I 91.9
4 195.0 22.0 109.0 I 90.9
5 01/26/01 196.0 24.1 108.7 I 90.7
6 11 197.0 17.5 111.7 I 93.2
7 01/29/01 198.0 18.3 110.4 I 92.1
8 199.0 19.7 108.0 I 90.1
9 198.0 19.0 110.6 I 92.3
10 199.5 18.3 111.0 I 92.6
11 01/30/01 201.0 18.3 110.1 I 91.9
12 200.0 18.5 111.4 I 92.9
13 201.5 19.1 109.9 I 91.7
14 200.0 20.4 110.1 I 91.9
15 02/01/01 202.5 18.4 111.7 1 93.2
16 11 203.0 17.7 111.6 I 93.1
17 02/13/01 205.0 14.7 110.4 1I1 93.5
18 204.5 16.4 107.9 111 91.4
19 204.0 15.3 108.7 III 92.1
20 205.5 15.8 109.7 lIl 92.9
21 02/15/01 198.0 18.7 110.1 II 90.3
22 197.0 14.7 115.4 II 94.7
23 196.0 15.4 113.3 II 93.0
24 02/16/01 201.0 15.6 112.7 IV 93.5
25 203.0 18.3 111.4 IV 92.4
26 201.0 17.1 109.1 IV 90.5
27 203.0 16.8 113.4 IV 94.1
28 02/19/01 204.0 18.1 112.2 IV 93.1
29 204.5 16.8 110.2 IV 91.4
30 204.0 17.9 117.8 V 93.1
31 205.5 14.0 116.4 V 92.0
32 203.5 14.3 115.7 V 91.4
33 204.5 14.4 116.8 V 92.3
34 04/04/01 206.9 RFG 13.0 117.6 VI 94.0
35 11 206.9 RFG 12.6 117.5 VI 94.0
36 206.9 RFG 11.9 118.5 VI 94.8
37 205.9 RFG 16.4 111.7 IV 92.6
38 206.9 RFG 14.8 109.9 III 93.1
39 206.9 RFG 14.5 109.4 III 92.7
REMARKS: RFG = Rough Finish Grade
PROJECT NO. CE -6170
PLATE NO. TWO
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS
OPTIMUM MOISTURE AMM M DENSITY
SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE
(LB. CU. FT) (% DRY WTI
Red Brown Silty-Sandy -Clay I 119.8 14.2
Grey Red Tan Silty- Sandy-
Clay II 121.8 14.1
Tan Brown Clayey -Sand
(Import) III 118.0 12.8
Tan Beige Sandy -Clay IV 120.5 12.5
Orange Brown Silty-Sand
(Import Blended) V 126.5 09.5
Grey Beige Silty-Sand
(Import) VI 125.0 10.5
EXPANSION POTENTIAL
SAMPLE NO. III IV V VI
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90% Remold 90% Remold 90%
INITIAL MOISTURE ( %) 12.6 12.6 9.7 9.9
AIR DRY MOISTURE ( %) 11.1 9.5 7.8 6.2
FINAL MOISTURE ( %) 23.8 26.6 17.8 15.9
DRY DENSITY (PCF) 106.2 108.5 113.9 112.5
LOAD (PSF) 150 150 150 150
SWELL ( %) 6.1 10.8 3.0 1.6
EXPANSION INDEX 61 108 30 16
DIRECT SHEAR
SAMPLE NO. I II III
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90% Remold 90%
ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION 12 9 30
COHESION INTERCEPT (PCF) 380 390 130
PROJECT NO. CE -6170
PLATE NO. THREE
i
' MICHAEL W. HART
ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
October 27, 2000
File No. 463 -2000
' Brian and Cathy Eischen
2844 Esturion Place
' Carlsbad, California
92009
' Subject: Proposed Single - Family Residence
Double LL Ranch Road (Lot 3 of Map 13791)
Encinitas, California
GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Eischen:
In accordance with our agreement, I have completed a geologic reconnaissance of the subject
' site located on Double LL Ranch Road in the Olivenhain area of Encinitas, California. The
results of the reconnaissance indicates the site is primarily underlain by the Delmar
Formation which consists of highly expansive claystone. Overlying the Delmar Formation
are surficial soils consisting of uncompacted fill, colluvium, and topsoils. Review of
published geologic literature as well as site - specific studies for this report indicates there is
no evidence of past landsliding at the site. The soil investigation prepared by North County
Compaction Engineering, Inc., recommends that the surficial soils be removed and
recompacted during the grading operation.
The opportunity to provide consulting services on this project is appreciated. Should you
have any questions regarding the report, please contact the undersigned at your convenience.
' Respectfully submitted,
Michael W.
Engineering Geologist O -"�
Nj� Eolc; r
CEG 706 \�
lcc addressee O� C
3cc K &S Engineering
' P.O. BOX 261 227 • SAN DIEGO • CALIFORNIA 92196
' Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
' GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE
DOUBLE LL RANCH ROAD PROPERTY
' Encinitas, California
' INTRODUCTION
' This report presents the results of a geologic reconnaissance for a proposed residence
located north of Double LL Ranch Road in Encinitas, California (Figure 1). The purpose of
' this study is to describe the geologic characteristics of the site as well as the potential
geologic hazards to which the site may be susceptible.
' FIELD WORK
' Field work performed for this study consisted of geologic observation of natural and man-
made rock exposures on and near the site utilizing a site plan submitted by K &S Engineering
' of San Diego. In addition, trench logs prepared during the geotechnical investigation of the
site by North County Compaction Engineering Inc. dated August, 2000, were reviewed.
' SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED PROJECT
The site consists of a trapezoidal shaped property with approximately 415 feet of frontage
' along Double LL Ranch Road. The lot extends approximately 400 feet to the north from
Double LL Ranch Road. The Site slopes gently from west to east from an elevation of
' approximately 220 feet along the western property line to 195 feet along the eastern property
line. The site is essentially barren of vegetation due to past grading operations that have
' created a level building pad in the central portion of the site as shown on Figure 2.
' The grading for the pad has created a cut slope along the west side of the building pad
approximately 10 feet in height with an inclination of 3.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical (3:1).
The recommendations of this report assume that the finish grades will not vary from existing
grades by more than 3 feet.
' MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
1
Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
GENERAL GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC SETTING
The project is situated in the coastal section of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province.
' The coastal section is underlain by a thick sequence of primarily marine clastic sediments
that were eroded off the Peninsular Ranges as a result of tectonic uplift that began in the
' Cretaceous Period approximately 60 million years ago. The portion of the coastal province
in which the site is located is underlain by Tertiary -aged marine sediments consisting
' primarily of flatlying interbedded sandstone, siltstone and claystone. Beginning in the early
Quaternary Period, the sea began the first of many transgressive cycles onto the coastal shelf
' resulting in the formation of a sequence of marine terraces descending in stages to present
sea - level. These marine terrace graded eastward with fluvial terraces cut by streams
emanating from adjacent highlands.
STRATIGRAPHY
The site is underlain by a single geologic bedrock unit consisting of the Delmar Formation.
This formation is overlain by surficial soils consisting of uncompacted fill, topsoil, and
possibly colluvium. These units are described in older to younger order in the following
' paragraphs.
' Delmar Formation:
Geologic mapping by (Tan, 1986) indicates the bedrock unit underlying the site consists of
the Scripps Formation. Review of the trench logs by North County Compaction
' Engineering completed during their geotechnical study of the site dated August, 2000,
indicates the bedrock consists of grey to red -brown and grey, silty clay. This is confirmed
' by inspection of the cut slope along the west side of the building pad in which light grey,
massive, sandy clays are exposed. The lithology more resembles the Delmar Formation
' than the Scripps Formation of San Diego and therefore, the bedrock is correlated with the
former unit.
Colluvium
' While not exposed on the building pad or adjacent areas, the above - referenced trench logs
refer to the bedrock being overlain by red -brown soft, silty clay identified as alluvium.
' MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
2
Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
Inspection of these materials indicates that these soils are more likely originated at the base
' of the slope to the west by unconcentrated overland flow and creep processes and are here
assigned a colluvival origin. These soils are likely to be highly expansive and potentially
' compressible under proposed structural loads. The geotechnical report referenced above
includes recommendations for their removal and recompaction during the remedial grading
' operation.
t Fill
Fill up to approximately 6 feet in thickness was encountered on the building pad by the
' geotechnical study. These soils were placed during the original grading of the site and
consist of red -brown moist, soft, silty clay according to the North County Compaction
' Engineering report. That report also recommends that these soils be entirely removed and
recompacted during future grading.
'
Topsoils
' Topsoils observed during the reconnaissance of the site consist of a surficial A- horizon
comprised of loose brown silty sands and an underlying a B- Horizon of unknown thickness
' consisting of dark brown organic clay.
GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE:
The geologic units underlying the site as evidenced by inspection of the geologic map of the
' Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle by (Tan, 1986) indicates the bedrock units underlying the site
are essentially horizontally stratified. Inspection of limited outcrops as well as a study of
aerial photographs indicates no evidence of on -site faulting or lineaments suggestive of
' possible faulting.
' GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Potential geologic hazards considered in this report include the potential for surface faulting,
' liquefaction, seismically induced settlement, landsliding, and seismic shaking.
' Landsliding: The property is situated at the base of a moderate slope on the east side of a
north-south trending ridge. A study of stereographic pairs of aerial photographs (AXN 8M
' MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
3
Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
15 &16) and topographic maps performed for this investigation indicates there is no
' geomorphic evidence to suggest the presence of ancient deep- seated landsliding on or
adjacent to the site. Reference to the Landslide Hazards Map of the Rancho Santa Fe
' Quadrangle by Tan And Giffen (1995) indicates the site lies within Subarea 3 -1 defined as
generally Susceptible to landsliding. Slopes within such areas are generally at or near their
' stability limits due to a combination of weak materials and steep slopes. Tan and Giffen
further state that although most slopes within this subarea do not currently contain landslide
' deposits, they can be expected to fail locally when adversely modified. Inspection of the
property above the site to the west indicates the presence of a relatively uniform slope
' gradient with no indication of past deep - seated slope movement. In addition, the existing
approximately 10 feet high cut slope along the western property line appears to be free of
' evidence of past slope movements.
' Local Faulting:
The geologic map of the Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle by Tan (1987) indicates there are no
known faults in the vicinity of the site. In addition, a review of aerial photographs made for
this report indicates there are no lineaments suggestive of faulting that project through or
' adjacent to the property.
' Regional Faulting and Seismicity:
The site will be affected by seismic shaking as a result of earthquakes on major active faults
located throughout the southern California area. The nearest of these fault systems, the
' Rose Canyon fault, lies approximately 7 miles to the west and is the most significant fault to
the site with respect to the potential for seismic activity. Lindvall and Rockwell (1995) have
' described the Rose Canyon fault system in terms of several segments that each have
distinctive earthquake potential. The closest segment is the Mission Bay segment which
extends from San Diego Bay on the south to La Jolla on the north. The Del Mar segment
extends offshore from La Jolla to Del Mar.
According to Lindvall and Rockwell (1995), the Mission Bay and Del Mar fault segments
' are capable of generating M,6.4 to M,6.6 earthquakes, respectively, with an estimated
recurrence time of approximately 720 years for these events and 1800 years for an
' MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
4
1
Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
earthquake event of M,,,6.9 that would result from rupture of both segments concurrently.
' Such an event could produce peak ground accelerations at the site of approximately 0.5g to
0.6g (Joyner and Boore, 1982). Other active faults, the Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San
' Andreas Faults lie approximately 25, 50, and 70 miles, respectively, to the east.
' Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement:
The soils underlying the site, except for the uncompacted fills and other surficial soils that
' will be removed and compacted during the grading operation, consist of moderately dense
claystone that comprise the Delmar Formation. These soils are not considered susceptible to
' seismically induced liquefaction or settlement.
' GROUNDWATER
No seepage or other evidence of groundwater was observed during the geotechnical
' investigation by North County Compaction Engineering or this geologic reconnaissance. The
depth to the regional groundwater surface is unknown, however, it is not anticipated the
' currently proposed building pad will be excavated to depths where it could be reasonably
anticipated that the regional groundwater level would be intercepted. It is possible that
' perched groundwater could occur on the west cut slope after or during heavy rains or from
seepage from uphill properties located west of the site.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The site is primarily underlain by the Delmar Formation that here consists of sandy
' claystone. These formational soils are overlain by clayey topsoils, colluvium, and fill.
2. Geologic mapping for this report, a study of aerial photographs and published geologic
literature indicates there is no evidence of ancient deep- seated landsliding on the property.
' It is recommended that if the existing cut slope is increased in height or modified that the
plans for such modifications be reviewed and approved by an engineering geologist.
3. The site is underlain by uncompacted fill soils and other surficial soils that are subject to
' compression under building loads. The soil report by North County Compaction
Engineering recommends that these soils be removed and properly compacted. It is also
' MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
5
Geologic Reconnaissance
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
' File No. 463 -2000
recommended that keys for fill slopes be inspected by an engineering geologist or
t geotechnical engineer to verify that they extend below any surficial soils and into bedrock.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. G., Rockwell, T., and Agnew, D.C., 1989, A study of the seismic hazard in San Diego,
Earthquake Spectra, vol. 5(2), pp 229 -333.
Joyner, W.B. and Boore, D.M. 1982, Prediction of earthquake response spectra, U.S. Geological
Survey Open File Report 82 -977, 16pp.
Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan area, California, California, Calif.
' Div. Mines and Geology, Bull. 200.
Lindvall, S.C., Rockwell, T.K., and Lindvall, C.E., 1990, The seismic hazard of San Diego revised:
' New evidence of Magnitude 6+ Holocene earthquakes on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, in
Proceedings of U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Palm Springs, California, vol
1: Earthquake Engineering Research Inst., p. 679 -688.
' Lindvall, S.C., and Rockwell, T.K., 1995, Holocene activity of the Rose Canyon fault zone in San
Diego, California, Jour. Geophysical Research, vol. 100, no. B12, Pages 24,121 -24 -132.
' North County Compaction Engineering , Inc., 2000, Preliminary Soils Investigation for Proposed
Single Family Dwelling, Guest House and tennis Court, Double LL Ranch Road, Double LL Ranch,
Olivenhain, California Lot No 3 of Map 13791.
' Tan, S.S. and Giffen, D., 1995, Landslide hazards in the northern part of the San Diego metropolitan
area, San Diego county, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Open File Report 95-
04.
' Tan, S.S., 1987, Geologic map of the Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle, San Diego County, California,
California division of Mines and Geology Open -File Report 86 -15LA.
MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
6
File No.463 -2000
' Double LL Ranch Rd. Residence
iaa i ` 1
1
�• l
\\ 1
h
�<
\r ..I' \,� _ - x.. �. � /' I I I _ •� �'f;4
\ y
E N `r E 4�0
1
Road
�.'��
N
SITE LOCATION MAP
Double LL Ranch Road Residence
Encinitas, California
(from: Tan and Giffen, 1995)
(1 " = 2000')
Legend
Subarea 3 -1: Generally susceptible to landsliding
Subarea 4 -1: Most susceptible to landsliding
MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
Figure 1
File No.463 -2000
Double LL Ranch Rd. Residence
V .
/ / I
PRO ,POSD
% Will
tio 1 6
zz
PfT
• � J 'I ` � i — I is � -F / 4 • / �• t / /..
r---I i ..
o LL _-+ Ito
N
SITE MAP
Double L Ranch Road Residence
Encinitas, California
(from Plate 1, North County Compaction Engineering, Inc.)
(1" =60', approx.)
MICHAEL W. HART, ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
Figure 2
l�
ti
N ORTH COUNTY
l ;
>� ■'i � "f'� F;�� R1Cdve.F�. �. � ��T1 g" �4 i' x i j �( �' d . . Y'° y t " f r � `� { y . � � ' .
ti
so r, iw s 1f c S f - •a,d3�
-
`+
PRELM NARY SOILS INVESTIGATION
FOR T
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
GUESTHOUSE and TENNIS COURT
DOUBLE `LL' RANCH ROAD
DOUBLE `LL' RANCH
OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA
LOT NO.3 OF MAP 13791
PREPARED FOR
J
MR. & MRS. EISCHEN
2844 ESTURION PL.
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
J
J -
1
l AUGUST 31, 2000
PROJECT NO. CE -6170
J
NORTH COUNTY
"COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.` August 31 2000
Froject No CE -6170
4 !.
l
Mr. & Mrs. Eischen
2844 Esturion Pl.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
SUBJECT: Preliminary Soils Investigation
Proposed Single Family Dwelling, Guesthouse and Tennis Court
Double `LL' Ranch Road
Double `LL' Ranch
Olivenhain, California
Lot No. 3 of Map 13791
Dear
Mr. & Mrs. Eischen:
In response to your request, we have performed a Preliminary Soils Investigation for the subject
project.
The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the suitability of the site for the proposed
development and make recommendations with regard to site grading and foundation design.
1 Briefly, our investigation revealed the presence of old fill soils to depths of 8 feet below existing
grade that will require removal and recompaction during grading. In addition, on -site soils are
classified as being "high" in expansion potential and will require special grading and/or
foundation considerations. However, it is our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed
development, provided recommendations set forth in the attached report are adhered to.
1 n t hesitate to contact us. This opportunit I f you have any questions, please do o ppo ty to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
_ Pe Y d,
Q �OFESS /p
North County Quo PEE R. RFC q�F
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
No. 713 Z
e e E ,_9/30/41 rn
( Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Re s S O T£
President Registered Ci
Geotechnical En
RKA:paj
cc: (3) submitted
P.O. BOX 302002 * ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 * (760 )480 -1116 FAX (760)741 -6568
J
1�
' IYORTH .
:COMPACTION
`ENGINEERING . INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.) Purpose and Scope 1
2.) Location and Description of Site 1
3.) Field Investigation 1
] 4.) Soil Conditions 2
S.) Laboratory Soil Testing 2
j 6.) Recommendations and Conclusions 3
A.) Grading 3
B.) Foundations 4
C.) Slopes 7
D.) Retaining Walls 7
1 E.) Estimated Paving Section 8
F.) Seismic Design Considerations 9_
G.) Review of Grading Plan 9
1 .) U and Limitations 9
J
1
APPENDIX
Appendix A: Exploration Legend & Unified Soil Classification Chart
r Plate No. One Test Pit Location Plan
Plate No. Two thru Four Exploration Logs
Plate No. Five Tabulation of Test Results
1
Appendix B: Recommended Grading Specifications
" PPe g Pe
NORTH. COUNTY
,;COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Protect No. CE-6170
Page 1
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of the investigation was to determine if the site is suitable for the proposed single
family dwelling, guesthouse and tennis court
The scope of the investigation was to:
A. Determine the physical properties and engineering characteristics of the
surface and subsurface soils.
B. Provide design information with regard to grading, site preparation, and
foundation design of the proposed structure(s).
2. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
1 The site is located on Double `LL' Ranch Road in Olivenhain, California and is south of and
adjacent to Dove Hollow Ranch
The trapazoidal shaped property covers approximately 415 feet of frontage along Double `LL'
Ranch Road and is 400 feet deep. The lot is bordered by vacant subdivision lots 2 and 4 to the
east and west, Dove Hollow Ranch to the north, and Double `LL' Ranch Road to the south
The site presently supports an existing cut/fill building pad that is utilized for parking and a
storage yard for Dove Hollow Ranch. Cut and fill slopes were constructed to heights of 10 feet
and 6 feet at inclinations of 2:1 horizontal to vertical units, respectively. On -site fill soils will
require removal and recompaction and should not be relied on for support of structures in their
1 present condition. The approximate finish grade elevation of the pad is 205 MSL.
J Vegetation consists of sparse native grasses and brush.
An existing Olivenhain Water District easement traverses through the south portion of the
property adjacent to Double `LL' Ranch Road.
j
3. FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was performed on August 16, 2000 and included an inspection of the site
and the excavation of three exploratory trenches, with a backhoe to depths of 9 feet. Location of
test pits are shown on the attached Plate No. One, entitled "Test Pit Location Plan".
J .
1
NORTH COUNTY
r
COMPACTION
�. ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE-617
0
Page 2
As excavation proceeded, representative bulk samples were collected. In place natural densities
i and moisture contents were determined at different depths in the excavations and are included
on Plate No.'s Two through Five. Subsequent to obtaining soil samples, our exploratory
excavations were backfilled.
4. SOIL CONDITIONS
consisting Loose surficial soils (silty -clays and sandy-clays) g of old fill/alluvium were found to
be 8 feet, 2' /z feet, and 1 foot in depth in Test Pit No.'s One, Two and Three, respectively.
Underlying native soils to depths explored were stiff silty -sandy clays.
On -site soils were found to have an expansion index varying between 77 and 95 and are
classified as being "high" in expansion potential. Therefore, special grading and/or foundation
recommendations with regard to this characteristic will be required
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of our investigation, nor did caving of exploratory
trenches occur. In addition, due to the relatively high cohesion characteristics on on -site soils, it
is our opinion, soil liquefaction is unlikely to occur in the event grading is performed in
accordance with the recommendations set forth in this report.
J S. LABORATORY SOIL TESTING
All laboratory test were performed on typical soils in accordance with accepted test methods of
the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
Tests conducted include:
A). Optimum Moisture & Maximum Density (ASTM D -1557)
B). Direct Shear (Remold) (ASTM D -3080)
Q. Sieve Analysis (ASTM D-421)
D). Field Density & Moisture (ASTM D -1556)
E). Expansion Potential (FHA Standard)
1:
Test results are tabulated on the attached Plate No.'s Two through Five, entitled "Exploration
Log" and "Tabulation of Test Results ".
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC. i
t `F j
r ;4.° Project No. CE -6170
4 Page 3'
1
l 6. RECOMNMNDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
General
1 It is our understanding, the proposed dwelling and guesthouse will consist of wood frame
construction utilizing slab on grade foundations.
In our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed dwelling, guesthouse and tennis court.
Recommendations presented in this report should be incorporated into the planning, design, and
1 construction phases of the subject project.
1
jj 6A. Grading
1
General
It is our understanding cutifill earthwork construction will be performed to create a level
building pad to accommodate slab on grade foundations. Furthermore, it is highly recommended
that the building pad be capped with a minimum of 48 inches of non - expansive imported soils.
The area to be capped should extend under, and a minimum of 5 feet beyond the proposed
structures, tennis court and surface improvements.
All grading should be performed in accordance with the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance
and the Recommendations/Specifications presented in this report.
Subsequent to site demolition, loose surficial soils (old fill/alluvium), as indicated on the
attached Plate No's Two through Four, should be undercut or removed to firm native ground and
recompacted in accordance with the attached Appendix V entitled "Recommended Grading
Specifications ". Firm native ground may be determined as undisturbed soil having an insitu
density of greater than ninety percent (90 %) of maximum dry density. We should be contacted to
document firm native ground is exposed and properly prepared prior to filling.
Prior to constructing fill slopes, shear keys should be excavated a minimum of 2 feet into firm
1 native ground, inclined back into slope, and have a minimum width of 15 feet. We should be
contacted to document keyways were properly constructed prior to placing fill.
Natural terrain steeper than an inclination of 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), should be benched
ll ' (stair- stepped) to provide a stable bedding for subsequent fill. Sizing of benches should be
J
determined by the Soils Engineer or his representative during grading.
1
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
Project No. CE -6170
i,
Page 4
l
f .
All fill soils generated from earthwork construction should be placed in conformance with the
] attached Appendix `B' entitled, "Recommended Grading Specifications ".
Soils to be imported should be non - expansive (less than 2% swell) and granular by nature,
having strength parameters equal to or greater than the prevailing on -site soils. We should be
contacted to inspect an/or test imported soils prior to hauling then on -site to assure they will be
i suitable for the proposed construction.
Particles of rock, asphalt, concrete debris, having a diameter of greater than 12 inches, will not
be suitable fill material and should be separated from fines during grading and hauled off -site.
If encountered, leach lines and/or pipes should be removed. Concrete pipes may be crushed in
place. Trench lines should be recompacted in accordance with Appendix W.
In the event it is decided to construct a non - expansive bearing cap, the contact between the cap
and the native clay soils should be graded to drain a minimum of two percent (2 %) fall to
daylight. In our opinion, this will reduce the probability of water build up and/or becoming
trapped between permeable sandy material and an impermeable clayey material. In the event two
percent (2 %) fall cannot be achieved, subdrains may be required to provide a well drained cap.
We should be contacted to inspect drainage and/or drains prior to placing and compacting cap
materials.
J In the event a non - expansive bearing cap is not constructed, it is highly probable the proposed
structure will be traversed by a transition from cut to fill. Therefore, to reduce structural damage
occurring from foundations bearing on two different soil types, the following measure should be
l employed.
It is recommended the cut side of the transitional areas be removed to a depth of 1 foot below
the bottom of the deepest proposed footing and brought back to grade with properly compacted
fill. This will allow the proposed structure to bear entirely on a compacted fill mat, thus reducing
J the probability of differential settlement. The removal area should extend under and a minimum
of 5 feet beyond the proposed dwelling.
6B. Foundations
General
In the event that selective grading is employed to insure that on -site clayey soils are capped with
a minimum of 48 inches of approved non - expansive imported soils, conventional foundations
may be utilized, provided the aforementioned Grading Recommendations are adhered to.
l
NORTH COUNTY
'COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
l Project No. CE -6170
Page 5
l For One -Story Construction:
Continuous footing having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum depth of 12
inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds
per square foot.
For Two-Story Construction:
Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 15 inches and be founded a minimum
depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade.
Isolated square footings having a diameter of 18 inches and founded a minimum depth of 18
inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds
per square foot.
All continuous footings are to be reinforced with one #4 bar top and bottom. Steel should be
positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing.
Interior slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch
centers, both ways at mid -point of slab thickness.
Slab underlayment should consist of 4 inches of washed concrete sand with a visqueen moisture
J barrier installed at mid -point of sand (2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should be
tested in accordance with ASTM D -2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30.
Foundation set -backs from top of slopes should be a minimum of 8 feet. If this cannot be
achieved, footings near or on adjacent slopes should be founded at a depth such that the
horizontal distance from the bottom outside edge of footing to the face of the slope is a
minimum of 8 feet.
6B2. Foundation
General
In the event the building pad is not capped with non - expansive imported soils and on -site clay -
soils exist within 48 inches of finish grade, the following special foundation recommendations
1 will be required to reduce structural damage from excessive subgrade and foundation movement.
1
1
l .
NORTH COUNTY
.� COMPACTION-
;ENGINEERING'' INC.
4 3', Project No. CF
Page 6
Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum of 24 inches
below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1200 pounds per
square foot.
All continuous footings are to be founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade
and reinforced with two #5 bars, top and bottom (total of 4 bars). Steel should be positioned 3
inches above bottom of footing, and 3 inches below top of footing.
Interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches thick and reinforced with #4 bars on 18 inch
centers, both ways. Steel should be positioned at mid - height of slab thickness.
Slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed within a 4 inch sand barrier (2 inches
sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to
insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30.
1 All foundation concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi. Sulfate soil
testing should be performed upon completion of grading to determine the type of concrete to be
utilized.
Foundation set -backs from top of slopes should be a minimum of 8 feet. If this cannot be
achieved, footings near or on adjacent slopes should be founded at a depth such that the
horizontal distance from the bottom outside edge of footing to the face of the slope is a
minimum of 8 feet.
1 Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to placing concrete. They should be watered to
insure they are kept in a very moist condition or at a moisture content exceeding optimum
moisture content by a minimum of five percent (5 %).
The tennis court contractor should be contacted to provide recommendations for slab design
with regard to highly expansive soils. In our opinion, post tension slabs perform well with
regard to the characteristics of highly expansive soils.
Prior to pouring of concrete, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. should be
contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for compliance to those set forth.
During placement of concrete North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. and/or a
1 qualified concrete inspector should be present to document construction of foundations.
rt a NORTH COUNTY
r ;° � COMPACTION
"l e ,
r E-I GINEERING, INC.
Xl 5 N
4 P Project No. C&6170 "
l > �
r M
Page 7
l 6B3. Foundations ( Second Alternative)
l
An alternative construction method to the above expansive soils recommendations would be to
have the slab designed as a post- tension concrete system. The design should be performed by a
licensed engineer engaged in this type of design and who has a minimum of 5 years experience.
A post- tension design may prove to be cost - effective. In the event it is decided to utilize a post-
tension system, additional laboratory testing will be required to provide the proper design
criteria. This will incur an additional cost of $300.00 for providing this service.
6C. Slopes
Cut and compacted fill slopes constructed to maximum heights of 15 feet with maximum slope
ratios of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical units) will be stable with relation to deep seated failure,
provided they are properly maintained. During grading, positive drainage away from top of
slopes should be provided. Subsequent to completion of grading, slopes should be planted as
soon as possible with light groundcover indigenous to the area.
1-
6D. Retaining Walls
On -site clay soils should not be utilized for backfill of retaining walls. Therefore, the following
retaining wall criteria is based on the assumption that compacted imported, non - expansive sands
utilized for backfill will have a minimum angle of internal friction of 30 degrees and a cohesion
intercept of 100 pounds per square foot. Retaining walls should maintain at least a 1:1
1 (horizontal to vertical) wedge of imported backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to
- the ground surface. All retaining walls should be provided with drains behind and at the base of -
the wall to assure a well drained condition. Miradrain 6000 and/or its equivalent is
recommended. Drains should be constructed in accordance with the manufactures
specifications. Prior to hauling retaining wall backfill soils on site, we should be contacted to
inspect and/or test them to assure they meet the above specifications. All retaining wall backfill
should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90 %) of maximum dry density.
I ` For static conditions, an allowable equivalent passive fluid pressure of 350 psf, increasing 350
1 psf per foot in depth may be assumed.
Allowable active pressures may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing
J 39 pcf for unrestrained walls. These values assume a vertical, smooth wall, and a level, drained
backfill. Should these conditions not be met, we should be contacted for new values.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.t
A
R Project Na CE -6170 ' ,
- 2 k
♦ 1 Y
" page g
Allowable active pressures for restrained walls may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure
of a fluid weighing 39 pcf, plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H. H= height of
retained soils above top of wall footing in vertical feet.
Allowable active pressures for retaining walls with 2:1 inclinations of sloping surcharge may be
assumed to be equivalent to a pressure of fluid weighing 56 pcf.
l The coefficient of friction of concrete to soil may be assumed to be .14 for resistance to
horizontal movement. (Based on footing founded in native caly- soils.)
6E. Estimated Paving Section
Structural section for asphaltic paving for the proposed driveways and parking area are based on
an estimated R -Value of 10. The following section is provided for bid purposes only. Actual
sections should be determined subsequent to completion of grading operations.
Assumed Traffic Index = 4.5
(Light Vehicular Traffic)
3 inches of asphaltic paving on
8 inches of select base coarse on
6 inches of recompacted native subgrade.
All materials and construction for asphaltic paving and base should conform to the Standard
Specifications of the State of California Business and Transportation Agency, Department of
Transportation, Sections 39 and 26, respectively. Class II base material should have a minimum
J R -Value of 78 and a sand equivalent of 30. All materials should be compacted to a minimum of
ninety -five percent (95 %).
] Rigid Concrete Paving:
6 inches of concrete reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch center, both ways, on
6 inches of Class II base material on
6 inches of recompacted native subgrade soil
NOTE: All concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3250 psi. All subgrade and
base materials should be compacted to a minimum of ninety -five percent (95 %).
1
g
NORTH_ COUNTY
COMPACTION
0 ^` ' `` ENGINEERING < " INC
» 1Y f ."
Project No CE-6170
1
J
Page 9
l
0. Seismic Design Considerations (Soil Parameters)
1
A.) Soil Profile = SD (Table 16 -J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code)
B.) Type `B' Fault (Rose Canyon)
C.) Distance =12 km (California Department of Conservation, Division
of Mines and Geology [maps], in conjunction with Tables 16-S
and 16 -T of the 1997 Uniform Building Code)
6G., Review of Grading Plan
Approved site and grading plans were not available at the time of our investigation. Therefore,
upon their completion, we should review them to assure compliance with the recommendations
presented in this report.
Preliminary Plans used during our investigation were prepared by K & S Engineering of San
l Diego, California.
1
7. UNCERTAINTY AND LIIV RATIONS
1 .
Surface and subsurface soils are assumed to be uniform. Therefore, should soils encountered
during construction differ from those presented in this report, we should be contacted to provide
their engineering properties.
] It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to carry out recommendations set forth in this
report.
During our investigation of the subject site, evidence of faulting was not encountered
Subsequent to review of available geologic literature, we feel any faulting in the vicinity of the
" site may be classified as inactive. However, it should be noted that San Diego County is located
t
in a high seismic area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake proof projects are economically
unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable and we assume no liability.
j We assume the on -site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel
J other than our own. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction
operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by
J CAL -OSHA and/or local agencies.
NORTH COUNTY
-
`
. `, Pro'ect No -6 ,;
z V Page 10
r
Should . you have an questions, lease do not hesitate to contact us. This, opportunity to be of
Y Y q , P PPo ty ,
service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
North County pFESS/ QP oNq
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Qu o P �� R RFG� �F
° c
E2 No. 71
3 m
d rn Exp. 9/301 J
G� G Q
r EC Ha oQ�'�
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli F OF CA��
President Registered Civil 19393
Geotechnical Engineer 000713
RKA:paj
cc: (3) submitted
1
NORTH COUNTY { r ..COMPACTION - .
ENGINEERING,' INC�
•� f
hk; F, °, EXPLORATION LEGEND d
E
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART:
y SOIL DESCRIPTION > GROUP SYMBOL ' TYPICAL N MF4 1
I. COARSE GRAINED: More than
jialf ofmaterial is lwt than
1 No. 200 sieve size.
GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel -sand
1 More than half of coarse fraction mixtures, little or no fines.
J is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but
smaller than 3 ". GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand
mixtures, little or no fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-
(Appreciable amount of fines) sand -silt mixtures.
GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded
gravel -sand, clay mixtures.
MS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravely sands,
More than half of coarse fraction little or no fines.
is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SP Poorly graded sands, gravely sands,
little or no fines.
SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and
(appreciable amount of fines) silt mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand
II IN
. FINE GRAINED: More than half and clay mixtures.
of material is small than No.200
sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands,
j rock flow, sandy silt or clayey-
silt -sand mixtures with slight
plasticity.
Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to medium
1 less than 50 plasticity, gravely clays, lean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays
of low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or
diatomaceous find sandy or silty
soils, elastic silts.
Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity,
greater than 50 fat clays.
{ OH Organic clays of medium to high
' plasticity:
1
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils.
r -
1 ,' US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample
CK - Undisturbed chunk sample
BG - Bulk sample
I ` , V - Water level at time of excavation or as indicated
J APPENDIX 'A'
l NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESTI G E INSPECTION SERVICES
8I r4F
l p' 4
PITT LOCATION PLANS rR,. ; :
R
, 4$i•' B
.' - � + • A �k F• l i�.'.ek�t
PROPOSBDEHBN`RSIDENCB }
DOUBLE LL'RANCH,ROAD. {'
OLIVENHAIN; CALIFORNIA
7
APPROX. SCALE .
/�.
i
PRQPOSD
• /� / TENNI OIIRT
MAP NO:
i
TEST
PfT
TP
Y
1 1 (! %
ARE. - LL _' R0
.
1 ;
PROJECT NO. CE -6170 PLATE NO. ONE
1
N `
W ORTH Counr�r
COMPACTION { y
}.. ENGINEERING.' Il`I r. %
,�p
}} p, + •may} S
,� EXPLORATION LOG R
.. 'PROJECT NAME: EISCHEN RESIDENCE DATE LOGGED: 08%16/00
ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. ONE',",
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
(Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classi-
(pcf) ( Sieve scation
CH RID BROWN, MOIST, SOFT,
SILTY -CLAY
1-
(OLD FILL)
2- (REMOVE AND RECOMPACT)
(HIGHLY EXPANSIVE)
3- BG 79.9 3'
4-
5-
1
CH RED BROWN, WET, SOFT, SILTY -CLA
1 7- (LOOSE ALLUVIUM)
j - -� -- (REMOVE AND RECOMPACT) -
J 8-
CH GREY - TAN -RED, WET, STIFF,
t M - -- -� -- SII,TY -CLAY VIRM NATIVE)
J 9-
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
PROJECT NO. CE -6170 PLATE NO. TWO
l
noRTi -i COUNTY u 't
COMPACTiOi`i
ORATION LOG
A
S�
k NAME } ` DATE LOGGED: 08/16/00
1 PROJECT EISC Nt' RF4iDENCF
p� - -
h ,
Yt
ELEVATION: EXI"AAA, 1 G r E TEST PIT NO. TWO
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
(Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classi-
(pcf) ( %) Sieve fication
CH BROWN, DRY, SOFT, SILTY -CLAY
1 (OLD FILL)
(REMOVE AND RECOMPACT
2 _ (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE)
' CH RED BROWN, MOIST, STIFF, SILTY -
3- CLAY
(FIRM NATIVE)
4-
(MGHLY EXPANSIVE)
1 f
5-
CH GREY- TAN -RED, WET, STIFF
SILTY -CLAY
l 7- CK 111.4 16.7 65.6 T
8- - --- - -- - - -- - - - - - -- - --- - _- - - -- - ------ »__ -_____
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
1 NOTE: 3/4 INCH SURFACE
SHRUWAGE CRACKS
1
J
J
PROJECT NO. CE -6170 PLATE NO. THREE
J�
' 1`{OR'T1 (INTY
x ¢ '
P
,> COM' A CTION
ENU1 EERING
.� INC., INC.
f ^elt&y y .` .�„s`� yt! ro ,; -� .. ..w • � S . [ :`s� � ':�, r w u
�a � EXPLORATION LOG
'
Yh EISCHEN RFSID CE DATE LOGGED: 08/16/00
PROJECT NA
_
ELEVATION: E S G GRADE TEST PIT NO. Tf -TRF.F
Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description & Remarks
l (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classi-
J (pcf) ( %) Sieve fication
CH BROWN, DRY, SOFT, SILTY- SANDY-
CLAY (OLD FILL)
(REMOVE AND RECOMPACT)
CH GREY - RED -TAN, MOIST STIFF
SILTY -CLAY
2- (FIRM NATIVE)
(HIGHLY EXPANSIVE)
3 -. CK 111.7 17.0 82.5 3'
BG
4-
-
6-
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT
C
PROJECT NO. CE -6170 PLATE NO. FOUR
Ne }
` NORTH COUNTY:
COMPACTIOI`� t
I`�GII`IEERII`IG I1IC ' 4 v
w #
OF TEST RESULTS
TU 4.Y . _ _
SOH DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE
(I.3 CU. M (% DRY wT)
Red Brown Silty-Sandy- 14.2
Clay P1 @3' 119.8
j Casey- Red --Tan Silty- 14.1
Sandy -Clay P3 @ 3' 121.8
EXPANSION POTENTIAL
SAWLE No PI Q 3' P3
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90%
INITIAL MOISTURE ( %) 14.1 14.4
AIR DRY MOISTURE ( %) 8.6 7.2
FINAL MOISTURE ( %) 25.8 23.2
DRY DENSITY (PCF) 107.8 109.6
LOAD (PSF) 150 150
l SWELL ( %) 9.5 7.7
EXPANSION INDEX 95 77
1 :
DIRECT SHEAR
1 .
annrLE No PI (2a 3' P3 0 3'
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90%
GLE INTERNAL FRICTION 12 9
COHESION INTERCEPT (PCF) 380 390
J l
PROJECT NO. CE -6170
PLATE NO. FIVE
J
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
l > EINGINEERING, INC.
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
1 z
t
' (General Provisions)
v
1 1. INTENT
The intent of these specifications is to provide procedures in accordance with current standard
practices regarding clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to receive fill, and
placing and compacting of fill soil to the lines, grades, and slopes delineated on the project
plans. Recommendations set forth in the attached "Preliminary Soils Investigation" report or
special provisions are a part of the "Recommended Grading Specifications" and shall supersede
the provisions contained hereinafter in case of conflict.
2. INSPECTION & TESTING
A qualified Soils Engineer shall be employed to inspect and test the earthwork in accordance
with these specification and the accepted plans. It will be necessary that the Soils Engineer or his
representative be allowed to provide adequate inspection so that he may certify that the work
was or was not accomplished as specified or indicated It shall be the responsibility of the
contractor to assist the Soils Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes,
l new information and dates, and new unforeseen soils conditions so that he may make these
certifications.
If substandard conditions (questionable soils, adverse weather, poor moisture control, inadequate_
compaction, etc.) Are encountered, the Soils Engineer will be empowered to either stop
l construction until conditions are remedied or recommend rejection of the work.
J
Soil tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the
following American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods:
*Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM D- 1557 -78)
* Density of Soil In -Place (ASTM D -1556 or ASTM D -2922 & 3017)
l
3. MATERIALS
Those soils used as fill will have a minimum of forty percent (40 %) passing a #4 sieve. They
J will be free of vegetable matter or other deleterious substances and contain no rock over 12
inches in size. Should unsuitable material be encountered, the Soils Engineer will be contacted
to provide recommendations.
APPENDIX 'B'
NORTH COUNTY a
� A �;COMPACTIOt`I
. ENGINEERING, INC. <
q '1f 1
PLACING AND SPREADING OF FILL
} E R ,. .
r The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which when compacted will not exceed 6
inches. n thickness.
Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to
'insure uniformity of material in each layer.
When moisture content of the fill material is below that recommended by the Soils Engineer,
water shall then be added until the moisture content is as specified to assure thorough bonding
during the compacting process.
When the moisture content of the fill materials is above that recommended by the Soils
Engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the
moisture content is as specified.
5. COMPACTION
After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to
not less than ninety percent (90 %) relative compaction. Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot
l rollers multiple -wheel pneumatic tired rollers or other types of rollers.
1
Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling
I each layer shall be continuous over it's entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to
1 ' insure that the desired density has been obtained.
I The fill operation shall be continued in 6 inch compacted layers, or as specified above, until the
1 fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades shown on the project plans.
6. WALL BACKFILL
"
Back ill soils should consist of non - expansive sand, Compaction should be achieved with light
hand -held pneumatic tampers to avoid over compaction and hence cause structural damage.
1 a minimum of Wall backfill should be compacted to ninety Pe rcent (90 %) of maximum density.
7. TRENCH BACKFILL
All trench backfill located within structural areas should be compacted to a minimum of ninety
percent (90 %) of maximum density.
APPENDIX `B'
J
K &S ENGINEERING
Planning Engineering Surveying
i
E- G!NcFRIiUG SERI /IGFS
i,___,_CIT`I OF ENC __�
HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS
FOR
LOT 3 OF MAP NO 13791
IN
CITY OF ENCINITAS
F Z
JN 00 -050 r F
November 28, 2000
S IS R.C.E. 48592 DATE
7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 100 San Diego, California 92108 (619) 296 -5565 Fax (619) 296 -5564
F
R TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS
2.HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS .......................... APPENDIX A
3.TABLES AND CHARTS . ............................... APPENDIX B
4.HYDROLOGY MAPS .... ............................... APPENDIX C
M
L
1. HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS
A. DESIGN METHODS
THE RATIONAL METHOD IS USED IN THIS HYDROLOGY STUDY; THE RATIONAL
FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS:
Q = CIA, WHERE : Q= PEAK DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET /SECOND
C = RUNOFF COEFFICIENT (DIMENSIONLESS)
I = RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES /HOUR
A = TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREA IN ACRES
*1 ACRE INCHES /HOUR = 1.008 CUBIC FEET /SEC
THE OVERLAND FLOW FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS:
Tc=1.8 (1.1 —C) * (L) .5/ (S *100) .333
L = OVERLAND TRAVEL DISTANCE IN FEET
S = SLOPE IN FT /FT
Tc= TIME OF CONCENTRATION IN MINUTES
B. DESIGN CRITERIA
— FREQUENCY, 100 YEAR STORM.
— LAND USE PER SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAP.
— RAIN FALL INTENSITY PER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1993 HYDROLOGY
DESIGN MANUAL.
C. REFERENCES
— COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1993, HYDROLOGY MANUAL.
— COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1992 REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING.
— HAND BOOK OF HYDRAULICS BY BRATER & KING, SIXTH EDITION.
APPENDIX A
(2. HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS)
PROPOSED HYDROLOGY
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
RATIONAL - HYDROLOGY
PROGRAM PACKAGE
Rational Hydrology Study Date: I1 -30 -2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY INFORMATION*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rational method hydrology program based on
San Diego County Flood Control Division
1985 Hydrology Manual
Storm Event(Year) = 100.00
Map data precipitation entered:
6 HOUR, Precipitation(Inches) = 3.000
24 Hour Precipitation(Inches) = 5.000
Adjusted 6 Hour Precipitation (Inches) = 3.000
P6/P24 = 60.0 %
San Diego Hydrology Manual "C" Values Used
Runoff Coefficients by RATIONAL METHOD
a ! 1 1 ! ++++-++ +++++++++++- ++
Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 2.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * **
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 600.00
Highest Elevation = 287.50
Lowest Elevation= 210.00
Elevation Difference = 77.50
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 12.215 Min.
TC = [l.8 *(1.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^ .5 )/(% SLOPE ^(1 /3)]
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 600.00 ^.5) /( 12.92 ^(1 /3)])= 12.215
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.443
Subarea(Acres) = 1.50 Subarea Runoff(CFS) = 3.00
Total Area(Acres) = 1.50 Total Runoff(CFS) = 3.00
TC(MIN) = 12.21
.........
+T + +++
Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station 3.000
* ** TRAPEZOIDAL /RECT. CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME • **
Upstream point elevation= 210.00
Downstream point elevation= 204.10
Channel length thru subarea(Feet) = 250.00
Channel base(Feet) = .00
Slope or "Z" of left channel bank = 15.000
Slope or "Z" of right channel bank = 5.000
Mannings "N" = .023 Maximum depth of channel (Ft.) = 1.00
Flow(Q) thru subarea(CFS) = 3.00
Upstream point elevation= 210.00
Downstream point elevation= 204.10
Flow length(Ft.) = 250.00
Travel time (Min.) = 1.43 TC(min.) = 13.64
Depth of flow = .32 (Ft.)
Average Velocity = 2.92 (Ft. /Sec.)
Channel flow top width = 6.41 (Ft.)
+ +++ + +++ +++++++++ + + +++ T' . . . r.
Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station 3.000 * **
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.137
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: 1 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 13.64
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.14
Total flow area (Acres) = 1.50
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 3.00
Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 4.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * *'
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 460.00
Highest Elevation = 287.50
Lowest Elevation = 215.00
Elevation Difference = 72.50
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X-C) = 10.009 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(l.l -C) *DISTANCE ^.5) /(% SLOPE ^(1 /3)]
TC = [1.8 *(l.l- .4500) *( 460.00 ^.5 )/( 15.76 ^(1 /3)])= 10.009
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 5.052
Subarea(Acres) _ .90 Subarea Runoff(CFS) = 2.05
Total Area(Acres) _ .90 Total Runoff(CFS) = 2.05
TC(MIN) = 10.01
Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 3.000 * **
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE)
Upstream point elevation = 215.00
Downstream point elevation= 204.10
Flow length(Ft.) = 165.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 2.05
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe now (CFS) = 2.05
Normal flow depth in pipe = 3.30 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.53 (In.)
Velocity = 7.854 (Ft/S)
Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 3.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * *'
* ** Compute Various Confluenced Flow Values " **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.941
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: 2 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 10.36
Rainfall intensity (in./hrn = 4.94
• Total flow area (Acres) _ .90
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 2.05
Confluence information:
Stream runoff Time Intensity
Number (CFS) (min.) (inch/hour)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 3.00 13.64 4.137
2 2.05 10.36 4.941
QSMX(1) _
+1.000* 1.000* 3.0)
+ .837* 1.000* 2.0)
= 4.712
QSMX(2) _
+1.000* .759* 3.0)
+1.000 *1.000* 2.0)
= 4.323
Rainfall intensity and time of concentration
used for 2 streams.
Individual stream flow values are:
3.00 2.05
Possible confluenced flow values are:
4.71 4.32
Individual Stream Area values are:
1.50 .90
Computed confluence estimates are:
Runoff(CFS) = 4.71 Time(min.) = 13.642
Total main stream study area (Acres) = 2.40
Process from Point/Station 3.000 to Point/Station 5.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation= 204.10
Downstream point elevation = 202.00
Flow length(Ft.) = 170.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 4.71
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 4.71
Normal flow depth in pipe = 7.58 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 22.31 (In.)
Velocity = 5.537 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .51 TC(min.) = 14.15
Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 25.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.00
Downstream point elevation = 198.60
Flow length(Ft.) = 20.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = I Required pipe flow (CFS) = 4.71
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 4.71
Normal flow depth in pipe = 3.93 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 17.77 (In.)
Velocity = 14.035 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .02 TC(min.) = 14.18
++ +++++ + + +++++++ + + + ++ i-#-+++++++++++++++++ rr- r ++ + TTT ++++ +Tr + +++ + ++
Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 25.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * **
r
--------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------------- ---
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.036
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: 1 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 14.18
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.04
Total flow area (Acres) = 2.40
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 4.71
+++++++++ ++++ ++ 1 1 1 1 1 T44- T ... +'
Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 24.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * **
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient =.4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 168.50
Highest Elevation = 206.00
Lowest Elevation = 203.70
Elevation Difference = 2.30
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X-C) = 13.691 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(1.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^ .5y(% SLOPE
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 168.50 ^.5) /( 1.36 ^(1/3)]) 13.691
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 4.128
Subarea(Acres) _ .28 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .52
Total Area(Acres) _ .28 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .52
TC(MIN) = 13.69
iHitHiii + + + ++ + + ++++
Process from Point/Station 24.000 to Point/Station 25.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.20
Downstream point elevation = 198.60
Flow length(Ft.) = 18.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .52
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .52
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.85 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.54 (In.)
Velocity = 10.078 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .03 TC(min.) = 13.72
+ + + + +++++ + + + + +++ + + ++ + + ++++++ ++++ ++rTTT
Process from Point/Station 24.000 to Point/Station 25.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * **
* ** Compute Various Confluenced Flow Values * **
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 4.122
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: 2 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 13.72
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.12
Total flow area (Acres) _ 628
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = .52
Confluence information:
Stream runoff Time Intensity
Number (CFS) (min.) (inch/hour)
--------------------------------------------- -------- --- ----- ---- ----- - - -- --
1 4.71 14.18 4.036
2 .52 13.72 4.122
QSMX(l) _
+l .000* 1.000• 4.7)
+.979 *1.000* .5)
= 5.221
QSMX(2) _
+1.000* .968* 4.7)
+1.000 *1.000* .5)
= 5.080
Rainfall intensity and time of concentration
used for 2 streams.
Individual stream flow values are:
4.71 .52
Possible confluenced flow values are:
5.22 5.08
Individual Stream Area values are:
2.40 .28
Computed confluence estimates are:
Runoff(CFS) = 5.22 Time(min.) = 14.178
Total main stream study area (Acres) = 2.68
Process from Point/Station 25.000 to Point/Station 6.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) •••
Upstream point elevation = 198.60
Downstream point elevation = 196.00
Flow length(Ft.) = 45.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 5.22
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 5.22
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.40 (In.)
_ Flow top width inside pipe = 20.04 (In.)
Velocity = 9.886 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .08 TC(min.) = 14.25
T + ++++T,- +4-+ 4- + +; ++
Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 7.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) • *•
Upstream point elevation = 196.00
Downstream point elevation = 195.70
Flow length(Ft.) = 25.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 5.22
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 5.22
Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.06 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 22.67 (In.)
Velocity = 5.640 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .07 TC(min.) = 14.33
++++++++++ TT, rTTTTT:+++ T T T11111 +- i++++ ++++++ + + + +++++++++++++++.++++
Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 7.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS •••
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING DATA INSIDE MAIN STREAM ARE CALCULATED
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 4.008
The flow values used for the stream: 1 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 14.33
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.01
Total flow area (Acres) = 2.68
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 5.22
Program is now starting with MAIN STREAM NO. 2
Process from Point/Station 28.000 to Point/Station 29.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * **
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 30.00
Highest Elevation = 206400
Lowest Elevation = 205.48
Elevation Difference = .52
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 5.33 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(1.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^ .5y(% SLOPE ^(1 /3))
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 30.00 ^.5N( 1.73 ^(1 /3)])= 5.33 USE TC= 10.0
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 5.045
Subarea(Acres) _ .02 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .05
Total Area(Acres) _ .02 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .05
TC(MIN) = 10.0
Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 30.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.46
Downstream point elevation = 202.29
Flow length(Ft.) = 17.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .05
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .05
Normal flow depth in pipe= 1.15 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 4.73 (In.)
Velocity = 1.718 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .16 TC(min.) = 10.20
Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 30.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.992
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .01 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .02
Total Area(Acres) _ .03 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .07
TC(MIN) = 10.20
Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 31.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.29
Downstream point elevation = 202.12
Flow length(Ft.) = 17.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .07
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .07
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.41 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.09 (In.)
Velocity = 1.932 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .15 TC(min.) = 10.34
+++++++++++ +++ + + ++++ + + ++++ ++++++++++++++ + ..........
Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 31.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.946
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .01 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .02
Total Area(Acres) _ .04 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .09
TC(MIN) = 10.34
Process from Point/Station 31.000 to Point/Station 32.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.12
Downstream point elevation = 201.95
Flow length(Ft.) = 17.00 . Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .09
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .09
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.63 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.33 (In.)
Velocity = 2.096 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .14 TC(min.) = 10.48
Process from Point/Station 31.000 to Point/Station 32.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.905
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .01 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .02
Total Area(Acres) _ .05 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .11
TC(MIN) = 10.48
+ ++ +++++++++++++ +++++++++ + + +++ + + +++llil +:- +++++
Process from Point/Station 32.000 to Point/Station 9.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 201.95
Downstream point elevation = 201.50
Flow length(Ft.) = 45.50 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = I Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .11
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .11
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.82 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.52 (In.)
Velocity = 2.222 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .34 TC(min.) = 10.82
Process from Point/Station 32.000 to Point/Station 9.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
` 100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.804
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .16 Subarea Runoff(CFS)_ .35
Total Area(Acres) _ .21 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .46
TC(MIN) = 10.82
+ + + + + +++ + +++.. H m i r�T ++++++ ....T + +++++++ +.+++ +++ T ,- r...
Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 201.50
Downstream point elevation = 201.18
Flow length(Ft.) = 31.90 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = l Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .46
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .46
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.11 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.57 (In.)
Velocity = 3.190 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .17 TC(min.) = 10.99
++ + + ++ +++ + ++I ++ +++++++++ ++++++ ++.+++++ + ++++....++++++..
Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 4.757
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .04 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .09
Total Area(Acres) _ .25 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .54
TC(MIN) = 10.99
+++ ++++++ +++i rTTT r ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++ + ++++++++++ + T.-.... ++r
Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 201.18
Downstream point elevation = 200.56
Flow length(Ft.) = 61.50 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .54
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .54
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.74 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 4.89 (In.)
Velocity = 3.268 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .31 TC(min.) = 11.30
+++ ill +++ + + + + + ....T + + + T ++++++++ +++ + ++ + + + + + + + +++++++ + + + + + ++
Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.672
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
R RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .07 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .15
Total Area(Acres) _ .32 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .69
TC(MIN) = 11.30
Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 12.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) *•'
Upstream point elevation = 200.56
Downstream point elevation = 200.06
Flow length(Ft.) = 49.70 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = I Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .69
Given pipe size (In.) = 8.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .69
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.33 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 7.97 (In.)
Velocity = 3.586 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .23 TC(min.) = 11.53
+++ + +TTTTT
Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Poirit/Station 12.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * *'
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.611
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .14 Subarea Runoff(CFS)_ .29
Total Area(Acres) _ .46 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .98
TC(MIN) = 11.53
++++++ +TTTT,,iiifiiiiiiii; ++ i +++ + + +++ + ;...
Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 12.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 4.611
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 2
The flow values used for the stream: 1 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 11.53
Rainfall intensity (in./hrn = 4.61
Total flow area (Acres) _ .46
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = .98
++ � rTT+++++ T,, rTT ++++++ Hr+ T+ + + +++++++ ++++ TTTTTT+:- TTTTTT,,r TT TTTT, r+ r,
Process from Point/Station 33.000 to Point/Station 34.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * **
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 25.00
Highest Elevation = 204.75
Lowest Elevation = 204.43
Elevation Difference = .32
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 5.39 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(1.1 - C) *DISTANCE ^.5 )/(% SLOPE ^(1 /3)]
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 25.00^.5 )/( 1.28 ^(1 /3)])= 5.39 USE TC= 10.0
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 5.030
Subarea(Acres) _ .01 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .02
Total Area(Acres) _ .01 Total Runoff(CFS)_ .02
TC(MIN) = 10.0
+++ + + ..TTT + 4-+ +1111++ + +++ +r + +++.+ +++++++ ++++++++H
Process from Point/Station 34.000 to Point/Station 35.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) ' **
Upstream point elevation = 202.85
Downstream point elevation = 202.55
Flow length(Ft.) = 29.70 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .02
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .02
Normal flow depth in pipe = .82 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 4.12 (In.)
Velocity = 1.402 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .35 TC(min.) = 10.43
+ + + +++T. +T + ++++++++++ +���
Process from Point/Station 34.000 to Point/Station 35.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.919
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient =.4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .02 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .04
Total Area(Acres) _ .03 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .07
TC(MIN) = 10.43
Process from Point/Station 35.000 to Point/Station 36.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 202.55
Downstream point elevation = 202.37
Flow length(Ft.) = 18.50 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .07
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .07
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.41 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.09 (In.)
Velocity = 1.904 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .16 TC(min.) = 10.59
+++++++++++ + + +++++++++ + + ++H H + .
Process from Point/Station 35.000 to Point/Station 36.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.870
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .03 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .07
Total Area(Acres) _ .06 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .13
TC(MIN) = 10.59
+++++++ + +T.- + + + + + + +++ + +++ + + +++ ++++++ 1111 +++ + + ++++++ + + + ++++++++ + + +++ + 1114- ++
Process from Point/Station 36.000 to Point/Station 37.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) ' **
D
Upstream point elevation = 202.37
Downstream point elevation = 202.07
Flow length(Ft.) = 28.90 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS)_ .13
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .13
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.97 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.63 (In.)
Velocity = 2.370 (FdS)
Travel time (Min.) _ .20 TC(min.) = 10.80
++ TTT.... +++
Process from Point/Station 36.000 to Point/Station 37.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.811
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient =.4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .03 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .06
Total Area(Acres) _ .09 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .20
TC(MIN) = 10.80
Process from Point/Station 37.000 to Point/Station 12.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) "*
Upstream point elevation = 202.07
Downstream point elevation = 200.06
Flow length(Ft.) = 47.90 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS)_ .20
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .20
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.68 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.39 (In.)
Velocity = 4.378 (FdS)
Travel time (Min.)_ .18 TC(min.) = 10.98
+ ++ + 1711 ++++++++ + + ++++ ++++ ++ +++++++++ + +++ +++ .......T+
Process from Point/Station 37.000 to Point/Station 12.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * **
* ** Compute Various Confluenced Flow Values "*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.759
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 2
The flow values used for the stream: 2 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 10.98
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.76
Total flow area (Acres) _ .09
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = .20
Confluence information:
Stream runoff Time Intensity
Number (CFS) (min.) (inch/hour)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 .98 11.53 4.611
2 .20 10.98 4.759
QSM X(1) _
+1.000 *1.000* 1.0)
+.969 *1.000* .2)
= 1.173
QSMX(2) _
+1.000* .952* 1.0)
+1.000* 1.000* .2)
= 1.132
Rainfall intensity and time of concentration
used for 2 streams.
Individual stream flow values are:
.98 .20
Possible confluenced flow values are:
1.17 1.13
Individual Stream Area values are:
.46 .09
Computed confluence estimates are:
Runoff(CFS) = 1.17 Time(min.) = 11.530
Total main stream study area (Acres) _ .55
r. . . ..... t
Process from Point/Station 12.000 to Point/Station 13.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 200.16
Downstream point elevation = 199.55
Flow length(Ft.) = 50.50 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 1.17
Given pipe size (In.) = 8.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 1.17
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.84 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe= 7.10 (In.)
Velocity= 4.295 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .20 TC(min.) = 11.73
-++1 + +++ ++
Process from Point/Station 13.000 to Point/Station 14.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 200.69
Downstream point elevation= 200.38
Flow length(Ft.) = 31.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 1.17
Given pipe size (In.) = 8.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 1.17
Normal flow depth in pipe = 6.36 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 6.46 (In.)
Velocity = 3.945 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .13 TC(min.) = 11.86
++ + + + + +++ + + + +++++++ + + + T - rrrT H H H H ...... H H
Process from Point/Station 13.000 to Point/Station 14.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION ' **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.529
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .03 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .06
Total Area(Acres) _ .58 Total Runoff(CFS) = 1.23
TC(MIN) = 11.86
++++++++++++++++++++++++ T..... .T +++++ ++++++++ ++++
Process from Point/Station 14.000 to Point/Station 17.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) *"
Upstream point elevation = 200.38
Downstream point elevation = 196.00
Flow length(Ft.) = 25.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = I Required pipe flow (CFS) = 1.23
Given pipe size (In.) = 8.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 1.23
Normal flow depth in pipe = 2.69 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 7.56 (In.)
Velocity= 11.963 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .03 TC(min.) = 11.89
++ + +++ +++++ ++ + 4..T + + ++
Process from Point/Station 17.000 to Point/Station 7.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 196.00
Downstream point elevation = 195.70
Flow length(Ft.) = 18.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 1.23
Given pipe size (In.) = 8.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 1.23
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.37 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 7.52 (In.)
Velocity = 4.955 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .06 TC(min.) = 11.95
++++++t rT t + +++ ++++++ +++++ ++++++++ ++++
Process from Point/Station 17.000 to Point/Station 7.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS * **
* ** Compute Various Confluenced Flow Values * **
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING DATA INSIDE MAIN STREAM ARE CALCULATED
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.505
The flow values used for the stream: 2 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 11.95
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 4.51
Total flow area (Acres) _ .58
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 1.23
Confluence information:
Stream runoff Time Intensity
Number (CFS) (min.) (inch/hour)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 5.22 14.33 4.008
2 1.23 11.95 4.505
QSMX(1) _
+1.000 *1.000* 5.2)
+.890 *1.000* 1.2)
= 6.319
QSMX(2) _
+1.000* .834* 5.2)
+1.000 *1.000* 1.2)
= 5.590
Rainfall intensity and time of concentration
used for 2 MAIN streams.
Individual stream flow values are:
5.22 1.23
Possible confluenced flow values are:
6.32 5.59
Individual Stream Area values are:
2.68 .58
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computed confluence estimates are:
Runoff(CFS) = 6.32 Time(min.) = 14.327
Total main stream study area (Acres) = 3.26
+ + + + ++++++ +++++++ ++,r+ + +++ + +++++ +
Process from Point/Station 15.000 to Point/Station 19.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION * **
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 20.00
Highest Elevation = 205.50
Lowest Elevation= 205.10
Elevation Difference = .40
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 4.15 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(1.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^ .5) /(% SLOPE
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 20.00 ^.5) /( 2.0 ^(1 /3)]) 4.15 USE TC= 10.0
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 5.027
Subarea(Acres) _ .04 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .09
Total Area(Acres) _ .04 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .09
TC(MIN) = 10.0
Process from Point/Station 19.000 to Point/Station 16.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 203.65
Downstream point elevation = 203.48
Flow length(Ft.) = 17.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS)_ .09
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .09
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.63 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.34 (In.)
Velocity = 2.098 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .14 TC(min.) = 10.22
+++++ ++++++++ + + ++++++++ H +
Process from Point/Station 16.000 to Point/Station 20.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 203.48
Downstream point elevation = 203.26
Flow length(Ft.) = 23.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .09
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .09
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.65 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.36 (In.)
Velocity = 2.066 (FI/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .19 TC(min.) = 10.41
+++++++++++++++++++ +- '- rT r + + +++++ + +++ + +++Trr . ++ + + + + + ++ + + + + - + + ++++ + +++
Process from Point/Station 16.000 to Point/Station 20.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.927
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient =.4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .02 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .04
Total Area(Acres) _ .06 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .13
TC(MIN) = 10.41
+++++++ + +++ + + +++ + +++++++ ..,-+ +.T + + T . . . TT Fr 1 1 +++++
Process from Point/Station 20.000 to Point/Station 21.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) "*
Upstream point elevation = 203.26
Downstream point elevation = 202.82
Flow length(Ft.) = 45.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .13
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .13
Normal flow depth in pipe = 2.01 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 5.67 (In.)
Velocity = 2.330 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .32 TC(min.) = 10.73
Process from Point/Station 20.000 to Point/Station 21.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION "*
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.831
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .08 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .17
Total Area(Acres) _ .14 Total Runoff(CFS)_ .31
TC(MIN) = 10.73
++++++ HHHHHHi
Process from Point/Station 21.000 to Point/Station 22.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) ' **
Upstream point elevation = 202.82
Downstream point elevation = 202.60
• Flow length(Ft.) = 20.00 Mannings N = .013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) _ .31
Given pipe size (In.) = 6.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) _ .31
Normal flow depth in pipe = 3.09 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 6.00 (In.)
Velocity = 3.034 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .11 TC(min.) = 10.84
Process from Point/Station 21.000 to Point/Station 22.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION "*
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.799
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .28 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .60
Total Area(Acres) _ .42 Total Runoff(CFS) _ .91
TC(MIN) = 10.84
++ + + + + +++++++++ + + + +++ + ++++ + + + + +++ + nom +,- + ++++++ + ++++++++ +++
Process from Point/Station 26.000 to Point/Station 27.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 560.00
Highest Elevation = 306.25
Lowest Elevation= 210.10
Elevation Difference = 96.15
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 10.732 Min.
TC = [1.8 *(1.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^.5Y(% SLOPE ^(1 /3)]
TC = [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 560.00^.5)/( 17.17 ^(1/3)]) 10.732
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.829
Subarea(Acres) = 1.70 Subarea Runoff(CFS) = 3.69
Total Area(Acres) = 1.70 Total Runoff(CFS) = 3.69
TC(MIN) = 10.73
++ + ++++++++++++ + + + + +.+++++ ++ ++ TT = +++
Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 27.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) " **
Upstream point elevation = 215.00
Downstream point elevation = 209.20
Flow length(Ft.) = 230.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 3.69
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 3.69
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.58 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 20.28 (In.)
Velocity = 6.662 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .58 TC(min.) = 11.31
Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 27.000
CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ' **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 4.669
r
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: I are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 11.31
Rainfall intensity (in./hr /) = 4.67
Total flow area (Acres) = 1.70
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 3.69
+ + + + + + + + + ++++ +++ + ++ +++ ++++++++ +++++++++ " +++
Process from Point/Station 43.000 to Point/Station 27.000
* ** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION "*
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Initial Subarea Flow Dist. = 780.00
Highest Elevation = 300.00
Lowest Elevation = 210.10
Elevation Difference = 89.90
Time of concentration calculated by the Urban
Areas overland flow method (APP X -C) = 14.466 Min.
TC = [I.8*(I.1 -C) *DISTANCE ^ .5Y(% SLOPE ^(1 /3)]
TC= [1.8 *(1.1- .4500) *( 780.00 ^.5) /( 11.53 ^(1 /3)])= 14.466
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 3.984
Subarea(Acres) = 3.22 Subarea Runoff(CFS) = 5.77
Total Area(Acres) = 3.22 Total Runoff(CFS) = 5.77
TC(MIN) = 14.47
++++++++++++++++++ + +++++++++ + + + +++ + + +++ +++ TT^T . . . + + +r +r
Process from Point/Station 44.000 to Point/Station 27.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) ' **
Upstream point elevation = 300.00
Downstream point elevation = 207.48
Flow length(Ft.) = 700.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 5.77
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 5.77
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.62 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 18.92 (In.)
Velocity = 13.636 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .86 TC(min.) = 15.32
H1 ++ +++i11L11+ ++++ + + +++ + + ........+T+ ++ITT + +r= ++ + +++
Process from Point/Station 44.000 to Point/Station 27.000
* ** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS * *'
* ** Compute Various Confluenced Flow Values * **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 3.839
ALONG THE MAIN STREAM NUMBER: 1
The flow values used for the stream: 2 are:
Time of concentration(min.) = 15.32
Rainfall intensity (in./hr/) = 3.84
Total flow area (Acres) = 3.22
Total runoff (CFS) at confluence point = 5.77
Confluence information:
Stream runoff Time Intensity
Number (CFS) (min.) (inchihour)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 3.69 11.31 4.669
2 5.77 15.32 3.839
QSMX(1) _
+1.000* 1.000* 3.7)
+1.000* .738* 5.8)
= 7.955
QSMX(2) _
+ .822* 1.000* 3.7)
+1.000 *1.000* 5.8)
= 8.809
Rainfall intensity and time of concentration
used for 2 streams.
Individual stream flow values are:
3.69 5.77
Possible confluenced flow values are:
7.95 8.81
Individual Stream Area values are:
1.70 3.22
Computed confluence estimates are:
Runoff(CFS) = 8.81 Time(min.) = 15.321
Total main stream study area (Acres) = 4.92
+++++++++++ TT�T+ +++++++++ +++ + + + + +++ ++++ +++ + + + + + + + +++++++
Process from Point/Station 27.000 to Point/Station 38.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * *'
Upstream point elevation = 208.54
Downstream point elevation = 206.69
" Flow length(Ft.) = 10.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 8.81
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 8.81
Normal flow depth in pipe = 5.24 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 19.83 (In.)
Velocity = 17.384 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.) _ .01 TC(min.) = 15.33
Process from Point/Station 38.000 to Point/Station 39.000
* ** TRAPEZOIDAURECT. CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME * **
Upstream point elevation = 207.31
Downstream point elevation = 205.74
Channel length thru subarea(Feet) = 16.00
Channel base(Feet) = 2.00
Slope or "Z" of left channel bank = .000
Slope or "Z" of right channel bank = .000
Mannings "N" _ .015 Maximum depth of channel (Ft.) = 1.50
Flow(Q) thru subarea(CFS) = 8.81
Upstream point elevation = 207.31
Downstream point elevation = 205.74
Flow length(Ft.) = 16.00
Travel time (Min.) _ .02 TC(min.) = 15.35
Depth of flow = .35 (Ft.)
Average Velocity = 12.60 (Ft. /Sec.)
Channel flow top width = 2.00 (Ft.)
++ iiii!i T,5Ziiii!i +T
Process from Point/Station 38.000 to Point/Station 39.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In. /Hr.) = 3.834
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
• RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .06 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .10
Total Area(Acres) = 4.98 Total Runoff(CFS) = 8.91
TC(MIN) = 15.35
Process from Point/Station 39.000 to Point/Station 40.000
* ** PIPEFLOW TIME (USER SPECIFIED SIZE) * **
Upstream point elevation = 205.12
Downstream point elevation = 199.88
Flow length(Ft.) = 75.00 Mannings N = .015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow (CFS) = 8.91
Given pipe size (In.) = 24.00
Calculated Individual Pipe flow (CFS) = 8.91
Normal flow depth in pipe = 6.74 (In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 21.57 (In.)
Velocity = 12.342 (Ft/S)
Travel time (Min.)_ .10 TC(min.) = 15.45
++++++++ + + + +++++ ++++ + + +++ ++++ + + + + +++ + ++ HiHHHHHHHHH
Process from Point/Station 39.000 to Point/Station 40.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 3.817
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient = .4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .16 Subarea Runoff(CFS)_ .27
Total Area(Acres) = 5.14 Total Runoff(CFS) = 9.19
TC(MIN) = 15.45
+++++++++++++ + +++ + 1+++++++++++ + ++++++ ++++ + T ,
Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 41.000
* ** TRAPEZOIDAURECT. CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME
Upstream point elevation= 199.88
Downstream point elevation= 193.22
Channel length thru subarea(Feet) = 115.00
Channel base(Feet) = 4.00
Slope or "Z" of left channel bank= .100
Slope or "Z" of right channel bank= .100
Mannings "N" _ .015 Maximum depth of channel (Ft.) = 1.00
Flow(Q) thru subarea(CFS) = 9.19
Upstream point elevation = 199.88
Downstream point elevation = 193.22
Flow length(Ft.) = 115.00
Travel time (Min.)_ .22 TC(min.) = 15.67
Depth of flow = .26 (Ft.)
Average Velocity = 8.90 (Ft. /Sec.)
Channel flow top width = 4.05 (Ft.)
TTT 1 r t il ill ++ TTT 11111111111IIIII TTT rte..4 +
Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 41.000
* ** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION * **
100.00 Year Rainfall Intensity(In./Hr.) = 3.784
Decimal Fraction Soil Group A = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group B = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group C = .000
Decimal Fraction Soil Group D = 1.000
RURAL (lots > 1/2 acre) runoff coefficient =.4500
Subarea(Acres) _ .36 Subarea Runoff(CFS) _ .61
Total Area(Acres) = 5.50 Total Runoff(CFS) = 9.80
' TC(MIN) = 15.67
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' T;fiTTT ,-- rTT++++ +++T TTTT-..... .................................
Process from Point/Station 41.000 to Point/Station 42.000
* ** TRAPEZOIDAURECT. CHANNEL TRAVEL TIME * **
Upstream point elevation = 193.22
Downstream point elevation = 186.03
Channel length thru subarea(Feet) = 190.00
Channel base(Feet) = 2.00
Slope or "Z" of left channel bank= .100
Slope or "Z" of right channel bank= .100
Mannings "N" _ .015 Maximum depth of channel (Ft.) = 1.00
Flow(Q) thru subarea(CFS) = 9.80
Upstream point elevation = 193.22
Downstream point elevation = 186.03
Flow length(Ft.) = 190.00
Travel time (Min.) _ .33 TC(min.) = 16.00
Depth of flow = .51 (Ft.)
Average Velocity = 9.46 (Ft. /Sec.)
Channel flow top width= 2.10 (Ft.)
End of computations.. ,
TOTAL STUDY AREA(ACRES) = 9.18
APPENDIX B
(3. TABLES AND CHARTS)
w II I I
MEMEEMIMMIN MEN 11101
■E■■■NIM■■N■E�■ ' ■M I��1 \ IFiiii A■i
■■■■N■■Nt■■■ ■
■N■■
MINIM■■■■■ ■EI■■■G1 ■41 ■I,■I =NL■■ ■■■■■u..■
■■■■�■■■■■■ ■■ L ■.I ■ ■ ■'1 ■ ■ ■■r/■r /■■►/■■
■. ■SEMEN■ ■N■ ASIA■ .■■rl■■�.■'/.EA1 ■■' /■■■■11■■■■
■NN ■N■ ■■N■■■■ ' ■iM■■ I■■fA■WNI■■II■■I,■■■NI ■■■■
■. ■MI■IMMINNN■■ - 'I ■■■FINEI■rA1El1■ ■►I■NEENE ■■E■
■.■ ■N■■■ ■EN■ 0 II■ ■II■A1 ■�M�I.E■■ ■II■■■.■
■
■E■ ■MINIM■E■■ ■ /A ■rl PEIA■ ■11 IN ■U ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■11■■ ■N■■
■■.■ ■NN ■NE■ . /1.11■■ I ►I■ ■1 ■.NI■ ■E■■■■
H ■ ■ ■f/ '1■ ■f / ■r,
■N■ ■ N■ % I ■ ■■N■
■■ ■N■■�NN■■ • ■I�N■ ■1 ■I/ ■I ASS . /.EN■E� MEN
■■■■■■■ ■E■ ■I■rl■■/, ■EI ■II , I■■ II ■E■■■■■■
■N■ ■EN■■■■ ■IINII■■rl I N■■■■■■■
N■■ I,■ on ' /■ ■N■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■SOME■ ■1 ■E ■I■ ■l1 ■III.. ■IIN.I ■■ i ■IM■■■■■■■■
NE ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■.MIME/ ■r1 ■SII ■IAEII►I ■ / ■OI�OS■ �■ ■■■■■.■■■
, , ■■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■ri■n■r■■�i■r�■■■riNr.■ ■Sri■■ ■■NON■ ■ ■■
■ ■■ ■IM■N ■S■O'Ar1 ■ // ■II� %O/I ■II ■�EUS■EN■ ■.■■■I%
■.■■■■■■■■ ■ ■! //Fill l ■U ■ ► /I� ■I,� ■ ► / ■ ■ ■ ►I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■H ■ ■ /.� ■Mfr
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■Il/t ■III.■ III'. ■II ■ /. ■ ■ ■I. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■HEi ■ ■ ■I.%
■■■ . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■I, ■ ► / ■rdl/I.IIINI ■ ■I■ ■SIN■ ■ ■ ■N� % ■ ■ ■��■ �
� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■I/ISE ►III /I,�' / ■'I ■II ■ ■ ■� / ■ ■■ ■� % ■ ■� % ■ ■■
■ ■.. ■ ■ ■N■ ■ ■ ►JtIIIMI ■1l ■III. ■I� ■/. ■ ■ ■Ii ■ ■E■ I,I ■ ■I.I ■ ■ ■� : ,
■■. H. ■ ■ ■■IA1II ■rl ■IIIN / ■I■'/MMI.ME■■ • .� ■ ■� / ■ ■ ■G/
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■NN■ ■fill ■I� ■'II!��III. ■ ■ ■U ■ ■■ � i • I ■ ■ ■ ►. / ■ ■■ •
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ICI ■ ►II, ■!1II ■U ■ % ■ ■/. ■ ■■ I � /i ■ ■ ■/%
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■I,I. ■I,N'III! ■I� ■IAN ■I.I ■N. �■ i • ./ ■ ■/� ■■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■III, ■ ► /I/I�11� /�� ■/% ■ ■ ■ ■6� ■ ►/■
H00 M"Mmm
%l oom■
si
, , � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■I/ III , ■ % /./Ilil ■I ■ ■ ■ /% ■�i ■� % ■��E■ �_� I ■Iw- ,
■ ■ ■ESN %/' III / % %�I�7� ■ ■ ■I.��%■��N ■� /. ■E /� • i�■
■.■ ■N / / / / � /, / % /. /G�NII�I ■� ■ /. % ■� %MI ■Iii■■ /� ■
■. ■I. /I% i ii / . %i / ■ ■ ■ /,1 /. ■ / %Yi ■ ■Ii ■ ■ ■�%.N. ■■ i%�. ■�■
• .. Ire/%%% i�%■■■ N�. lr� /N� /� % ■ /ii ■Iri%N ■N ■ /i�N.II�■ •
on
ME
■ ■. ■■ NNE / / / %� %�iN�i %� ■.�i%� ■N ■ ■ ■NN ■ ■� �Won
■■■■/'/, i� %i /.; ■I�i / ■ ■_� ■����� ■ ■ ■��!�i ■SEEN■.
NEMESES
Nor MIMMUMME
•
j ' � • '� � ' "�• '� � `_ for' !� i o
`�• yes •/� 7�rs� o � �� ° ` ^.
cn
',
CD C, V " br
ommom 4.~
cz
N v C3 r• ° ° '� �� r•+�Z� o
cm
O
< , v' \� `a'
co
Q.
t `v oo
W CI i`� I ..� , o •
�• • , 1 v
att.N c •
Cox
. Q cl '�+.� • _ - • —j am 7
O 0114
O c o. K
z I-
0 <
o
x
V �
z
UJ <_=�_
Dvv
N...1 - s
N tD 2 Cl a e•1
U z M N
.:CbW s
0
• • ; � I1•A• I; �
1 N lZe""t" •
..000l
000 It
cm
00,
00
=ago CD C*-j I . a
me" 1 1. — 10 .z �� o
LO
0 �
(= Ulb
O-C u
CWV
c
cn J
c
C-4
Co
C=k
CD CN
Ln
LLJ
CN
C= LU
ac
C6
co
-C
-C 1.4
cz le"Is -C
z
or I
A -C
u 0,
-C 0
• IC s
dOo pis 3;
U 0
W 0
916 - -2
0 E 0
'A
6.4 A IL
Q 4c
3c w -i
3L 6.
Q 0
t TT-A-7
cam.4J
'' t o
4j 4- # i
L 0 Z Z7 A FJ 411 L C
r
Z 7 7 N O 4J 0 V ~"
T Q rl
N 43 AZ . - � 1
L C C t C +�' 10 O N C19 1
W%- 3 '+- C in r L ap 4j CL
us 4J
'r' V G 4 V O t L # 0
E 4J 0 . r O 4J 4J L w N
W u t ai
C Y ,8 1 0
w r °
4J W +� a-
.0 IV oc O CL r�
vl r >> C r to C C N r
.. N /0 4J L O O 0
C a W O a /0 'r •r t C le • C1
p 1q = W= 4J W as ++ 4j 0 C N L .-
r E 4J 4J 4/ r t 10 M t C O qr
4J C L a4J 4J r rC71 v E C u
a C LrS7 ° _•� a c
V O O L C V a
4- �� C r r
•r r C K W 0 Tr �' y w r
V_ 4J V L L u 4J p • a
G. b N CI C O a+J 0 0 4J N LT C N CL
C 4- 1 4J . L L7 L . L a L 0 C .� p 0 r tC Q
rC•0 d � a � L d �
• L T O LA.
L ,ONO'a -CN ^ 0 rr C!4J V- °
O V E a.-- C r L 4J L L 1 •0 Z
4• W /0 E •O 40 t d t U r •r u C 0 0 #
iJ r� N GD S to W r V
N d• r C N al
O Et N 0#- 74JN0 A A O T 41A 4J a
O l0 r N O N N
r pp
0 C N •� 2 b C'i 10
4J L Q t /t! Cu L t 0 r 4- L ••- L L N Q 1•4
V Lt. N 1-- G G 4J 4J 4J
0.0 D a 1-- 4J .-
m a
a o N M d
C r N M d
V
6 -Hour Precipitation (inches) •
z
0 0In0 %n40 %n o Ln o• .� o
Ca
y y ; � ` � �` .fir... L " ' 1 . � •, -- — •�— ��'—� • . . ,
a o
0 C31
gn
f
• -
s ' �
.+ r r a �.'L, �a •t ".'i s Z APPE61k XI IV-� ..
Average Values of Roughness Coefficient (Manning's n)
Roughness
Type of Waterway Coefficient (n)
1. Closed Conduits (1)
Steel (not lined) 0.015
Cast Iron 0.015
Aluminum .021
Corrugated Metal (not lined) 0.024
Corrugated Metal (2) (smooth asphalt quarterlining) 0.021
Corrugated Metal (2) (smooth asphalt half lining) 0.018
Corrugated Metal (smooth asphalt full lining) 0.012
Concrete RCP 0.012
Clay (sewer) 0.013
Asbestos Cement4 Pve-- 0.011
Drain Tile (terra cotta) 0.015
Cast -in -place Pipe 0.015
Reinforced Concrete Box 0.014
2. Open Channels (1)
a. Unlined
Clay Loam 0.023
Sand 0.020
b. Revetted
' Gravel O.OSO
Rock O.Ov0
Pipe and Wire 0.025
Sacked Concrete 0.025
C. Lined
0.014
Concrete (poured) 0.016
Air, Blown Mortar (3) 0.018
Asphaltic Concrete or Bituminous Plant Mix
d. Vegetated (S)
Grass lined, maintained - .035
Grass and Weeds .045
Grass lined with concrete low flow channel .032
3. Pavement and Gutters (1)
Concrete 0.01.6
Bituminous (plant- mixed) 0.016
APPF.��DIX XV:� A _
r TABLE 2
\ RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD)
DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN)
••- Coeffi C
Soil Group (1)
Land Use
A B C D
Residential:
Single Family — .40 .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
Commercial ( .70 .75 .80 .85
80% Impervious
Industrial (2) .80 .85 .90 .95
90% I mpe ry i ous
�t
NOTES:
( ' ) Soil Group mans are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
( actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervious-
ness values of 8014 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. group.
Actual imperviousness - 5056
Tabulated imperviousness - 80%
Revised C - 80 x 0.85 - 0.53
IV -A -9
7 APPENDIX IX -B
z . : Rev. S /81
Ernest F. Brater and Horace Williams King
HANDBOOK OF .
1 1 A 1 1
Table 7 -14. Values of K' for Circular Channels in the Formula
- dlis'
D - depth of water d diameter of cbanncl
D 00 .O1 .02 03 ,04 .05 .06 .07 I .08 .09
_ ,
d
,0 .00007 .00031 .00074 .00138• .00222 .00328 .00455 -MG04 .0077
.1 .00967 .0118 .0142 .0167 .01 115 .0225 .0257 .0291 .0327 .0366
..2 .04.06 .0448 .0492 .0537 .0585 .0634 .0686 .0738 .0793 .0849
.3 .0907 .0966 .1027 .1089 .1153 .1218 .1284 .1352 .1420 .1490
.4 .1561 .1633 .1705 .1779 .1854 .1929 .2005 .2082 .2160 .2238
.5 .232 .239 .247 .255 .263 .271 .279 .287 .295 .303
.6 .311 .319 .327 .335 .343 .350 .358 .366 .373 .380
.7 .388 :395 .402 .409 .416 .422 .429 .435 .441 .447
. 8 AS* .458 .463 1.468 .473 .477 .481 .485 .488 .491
.9 .494 .496 .497 .498 .498 .498 .496 .489 .483
1.0 .463
+ 1
APPENDIX C
(4. HYDROLOGY MAP)
h1 .... x.., s;,^•*k ''� . - ::+ra" ,:> ..ffi... .. m ,. +l,
K , : :.. ...:
�, 1 7
tr
wd j + #
lS3 IP tr0 9 00- I -g 6Mp asv
q -96z (60); 9OIZ6 V3 003 WS 'ooz ins ' IWW a NOISSM IORL ' ONWn >
_ g o CN
chi s O
W z
\\ \ z •� ° co (� N
\ _ o Q (()
\ c N w
\ \ Fo cm Q � _
\ \ Z w v U) \ \ w .y
Z rn
LLI
o v p
\ � Q
\ ---
LLJ
\ leg
rs..
\ cr
\ \ W
\ \ N �-'
\ \\ v o
\\ \ U w Z w
"
\ G l a'
LL
CL
\ > c Z
0 O
v� o -^
\ \ o
� (r O
Z r j
v U
\ \ o
\ \ I v LLJ
LL
-— _
O
w
\ \ z
\ \ 1" -
\ \ Q O
a Of \ z
� 3
V
ci
LO
m
ate!
\ \ o° a
o
\ r orz �
O
\ \ �
Z:
(D u)
W Q�Q
W \ om W
0 61 a O >
Z J \ O W
O N Q F- \ \ w0 ° m 0 Q
1 Z W H ` r O v
s6I r o o z z o `° o
F- v
F- z � \ \ r v ° Q
0,� \ Nz� LL
�", \ w�� Q
��
r \
LAJ
z PSSEM� \ W
X \ \\ Z
W 0 w c� \ W
Q N
W IiJ
\ o a
d- uj °z o
uj Q et
FIE
Q O W N O
Q 0 it) N
/ � Q � p
\ \ •.
\ x w U Z M
w a = LLJ Q
O O
a
rn / _ \ �p W
CD W
o of o ch W
a m - Z
,
LLJ
1. 7 . f. r ta.
st
(y ,
I
S • .. .,. , ... Flat. X.
x a F.,
« . � 9� a. _ r
- -.. .. •, .. .. <. -.;..;
\ \ _
va w� ,lad•' .. ; .., ,- r9r
J
S ° z r \ U) <
� r g
\ a
J / a p 2 a n a
� 9p Ob a
CN z a C-0 tf
! Q N / , O _ N O
LLJ
z ( J I
p
!�
O y e N O
Ki
> a0 °O by O �5 ��, r) O O p
V n oo °' ® voNO o r- °
• N N J N N CD
rn
s oz
Ay o o s o ,,,
Lo
�
,9 �,, z ^i
SOS f N \\ v a I
c ' Q
I
Q 'o FO- I.J f- ° Of Q
S, w o w m
° i w V �V w w l0 Q
AJ
o J Q W
o Z
I N
,o ¢ O w b a � o N 11 o z ° V I o J LLJ
rn
J J can) _ N N O LJ
U) Z
i= rn 9 � � r o w W J j� > 00
W r0 t!1 I
co w
to
SO N IL C3
F- U ` V I ZO ZW r
N J - t c�
-
� z z
Z Y IC? a
Z M cn U
° O F
W U
Z
m
Li l V� W z
ie o +i - --
°� o
d "_ Z 30 vi
O
V
3 W U et
r t
S 9 °o in rn
3 4`Z. N J \// �� Q w Zr
N 00
r w ° w
- c _ - >
v > O OZ p Lei
q
Od I O
U
N .—
° U � a r
o
o o n WW
S�2 ° w / + "I w zo V
LAI Es
w
u> ° ,n o L�
(D C) Q J O+ m U W
X
tF_ N rn . N
m
m
O J � J F- La
-0 >
/ /
MW or
/ om
ry
a
(n s
I � _
I /
I
/ o
I
M
/ r
I
� , o u m
W
"
;
,.0
,
,.. }g
..
a cn.:t ?..:.,,,, �i
MM.., C,t G
.�1 �.
.F.. , ... ........ .... ... M xrt,. . .� ..
v., x ffi. F�,.... 1 R; s•., W....a +A�..,a+.... +� a
i .. ... , ., .. .: „,.'w..?§'... :96 ,±s. _ ., >.. ate: