The URL can be used to link to this page

1997-5013 G ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Capital Improvement Projects Ci O District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering February 12, 2001 Glendale Federal Bank FSB (now California Federal Bank) 113 North El Camino Real Encinitas, CA 92024 Re: Case 93-029 TM "SE-1Y Double LL Ranch: Lot 5" Grading Permit 5013GI (1099 Double LL Ranch Rd/Byldin Company} A.P.N. 264-240-37 Final release of security Permit 5013GI authorized clearing and grubbing, earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all as necessary to construct a single family dwelling on a residential lot within the named subdivision. Final inspection has been completed to the satisfaction of the Field Operations Division. Therefore, release of the security deposit is merited. Assignment of Account 095080559-2 (renumbered 791-0021612?), in the amount of $2,520.00, has been cancelled by the Financial Services Manager and is hereby released for payment to the depositor. The original document is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Jeff Garami at (760) 633-2780 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, c a Greg Shields eslie Suelter Senior Civil Engineer financial Services Manager Field Operations Financial Services cc Leslie Suelter, Financial Services Manager Byldin Company, Developer enc PGS/rtb/jsg/f: grading/ginnew/-6013 f.doc 1 TE1, 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas. California 93024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 roCy"elect paper ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT I Capital Improvement Projects 11-A 1 0 District Support Services 1J J Field Operations Encinitas Stormwater Complaints/Sand Replenishment Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering July 28, 1999 attn: Helen Maloney Insurance Company of the West Post Office Box 85563 San Diego, CA 92186-5563 Re: Tract 93-029 (TM) "SE-ly Double LL Ranch" {McComas, Martini. & Lynn H.) Sewer construction Permit DCS202 [Public Sewer Improvements) A.P.N. 264-241-30, 264-240-34 Final release of security Sewer Construction Permit DCS202 authorized the public sewer improvements required as a condition of approval for the named subdivision. Warranty inspection has been completed to the satisfaction of the Field Operations Division. Therefore, release of the posted security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 1494615, in the initial amount of $31,711.00 and since reduced to $7,928.00, is hereby fully exonerated. The original document is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Jeff Garami at (760) 633-2780 or in writing, attention this Department Sincerely, Greg Slields Senior Civil Engineer Field Operations cc Leslie Suelter, Financial Services Manager Martin J. McComas & Lynn H. McComas, Property Owners enc HCJ/jsg/93-029b.doc 1 TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled paper COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS June 16, 1997 tS i Marry McComas 3462 Corvallis Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 Subject: OBSERVATION AND DENSITY TESTING Sewer Line Backfill TM 93-029, Permit No. 4402GI Double LL Ranch Road Extension Olivenhain, California Dear Mr. McComas: As per our telephone discussion, observation and density testing on the sewer line backifll was not conducted by this firm. A telephone conversation on June 13, 1997 with Joe Spear, owner of Southern California Pipeline, revealed that Southern California Pipeline did not contact Coast Geotechnical directly for required observation/testing services as was previously indicated to the city inspector Todd Baumbach by Lance Cornell, an employee of Southern California Pipeline. Southern California Pipeline has suggested pot holing the sewer trench backfill for density testing. Such an approach provides isolated (spot) test results, however such an approach should not be considered a substitute for observation and testing during fill placement. In the event that the spot testing results in densities reflecting less than 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density, the backfill should be removed and replaced. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, COAST GEOTECHNICAL Mark Burwell President cc: Todd Baumbach, City of Encinitas 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOLANA BEACH • CALIFORNIA 92075 (619) 755-8622 • FAX (619) 755-9126 L` • III I September 16, 1993 W.O. #G-10063 Page 5 I Subdrains L' Groundwater seepage was encountered during canyon cleaning for the development of Double LL Ranch Road. A canyon subdrain, consisting of a 6.0 inch diameter pipe embedded in a minimum of 2.0 feet of gravel was constructed. PAVEMENT SECTION Previous testing of the sedimentary deposits indicated an R-value of 6 for clay-bearing soils and an R-value of 34 for on-site sandy deposits. As previously indicated, the proposed roads were undercut a minimum of 3.0 feet and replaced with on-site sandy deposits. Recommended Pavement Section: Double LL Ranch Road (STA. 5+20.33 to STA. 21+00) Calle 47 (STA. 1+00 to Southern Terminus) (Traffic Index of 4.5, R-value 34) `A- 3 inches of asphaltic paving on ` c~6 inches of Class 2 Aggregate Base=on 12 inches of subgrade sandy deposits be scarified, moistened to optimum moisture Subgrade soils should content and compacted to the- thickness indicated in the above structural section, and left in a condition to receive base FRASER ENGINEERING, INC. 21910 Camino Real, Oceanside, 92054 • (619) 722-3495 • FAX (619) 722-3490 HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS for TM 93-029 DOUBLE LL RANCH SIX-LOT SUBDIVISION r APR 0 3 1996 ENGi\EEPING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS Prepared: March 12, 1995 •t Revised ' ' January 8, 1996 -`!v gar z t V E~ '==r GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Runoff from the TM 93-029 watershed generally flows west to east, towards the existing creekbed located along the project's frontage at Lone Jack Road located between Lot 1 and Lots 2, 3 and 4. BASIN 'A': Basin 'A' encompasses 26.8 acres of the project's watershed and generates a 100-year frequency design runoff of 49.6 cfs. Approximately 60 percent of Basin 'A' was considered unusable for site development and consists of densely vegetated steep slopes. In consideration of the mix of steep slopes, rural homesites, and the paved surface of Double LL Ranch Road, an overall runoff coefficient of C=0.5 was selected for Basin W. Runoff from Basin 'A' transitions from a natural channel that roughly parallels Double LL Ranch Road to a proposed trapezoidal drainage channel. The proposed channel also parallels Double LL Ranch Road and its flow is conveyed under the proposed private driveway section by a proposed 30-inch RCP storm drain to the creekbed. BASINS' Basin 'B' is located in the southeast corner of the project's watershed and generates a 100-year frequency design runoff of 16.2 cfs. Approximately 40 percent of Basin 'B' was considered unusable for site development because of steep slopes. A combination of rural homesites use with the steep slopes yielded a net runoff coefficient of C=0.45 for Basin 'B'. Runoff from Basin 'B' is conveyed along the west side of the proposed drive in a shallow earthen ditch. This proposed earthen ditch is directed to the existing creekbed. H:\02\WORDPROC%HYDROCOV.DOC FRASER ENGINEERING, rvc.,,, / w _ 3as „v A A p. A- 2 Ac- 3. C /o 016 /OO1za 7v'~'-ICJ lscc,' - 0.34 All, T -C = I` t~ N SEF i~/~i 1 CN, EIjCHg2i ) (/SING. A~3o✓E' ~/yfL' , Z = 3.7 c iq / t r (SE r~ rt rrr C.a~ I -D c ~szr~ RvL rtprl C = o `~5 401 C. x 60tC.4s~640 4 Z boo _ ~.sx x g = 446 ifs ~Do L -t = l 2 7 Nl ( 'S Br ~T,q- c rta c/;~I/z r ) 4.4 C= c'•4s 3/ JOB. NO By SUF-=-CT DATE SHEETNO_ NORM YQ .,PCB COLINA 01 1 cr- 1 _ t i r Z v ~ NGr ~ O II ~ I Z ' ' O¢ .r IV3 ~sy✓ti p i Y~ i ~rre.. ~ GP~S ~ C. t f Q t ! _ F Gam ..Q,`.r Y i ~l z Y Q W~ `J Z I i Z V'I )'~~.r j `1- m 30 Q r < I ! w u v Il y1 ;WOE Z ~\P. 6O F 4'0/ O O t o a H b f P f T:12 r W Q I wb3S3CN, <Q Z Ny ,J~'J2 9~nO H NJMy! O i I UQ~ " Q~ ~~C _M 7TNy~ b W 1 SS~3M S~ ~ry~ i /O a I ti 1S h zNl~yl~ '~~3 ~IAJ?7, ?J ` v Goa , / 7 co `QR _ _ JI O)141 o Q?/O/ 26~ ^z Qb = ,(S = e lS y` fff~~~ _ _ ~ H~ a by ~ t ' I CALIGORKIA m ^ C/ 904 Hl Ohs 0P4 s~w~) vi okra o N k ? c M p-` c o P 2 a Q 2 it r/e 4 O- y z &L, I -r7 AM Aq3 co IA- q.AN 3 O EC> ? ~ Z ~t`, ~wpPNOU1l _ U 1 7~1IY~l,l >IC SIE~ F ~r 0~ IGO r` Q a_.., - d H o' 6d. ``'jMbb~s ~1Q fy MMERSON~ 7^ \ Z t ~i a or z , ~bo• 'ti►^ 5 i` ' . d~ ~~,J , ~ ~SU CS ` ..'Z>~` 1 ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o O u• ~ ¢ .~'LIGO bfS / ~J ~ Nb'J > 1J v~ ~~NG s Z , ld. 3/y N p = ? 6b'yd a a a¢ Q bid / )I!y f p.~,l>"~ ~1 ~ ~ 'z` " ~ ~ tea. ~S o►t,~f dij 'mac n~~ o ` p -GH ~ ►y~ ~~sj,,, 1 a S¢J . /~pr r - - a~i 4 s~~Y P" 0C 1 Orr 21 uCii ~ ' ° 1C v mss- ~ U ~ tl1N ^ i 0 `~~"E c ~ i nk ~ ~ 3 a=ti, h v Q'c ti~ 'Q 3 PMP`„ coo ~ t Ol, a~ i > ~ I n0 rQY1 T`t,- v O by j PS Pp Mf 9.~ < ~i1/v3J J• y'!' --~~~3'd J it ti, ~Q`EO~ W / _ yC 6''•L o i ~n Q " o Q<' A+ W •''7'L GP M=: W .V Gn 8 Q b .Za. m`V O SAP`%w q fwrt -a SK 2~t c ,r1~ o.~ _ MO .a:^~ r q^ arl jg i Z ND u DO 0 6 S ,t, rG -C a e Ac O t -1C a LN t f e f ¢ UG` / 'Q, w =1 O O LN 60•'~)'~(,' ` ¢ ¢ ° ° ? z c+ O aZ, r f r. , '3' w~ b Lp,GE H Z 6 - 7. ~~O 'T _ R v W a 2 7 fc vE V~L PEE o d' r-'e.-. a W R , O~ z j a° O p N z WOOD. 7 ..K .+-j_ Oh I .Y I~ 21 C` - d SNADOW P10- SURE O m ° 2 ¢ vi ¢ Cc> 6 ~ESZ{ LJr m t pD F ~r ? ¢ W y a ? ` u+ 6W goo _ <O LN r'rrC~J<. -q\\ V GE RUN pv O 2 " ael~ L 1 j=. o $ ~ < _ d m u n i g v"~ ~,y 3 ~l bo I. -rROON~ 50~G p C~ VlIIVdVH ° tAM ✓ ; D 5/E° t = Z RT 1 as as 39018A JERW e~.pN Id , > o~ A SOrdr> ;c ~ snn f u H►,NA i h p" ddv~ S~~v < . w o < JL. E I: `t J RD b 16t'V V MISSION • FALLBR00 5K ST A 5K 1-5 y sAy 6 6L 6M 6N 0 6K o~ I 7 8 8K 8L SM 12P I s4 I = p~ Pv 11 AVN9 V'LLEY 9 ~S 10 12 12L c 12M 12N m OCEANS DE VISTA W TA' U Arl 13 X14 15 X16 ° Q 17 18 * SAN IARLSBAD 04iN~N/may 3 MA COS 0 RD F ~y PALOM0 19 0R 20 21 22 i ES2OND1 O 404 S4 pSQOAC i 0 27 24 z o 26 28N i 28 i EN. IN= GRANA 30 RANCHO 33 i SO p SANTA Q 31 32 B RD c 33N B CH > 0 i 0 35 oz POWApY 37N I~- DEL MAR X34 i 7 Y ?OWA 3 38 a 39 41 42 40 5 10 45 0 46 47 48 MILES S NT 9 Lao 55 56 43A 52 53 x 54 EL 4 v`I FR CAJON ow" MISSION LA MESA s 59 S 60° 62 5,4 N ~o`~ ~9ti 4 DIE 6-2 O 61 LEMON 63 GROVE Ull : IN* J 0 \ ~j-' ~ C~f.7 m act." CU-i C=Z Gr.. co `L~. `wN^^ O - Q L~1 c C~4 7. Z < t I ~ ~ 7 ! L~ t7 ~ O ` • < <z N r J } 2 ~ Y v t-t > rr,,, J 1 1 - O CE i t I I t ! I I ? C''~ ~b.-4 I I I I ' 1 I Cc,t z - .J < z - G V) a y u z U_ _2 G v O O i ~ C~ t11 O L1~ tf1 , < O cC~'1 U. r1 G ~ ~ O W O H O U 7. z< O tsi J U ~ < t~ p U- L I I 1 u a. -2% r u / 1 `Z 1 co- oo, / era " r 1 c- cn ~ J Gam? u a~ v f' o -C I~ J C ` / •U LZl /Li7 C \ \v / wY L7 ~J \~-h3 \ V CM N CV ./y..: O F3~ C- t..;~ u f z N Cam{ Ir-s ~ • 0 -C O W W / < 3 75 - f ¢ c < Z r.5 ~ tJ u c Z a, ts. - -i CO ~ { I I i I I f - Lu UN r 6 7 O d< a< 1 M J O I ~ U ~ U- CL- 4c C C tY1 i 1 O Ou~O << o. p 2 In M O t- . W O M I Z F, V p U- l a ? .a v Y ( yi V r- y II-A-7 FRASER ENGINEERING, INC. vb N C'~ v ~ ~ ~ n ;f i N 1 I 9 1j p 1 1 ln` ! Ul j a i it -o i L- ~ C - a 0 70 n b ~ ~ 1 JOB. NO BY SUB..ECT DATE SHEETNO. FRASER ENGINEERING, INC. I J ? © N M i t i i i i I 1 J I N i i ~ I ' I I f j. i t I i I i I I i r 1 4 ~ V i l JOB. NO BY SUBJECT DATE SHEETNO. TABLE 2 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN) Coefficient. 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 Cons, ercia](2) .70 .75 .80 .85 80% Impervious Industriai(2) .80 .85 9o .95 90% Impervious NOTES: (')Soil Group mans are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works. (2)Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervious- ness values of 80% or 90%,, the values given for coefficient C, maybe 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 - 50% Tabulated imperviousness = 801. Revised C = .LO x O.85 =0.53 80 IV-A-9 APPENDIX IX-B Rev. 5/81 EQ/1AT/ON ~ 3gS C//. 9L 1 FGGt T H / SDDD IC ' T//T!G O~ COnCGnfiaf/On 4000 L Length of watershed H = Difference in a%vaticn along ef~ecfive 5/0,0e line rSee .9,0pend1X X-B) T 3000 L ~fili/es Fee/ flours Minutes 1000 ¢ 240 „3 /BO /000 \ 900 2 /20 800 700 /00 600 \ \ S 90 SOD \ ~ 4- 00 ~3~ 3 / 60 300 \ SD 2- ZOD \ \ ~O \ 30 1 Zc~ \ / ~ SDDD BnS~¢~D0 20 Ac DODO \ SD 40 ~Sti ' 20,00 \ \ 12 \ tRCa NOTE 00 1200 8 gFOR NATURAL WATERSFM- 20 ADD TEN MINUTES TO /000 7 Q = I E? - $ h p COMPUTED TIME OF CON- 800 e CENTRATION_ 700 61161 400 \ ~ 3 300 +N o = 1Z Mt~ 5 20o z H z Tc SAN DIEGO COUNTY NOMOGRAPH FOR DETERMINATION DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc) FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS DESIGN MANUAL APPROVED DATE /2 E APPENDIX X-A -A-10 Rev. 5/81 H +r 4- Q 44 C p U U ~ rr A L ^l~' r- 'l7 O U U L7 to .a > X C>% O L t0 A W L C a A V O O X = 7 7 In O -r- t-A U U C Y C >%r- fn +J i - S: r- T - to U +S U U L C7 r- C z C U L. C C UZ.Q C r A O U4- OT UlA r. L L fl d C G C C O C •er A 4-S to N r G> -0 (_2 1111 4-3 d) CL ic U G 4- 4- O = L L 4-0 4-3 =11 U U= Ei~ ~ O v C -0 L y a) +j O C r 1 Q Ur A C C O O~ N N N-a S C O C C Y T O A 3 L O O U h r4-1, + H + C Qm-0 o~ A = c A - m o A= U O +-b +J Cu C L 4-3 4-) 40 CC l" 4-J rj +111 C L CL+j +.P 4j -C C N r \ t0 A . i •r• T T T Cn Y M C V v o o i c~ v. o. c o C v a E T Y T 4- C. -C O U T •r• - O a).,- C _ V L= U U L = U U d O. A to al C` O C_ 4-j a) U = +•11 = O tZ 44 (A Cr Q. 4-1 4-J S_ L7 S_ S_ A G . o. IZ 4 U N C E U •r- to C i T p V1 O •C .C N • r• A C p _ Z 3 O V E IZr- C r i i= r r- U +•2 U_ 73 4- G7 fa A •.r A tp ~C L = V r- C V C 11 M % H CL E r- C d• tn to U A ~U O O 4J i C S- 07 A Q7 N N U = r- Y V N `L O E= H O O &J O 4J +J 3- 4-1 of 4-j U II O a If T O U C N -r'7 A C7 C) A O -r- U A r- •r7 +A iC•= A U 17== O r-4- S_ r- U U to 17 V ..r u u- N M. O Q 0. f- +j T to d ¢ 4-J Gl C- i D r Cam: Cn 'Cr to Q O r N M Cr z 6-Hour Precipitation (inches) cs a Ln o to o to o LO CD Un o N tC t1: it 1 a !+7 M N N - -'i--1'fy z ~ v V v ~ _ _I J I I 11 1 I I 1 1 I I Z ~ Fr C I I^-~ r -a- - ~ =1_ ! il!ill !i! { I i 1 I 1 1 ' 0. ..4 cz. O 1 1 - Ilt I!.1 I I i 1 N G 4j_- t I I 1 ;It t!:II ;lil ~IIf III 1 N H d D f ' ~ -T r 27 0 C) cis „1 L .li 1 1 1 1 t I I -r- ~ , I I I I l i l I I i l t ~ ~r ill l I i t I t - 1 1 1 1 1-I ! 1 t: 111: I lilt III I I O APPE:NDIX XI IV-A-14 (anoil JSayoui) Xyisua;uj o " LO o o m w ca a 3 0 LL co to 0 LO ti M C p p c O Q' U C U c~ L ~ N 0 cc C C 2 N L L 0 0 U^) L w J m O N N mY O 0 o M m M L I- O ci N u; N o ti N a 9.s com cn E -S5 E a~ E LO o co o v rn Co C: 0 CL cn Fl- C14 j.co m U- rCN00 ONOCD I- rCMCOLOC0aLO -C C= 0000 rMCDqT CO I-OrLO rCVrCD 0 C'4 C-) CM 0000 0) M'a'NNM6 C6 Mui NM1`-O O MCC) r CD r I~ CD 9 9 O CO - C i L m L m o H U U c O 2) O - M rT. U d ) O N cm N U M Q U 0 Q. C M -0 N CL L cUn N U° Q~ CL m C E 6 m- Q- m cA N m ~s m o 2WZ N iiimm o mrn6 N L- 4) CL U) E U. >1>.U ~o0 -a u. pc~ _ Q-a ca) W0 > c c E-C = ~ U ~ o o x"" 3 o o 0 o 0 C. M o m n o m o~ a Z- m m o. °M a aa~u ~cn =~UO~ i~E-UaU»(n L- LL LL LL o o rno ao of o o r 0 L o m rn n m m n, 3 0 LL to 0 0 L6 LO n of 0 W - N ~ co Q ~ o C ~ o UdU z C U rnm w0 CL M --Z (6 O ° > a m n ~ ~ cn p c M 0 vi N ° 0 O N O O a O tC U N = :5 < cc C) -E 0 CL 0U rooo ~m U) Or- oo N N cm cm- OOco CD ' ~t- OLO 0 0C1-- Iq O N LO Il- N'IT OOOCDOco(D O M C C O N'T Cl) N O N 1` co d• O C O V _ N (D cu O U o N ~ C O U wV-, FE CD O O a tML C O p- E .L-. 4) m a) Ca. N L= a c CL N O O E (a m U U) a N CC O L_ O N 2 W O O +Z O LL a) 4) 0 CD 0) a) CL N t5 in LU O O C C O E ca L O m U V V V 3 0 0'~ 3L > o C c~ o u, Q.3-- Q_:. o a~ o o'0 0 0 0 0 n m L MO .N (D 4) 0 0 0 c 4) a~ o. aa~~~cn S~UM~ f- >>cnLL U- a CO N O 1~ co rO N O ~ 0 rn ~ m 3 0 U- ca (0 `O LO N o C C co c co U L U m ca a C; ca N c ~ Q m 0 O1 ~ wm Y C) o A m Ce) Y ci L C Eli N j a O > N N O > > C N N m E c m 2 2 a= w Q cc o °o °o m o = E 000 co C) C) C) L ca LL' N 0°0000 00 NOS ND OO-tgr00 OM0MN0~000 ONO O °)a) ~-Lo MMd CMM0CD u)MV- OM (1)'a O Oc*)NNOOtC)MMtA I- 0 Q O m r ti m O O~~-~U ~ c0 C L V O U N w L r O Q. a) O C(1) CL L 2 O E a) CL N w. O V U7 O O a) C CL ca -2 D LL. N E O cU) N p_ > O 4) CL C-5 ) = W Z N U U N W 0 W r-1), cc)~fJ) E LN U)LQ cCcC V U ~,N a) a) L 3 > c cc ° w~ 3 n.'S2 = o o N= 3 O 'o 0 0 0 6 Q N M O N a) O O L L O N Q° O (r- co 01 (r- 0 IL 0 > > U) U- LL Q f0 N O ~ 00 C7 O V O ~ a e JVO, 0 Lo o .r 0f c9 ~a 3 0 LL to cD Cl) C N 00 Cl) Q~ O C o ~ ca U CU z L Co m U o N Q Q = co O aw rn m N L N N f`6 y C) 0 1 02 C~ ~ m Cl) G r ~ ~C v CV i c ~ N o N O O c~ya C > > m O L C N__ U m E U = $ cn M O O E Cf) C) C) E m C) C) Q. o C) C) C) M Lm~ No 00000 . tM MNCDONrOd CO CO NN O- CD OIt IT CD CD OO O C N v- LO CDpprOM0gT pNU') OM (D C: Otito LO CD Oco CD ISO Q-C tB rr ti N C: (0 C O U O Q 4+ T Q N N Q O CL L N O O C O p 0U) C dQ co E E cn (D a~ o (D (D m ui ❑ll N O O Q~ ~a~_❑~_ TTUZ N O (B N to U U cch W p m ❑ E E r t Q m t17 a N N 3 > 7 C~$ N to O. a z- 2 L) 0 2 N pp 30 O O O O N p Q f0 -r- p O 0 (D O N N Q s_ _ ~~cn S~U~~m❑ ❑u.~rUV»cnU- a cD co q! LP a~ o~ Try? ,i_ FRASER ENGINEERING, INC. T~ 9'3-29 y )e_fa 1car~-Qd~S'~ z' -f cI JOB. NO BY SUBJECT DATE SHEETNO . ~ v av L L A "D V N (00 m m m^ I 1 I 1 "c C c C 39 to N L V q •F O q I I 1 I In lA VI N - m 7 J J N ~ C qca~- L - co co } C q-~ m - M O C9 C7 .N .N .N r ; q c 4- 0"o \ - \ s \ m eD rn r- N W D v- m m v- co a O. ID N> V G`•' M - IL M- IL M -a. 1- F- ; - c 0 o O 0 q } C- U a N q C L U O^ N M 1 1 1 I O-~+~ 3} a o 0 4- 0 00 v U m 1 I t 1 m 01} L c N G' m J O q v- a L s s j4- 0 tD~ q O m - UO^ v ap N < - \ 1.4 N 00, ~S.- O 0 O W O O N N.+ M - M - M N - C N N O 0 } S Yj d- N 0 a 1 c ~O O O n of M 42 OL L q Q 0 L U W - - N N ?I,% --r W; q L U to s1- N 4-= 0 .2;--N}mr - N MI N( } c c q N Ol} %0 Y N^ Y Y 1 L < C N C O O m q a L • U N U cm U O1 U D1 tT \ O \ O H c C O U~ q ` O- ~ O C pp C I C - -F- - O 1 CCU Zm 00- Zm q- LL- J N a- O w } C N U M n O m C- O.m N N 40 E r- Go 0% N a L ma m4- 1 1 1 M n 6 L 1 a M c t11 0 O 4- 0 'n P O L. m- N pU Ott 10 N N} V Z q > N Oh o E -vO- v m% m _ co M= U) C miLL-.0 q N N C ~,S E C O q N N N 0/ pp Y n I N O G N > L J m 0 c Z a O N 0 } 0 O 0= < 0 C N N; k co N 0 L L r O N d C Y O Z q U -rte H N L O < C r Q. N q- W g N> d w (Z' -H 00 C LL1 r r V H N 7 0 q O 0 w u1 O~ q L N; O < Y - L L. t U' w } 4- L U N UO q 2 CL _a 0 i- w L. U 0 q q 1•- N N C t[1 O O q q r Q' L - O j N CL 4) go ta L q C L C 1 4-- q- L q} W J \F0- ~O I n, H 0 U } L -00 CL 1- q EU O E U' U O+ -X C O) Of a U U - m U L < - a 0 0 N c E S q S n O F- c o o q q U O w C N 0 U N C q c W ~ ~ O O L} 0 r a C m? y Z C 0 C O 7 U - 1 I 1 m 0 C Z O 0: C tr 00 O - O N - W 111 O~ q+- ~ c LLqL E U U 4-+- 00 E c q O 0.0 W q U~ C c O 00 `~-r 0 > N c 0- Cr 1- 111-- O N q q} mN- N N 00111 0 C +L-0 1 +=o I p c 1nrn ENO tO G- C < L O 1--- C C C C C 0-+- O m S s CL O s N 0 0 0 0 Oaaa.aa E- U q N N m N U ~C m F-~~rr------ q m } mr L ? Q- -W N-N vQ 111111111- m N - ~ L } t1 ~ L - T n 0 IA o `m o « rn f/1 f4 ~a 3 0 LL c co cD Cl) O _(D U O UV F- a z 0) co c '0 W c ~ N ca m N rnG a~ N, L Cc -Y. 1 C m r) N N Y a) d 0 0 c C4 a 0 ti E m O - N O (A > > N O m (D 0) c cC 2 2 _ N O O O O N oorE~ 000 L M L O O O _ C)- (D 0 C) CD -0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 000 N f 72 O O CV " CV CD Ict O O °s a) r- LO C7O(3)ma o0)mLO ~N N.C C CO~OLnCD O(nOD LO O'j O Q C) 04 -tIt OOI`O - ti co O I` F- U O a) ~ =O •V L U _ (D L O- a) O p O O O U U C ° Oo O U) Q O. m a) E a) Q) E L caVcn~°~as coas~as2 =W°= DLL O O O m as- (1) :3., O NCL tC5~(A Z U) U U tai) W -p LL 0 C = fn E CO Q -0 i) (0 fd = = = 0 to ° a) Y 30 ° c cU) o r 3- v v°° cs 3 s > = c o 'o O O as ° Q ass LM O C.) a~ as O m o L a°i as n° O FE mcn »>wLLIi a O_ N_ N O O _ o In o N m 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 O I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I LL 1 I 1 , 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 i I I I I I 1 t 1 I 1 1 I , I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 , I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I , O 1 I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I i 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 , I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 - - 1- - ! - -1- - I - - I - - ! - ! - - 1 p I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 O 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 co 1 1 1 I 1 I to 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 i 1 I I I 1 ~ 1 i 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I L 0 I I I I I 1 I 1 M N ~ ~ --r-r--r-r--r-r-'~- r- O C p o 3 C - I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I ~ I 1 1 I I 1 I , , I 1 I 1 1 I I CD U Q I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 U - O 1 1 1 I I 1 I I V ^ 1 I I I I I I 1 CL 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 y~ I I 1 1 1 1 1 I C EW 0 I I I I I I I 1 - A C 1 I I I 1 I I I 0 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 V/ co CL L 1 1 I I I I 1 4 U I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 Q. N 1 1 1 1 I I I i O O)o co F- 1 I I 1 I 1 I C w > y,,, I 1 1 1 I I 1 W N (V 1 i I I I 1 I .C fl. I I I I 1 1 I C y 'y 0 ~ N ~ 1 I i I 1 I I I C f6 Y MM Q) 0 I 1 I , 1 I I LO fQ U. O VI L cQ --1--1--1--1---i•- I--L- 0L I I I I I 1 I I V G LO r 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I O C co L 1 I I 1 1 I 1 O C 1 I I I I I 1 1 AA,, I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 O W I 1 t I C (a C O 3 1 I I I I I I I 6 = ti 0 Ncn 0 E O I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I N N _ --1--! --1--! --I- - O 2 N O I - 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 p Q co I I 1 1 1 I I i N 'X O I I 1 I I 1 1 I M co V I I 1 I I I i i C O 1 1 1 1 1 C C) G I I I I 1 I E O C 0 C) Q O G O O I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I L I L L L 0 C) -a C7 U O~ co O O , 1 1 O C O I 1 I I I I I , T- 1 1 1 I G 0 O - C) CD O O O Lo N E' - O N N N CO --r-r----r---- r- ,--r- O CD ~ I I I I I 1 1 0 O O 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I A cr- N N ~ E p 1 i 1 1 I 1 1 I Q Q. C O 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 (B O I I I I 1 1 I I i~ N LL L c 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I O~ r" S U 1 1 1 I 1 I i 1 C 1 1 I I I 1 1 Q V 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 Q m I I 1 I r V M O I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 0 [C-C CL O fl' -+--I- +--1--~- p to a) 1 1 1 a) E L v' u_ 4 O ~ N O U- m c C N ~ O ~ O O O O 0 O/OO Q L 1 1 I I I I 1 I q ly G V C J LL W D U I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I L 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 d I I 1 1 1 I I O Lo Co to ti In co 1[) Q O w O ti O 10 O O 7 N O O O O o 0 (4) y;dad lauueyo DRAINAGE STUDY FOR n LOT 5, MAP NO. 13320 APR fj 4 199 Cif b- ,t Prepared for: D.L. Storer P.O. Box 2604 Del Mar, CA 92014 Prepared by: Dudek & Associates, Inc. 605 Third Street Encinitas, CA 92024 cOY CFESS/ ~,EO NOF 'lam tli [7 rn February 14, 1997 020187 (Job No. 1347-01) Ex , 9-0-97 C CAUi4'~P 411 tq!+ Gerald L. Hoff i er, E. RCE 20187 A ti TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction A-1 Project Location Map A-2 Drainage Criteria and Methodology A-4 Explanation of Rational Method A-5 Design Tables A-11 Hydrology Study B-1 Drainage Study Map C-1 A : INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The proposed project is for the grading of Lot 5 of Map No. 13320. This report provides the calculations to support the drainage design in order to safely convey th 100-year storm flows across the site and into the existing drainage channel running parallel to Double LL ranch Road along the frontage of this site. REFERENCES This report references the hydrology study titled "Hydrology Calculations for TM 93- 029, Double LL Ranch Six Lot Subdivision", prepared by Fraser Engineering, Inc., dated March 12, 1995, revised January 8, 1996, on file at the City of Encinitas. This report contains the hydrologic calculations for determining the 100-year storm flows across the drainage basin containing Lot 5. GENERAL DESCRIPTION The site is located approximately 0.1 miles southwest of the intersection of Lone Jack Road and Double LL Ranch Road, in the City of Encinitas. The proposed project will consist of a graded pad, for future residential use, consisting of approximately 1.3 acres of graded area. Offsite drainage will be conveyed by a concrete ditch, along the easterly portion of the site, into the existing channel along the lot frontage. A runoff coefficient of 0.5 was used in this analysis to be conservati-te. Al A s ~ i / Ponsallo t U : ° 8K 8L , 3 7~ P NORTH VE CO FR CANYON RD D CASTLE RD l/ ~ Z 9C = T 5a Luis Rey 11 ~ yo O v a N P T BOBIER 12 12L 12? a BL 1 O ~ a DR ~ roc VISTA 'AnNTC ..,I Ff CEAN- T RD SIDE 13 14 15 16=, ~ 17 a CARLSBAD C4 M1 SAN TRcOS f 1$ NO 5~ Rp AIRPORT COS g~ \ Q~Ny pp&OMAR ~ M t AKE 22 ESCONOIE 19 20 N MARO V 23 V Q. ~ s ~a SATIQUITO GFf O~~ LAGOO La Costa = lyq`~ NI LA cosr AV Ra V14 eucadia OLIVENHAIN RD PR 6 27 HIGNE'~N 2 Z = f( wwe ! /T d I CH LAKE 28 Cq,N HODGES NCINITS ENG, -1 D A ,v~ f( NOT O Cardi By a) LA RqN Th Sea GRANADA 0 BERNARDO RD 30 ~P 31 Rancho o ? 29 LOMAS ! Bernardo T SOLANA BEACH SANTA FE ~P a 3 ~pq 40 W OW h DR O airbanks ~ F 3 VIA A Ede Ranch 'W ell RD T = '.1-z" OCarm I O o < Valle p DEL MAR W 35 36 2° POPOWAY 34 o 4,y PO AY 37 0 U n m Q V AILEV ~ o BL SORPEN MESA 00 41 3$ RUiI e0ME4O orrento O Valley z IRAMAR Mira tar x Y Z Z 1 45 46 47 Unive city gOLE0P0 g9WY O Tierrasant a Jolla LA RE- 1 111'y MnNT ~Z - VACINITY MAP-- POUBLEV Q RANCH RD. DOVE HOLLOW ROAD as vr- C, SITE Q at ROAD a a z ° a o LONE s v z a NOT TO SCALE 3 DRAINAGE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY Design Storm: 100-year Land Use: Natural (Current) Residential (Future) Soil Type: Soil type based on SCS Soil Survey for San Diego County. Hydrologic Soil "D" was used for this analysis. Runoff Coefficirnts: "C" value based on San Diego County Hydrology manual. Rainfall intensity: Based on criteria presented in the San Diego County Hydrology Manual. w RATIONAL METHOD THE RATIONAL METHOD WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED TO ESTIMATE RUNOFF FROM SMALL URBAN AND DEVELOPED AREAS, AND ITS USE SHOULD GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THESE CONDITIONS. BASICALLY, THE RATIONAL-METHOD EQUATION RELATES RAINFALL INTENSITY, A RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, AND DRAINAGE-AREA SIZE TO THE DIRECT PEAK RUNOFF FROM THE DRAINAGE AREA. THE RELATIONSHIP IS EXPRESSED BY THE EQUATION: Q = CIA WHERE: Q = THE RUNOFF IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (CFS) FROM A GIVEN AREA. C = A RUNOFF COEFFICIENT REPRESENTING THE RATIO OF RUNOFF TO RAINFALL. I = THE TIME-AVERAGED RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES PER HOUR CORRESPONDING TO THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION. A = DRAINAGE AREA, (ACRES). THE VALUES OF THE RAINFALL COEFFICIENT (C) AND THE RAINFALL INTENSITY (I) ARE BASED ON A STUDY OF DRAINAGE-AREA CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS TYPE AND CONDITION OF THE RUNOFF SURFACES AND THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION. DATA REQUIRED FOR THE COMPUTATION OF PEAK DISCHARGE BY THE RATIONAL METHOD ARE: (i) RAINFALL INTENSITY, (I) FOR A STORM OF SPECIFIED DURATION AND SELECTED DESIGN FREQUENCY, (ii) DRAINAGE- AREA CHARACTERISTICS OF SIZE (A), SHAPE, SLOPE, AND A RAINFALL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT (C). A5 K ~ RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN) Coefficient, C Soil Group 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 Comme-rcial (z' 80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 .85 Industrial 12) 90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95 NOTES: Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works. (2) Where actual conditions; deviate significantly from the tabulated imperviousness values of 80% or 90%, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on D soil group. Actual imperviousness = 50% Tabulated imperviousness = 80% Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 0.53 80 IV-A-9 APPENDIX IX ^ Updated 4/93 o MO. Lr, C"2', v~ ' ! E _ 0 11 _ C~~~PP a GA - f../ i c° vow Q C. O M cz~ L:r J ` r `3D r 22 Lr, Fia.~ cr C Vr: 1\ LntV w l u C T iLC7, V 1 a O CSI y M M w z~ O < - O W W < C, Z ~ < - w rn Z O v. H + < L / CO'' N C z 5 v ~ W U z ov O a, O I. v p 00 O L'J 9 N a< W M I U Z LL- J M I 4' L N O C M W< O H FT- ~ D m C) O L,J O O 7 U O < m of 1 0 4 < O ° rn Ci p r. W O W J < O U c) LL. I z 7 H N < u a a A 7 II-A-7 i C a ti c I ~r ~ , 11 `L^ 7 MCC c co z Cn \ , S2 !LIM Ly.. ~ ~ i 7 rv ~ ~ fie- tIl CJS Lr - o '`l -CD CV ' 4 ✓ i l w P~ \ 1 m • 6 < F a O < O Z C ~ C J z < z v LLJ o en a < <OO _ - - t11 V <y0 O if1 _ cvl t i Z Z _ C~ 0 v Ow0 z i U < }'F- M L9 Z < O M' N O d O < o O W J z U oU-H N ..l U w a 3 d G t O O 00 r- C N 0 4- jc u% C p .r d d x r0 j X -0 -0 LO .0 4-3 C N S.- LO b •N r i 41 5 ~ V U ^ ~O 0 t 7 7 N O•r V) C r N r• s: r Q: t i C C U 2r-Z C. •r r0 O = CC: Ci. 1 > O 4- O •r d LO f, s- •r I NC- > ro d-) ~ 3 Q C qzr •r -0 U N = +s d C_ t0 N C 4- 4- O _ -4-3 S- d N 4-3 L E vO`" i C '10 S- d a U C -r• 1 T7 N 0 m~~ to =C O 0 ~N CLI N t0 i O O C C. O-0 O t0 •r •r t C t0 d O t0 C O O +3 C) 4-3 4j C II i r- .r 4J d r t t0 t0 4-2 ro C L C i C1+j +3 4-1 C N .r •r 01 t0 C i -r •l7 O •r •r •r' O C V U O O S_ C-0 U O• G 3 = C O E r .r- .t .r 4- ' G er Lv p •r .r •r O W 'a) O t- r U S- -r- V V S- C_ C• t0 N (Ij C O G+•+ QJ 'U = . +•J -0 Cr •C 11ko CL s_ Ln i fl. M. +2 a`~i N c E C -r C a G i d C •r O i i CL 4.3 C1 p i t0 C 0 •r- •r O LL. i r O to O Z7 t N O O U E 0- t-• C t r r N 4-1 G 'fl Z ~ 4- LI) co m- t0 to t i .C V t- C t0 ~ -0 S-• E 4J LU -0 •r U C O 4J N C1 r- C +J, •r d N LO O t0 (U t-- O 0 U = S.. O t0 cn N N O -c 4-3 (A O E L N 0 •r = i•) O 4-) +J y N +2 Lv It O II O C) C N tC O n t0 O r N t0 •r7 11 +-j S.• C• b O O r• 4- S- r L t u C) LC Z7 U U LL N S p C +3 +J CL O O G I +.a •r N O- Q + H N r i ^ ^ ^ Q Q: C'.: M d' O i~ n ^ ^ ^ •r ^ ^ r- N M G. ~ t- In Q y 6-Hour Precipitation (inches) z: L3 O Ln O Ln O En O LO O In O N tO V; L[) Q !h M c l; r r• LO O -~-r- - T'-L' D Ln \ Ld r-. L 1 _ - - - a rr ' - - - - - r' M . I_ - -r , 1, 1 1 1 I t ! ( N i LZ-. V] •r-1 0. CO) ~Y O 1+ cS 1 - E v t` %0 Q - - _ - - - - T~_ Il A it 11 _ - _ _ -.t-- - 4 H H C1. 0 1- tO J - - - M 1 . 1_ _ - - - - - - ' I 1 -t - - r- ^t - . I I f I I I -7- APPENDIX XI IV-A-14 (.anon JSayoui) X4isua-4uI ~ i A/ EO&WT/DN 9L 31 .385 F~ of Tc ,y J SDOD Tc = Tme o/ e0Y7cen1,1211,017 4000 L = Len9fh o/' wafershed H ° Di/f'erence /n e%vafian along e/ileni'me S/ooe 1117 (Sce ~9Ppendix Y tV 300a ~ T iL1i/es Fee/ flours iLlinufes 1000 4--240 3 /BD /D /DDO \ 900 2 /20 B00 7,00 /DD 16,00 \ \ 5 90 SOO \ ~ 4- 7O ¢00 200 \ \ 2 a0 ~ 30 /OO / SDOD ~~QDD 20 3000 /6 SO ti D. S \ /4 ¢0 2000 \ \ /2 /BOD \ NOTE /600 /D /QDD 9 1200 B ~IFOR NATURAL WATERSIM-DS 2D ~I ADD TEN MINUTES TO I~ /DOD 7 COMPUTED TIME OF CON- it 900 CENTRATION_ BOO 6 • 600 S /D 5DD ¢ 400 3 300 5 200 H L r SAN DIEGO COUNTY NOMOGRAPH FOR DETERMINATfON DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc) FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS DESIGN MANUAL APPROVED DATE APPENDIX X-A AI TV-A-10 Rev. 5/81 ~ S 7-30 HANDBOOK OF HYDRAULICS Table 7-4. For Determining the Area a of the Cross Section of a Circular Conduit Flouring Part Full depth of water D Let and C. =the tabulated value. Then a Cade. diameter of channel d D 00 .01 .02 .03 . .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 d .0 .0000 .0013 .0037 .0069 .0105 .0147 .0192 .0242 .0294 .0350 .1 .0409 .0470 .0534 .0600 .0668 .0739 .0811 .0885 .0961 .1039 .2 .1118 .1199 .1281 .1365 .1449 .1535 .1623 .1711 .1800 .1890 .3 .1982 .2074 .2167 .2260 .2355 .2450 .2546 .2642 .2739 .2836 4 .2934 .3032 .3130 .3229 .3328 .3428 .3527 .3627 .3727 .3827 .5 .393 .403 .413 .423 .433 .443 .453 .462 .472 .482 .6 .492 .502 .512 .521 .531 .540 .550 .559 .569 .578 .7 .587 .596 .605 .614 .623 .632 .640 .649 .657 .666 .8 .674 .681 .689 .697 .704 2 .719 .725 .732 .738 .9 I .745 .750 .756 .761 .766 .771 .775 .779 .782 .784 Table 7-5. For Determining the Hydraulic Radius r of the Cross Section of a Circular Conduit Flowing Part Full depth of water _ D and G = the tabulated value. Then r = Crd. Let diameter of channel d D .08 .09 - .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 d I 0 I .000 .007 .013 .020 .026 .033 .039 .045 .051 .057 1 I .063 .070 .075 .081 .087 .093 .099 .104 .110 .115 .121 .126 .131 .136 .142 .147 .152 .157 .161 .166 .3 .171 .176 .180 .185 .189 .193 .198 .202 .206 .210 .4 .214 .218 .222 .226 .229 .233 - .236 .240 .243 .247 .5 .250 *."53 .256 .259 .262 .265 .268 .270 .273 .275 X .278 .280 .282 .284 .28E 288 .290 .292 .293 .295 .7 .296 .298 .299 .300 .301 .3U2 .302 .303 .304 .304 .8 I .304 .304 .304 .304 .304 .303 .303 .302 .301 •299 .9 I .298 .296 .294 .292 .289 .286 I .253 279 .274 .267 ,411 1 STEADY UNIFORM FLOW IN OPEN CHANNELS 7-59 Table 7-1:3. Values of K for Circular Channels in the Formula Q - Ii n D = depth of water d = diameter of channel D i i .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 08 I .09 d .0 15.02 10.56 8.67 7.38 6.56 6.97 5.-17 5.08 4.76 .1 4.4'9 14.25 4.04 3.56 3.69 3.54 3.41 3.28 3.17 3.06 .2 2.96 2.87 2.79 2.71 2.63 2.56 2.49 2.42 2.:36 2.30 .3 2.25 12.20 2.14 2.09 2.05 2.00 1.96 1.92 1.87 1.54 .4 1.80 1.76 1.72 1.69 1.66 1.62 1.59 1.56 1.53 1.50 .5 1.470 1.442, 1.115 1.388 1.362 1.336 1.311 1.28(11 1.2631 1.'238 .6 1.215 1.192 1.170 1.1.18 1.126 1.105 1.084 1.0614 1.04-131 1.023 .7 1.004 .984 .965 .947 .92S .910 S91 .874 .856.838 .8 .821 .804 .787 .770 .75:3 .73(1 .720 .703 .687 .670 .9 .6541 037 .621 .604 .588 .571 .553 .535 .516 .496 1.0 .•1631 Table 7-t4. Values or K' for Circcrlar• Channels in the Formula rt D = depth of w.Lter d = diameter of channel D - .00 .01 .02 .03 .0.1 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 d .0 .00007 .00031 .00074 .00135 .00'_'22 .003`28 .00455 .0060-1 .007; - .1 .00967 .0118 .01 12 .0167 .0115 .0225 .0257 .0291 .03-7 .036G .2 .0406 .0448 .0492 .0537 .0585 .0634 .0686 .0738 .0793 .0849 .3 .0907 .0966 .1027 .1089 .1153 .1218 .1254 .1352 .1420 .1490 .4 .1561 .1633 .1703 .1779 .1854 .1929 .2005 .3082 .2160 .223S .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 .453 .438 .4613 .468 .473 .477 .481 .485 .488 .491 .9 .494 .496 .497 .498 .498 .498 .496 .494 .489 .483 it, C. 1.0 .463 t ti A/ Z- . f " r y y R R R O m C O a--- 1 I I I I I m I y ~N tan Co `i aa 4J - - a „ to a -.1 m u a y f+1 C7 C7 C7 = = = = m co ,a O L, .i N c C4 c N m ri 0 u 0 0 0 i1 0 > 41 11.1 O Q O M .•-1 m (•1 .•1 m m -4 m ~l 134 w o R 1+ o rn C m m 41 a m V R L m------ 41 41 :1 to I m C m 0 O -.1 A is a x 1+ N _ I I I 8 F A U 4 o i1 m o V• U m I I I I I 1 a 1+ 1+ 4. ~I •.i y m m a.~ a LL U1 V. - R o > 11 11 1+ a m 1a 0 m m .i m - - - - - - - - - - - 14 O -.1 - - - - - - c •.1 0 0 .C .1 L1 s. c - rv R LL u w sa Ri 0 0 1 -4 a -4 d' CO rv .1 LL t R .-1 4J 41 w a -4 0 a1 0 o v \ \ \ \ p\1 I N .-1 m A C 3 r O -4 LL m e4 r+1 .-1 1•'1 •'1 .--1 a •.1 C a 41 W O X C .O+ x a E m o e - 4j w 41 C a l- o o a p r a r•1 a 4A1 .1 a LL • u a 1'1 x • r4 N M r to 4.1 U LL •.1 m 0 LL u to m o y a .-1 m •.i to w m -4 m R • x s a o a m to y E C > m m _ v 7. rv Z 0 0~ m m 0 m a U b N U b+ I U b1 I U V1 I C+ I \ O I \ O H E+ "i a m m 1 .1 O a Z. O a C a C -A E. .4 F 1~4 r li .1 c OW y R "4 In u - w > jr~oo uc > G I* 0 1 rn r m o+ t I I I eq (4 -4 0 0 4.1 ko r o .r .1 .1 .r 0 a m N r' (s• 01 0 y . r• .i N v1 a 3 d M 0 N w 0 0 y 1n Oo O C tT .1 y a1 M 1n r .•1 to • X I t l m B a a O 1n O 11 0 0 1+ "1 ,OZ 4 N 01 to Y m C u 0 a1 (p 0 0 -.1 -.4 41 0 41 to •4 LLB m -.o y C7 r1 0 •.i a C 04.40 O fV •j• 1n O a. 4 .4 A -.1 0 w 1.1 1n r o B m .•1 m x I I m 0 41 C 1e A a m Z v U 0 1n I x 0+ L 3 a •-1 NO 11 u a O+ORr414.0 m o, c 0 41 ••1 A a a * J1 11 C o m> a a 41 z o 0 0 3 -AR 4 0 o C w u 4•1 0 CO •.4 m z a Z In ~4 I .1 G o y a +1 C > F CA \ O 1 I 1 I C o B A C -.1 +J w ••1 E•1 0 o I 1n +1 m 01 C o R n 04 vJ 1n 0% to o .-1 0 14 C C w Vl w a 0 l.. 41 •.r •.1 O O 0_4A O+1 U I o o •-•1 u 41 0 T O w R O u N Z 1n •-1 1 .--I ri f•• a w 4-j 0 0 0 F o o i an B C o B C 0 1.1 w m* C7 U 0 U•• A •-r O p O .-1 y X i1 w N 0 B 41 E ,7., O O 4 0 0 0 0 .a 0. a 0 $ O 1n .r 1 .-1 •14 w R LL m o C N a+ w H 1 I I 1 y 4J -A C U C3 I 1n 0 0 0 0 0 a in o ur •A 04 .a 1n o, 1 .-1 C " A 0 .C C W a .0 A 41 I x 41 41 -.1 0- o o B a .r a 4.1 u m a y O O 41 r-1 J1 C 0 o w 0 11 0 1n .-1 .4 w a 41 11 O -1 11 F I 1 0 0 4. +1 .-1 .-1 0 0 0 1n .C CO t 3 .l 114 0 a LL N In O1 41 V 41 a C -.1 B C C o almo 7 G O C U y 10 a m X to Z Z Z Z Z O .,1 •.1 C O m M 0 1-1 u W 00000m mmmm s 11 aw a .C a O Nl H H E+ E H a a a a a a R U U •11 .r 0 41 a H O O 0 0 U t m m H Q N .•1 N v O 1n v1 1n .-1 0 41 I 1 0 .4 41 C,• . o rr C4 r m O m 6.0 >1 1s a * .-1 LL•-1 U 41 a A L U A•13 A(ZEA - ~ ~~,,~r Q jc?~c S1ZIA,6 Z,)r ZW6 =CzA=0~ Aei~A = Q 9/o Acres Pee = 2 ° tu, C 71h~~ oG Svc. irr ~ads2s L = 4501st = 3zz - zzs 97 v~ G CNO~I~ ire-ivs Q: G~,q = D. S(~} G~ )CO.~~) = 2, 2l 4F5 TO wxw-v Arvr A =rcMC Tim F r~ l~iTU t S Alm 6U.6 r8ZZ f r4VA NvoE to s - ~t o ~ T -1A- Ali) 'IA' L12i-= l01 fi Cl,,~ Z, z~ 6Fs B~ 1 ~/3 s Ih- Q lGu~ s I3a-T~ - p~cr A12 ) yJ = 0, 0/& mg- u/Eo DOW! S - 2 °b tka, k5aa4F G, 5' FW-4,00*0 TAY 2' t~/►DE DtT6 N 066? o U, 0~3 ¢ (Z ~ ~'3 o~) rZ = 3, 5 U cis sv ~rkgx 0.V/G, ivo = Z 67 CPS L 3, 5~ cFS Ole- f 2. $Z RA-P S1zl~rC, c~c cac , Qc~ = Z. G7 CF5 J21P - RA-P s~ Q't vr--,WC-17{I p6~2- 6aC-. il-00c. 5jFCr7OA l 2-00 0 t;A G~ 413) D~.c/uE VELD~iTV ; 2. (O 7 GtS I ~i pv /nl% c~lr/~vGi Ttt / Vn~ -FA44z 7 - 14- 13 -7 / =7 v 27 ~~M 14~~C>> T - CSC r3ac4r~ A-// . p~d'- b. r3? 1 ~ ~a = D Olo~~ so PF9 612C-E V rnoce- cl Gl G,~+T sS lziP- /u~P 2.0 ' TH~u~ Sl Z~ P.~D ~EQ- ~~1~50 Q -40 , Ooly FCP- IM ~3 -oz~, r ~ J V -A tj SFACN~D G/aucrc~l,.i,, ; aCF_ ~~Sjb~ Ytiu~x ~ s ~~t' n~ _.(2E TLtP ~-1~ I . I'S M RIP ZlD' S(2F PA7) P62- Sosu~~ D-40 I Z' 12' 7f~C*9E 7~~C*7F*7~**iC ~C**7f 7E*~f '~C ]f *]~7~~C ]~~C ]~C iC*~f ~C*7~~f'IC~C***]~f~'***********~C*7~~C'~C~C 7~C***7E**]~C*]~~C ]~~C ]r ~C HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982-95 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 5.1 Release Date: 01/01/95 License ID 1419 Analysis prepared by: Dudek and Associates, Inc. 605 Third Street Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 942-5147 TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 11:33 2/23/1997 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW ANALYSIS FOR BOX CULVERT * FOR LOT 5, MAP NO. 13320 * GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE INPUT INFORMATION: CONSTANT CHANNEL SLOPE(FEET/FEET) _ .025000 CHANNEL LENGTH(FEET) = 20.40 CONSTANT CHANNEL FLOW(CFS) = 49.60 CONSTANT CHANNEL FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) _ .013000 ASSUMED CHANNEL CONTROL DEPTH(FEET) _ .00 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF INTERVALS IN PROFILE = 25 CONSTANT CHANNEL BASEWIDTH(FEET) = 6.00 CONSTANT CHANNEL "Z" FACTOR = .0000 NORMAL DEPTH(FEET) _ .68 CRITICAL DEPTH(FEET) = 1.29 UPSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED DEPTH(FT) = 1.29 GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION: DISTANCE FROM FLOWDEPTH VELOCITY SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) .000 1.285 6.430 1.928 927.46 .032 1.261 6.553 1.928 927.79 .135 1.237 6.681 1.930 928.80 .316 1.213 6.815 1.934 930.53 .584 1.188 6.954 1.940 932.99 .947 1.164 7.098 1.947 936.23 1.418 1.140 7.249 1.957 940.28 2.009 1.116 7.406 1.968 945.18 2.736 1.092 7.571 1.982 950.97 3.617 1.067 7.742 1.999 957.70 4.675 1.043 7.922 2.018 965.41 5.936 1.019 8.110 2.041 974.16 7.432 .995 8.308 2.067 984.02 9.205 .971 8.515 2.097 995.03 11.305 .946 8.733 2.131 1007.29 13.800 .922 8.962 2.170 1020.87 ~1~ r 1 16.775 .898 9.204 2.214 1035.86 20.349 .874 9.459 2.264 1052.35 20.400 .873 9.462 2.264 1052.55 LO 1 D ~ c r QS A-00 Avornov;,(- ppst.- To ''13A r~ A, Cfl~n CtlRnn = LAm T 'god ~S~ 0. S 1 00 _2 T= PF-4~ Aq J?IjW U7`/ It,)C, ~v4O 2- C Ccru~iT Ps 3D„R~ So' LpAl G , o)/ A- SZ oAF of 2r757 A-?544~of r---D l-p~l~ rcUG G~G~r'o; s~r~ Gi~~au~u.~( u a~~ YA- E9 F6010 PP-oiof of 6~xl; r 30 to 0-7 HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982-95 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 5.1 Release Date: 01/01/95 License ID 1419 Analysis prepared by: Dudek and Associates, Inc. 605 Third Street Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 942-5147 TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 14:41 2/23/1997 GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE INPUT INFORMATION------------------------- CHANNEL SLOPE(FEET/FEET) 027500 = 50.00 CHANNEL LENGTH(FEET) = 51.70 CONSTANT CHANNEL FLOW(CFS) _ CONSTANT CHANNEL FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.013000 ASSUMED CHANNEL CONTROL DEPTH(FEET) _ MAXIMUM NUMBER OF INTERVALS IN PROFILE = 25 CONSTANT PIPE DIAMETER(INCHES) = 30.000 NORMAL DEPTH(FEET) = 1.63 CRITICAL DEPTH(FEET) = 2.32 UPSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED DEPTH(FT) = 2.32 GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION---------------------- DISTANCE FROM FLOWDEPTH VELOCITY SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ 159 MOMENTUM1906 DS) CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) ENERGY(FT) .000 2.320 10.878 1419.92 .093 2.293 10.963 4.160 .373 2.265 11.054 4.164 1420.84 .845 2.237 11.152 4.170 1422.39 1424.56 1.516 2.210 11.257 4.179 2.398 2.182 11.369 4.191 1427.91 3.505 2.155 11.487 4.205 1432.22 1437.18 4.857 2.127 11.611 4.222 6.476 2.100 11.742 4.242 1442.82 8.391 2.072 11.880 4.265 1449.17 1456.24 10.636 2.045 12.025 4.292 13.255 2.017 12.178 4.321 1464.06 16.301 1.990 12.337 4.355 1472.67 1482.24 19.841 1.962 12.504 4.392 23.958 1.935 12.680 4.433 1492.82 28.764 1.907 12.863 4.478 1504.27 1516.63 34.402 1.880 13.054 4.528 41.069 1.852 13.255 4.582 1529.94 49.042 1.825 13.465 4.641 1544.23 1545.70 50.000 1.822 13.486 4.648 f> " U PIPE-FLOW HYDRAULICS COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: LACFCD,LACRD, AND OCEMA HYDRAULICS CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1982-94 Advanced Engineering Software Ver. 5.6A Release Date: 6/01/94 License ID 14 Analysis prepared by: Z I j l 77 Dudek and Associates, Inc. 605 Third Street ~io• c~ v Encinitas, CA 92024 Exp• (619) 942-5147 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * LOT 5, MAP 13320 * STORM DRAIN ALTERNATIVE B * 30" HDPEP PIPE PER ADS S...t MAY 14 1997 ~},?1~.E `--ii?l:i S t` `P'C ILS FILE NAME: LOT5REV.PIP 01~t`r"nirr TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 9:56 5/11/1997 GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW ANALYSIS FOR PIPE SYSTEM NODAL POINT STATUS TABLE (Note: indicates nodal point data used.) UPSTREAM RUN DOWNSTREAM RUN NODE MODEL PRESSURE PRESSURE+ FLOW PRESSURE+ NUMBER PROCESS HEAD(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) DEPTH(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) 100.00- 2.29 Dc 1331.58 1.72* 1493.36 } FRICTION 110.00- 2.29*Dc 1331.58 2.29*Dc 1331.58 } CATCH BASIN 110.00- 4.02* 849.87 2.29 Dc 320.89 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ENERGY BALANCES USED IN EACH PROFILE = 25 NOTE: STEADY FLOW HYDRAULIC HEAD-LOSS COMPUTATIONS BASED ON THE MOST CONSERVATIVE FORMULAE FROM THE CURRENT LACRD,LACFCD, AND OCEMA DESIGN MANUALS. DOWNSTREAM PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA: NODE NUMBER = 100.00 FLOWLINE ELEVATION = 191.60 PIPE FLOW = 49.60 CFS PIPE DIAMETER = 30.00 INCHES ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM CONTROL HGL = .000 *NOTE: ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM CONTROL DEPTH(****** FT.) IS LESS THAN CRITICAL DEPTH( 2.29 FT.) CRITICAL DEPTH IS ASSUMED AS DOWNSTREAM CONTROL DEPTH FOR UPSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS NODE 100.00 : HGL = < 193.321>;EGL= < 196.262>;FLOWLINE= < 191.600> FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 1 UPSTREAM NODE 110.00 ELEVATION = 193.10 (FLOW IS SUPERCRITICAL) CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES(LACFCD): Y PIPE FLOW = 49.60 CFS PIPE DIAMETER = 30.00 INCHES PIPE LENGTH = 55.00 FEET MANNING'S N = .01200 NORMAL DEPTH(FT) = 1.51 CRITICAL DEPTH(FT) = 2.29 UPSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED FLOWDEPTH(FT) = 2.29 GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION: DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) .000 2.294 10.512 4.011 1331.58 .094 2.263 10.612 4.013 1332.03 .378 2.231 10.722 4.017 1333.37 .859 2.200 10.839 4.025 1335.60 1.549 2.168 10.965 4.036 1338.72 2.461 2.137 11.098 4.051 1342.75 3.612 2.105 11.241 4.068 1347.69 5.026 2.074 11.392 4.090 1353.57 6.729 2.042 11.551 4.115 1360.41 8.754 2.011 11.720 4.145 1368.25 11.142 1.979 11.898 4.179 1377.10 13.942 1.947 12.086 4.217 1387.02 17.215 1.916 12.284 4.260 1398.03 21.039 1.884 12.492 4.309 1410.19 25.511 1.853 12.711 4.363 1423.54 30.758 1.821 12.942 4.424 1438.14 36.946 1.790 13.185 4.491 1454.04 44.304 1.758 13.441 4.565 1471.30 53.149 1.727 13.710 4.647 1490.01 55.000 1.721 13.758 4.662 1493.36 NODE 110.00 HGL = < 195.394>;EGL= < 197.111>;FLOWLINE= < 193.100> -►vP d~ lk~A.o we~~ k`i~ F"ze.e bcc,nA . FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 8 UPSTREAM NODE 110.00 ELEVATION = 193.43 (FLOW IS AT CRITICAL DEPTH) CALCULATE CATCH BASIN ENTRANCE LOSSES(LACFCD): PIPE FLOW = 49.60 CFS PIPE DIAMETER = 30.00 INCHES FLOW VELOCITY = 10.51 FEET/SEC. VELOCITY HEAD = 1.717 FEET CATCH BASIN ENERGY LOSS = .2*(VELOCITY HEAD) _ .2*( 1.717) _ .343 NODE 110.00 : HGL = < 197.455>;EGL= < 197.455>;FLOWLINE= < 193.430> UPSTREAM PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA: NODE NUMBER = 110.00 FLOWLINE ELEVATION = 193.43 ASSUMED UPSTREAM CONTROL HGL = 195.72 FOR DOWNSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS END OF GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW ANALYSIS l h ''aO PLO i o ° 1A ° I rV V "err v ~ 0 a Z I OL ` by O b O wo a r ~ N `Q LA mN ~ O ~O ' r*1 D d ~yr~'1 ~ o C~ rr, O o` ooc • J rn t ! rrl D AA = N\` _ O O i Z oc t i ~ t 0 V • N ' Ott O / r N ~ I~ ~ o yp- o, c -00 O W cp 0 YON... Z Q ;u rri `I r I~ O~ZZ~ O a ~ O~ ~ 7 D a XI I rTl Z SEWE: Rr \5~ ~pFpR 04 0 W C;~ GH EpX`f jGV ~51~4N 1 o N 12 ofrAP \ } - V) Q M~ E4p~R -CL con x m _ r ~ ~ o c~`g~ \o 30~ Fla E RPxoo Z V) o wui A ~z Q, a ~ ~ ~~R ~6 ~ 63 e ~ \ W Q Q a r p oO GS ,~g,R ` \ J cz o ro ,Y F \ 0 CL U') -j (t LUC) RFC\~'y `'~EPRp ? o` \ \ \ = O van c o 4- SEAR \ o -a \ . U ^ Q ~ o S 6+85 ASSEMB \ \ \ ~ t O O Z lot O 8 \ \ O41 ~ P: W U ZW:z \ \ W V) C) ~ v ~2 RP~- o \ \ \ Zoo Zp'00 G , pT SINE 3» W (R) 00~ , - Z 3 ` 4, \ L 16.05' 4 - \o\\ \ 5+12.12 `t z LAJ \ 1 \ 1` J 4W Q H o m a: ~ za Boa • 1 1 0 o Q W ~u~ 1 ~jwl 1 to O~a ~ ' t o I Q Q. z (r) Q: ui \ 1(a. Z a ~ I ~o0 1 J a \ ` ` m IM ZV~(n F~ LLJ 15,15. I ~ I ~ 3oa0.~ i z , T a \ I 5 ,43" W (R) °1 O QI I ~I ~ y 7 lot 17 01 16 401 77t' 'Y01db C7W t-/.,1x 0o a.s~ vn Z ~3 I o', I I 60 -2 gr Q- 19 11 f7aHL - I < -19! ^ 0y8-/ Z I 12Y,LL rwB 7~r~.n,\ {y:.I I ~i i 11~M18 1 I ~ ~ • a=fla - 88.69~J SldlYlS A10aon2lLSApo - - \ 3d1d 713[s lukG, C731i I + o i~ Of b ~ r I ~ ` ~3h '00 ,0001 Z / 31 &n SnAGY6, 3 N3n 6 Y3 Z I 4 crv I I f r 1~ Q~~~ CARDIFF GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS April 4, 1996 Chris Lloyd t 3615 Fortuna Ranch Road 1t Q 1gg6 Encinitas, CA 92024 ' Subject: ADDENDUM REPORT/GRADING PLAN REVIEW TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates Encinitas, California Reference: GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE ' Double LL Ranch Estates Lots 1 through 6, inclusive T.P.M. 93-029 ' Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 25, 1995 ' Dear Mr. Lloyd: This report presents the results of our limited geotechnical investigation and review of the grading plans. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the general subsurface ' conditions and their influence on the construction of the proposed private road. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS Two exploratory trenches were excavated on the site with a tractor-mounted backhoe to ' a maximum depth of 15 feet. A brief description of the earth materials encountered is discussed on the following page: 1 135 LIVERPOOL DRIVE - SUITE A - CARDIFF - CA 92(07 (619) 753-3697 - FAX (619) 753-4158 April 4, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 2 ' Alluvium/Colluvium (Undifferentiated) Approximately 9.5 feet of soft, sandy clayey silt was encountered in the vicinity of exploratory Trench No. 1. The upper 3.5 feet of the alluvial/colluvial material is highly organic. Approximately 4.0 feet of soft brown sandy clay was encountered in the vicinity of Trench No. 2. These deposits appear to be colluvial in nature rather than alluvial. In ' general, the alluvium/colluvium encountered adjacent to the stream is soft and highly ' compressible. ' Formational Rock ' In the vicinity of Trench No. 2, soft claystone/siltstone was encountered below the colluvium. The sedimentary rock is wet and weathered with caving from a depth of 5.0 ' feet below grade. The sedimentary rock was not encountered in exploratory Trench No. ' 1. Bedrock ' Metavolcanic rock commonly referred to as the Santiago Peak Volcanics was encountered at depth in both exploratory trenches. The upper portion of the bedrock is hard but fractured in the upper 1.0 to 2.0 feet. The metavolcanic rock typically becomes t increasingly dense and less fractured with depth. ' April 4, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 3 ' Seepage/Groundwater The claystone/siltstone encountered in Trench No. 2 exhibits seepage and caving t throughout the sedimentary rock zone. Groundwater was observed at an approximate depth of 12.3 feet (after 15 minutes) below grade. Significant seepage was observed along the sidewalls of Trench No. 1 at a depth of about 6.5 feet below grade. ' Groundwater was observed at a depth of 8.6 feet (after 30 minutes). Fluctuations of the ' groundwater level will occur due to rainfall, irrigation and subsurface flow. Expansive Soils ' The alluvium/colluvium and clayey sedimentary rock units encountered on the site are highly expansive. ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1) The grading plans prepared by Conway and Associates are acceptable to this office. 1 However, relatively extensive grading will be required for the development of the ' proposed private road as indicated below: 2) The alluvium/colluvium as well as soft, clayey sedimentary rock units are highly compressible and are not suitable for the support of proposed fills and private ' road. 1 April 4, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 4 3) These deposits should be removed to the underlying bedrock and replaced as properly compacted fill in the area of the proposed road. A subdrain and some ' degree of dewatering will be required for remedial grading. 4) In order to more fully delineate the subsurface conditions and to provide more specific recommendations and alternatives for remedial grading, additional ' exploratory trenches should be excavated prior to construction. A formal report will be prepared upon completion of the recommended additional exploration and laboratory testing. LIMITATIONS ' This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the ' owner's representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in ' this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts, specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review ' is performed during the course of construction. April 4, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 5 The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. ' The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in ' rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made ' and reported herein. Cardiff Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In ' time however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature ' on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially t ' invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and ' should not be relied upon after the passage of three years. ' The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction ' and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. Our engineering work ' April 4, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 6 and the judgments given meet present professional standards. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. ' If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 753-3697. The opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. ' Respectfully submitted, CARDIFF GEOTECHNICAL Mark Burwell y ~•2' Vith a Sing net, P.E. ;od ' Geologist 782 Geotechnical Engineer * Exp. 12-31-97 v Lec 0 C P&- 1 1 Enclosures: Typical Section Portion of Grading Plan 1 t 1 1 1 A a' tC t o F' o U M 1 b CL h v ~ ~ ~ u A / o I a a '0~ a N ~ ~ a ( w d a l i y ~ ~ ~ L H w - ` - ' 1 N --A W p S'b \ L ' ON HOmul u ~Q\ p a~ w oOv o 1 H " 04 1 ~ a S ~~fl~ i t PORTION OF GRADING PLAN 1 TM 93-029 i : INSTAII L / CAP ASSLMBLY LOT 1 clW1 why9~G rofr ° 00 / ENO ~pOR NG \0 R R' a 6 P / " 0° li ~tpfP / Gil GENS~ c~ 6 CIO, v X4 It DAYUGHT-- Ope ,Dir pJ1 ,4PG . OE VC 0 18• INSTALL 8" PVC c 335' fv0 WATER UNE 1F L~ a ~~,5 ON C!_ p~4VA"1111EEEE 1 ~O . 10 zo ~~N M~ % ~l , - DRIVE ~ TYPICAL _ 1 l0l,-T%iy, PLO STIR £o vib fat%? F~ AR P~ 2 c~ t 2 „ TRENCH NO. 2 ; a co; pc .e~ P✓i. 5N DETAIL t- SHT >;`~+`~c . TRENCH NO 10 1 REMOVE E STING DES~MG BASfN a ' P}aa cam- V ` i bq Lit T -(()fk0 Pcn~ r ARPpR~N5\Otl ep, -GRADE TO DRAIN FH - SEA ~M£ B~ A° P F~ 5#t1~~-0014 g t0 A gE Sp14 S °E P` /~PRVA' cN►, e N.T.S. ' LEGEND ' TRMCH LOCATION (approx.) ' F-100063-14 ' CARDIFF GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS April 25, 1995 ' JUL 31 1995 Chris Lloyd t 3615 Fortuna Ranch Road Encinitas, CA 92024 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE 1 Double LL Ranch Estates Lots 1 through 6, inclusive T.P.M. 93-029 f _F ' Encinitas, California - ' Dear Mr. Lloyd: This report has been prepared at your request and presents the results of our geotechnicat reconnaissance on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to ' ' evaluate the general geotechnical conditions and their influence on the division of the southeastern portion of the property into six separate lots. This study is based on geotechnical data obtained from observations and testing during the grading phase for Double LL Ranch Road, Calle Margarita, and the eastern portion of ' Map 12816, as well as previous studies. SITE CONDITIONS ' The overall Double LL Ranch Estates includes 120± acres of terrain located along the ' west side of Lone Jack Road, in the city of Encinitas. The eastern portion of the property is composed of gently sloping terrain and is incised by a south-trending stream. The ' 135 LIVERPOOL DRIVE • SUITE A • CARDIFF • CA 92007 (619) 753-3697 • FAX (619) 753-4158 ' April 25, 1995 W.O. P-100063 Page 2 western portion of the property is characterized by gentle to moderately steep slopes, ranging in gradients from 5:1 to 21/2:1 (horizontal to vertical) which ascend to a terrace ' plateau. The slopes are incised by several ravines. Vegetation along slopes includes a moderate growth of brush and shrubs. The stream ' is bordered by numerous trees and shrubs. ' PROPOSED DIVISION ' Plans for the land division were prepared by Conway and Associates. The project includes dividing the southeast portion of the property into six separate lots. A proposed ' private drive which parallels the stream will provide access for Lot Nos. 2, 3 and 4. ' Grading for the development of the proposed road includes the placement of up to 6.0 feet of fill. Rip rap will be utilized along the east-facing fill slope to reduce stream scouring and erosion. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS Alluvium/Colluvium ' The lower elevations adjacent to the south-trending stream are underlain by colluvial and ' alluvial deposits (undifferentiated). The soil is composed of dark brown sandy clay and is generally soft, moist and highly expansive. The soil is underlain by alluvial deposits consisting of sand, silt and clay with numerous rock fragments. The alluvium is typically ' soft and compressible. 1 ' April 25, 1995 W.O. P-100063 Page 3 ' Formational Rock The slopes along the western portion of the site are underlain by greenish brown sandy ' claystone which appears to be lithologically equivalent to the Del Mar Formation. The claystone is highly fractured and expansive. The clayey rock units of the Del Mar Formation are overlain by tan to brown sandstone with occasional lenses of claystone. The sandstone generally predominates above an elevation of 275 feet and is well exposed ' along the 2:1 cut slope for Double I.L Ranch Road. ' Santiago Peak Volcanics ' Volcanic bedrock units were encountered beneath the alluvial deposits in the eastern portion of the property. The massive metavolcanic rock is exposed along the slopes east ' of the subject property. The Jurassic age metavolcanic rock has commonly been ' designated as the Santiago Peak Volcanics on published geologic maps. ' Seismicity No faults are known to traverse the subject property. However, the property will be exposed to strong ground motion resulting from the release of energy along major faults t in the region. ' Expansive Soils Soil and clayey rock units of the Del Mar Formation are highly expansive and will require special consideration for pad development and foundation design. ' April 25, 1995 W.O. P-100063 Page 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The eastern portion of the site is underlain by thick deposits, up to 10± feet, of ' alluvium and colluvium (undifferentiated). The alluvium is generally soft and compressible. The clayey soil deposits are highly expansive. ' 2. The stream and the eastern portion of the site (Lot 1) are generally underlain at depth by the Santiago Peak Volcanics. However, the area west of the stream including Lot Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 is generally underlain at depth by clayey rock units of the Del Mar Formation. 3. In our opinion, each of the proposed lots is developable from a geotechnical ' viewpoint. I lowever, special consideration will be required for foundation design ' and site development due to the nature and characteristics of the surficial deposits and underlying formational rock units. Prior to individual lot development, a site specific geotechnical investigation should be performed. 4. In view of the potentially soft and compressible alluvial deposits in the area of the proposed private drive, two exploratory trenches should be excavated prior to ' construction. Recommendations for pavement design, removals/recompaction and ' fill placement will be provided based on the results of laboratory testing of recovered samples. ' April 25, 1995 W.O. P-100063 Page 5 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 753-3697. This opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. Respectfully submitted, ' CARDIFF GEOTECIINICAL Mark Burwell Vith a Sin anet, P.E. Geot r LCa1 env `eer Geologist • 1 ` - 7t21 ^y s r dom. r t Enclosures: Plate A .........................................................................Vicinity Map ' Plate B .....................................................................Geotechnical Map 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 ENCLOSURES 1 • 1•• ii• 7w •1• O t 1 \ FUTURE L-01 i FUTURE LIT " 11 FUTURE LOT 1 ~ t FutURE LOT LOT l FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FUTURE , NOT A PART -L--" l LOT t •~i.s"oodr w PCL FARE mfr :r'° - t 1 6 \ ~ l6.Lr•1.~. 20~ r~ r~ay- 3 ~ Y Q ~i.•a~ •.wu 1•• ' ,A w~s~gwol r w~..s~/y1 ~ tl' Y M ~ ~-n~~• Y LOT 7 1 1 - %~ir TI~NwK 1 ~ LOT I • l`~ 1 1 t LOT 4 t t c~ o f o t ~ LOTS r .-.04~~ I t t t k 1 t ..'°"'r,~l• 1 v l t t LOT 3 ` t t t _L._LOT a LOT 2 r.. L `C 1 ' FUTURE L07 FUTURE LOT vow ~ t Q 1 ` ' M ~•m-r Proposed Drive t 1 ~1 t n r ^ MAP 12644 U3 t ~ i t ~ t t t ~ t t N t t t ~ t ~ t t t , ' ` t t t i aJ ' lVXCy TY MAP ' (showing proposed division) ' PLATE A C ~ 1 r~~ PGl_ ~o ~ 1991. re ~ X06 ~ a 4~ w 08°8 -_E _ R = 570.00' L 46.17' k 14' 36. 52- 614, r 88.84 - 'I ri7- R = 930.00' L 76.28' f 41- 58" ~i 1 1 3 L DT' ~Q SIANDS l ♦ 1 'r r' - r ♦ ~ „1 PENDING PARCEL MAP: ,p CITY OF ENCINITAS . v TM 92-212 + r RESPLIT OF LOT 1 3 OF MAP 12816 INTO 2 PAR M' 7 .0 ' - _ 'T p ' O L DT or y L CENTERLINE OF K O 8.00' RECREATIONAL 100 YEAR FLOOD ( TRAIL PER DOC. No. INNUNDATION (LINE 1991-Q201867 ' r OPEN,SPACE EASEMENT RECORDED 5/2/91. + I FOR FLOOD PLAIN PURPOSES 1 I L Jr, LOT, 3 4~- EXISTING S.I~.G.dr E. EASEMENT I i (CROSSES SUBJECT PROPERTY) J\IJA J l 2644 - ~ ~ ` \ ~EOTECHN=CAL MAP t I PENDING PARCEL MAP: 'ITY OF ENCINITAS 'M 92-035 DING GENERAL GEOTigCHNICAL CONDITIONS r r. it rl rf r(7 IQrI^ PLATE B COAST GEOTECHNICAL ' CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS October 25, 1996 ' Marry McComas 3462 Corvallis Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 t ' Subject: ADDENDUM REPORT New Road Alignment TM 93-029 ' Encinitas, California IDV i SERV`G ~NGM0F b References: 1) CLARIFICATION LETTER ' Supplemental Exploration TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates Encinitas, California ' Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 26, 1996 ' 2) ADDENDUM REPORT/GRADING PLAN REVIEW TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates ' Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 4, 1996 3) GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE ' Double LL Ranch Estates Lots 1 through 6, inclusive T.P.M. 93-029 Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical ' Dated April 25, 1995 779 ACADEMY DRIVE • SOI.ANA BEACH • CALIFORNIA 92075 (619) 755-8622 • FAX (619) 755-9126 ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 2 ' Dear Mr. McComas: This report presents the results of our additional subsurface exploration along the new ' road alignment on the above referenced project. The purpose of this limited study is to evaluate the general geotechnical conditions and their influence on the construction of the proposed private road. Previous geotechnical data, in part, is included within this t report, where applicable. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ' Grading and improvement plans for T.P.M. 93-029 were prepared by Conway and ' Associates. However, the plans have recently been revised by Pasco Engineering. The changes generally reflect the relocation of the proposed private road further to the west. Two exploratory trenches were excavated near the new road alignment to evaluate the geotechnical conditions. A brief description of the earth materials is discussed below: ' Soil/Colluvium Approximately 3.0 to 3.5 feet of dark brown sandy clay was encountered in the exploratory trenches. The soil is generally dry to damp. The upper 2.0 feet of the soil ' is blocky due to desiccation cracks. The contact with the underlying Eocene deposits is generally gradational. t ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 3 ' Formation Rock In the vicinity of Trench No. 1, pale green claystone was encountered below the soil ' zone. The claystone is soft and wet in the upper 5.0 feet. Below the weathered zone, the claystone becomes stiff to the depth explored, however, a 1.0 foot thick organic zone was encountered at a depth of 5.0 feet. In the vicinity of Trench No. 2, approximately 7.0 feet of the clayey deposits overlie ' metavolcanic rock and are highly weathered, soft and wet. ' Bedrock In the vicinity of Trench No. 2, metavolcanic rock commonly referred to as the Santiago ' Peak Volcanics was encountered. The bedrock is generally broken and fractured in the ' upper 1.0 to 2.0 feet but becomes increasingly dense and hard with depth. ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ' General Subsurface exploration conducted as part of this study suggests that the southern portion of the proposed new road alignment is underlain by clayey soil deposits and clayey, ' weathered sedimentary rock units. Previous exploration suggests that soil and alluvial deposits are present along the northernmost portion of the proposed road adjacent to t Double LL Ranch Road (See Reference No. 2). The soil, alluvium as well as soft, clayey 1 t ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 Page 4 sedimentary rock units are highly compressible and are not suitable for the support of proposed fills and the road section. These deposits should be removed and replaced as ' properly compacted fill. The moisture content within the existing deposits is generally several percent above optimum moisture content. Some degree of aeration may be required for remedial grading. ' Removals/Recompaction/Fill Placement It is anticipated that removal depths along the southern portion of the road will range ' from approximately 6.0 to 8.0 vertical feet, as indicated in the enclosed Typical Section. ' Additional depth and supplemental recommendations may be required for removals along the northern portion of the road which may encounter alluvial deposits and groundwater. A minimum 15 foot wide key should be excavated along the eastern portion of the proposed fill slope and the proposed road. The depth of the key will vary depending ' upon actual field conditions encountered during grading. A subdrain as depicted on the ' enclosed Typical Section and Plate A should be constructed. The base of the excavation should be scarified a minimum of 8.0 inches, aerated as necessary depending on moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Excavated materials are suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are cleaned of all vegetation, debris and rock fragments greater than 8.0 inches and ' thoroughly mixed. Some degree of difficulty should be anticipated in mixing onsite clayey soils. ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 5 ' All fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch lifts, moistened or aerated as necessary, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. A copy ' of our standard grading guidelines is enclosed and should be considered as part of this ' report. Pavement Section ' Previous testing of clayey deposits on Double LL Ranch Estates suggests an R-value of 6. Actual pavement design should be based on R-value testing of the street subgrade ' deposits. However, the following pavement section should be considered as a ' preliminary design. ' Private Road (Traffic Index of 4.5, R-value of 6) ' 3 inches of asphaltic paving on ' 10 inches of select base (Class 2) on 12 inches minimum of recompacted clayey soils 1 ' Subgrade soils should be compacted to the thickness indicated in the structural section and left in a condition to receive base materials. Class 2 base material should have a ' minimum R-value of 78 and a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Subgrade soils and base ' materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their laboratory maximum dry density. t ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 6 ' LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the ' owner's representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to ' the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in ' this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications ' are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts, specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. 1 The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described ' herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. ' The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur among the ' exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in ' rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. ' October 25, 1996 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 7 ' The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time, however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature ' on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be t brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and ' should not be relied upon after the passage of three years. ' The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general experience in the geotechnical field. Our engineering work ' and the judgments given meet present professional standards. However, in no respect ' do we guarantee the outcome of the project. t If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. Respectfully submitted SIN COAST GEOTECHNICAL co 37 732 c~ . w ~a t . 12-313 Exp Mark Burwell ~ Vithaya Singhanet, P.E. Geologist Geotechnical Engineer Co Enclosures: Laboratory Test Results ' Trench Logs Typical Section Plate A ' Portion of Grading Plan Grading Guidelines 1 1 i ENCLOSURES i i ' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I ' Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (Laboratory Standard ASTM D-1557-91) 1 Sample Max. Dry Optimum Location Density Moisture Content ' cf T-1B @ 3.51(alluvium) 113.0 16.2 ' T-2A @ 3.0' (colluvium) 121.0 11.5 T-1 @ 4.5' (claystone) 114.7 16.3 TABLE II ' Field Dry Density and Moisture Content ' Sample Field Dry Field Moisture Location Density Content o 10/18/96 cf T-1 @ 4.0' 100.4 26.4 ' T-1 @ 7.0' 87.5 15.6 T-1 @ 10.0' 93.2 23.1 ' T-2 @ 3.0' 100.9 23.6 T-2 @ 4.0' 92.7 35.3 T-2 @ 8.0' 96.0 17.3 ' 9/12/96 T-2A @ 4.0' 99.0 19.0 T-2A @ 4.0' 96.5 20.4 ' T-2A @ 7.0' 86.0 23.1 T-2A @ 10.0' 103.8 23.4 ' 4/6/95 T-1B @ 1.0' 73.6 40.6 T-1B @ 3.5' 100.9 23.9 T-1B @ 5.0' 103.7 21.6 ' T-2B @ 3.5' 102.2 20.3 T-2B @ 5.0' 105.9 21.9 ' P-247106 1 1 1 t 1 N 0 ~ ~ v 3 0 ~ ~~I 1 IZ 1 ~d Irl v 1 c 1-h I Cn m \ 1+1 I Lij ED u a U - a0 - v v o o z o 1 W~ ' o V V V ~ ~ za 3 ~ro Do ~z C 1 ' J V3 ~4 V3 U N O 0 U 0 FTT I I I H-1 11 TT* 06 U ~ ~ U G h a V U ~ \ C7 ~ a ~ ~ 3 `4 0.. ' l L V \ ~ lI Cl) Lt1 0 v \ V a 3 ~ i` I~ \1 I~ ~;,U4 19, Z w° h w z ° x z 1 Z ' F U z 0 v U Q 1 1 N L ° oh i ~ ' M N ~ m r ~ o U Oo L.i~ O~ y 1\ cn m a z W o d ~ ~ 3 c,l 1 m L 3~ ~ ~n W f ~ V ~ O U v N ° ~c Q I z W y W N Q Qo O W Z !A z Uo u p ey o ~ ~ Fes- p c ~h ~ a \ ~ t U W v l 1 D 4 L Ll U ~ ~ f ~ ' m c ~ o 0 I-Q q~ M w o % m aka IRJ z ° o DO --f ' U h ti ' Z 3 Q In Ha z U o U p ' t. 0 1- Q i y O ~ ~ 3 CL y a 3 ~ Z v1 m ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 t ' ? %J 1 o ° V e '40 in ~ £ h o u ~ ~ v v !1 w H ~h ko ' Z 3 (n z < 153 ' O0 Uo u Q 1 i 1 I I 1 44 E-i H ' U o H N / a A H W H / O U vui a a N► 11 ~ nI 1 P4 N U► R -01 \ i n a~ < 1 1 r r r r FILL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO'1 LINE FROM TOE OF SLOPE W COMPETENT MATERIAL EXISTING z--- - GROUND SURFACE REMOVE UNSUITABLE n MATERIAL BENCH 4KEYN~~LOWEST r DEPTH BENCH (KEY). r Of MIN. ' OVERLAP 3148-1-112' _ CLEAN GRAVEL 1 g• MIN. (itttJft. MIN.) ~ • - 4@0- a.I ' 4' 4 NONPERFORATEO NON-PP PFORATEO PERFORATED • PPE LATERAL TO PIPE ' INTERVALS AT 100' 6>r MIN FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 40 IN MIN: 140N OR APPROVED EOUIVALENT)* SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL 1 1 1 KEY, BENCHING AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL r ' PLATE A 1 i i i i i i i i ~i i i i i i ' GRADING GUIDELINES Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing ' agencies, Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code and the guidelines presented below: ' Site Clearing Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the ' site. Non-organic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas under direction of the Soils engineer. ' Subdrainage 1. During grading, the Geologist should evaluate the necessity of placing additional ' drains. 2. All subdrainage systems should be observed by the Geologist and Soils Engineer ' during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. ' 3. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors. Outlets should be located and protected. ' Treatment of Existing Ground 1. All heavy vegetation, rubbish and other deleterious materials should be disposed ' of off site. 2. All surficial deposits of alluvium and colluvium should be removed unless ' otherwise indicated in the text of this report. Groundwater existing in the alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months. ' 3. Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill ' standards. Fill Placement ' 1. Most site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see report). Highly organic or ' contaminated soil should not be used for compacted fill. (1) ' 2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in ' thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by the Soils Engineer. ' 3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that acceptable to the Soils engineer, the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the ' following: a) Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. ' Moisture should be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre- watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or dry surficial soils. ' b Each six inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the ' controlling governmental agency. In this case, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D-1557-91. ' 4. Side-hill fills should have an equipment-width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil and into competent material and tilted back into the hill (Plate A). ' As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial soil and slopewash, and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by the Soils Engineer. t 5. Rock fragments less than six inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided: ' a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets; ' b) There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks; ' c) The distribution of the rocks is supervised by the Soils Engineer. 6. Rocks greater than six inches in diameter should be taken off site, or placed in ' accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. ' 7. In clay soil large chunks or blocks are common; if in excess of eight (8) inches minimum dimension then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break the up blocks. ' (2) ' 8. The Contractor should be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by ' either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. ' If fill slopes are built "at grade" using direct compaction methods then the slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor ' should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades. Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes should be back rolled approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. Density tests ' should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope. ' In addition, if a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be employed, slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to ' determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Finish grade testing of the slope should be performed after construction is complete. Each day the Contractor should receive a copy of the Soils Engineer's "Daily Field Engineering ' Report" which would indicate the results of field density tests that day. ' 9. Fill over cut slopes should be constructed in the following manner: a) All surficial soils and weathered rock materials should be removed at the ' cut-fill interface. b) A key at least 1 equipment width wide and tipped at least 1 foot into slope ' should be excavated into competent materials and observed by the Soils Engineer or his representative. ' c) The cut portion of the slope should be constructed prior to fill placement to evaluate if stabilization is necessary, the contractor should be responsible for any additional earthwork created by placing fill prior to cut ' excavation. 10. Transition lots (cut and fill) and lots above stabilization fills should be capped with a three foot thick compacted fill blanket. 11. Cut pads should be observed by the Geologist to evaluate the need for ' overexcavation and replacement with fill. This may be necessary to reduce water infiltration into highly fractured bedrock or other permeable zones,and/or due to differing expansive potential of materials beneath a structure. The overexcavation ' should be at least three feet. Deeper overexcavation may be recommended in some cases. (3) ' 12. Exploratory backhoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Grading Observation and Testing 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by the Soils Engineer during the progress of grading. ' 2. In general, density tests would be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the fill. In any event, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate if the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. ' 3. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as required by the Soils Engineer. 4. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations,subdrains and rock ' disposal should be observed by the Soils Engineer prior to placing any fill. It will ' be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Soils Engineer when such areas are ready for observation. ' 5. A Geologist should observe subdrain construction. ' 6. A Geologist should observe benching prior to and during placement of fill. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be placed to the following standards: ' 1. Ninety percent of the laboratory standard if native material is used as backfill. 2. As an alternative, clean sand may be utilized and flooded into place. No specific ' relative compaction would be required; however, observation, probing, and if deemed necessary, testing may be required. ' 3. Exterior trenches, paralleling a footing and extending below a 1:1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, should be compacted to 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill, until it is similar to the inplace fill, should not be allowed in these trench backfill areas. Density testing along with probing should be accomplished to verify the desired ' results. ' (4) ' CARDIFF GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 1 April 26, 1996 Chris Lloyd APR 26 1996 ' 3615 Fortuna Ranch Road R-IGES Encinitas, CA 92024 Chi •y C,?~ ~ •.i i ~ , ~ ' Subject: CLARIFICATION LETTER Supplemental Exploration TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates ' Encinitas, California ' References: 1) ADDENDUM REPORT/GRADING PLAN REVIEW TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates Encinitas, California ' Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 4, 1996 2) GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE ' Double LL Ranch Estates Lots 1 through 6, inclusive T.P.M. 93-029 ' Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 25, 1995 Dear Mr. Lloyd: 1 This letter has been prepared in response to our meeting with the city of Encinitas and discussions with Blair Knoll, City Engineer. The purpose of this letter is to clarify the intent of the additional exploration recommended in the above Referenced Report No. 1. The two exploratory trenches indicated in Referenced Report No. 1 were excavated along ' the northern portion of the proposed road alignment. The southern excavation (Trench 135 LIVERPOOL DRIVE • SUITE A • CARDIFF • CA 92007 (619) 753-3697 • FAX (619) 753-4158 April 26, 1996 W.O. G-100063 Page 2 No. 2) encountered soft, wet claystone above the metavolcanic rock. The purpose of the recommended additional exploration is to further delineate the contact between the ' claystone and metavolcanic rock in the southern portion of the proposed road. During the time in which the referenced report was being prepared, preliminary ' discussions regarding the possibility of relocating the proposed road further to the west were conducted with the project civil engineer, Conway and Associates. A decision in this ' regard is still undecided, to date. In the event that the actual road is constructed further ' west, then additional exploratory trenches should be excavated along the new road alignment. Additional exploration may be conducted at the onset or just prior to construction but should be completed before mass or remedial grading. Such an approach will further ' ' delineate the subsurface conditions, provide current data regarding seepage and ' groundwater levels, and provide additional recommendations regarding the extent of remedial grading. 1 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office at 753-3697. The opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. Respectfully submitted, ' CARDIFF GEOTECI4NICAL COD Mark I3urwe1l ' ' Vrthaya Smghanet, P.E. Exp. I2-3I-9~ Geologist 1 Geotechnical Engineer F OFF 1 COAST GEOTECHNICAL ' CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ' December 9, 1997 ' Marry McComas 3462 Corvallis Street ' Carlsbad, CA 92008 ' Subject: FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Private Road ' TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates Encinitas, California References: PLEASE SEE PAGE 9 DEC 23 1997 ' ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS ' Dear Mr. McComas: ' In response to your request, we have performed field observations and testing during the rough grading phase on the above referenced property. The results of our density tests and laboratory testing are presented in this report. ' Based on the results of our testing, it is our opinion that the fill observed was placed in an adequate manner and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory ' maximum dry density. However, the private road is underlain by highly expansive soil deposits and will require varying degrees of maintenance. ' If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at (619) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated. ES,S N Respectfully submitted, q~ COAST GEOTECHNICAL C7 7P2 z ~ EXP, 12-31-01 V ' Mark Burwell Vithaya Singhanet, P.E. Geologist Geotechnical Engineer 1 ' 779 ACADEMY DRIVE: • SOLANA BEACH • CALIFORNIA 92075 (619) 755-8622 • FAX (619) 755-9126 ' FINAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Private Road ' TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates Encinitas, California Prepared for: ' Marty McComas 3462 Corvallis Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 1 December 9, 1997 ' W.O. G-247106 1 Prepared by: COAST GEOTECHNICAL 779 Academy Drive Solana Beach, California ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 t Page ,3 INTRODUCTION ' This report presents the results of our observations and field density testing on the ' subject property. The project included the construction of approximately 610 lateral feet of a private road, construction of proposed fill slopes, removal and recompaction of street ' subgrade deposits, placement of Class 2 base and utility trench backfill. The results of ' our density tests are presented on Table I. The approximate locations of these tests are shown on the enclosed Grading Plan (Sheets 1 and 2). ' LABORATORY TEST DATA ' The laboratory standard for determining the maximum dry density was performed in accordance with ASTM D 1557-91. Field density tests were performed in accordance with ' ASTM D 1556. The results of the laboratory maximum dry density, for the soil types used ' as compacted fill on the site, is summarized below: Maximum Dry Density Optimum Soil Type Description (p.c.f.) Moisture ' A Mixture of on-site 117.0 15.0 soils, dark brown ' slightly silty, sandy clay ' B Class 2 base 138.0 8.5 material C Water line sand 126.0 9.5 bedding ' D Mixture of on-site 120.0 13.8 soils, tan to brown ' silty clayey sand r ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-2471o6 r Page 4 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS r The private road is underlain by relatively thick deposits of colluvium and alluvium (undifferentiated). Underlying the clayey surficial materials, pale green to brown claystone is present along most of the road alignment. However, metavolcanic rock ' underlies the surficial deposits along the northern portion of the private road. Excavated colluvium/alluvium and clayey formational rock units were mixed and used as compacted fill. Lot 2 along the southern extent of the private road was used as a borrow site. r Colluvial deposits obtained from the lot were also used as compacted fill in the roadway. r DISCUSSION r The grading contractor on this project was Rex Endrezzi Excavating. Underground r utilities (sewer and water) were constructed by Southern California Pipeline and the pavement section was constructed by Palomar Grading and Paving. The following is a discussion of the general grading operations, as they were performed on the site: r 1) All surface deleterious material was removed from the area of the proposed road prior to grading. r ' 2) A keyway was excavated along the base of the proposed fill slope and extends for the full width of the road. The undercut generally extends into sedimentary rock units consisting of claystone and sandy claystone except along the northern 1 ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 5 portion of the road which extends into moderately dense alluvium, approximately ' 9.0 feet below existing grade. 3) A subdrain consisting of a 4.0 inch diameter perforated pipe embedded in gravel ' and wrapped in filter fabric was installed along the western extent of the road ' overexcavation. Outlets for the subdrain were installed along the northern and southern extent of the road. ' 4) Fill consisting of a mixture of excavated materials was placed in lifts of about 6.0 to 8.0 inches thick. The fill was moistened as required, to achieve near optimum ' moisture content and compacted by track rolling with heavy earth-moving ' equipment and by a sheepsfoot. 5) Clayey soils were excavated from Lot 2, adjacent to the southern terminus of the ' road, in order to achieve subgrade elevation. 6) Fill slopes were overbuilt and trimmed back to a maximum gradient of 2:1 ' (horizontal to vertical). 7) Sewer trench and water line backfill is composed of a mixture of on-site materials. ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 Page 6 The backfill was placed in 8.0 to 10.0 inch lifts, moistened as required and ' compacted with a sheepsfoot attached to a tractor mounted backhoe. 8) Prior to placement of Class 2 base, the street subgrade was scarified, in most areas, moistened as required and compacted with a vibratory drum roller. Due to the ' nature of the clayey soils used as fill deposits, compaction of the road subgrade soils was limited to approximately 93 to 94 percent of the laboratory maximum dry ' density. 9) A portion of the Class 2 base section (6.0 inches) was placed and some degree of traffic utilized the private road resulting in minor contamination of the base ' materials. 11) The remaining 4.0 inch section of Class 2 base was placed at a latter date. The ' base materials were compacted with a vibratory steel drum roller. 12) The following structural section was constructed: ' (R-value 5) ' 3.0 inches of asphaltic paving on 10.0 inches of select base (Class 2) on ' 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils 1 ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS ' 1) Selective testing and observation during rough grading suggests the fill was adequately placed and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. ' 2) Selective testing and observation during compaction of street subgrade soils suggest that the clayey soils were compacted to approximately 92 to 93 percent of ' the laboratory maximum dry density. Selective testing of the Class 2 base suggest ' these materials were compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the laboratory ' maximum dry density. ' LIMITATIONS ' This office assumes no responsibility for any alterations made without our knowledge and written approval, subsequent to the issuance of this report. All ramps made though ' slopes, and other areas of disturbance which require the placement of compacted fill to ' restore them to the original condition, will not be reviewed unless such backfilling operations are performed under our observation and tested for required compaction. Observations and density testing were performed on a periodic basis only. Complete observation and testing during the grading phase was not desired by the owner. ' The future performance of the road is dependent upon numerous unpredictable factors December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 8 such as subsurface water migration from lot development, high ground water conditions and potential traffic from trucks and heavy equipment. Due to the nature of the underlying clayey soils, varying degrees of maintenance will be required to maintain the road. ' ENCLOSURES: TABLE I (PAGES 1-4 ) PORTIONS OF GRADING PLAN (PLATES 1 AND 2) 1 ' December 9, 1997 W.O. G-247106 ' Page 9 REFERENCES 1 ' 1) ADDENDUM REPORT New Road Alignment TM 93-029 Encinitas, California Prepared by Coast Geotechnical October 25, 1996 ' 2) CLARIFICATION LETTER Supplemental Exploration TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates ' Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 26, 1996 ' 3) ADDENDUM REPORT/GRADING PLAN REVIEW TM 93-029, Double LL Ranch Estates ' Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical Dated April 4, 1996 ' 4) GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE Double LL Ranch Estates Lots 1 through 6, inclusive T.P.M. 93-029 Encinitas, California Prepared by Cardiff Geotechnical ' Dated April 25, 1995 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ENCLOSURES i i i i i i i ' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ' TABLE I Field Dry Density and Moisture Content Moisture Dry Relative ' Test Test Approx. Content Density o Soil Date No. Location Elev. I (pcf) Compaction Type 5/14/97 1 See Map 173.0' 20.4 103.5 Alluvium 5/15/97 2 See Map 174.0' 19.6 103.4 Alluvium ' 5/15/97 3 See Map 177.0' 13.6 106.8 91 A 5/15/97 4 See Map 177.0' 16.3 106.9 91 A ' 5/15/97 5 See Map 176.0' 18.7 108.4 93 A 5/16/97 6 See Map 176.0' 17.6 109.4 93 A ' 5/16/97 7 See Map 173.0' 16.7 113.3 Claystone ' 5/19/97 8 See Map 170.0' 19.9 104.9 Claystone 5/19/97 9 See Map 173.0' 17.6 106.9 Claystone ' 5/20/97 10 See Map 177.0' 18.2 108.8 93 A 5/20/97 11 See Map 175.0' 17.6 108.4 93 A t 5/20/97 12 See Map 176.0' 18.9 108.1 92 A ' 5/20/97 13 See Map 177.0' 19.0 108.9 93 A 5/21/97 14 See Map 180.0' 16.9 109.4 94 A t 5/21/97 15 See Map 180.5' 18.4 107.0 92 A 5/21/97 16 See Map 181.0' 18.3 110.2 94 A ' 5/22/97 17 See Map 181.0' 17.3 106.7 91 A 5/22/97 18 See Map 177.0' 17.1 110.2 94 A 5/23/97 19 See Map 184.0' 16.1 109.3 93 A ' 5/23/97 20 See Map 181.0' 16.2 107.7 92 A 5/23/97 21 See Map 181.0' 18.9 108.6 93 A ' (Page 1 of 4) 1 ' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I (Continued) Field Dry Density and Moisture Content ' (Water Line Trench Backfill) Approx. Moisture Dry Relative Test Test Height Content Density a Soil Date No. Location Of Fill a cf Compaction Type ' 6/27/97 W1 See Map 0.5' 12.5 119.2 95 C 6/27/97 W2 See Map 0.5' 13.5 114.0 90 C 6/28/97 W3 See Map 0.5' 11.5 115.6 92 C ' 6/28/97 W4 See Map 0.5' 13.4 114.9 91 C 7/01/97 W5 See Map 1.0' 10.5 115.7 92 C t 7/01/97 W6 See Map 1.0' 11.7 116.7 93 C 7/01/97 W7 See Map 1.0' 8.0 116.4 92 C ' 7/02/97 W8 See Map 0.5' 8.0 117.2 93 C ' 7/02/97 W9 See Map 0.5' 9.9 116.3 92 C 7/02/97 W10 See Map 2.0' 15.7 109.3 93 A ' 7/02/97 W11 See Map 2.0' 14.9 108.4 93 A 7/03/97 W12 See Map 0.5' 9.5 115.0 91 C ' 7/03/97 W13 See Map 4.0' 15.2 113.9 95 D 7/03/97 W14 See Map 4.0' 16.2 116.3 97 D ' 7/05/97 W15 See Map 0.5' 11.2 114.8 91 C ' 7/05/97 W16 See Map 2.0' 15.3 116.2 97 D ' (Page 2 of 4) ' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ' TABLE I (Continued) Field Dry Density and Moisture Content ' (Sewer Line Trench Backfill)* Approx. Moisture Dry Relative Test Test Height Content Density o Soil Date No. Location Of Fill % cf Compaction Type 6/27/97 S1 See Map 5.0' 16.2 108.9 93 A 6/27/97 S2 See Map 5.0' 13.6 117.8 98 A 6/27/97 S3 See Map 2.0' 13.0 106.8 91 A ' 6/28/97 S4 See Map 5.0' 12.8 108.6 93 A 6/28/97 S5 See Map 5.0' 12.0 107.0 91 A Sewer line trench backfill in place, testing by "pot holing" and drive tube method ' (Page 3 of 4) r LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 1 TABLE I (Continued) Field Dry Density and Moisture Content (Road Subgrade) Moisture Dry Relative Test Test Approx. Content Density I Soil Date No. Location Elev. o cf Compaction Type ' 7/23/97 SG1 See Map S.G. 16.4 108.4 93 A 7/23/97 SG2 See Map S.G. 16.9 110.1 94 A ' 10/30/97 SG3 See Map S.G. 16.0 116.3 94 D TABLE I (Continued) ' Field Dry Density and Moisture Content (Class 2 Base) Moisture Dry Relative Test Test Approx. Content Density % Soil Date No. Location Elev. % cf Compaction Type 7/24/97 B1 See Map Grade 10.1 131.2 95 B ' 7/24/97 B2 See Map Grade 10.9 132.5 96 B 7/24/97 B3 See Map Grade 10.3 131.2 95 B ' 10/30/97 B4 See Map Grade 13.9 130.5 95 B i i G-247106 ' (Page 4 of 4) 1 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET O 20 40 g 1 / v "A.10 -NP-elk /9fJZ of A/Clk LOT 3 EXrEAlD IZIP 94P TO r h CQUST, 1 or rp4c eOX CULvej ~ I°EQ SC ar M 3W W. I *QD 5rOC,-f Did . 0 a ,n 094 7YP6 B °vc warc z e- vQrE vlz/v~ o. ' I°. rr S ` .vT JFH I f 7F!j I? 2p palvarE y ~CME~(/T P~D ~ LVC1T$Q 5 I •11~ ' 1 I o 'zC. 1 p 1W 6 + ¢.19 'QT. SL--Hr N N 1"'STile4 F.H. E-~ SGT 1 ~W W a i z 3 ' PLATE 1 OF 2 ' COAST OMTKNN/CAL 0-247106 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. March 31, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 Storer & Associates P.O. Box 2604 Del Mar, CA 92014 Subject: Amendment Letter for Preliminary Soils Report: - (Project No. CE-5326, dated December 11, 1996) Proposed Myers Residence AM ss 30 1997 1099 Double `L' Ranch Road VIU- Olivenhain, California (Lot 45 of Map 13320, TCT93-029) Dear Mr. Storer: It is our understanding the subject project legal description has been designated as Lot #5 of Map 13320, TCT93-029 in lieu of Lot #24 of Double `L'. Ranch ad delineated in our Preliminary Soils Report. In addition, we further understand the foundation of the dwelling will be changed from ~y raised floor to slab on grade construction. Therefore, we are providing herein, interior slab recommendations to be amended to our Preliminary Soils Report dated December 11, 1996. Assuming highly expansive soils will exist at finish grade upon completion of grading, 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-point of slab thickness. Footing depths, reinforcement, and slab underlayment should remain as presented under Recommendation 6132 of our Preliminary Soils Report, dated December 11, 1996 and incorporated into the project plans. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, s,f . North County ~ COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. '71 Ronald K. Adams Dale R. President Registered k s ~ Geotechnical nor 4 0, RKA:k1a cc: (3) submitted P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 (619) 480-1116 s NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. r°. 77 PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING L n71 / 1 ~V l ttG yi-z ~QLIt-L Pi i11R'n'~~~ Olivenhain, California LET- 5'- M4P ~o '133Z0 PREPARED FOR Storer & Associates P.O. Box 2604 Del Mar, CA 92014 December 11, 1996 PROJECT NO. CE-5326 P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 (619) 480-1116 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. December 11, 1996 Project No. CE-5326 Storer & Associates P.O. Box 2604 Del Mar, CA 92014 ,Q N© SUBJECT: Proposed Single Family Dwelling l13 3 20 Olivenhain, California Dear Mr. Storer: 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. Briefly, our investigation revealed unfavorable soil conditions due to the presence of clay soils classified as being `very high' in expansion potential. However, it is our opinion the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided recommendations set forth in the attached report are adhered to. 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 COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. r^ G E713 cry xr w xp. 99-3? y Ronald K. Adams Dale R. R li FQT CN~1~~' •CQ President Registered Geotechnical 3 RKA:kla cc: (3) submitted (2) filed P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 (619) 480-1116 NORTH COUNTY 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 1 5. Laboratory Soil Testing 2 6. Recommendations and Conclusions 2 A. Grading 2 B: Foundations 4 C. Slopes 5 D. Estimated Paving Section 5 E. Review of Grading Plan 6 7. Uncertainty and Limitations 6 APPENDIX Appendix A: Exploration Legend & Unified Soil Classification Chart Plate No. One Test Pit Location Plan Plate No. Two - Four Exploration Logs Plate No. Five Tabulation of Test Results Appendix B: Recommended Grading Specifications NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. December 11, 1996 Project No. CE-5326 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. 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 SIT The site is locat Road in the City of Encinitas, California, and has been designs Lot #24 of the Dou e ' Ranch Subdivision., The 2.1 acre trapezoidal St,west, d by Double 'LL' Ranch Road to the north, and vacant subdivision o.'s 25, 26, and 27 to the and south, respectively. ~rrr. Site topography consists of gentle terrain sloping downward to the north and northeast. The site descends from the base of a hillside located on the adjacent property to the south. Site vegetation consists of sparse native grasses and brush. A 30 foot wide private storm drain easement parallels the north property line along Double `L' Ranch Road. 3. FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on November 26, 1996 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". As excavation proceeded, representative bulk samples were collected. In place natural densities and moisture contents were determined at different depths in the excavations and are included on Plate No.'s Two through Four. Subsequent to obtaining soil samples, our exploratory excavations were backfilled. 4. SOIL CONDITIONS Loose surficial soils (silty clays and fat clays) consisting of plowed ground were found to be 3 feet, 1.5 feet, and 2.5 feet in depth in Test Pit No.'s One, Two, and Three, respectively. Underlying native soils to depths explored were comprised of stiff silty-clays and clays. Formational sons were not encountered. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Page 2 Expansive soils varying from moderate to very high in swell potential were encountered in all exploratory trenches. 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. 5. 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 (Uniform Building Code 29C) Test results are tabulated on the attached Plate No.'s Two through Five, entitled "Exploration Log & Tabulation of Test Results". 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS General It is our understanding, the proposed dwelling will consist of wood frame construction utilizing a combination of garage slab on grade and raised floor foundations. In our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed single family residence provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the planning, design, and construction phases of the subject project. 6A. Grading General It is our understanding cut/fill earthwork construction will be performed to create a level building pad to accommodate the proposed single family dwelling. Due to concerns with regard to prevailing expansive soil conditions, our initial recommendation is the building area be capped with a minimum of 48 inches of non-expansive imported soils. The cap should be constructed under and a minimum of 10 feet beyond the proposed building location. In our opinion, the cap will be beneficial for the following reasons: 1). Reduce structural damage from the effects of highly expansive soils. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Page 3 2). Provide a uniform bearing cap, thus reducing structural damage occurring from differential settlement. 3). Increase the allowable soil bearing pressure. 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 (plowed ground), 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 `B' entitled "Recommended Grading Specifications". Firm native ground may be determined as undisturbed soil having an insitu density of greater than 90 percent (90%) of maximum dry density. We should be contacted to document firm native ground is exposed and properly prepared prior to fill. Prior to construction fill slopes, shear keys should be excavated a minimum of 2 feet into firm native ground, inclined back into slope, and have a minimum width of 10 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 (stair-stepped) to provide stable bedding for subsequent fill. Sizing of benches should be determined by the Soils Engineer or his representative during grading. '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 to adequately support the proposed loads. We should be contacted to inspect and/or test imported soils prior to hauling them on-site to assure they will be suitable for the proposed construction. 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. It is our opinion, this will reduce the probability of water build up and/or becoming trapped between permeable sandy material and an impermeable clay 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. 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 employed: It is recommended the cut side of the transitional areas be removed to a depth of I foot below the bottom of the deepest proposed footing and brought back to grade NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. • Page 4 with properly compacted fill. This will allow the proposed structure to bear entirely on a compacted fill mat, thus reducing the probability of differential settlement. The removal area should extend under a minimum of 10 feet beyond the proposed dwelling. 613. Foundations General In the event the building area is capped with non-expansive imported soils, and in accordance with the aforementioned grading recommendations, the following foundation design criteria may be utilized. For One & Two Story Construction: Continuous footing having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an estimated allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot. Isolated square footings having a diameter of 18 inches and founded a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an estimated allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot. All continuous footings are to be reinforced with one #4 br top and bottom. Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing. Slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with #3 bars on 18 inch centers, both ways. Steel should be positioned at mid-height of slab thickness. Slab underlayment should consist of 4 inches of washed concrete sand with a visqueen moisture 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. 6132} Foundations (First Alternative) General In the event it is decided not to construct a non-expansive bearing cap, the following recommendations should be employed with regard to highly expansive soils to reduce the probability of structural damage occurring from excessive foundation and subgrade movement. Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have a allowable soil bearing pressure of 800 pounds per square foot. Isolated footing having a minimum width of 24 inches and founded a minimum of 24 inches NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Page 5 below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 800 pounds per square foot All continuous footings are to be founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade and reinforced with two 45 bars top and bottom (a total of 4 bars). Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing. Garage slabs should be a minimum if 5 inches thick and reinforced with #4 bars in 18 inch centers both ways. Steel should be positioned at mid-height of slab thickness. All foundation concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi. Slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed within a b inch sand barrier (3 inches sand, visqueen, 3 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to placing concrete. They should be watered ti 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%). 6C. Slopes Cut and compacted fill slopes constructed to maximum heights of 14 feet with minimum 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. It should be noted, out of slope slip planes are common to the area. Although potential slip planes were not encountered during our investigation, further inspection of cut slopes during grading will be warranted to assure adverse slope bedding planes do not exist. (Clay seems comprised of siicken sided siltstone or claystone). 6D. Estimated Paving Section Structural section for asphaltic paving for the proposed driveways and parking area are based on an estimated R-Value of 5. 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 10 inches of select base coarse on 8 inches of recompacted native subgrade. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Page 6 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 R- Vaiue 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 12 inch centers, both ways, on 6 inches of Class II base material, on 6 inches of recompacted native subgrade soils. 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%). 6E. Review of Grading Plan Approved site and grading plans were not available at the time of our investigation. Therefore, upon their completion, we would like to review them to assure compliance with the recommendations presented in this report. Preliminary plans used during our investigation were provided by Storer & Associates, and were not dated. 7. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS 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 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. 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. Page 7 Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. 5$t0:A, G ER 'Lk "t o. GEE713 xp. 9-3-°x.. J ccN~\ p Ronald K. Adams Dale President RegiRRCi Geotechnical En F C 13 RKA-1da cc: (3) submitted (2) filed NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES 1. COARSE GRAINED: More than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel- More tFan half of coarse fraction sand mixtures, little or no is larger than No. 4 sieve size, fines. but smaller than 3". GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little.or not fines. GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded (appreciable amount of gravel-sand-silt mixtures. fines) GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand, clay mixtures. SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravelly Fiore than half of coarse fraction sands, little or no fines. is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded (appreciable amount of sand and silt mixtures. fines) SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. 11. FINE GRAINED: More than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size. SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine. sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity. Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to med- less than 50 ium plasticity, gravelly 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 plas- greater than 50 ticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample CK - Undisturbed chunk sample BG - Bulk sample - Water level at time of excavation or as indicated APPENDIX 'A' NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING S INSPECTION SERVICES TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DOUBLE 'L' RANCH SUBDIVISION OLIV AIN, CALIFORNIA 02 W t S Approx:--Scale Double 'L' Ranch 111 = Road 500, a a . X33 3 2 ~ G0 Proposed V Ho se P I Test Pit PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. ONE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING S INSPECTION SERVICE LAO 1 19" EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME DATE LOGGED 11-26-96 ELEVATION EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. oNR a~ fV o Z 4 Description & Remarks 0 E N U Q 0 a U N CH BROWN GRAY, WET, SOFT SILTY-CLAY. 1- (PLOWED GROUND) (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) 2- 3- CH BROWN GRAY, WET, STIFF SILTY-CLAY. (FIRM ALLUVIUM) 4- BG 104.3 17.0 71.4 4' (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) 5- 6- 7- CH BEIGE-GREEN-ORANGE, MOIST, MEDIUM STIFF, SILTY-CLAY. 8- BG 83.0 8' (FIRM ALLUVIUM) 9- BOTTOM OF TEST PIT. CE-5326 PLATE NO. TWO PROJECT NO. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERES4CO'*'~ J 3 ? Z4=2~ EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME L OF DOUBLE 'L' RANCH DATE LOGGED 11-26-96 ELEVATION EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. TWO a~ C) ° Description & Remarks E N 05 Q o d E ca U) CH BROWN GRAY, WET, SOFT SILTY-CLAY. (PLOWED GROUND) 1- (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) CH BROWN TAN, WET, STIFF, SILTY-CLAY. 2- (FIRM ALLUVIUM) 3- (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) 4- I i 5- 6- CL BROWN-GRAY-ORANGE, MOIST, STIFF, SANDY-CLAY. 7- 8- 9- BOTTOM OF TEST PIT. PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. THREE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES u6i- '5~ M.o XPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME LOT 4 OF DOUBLE 'L' RANCH DATE LOGGED 11-26-96 ELEVATION EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. THREE n~ c ° 0 o Description & Remarks L G Cl) Q E 0 N cc eC Q a U Cu CD CH BROWN GRAY, WET, SOFT, SILTY-CLAY. (PLOWED GROUND) 1- (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) 2- CH BROWN TAN, WET, STIFF SILTY-CLAY. 43- (FIRM ALLUVIUM) - (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE) 5- 6- SC BEIGE-GREEN-ORANGE, MOIST, MEDIUM DENSE, CLAYEY-SAND. 7- 8- BOTTOM OF TEST PIT. PLATE NO. FOUR PROJECT NO. CE-5326 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY SOIL. DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE jI, CU ET) DRY WT) Brown Gray Silty-Clay P1 @4' 115.5 15.0 EXPANSION POTENTIAL SAMPLE NO. P1 @4' CONDITION Remold 90% INITIAL MOISTURE 15.5 AIR DRY MOISTURE 9.0 FINAL MOISTURE 29.0 FINAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) 104.0 LOAD (PSF) 150 SWELL 14.6 EXPANSION INDEX 146 DIRECT SHEAR SAMPLE Na Pi @4' CONDITION Remold 90% ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION 9 COHESION INTERCEPT (PCF) 400 PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. FIVE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS (General Provisions) 1. INTENT The intent of these specifications is to provide general 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 and/or special provisions are a part of the "Recommended Grading Specifications" and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. 2. INSPECTION & TESTING A qualified soils engineer shall be employed to inspect and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications 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 con- tractor to assist the soils engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes, new information and dates, and new unf ore- seen soils conditions so that he may make these certifications. If substandard conditions (questionable soils, adverse weather, poor moisture control, inadequate compaction, etc.) are encount- ered, the soils engineer will be empowered to either stop con- struction until conditions are remedied or recommend rejection of the work. 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 3. MATERIALS Those soils used as fill will have a minimum of 50% passing a #4 sieve. They 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 COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. 4. PLACING AND SPREADING OF FILL The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which when compacted will not exceed 6 inches in 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 the moisture content of the fill material is below that recom- mended 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 f ill material is above that recom- mended 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 rollers, multiplewheel pneumatic tired rollers or other types of rollers. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be con- tinuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been obtained. The fill operation shall be continued in 6 inch compacted layers, or as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades shown on the project plans. 6. WALL BACKF ILL Backfill soil should consist of nonexpansive sand. Compaction should be achieved with light hand-held pneumatic tampers to avoid over compaction and hence cause structural damage. Wall backfill .should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (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" i i NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 Storer & Associates P.O. Box 2604 _ Del Mar, CA 92014 8 SEAViCES iNIITAS Subject: Report of Certification of Compacted Fill Ground Proposed Single Family Dwelling 1099 Double `L' Ranch Road (Lot #5 of Map 13320) Olivenhain, California Dear Mr. Storer: 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 July 11,1997 through July 24, 1997. 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 Dudek & Associates, and were dated April 1, 1997. Grading. operations were performed by Jim Conner of Temecula, California. Reference is made to our previously submitted reports: 1). "Preliminary Soils Investigation", dated December 11, 1996. 2). "Amendment Letter for Preliminary Soils Report", (Project No. CE-5326), dated March 31, 1997. P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 (760) 480-1116 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 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 single family dwelling. 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 report. 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 TESTING 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) SOIL CONDITIONS Native soils encountered were silty-clays, and fine clayey-sands. Fill soils were generated from on-site excavation. The building site 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. Expansive soils were observed during grading and exist at finish grade. Therefore special recommendations will be necessary to reduce the probability of structural damage. The key was approximately 25 feet wide and varied between 4 to 6 feet in depth, and inclined into the slope. During earthwork construction, native areas to receive fill were scarified, watered, and 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 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 Page 3 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). 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 800 pounds per square foot. 4). 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. 5). 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%). 6). Unless requested, recommendations for future improvements (additions, pools, recreation slabs, additional grading, etc.) Were not included in this report. Prior to construction, we should be contacted to update conditions and provide additional recommendations. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 Page 4 7). 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. 8). Expansive soils conditions observed during grading operations will require special recommendations to reduce structural damage occurring from excessive subgrade and foundation movement. Recommendations set forth will reduce the probability of future damage and should be strictly adhered to: All continuous footings should be founded a minimum of 24 inches below finish grade and reinforced with two #5 bars top and bottom (a total of 4 bars). Steel should be positioned 3 inches below top of footing, and 3 inches above bottom of footing. Interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches thick and reinforced with #4 bars on 18 inch centers each ways. Slab reinforcement should be placed near the center of slab and extended through joints to provide a tension tie with perimeter footings. Garage slabs should be free floating. Slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed at mid-point within a 6 inch sand barrier (3 inches sand, visqueen, 3 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30. 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%). All foundation concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi. 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 qualified concrete inspector should be present to document construction of foundations. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 Page 5 POST-TENSION SLAB AND FOUNDATION 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 $505.00 for providing this service. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS It should be noted, foundation inspections on projects located within the county of San Diego jurisdiction may not require inspection by our firm. Therefore, the project owner and/or the general contractor may waive the inspection and assume responsibility to assure that all recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the construction phase of the project. However, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Cannot assume liability for projects not inspected by our firm. 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. July 27, 1997 Project No. CE-5326 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 COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Q~pFUS (O~yq! Q,OG Eh' o, G F-713 ~xp- 9~3p•97 Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli 0 President Registered Civil Geotechmcal Engin 0®610 RKA:kla cc: (3) submitted NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING ^v EXIST. iMrKV.~•• tStts~+ Q P.WG. N0: 41 A L- OQ~Je~ s (ttM EAST. 6*3M -G, 12' R~tpp0. !n -me. _ No Scale - w - - ZrONC. ..r T - , . l VCHT..rUgss;mp UP 20 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY- t "%X W/ W •CRUS+HIED ou , DWELLING ROCK FILTt R AL.A-WET, t' 1099 Double Ranch I' Olivenhain, CA t Jr 2:1' 7 p 2.. TEST 40 .6 1 i tc/ W0 Fr. A- BASE kMIN.)•• ` Z_ S lob 41 209.5 Z! 209.0 22~ i 1s z0 4 / o FL 4965-1 r-71 0. , -9 4 v 34 s t 35 . 208.0. B z 4 ,r r~~I ,3B•- FL . 45 '2,0.0 HINGE • 18 t -f- UNE i 30 t 33 32 LOT 5 t MAP 13320 ~ t Q 211.0 67.8 TEST LOCATION SKETCH PROJECT No. CE-5326 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 07/11/97 See 190.0 14.7 110.1 I 95.3 2 Plate 192.0 17.1 111.3 I 96.4 3 One 190.0 15.4 110.1 I 95.3 4 192.0 17.7 112.7 1 95.8 5 07/14/97 194.0 17.5 107.0 I 92.6 6 196.0 18.6 109.3 I 94.6 7 194.0 15.7 116.8 II 94.7 8 196.0 15.3 114.6 II 92.9 9 197.0 18.3 109.5 I 97.8 10 198.0 17.7 108.6 I 94.0 11 196.0 16.0 113.2 II 91.8 12 198.0 17.7 115.7 II 93.8 13 07/15/97 195.0 17.3 110.1 I 95.3 14 196.0 16.9 108.2 I 93.7 15 198.0 17.9 106.6 I 92.3 16 199.0 16.8 105.2 I 91.1 1.7 200.0 17.7 109.5 I 94.8 18 07/16/97 201.0 21.7 114.2 11 92.6 19 202.0 20.5 116.4 II 94.4 20 202.0 16.5 105.0 I 90.9 21 204.0 17.8 110.3 I 95.5 22 205.0 17.5 105.1 I 91.0 23 206.0 16.1 112.1 II 90.9 24 07/17/97 201.0 20.2 108.7 1I1 91.0 25 203.0 20.0 109.2 111 91.4 26 202.0 16.6 113.1 III 94.6 27 204.0 15.3 114.9 I1I 96.2 28 07/18/97 202.0 20.6 111.7 III 93.5 29 204.0 19.7 110.5 11I 92.5 30 203.0 18.2 112.1 III 93.8 31 205.0 17.6 112.8 III 94.4 32 07/21/97 207.0 18.6 111.5 111 93.3 33 208.0 19.3 113.7 III 95.1 34 207.0 17.7 114.7 111 96.0 35 209.0 17.2 115.3 III 96.5 PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. TWO (page 1) 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 36 07/22/97 See 206.0 20.4 111.3 III 93.1 37 Plate 207.0 21.5 110.6 III 92.2 38 One 205.0 19.9 112.6 III 94.2 39 207.0 18.7 111.0 III 92.9 40 07/23/97 208.0 19.9 103.9 IV 90.0 41 209.0 18.7 104.6 IV 90.6 42 208.0 19.3 104.5 IV 90.5 43 ° 209.0 18.7 105.6 IV 91.4 44 207.0 20.4 106.0 I 91.8 45 209.0 19.9 105.1 I 91.0 46 07/24/97 210.0 RFG 18.2 105.5 IV 91.3 47 210.0 RFG 18.4 105.1 IV 91.0 48 210.0 RFG 18.9 104.5 IV 90.5 49 210.0 RFG 19.4 106.2 IV 91.9 REMARKS: RFG = Rough Finish Grade PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. TWO (page 2) NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE (LB. CU. FTl DRY WT) Brown Gray Silty-Clay I 115.5 15.0 Dark Tan Brown Silty- Sandy Clay II 123.3 12.1 Gray & Olive Green Clayey- Siltstone III 119.5 14.3 Tan Red Silty-Sandy Clay IV 115.5 15.5 EXPANSION POTENTIAL SAMPLE NO. II III IV CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90% Remold 90% INITIAL MOISTURE 11.9 14.6 15.1 AIR DRY MOISTURE 7.8 8.5 11.8 FINAL MOISTURE 24.4 30.5 25.8 FINAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) 111.0 107.6 103.9 LOAD (PSF) 150 150 150 SWELL 11.3 16.8 6.4 EXPANSION INDEX 113 168 64 PROJECT NO. CE-5326 PLATE NO. THREE 'FRASER ' ENGINEERING, INC. 2191 E/ Camino Real, Oceanside, 92054 • (619) 722-3495 • FAX (619) 722-3490 ' HEC-RAS HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ' for TM 93-029 ' DOUBLE LL RANCH SIX-LOT SUBDIVISION 1 VI APR 0 3 1996 ' ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF ENCINITAS J, aT 4 hl Prepared: March 22, 1996 ' 0:\779\02\WORDP ROC\H EC2-COV. DOC 1 FRASER ' ENGINEERING, INC. 2191 E/ Camino Real, Oceanside, 92054 • (619) 722-3495 • FAX (619) 722-3490 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: This hydraulic analysis for Escondido Creek, located west of and adjacent to Lone Jack ' Road and running through the proposed TM93-029 subdivision, was prepared at the request of the City of Encinitas Engineering Department to investigate the effects of the proposed private driveway fill embankment on the subject watercourse. The hydraulic ' design study prepared by Cardiff Design Center, Inc. titled "Hydraulic Design Study for the Channel Along The Westerly Side of Lone Jack Road, Near Proposed Dove Hollow Road", prepared October 10, 1989 and revised January 28, 1991 for an earlier phase of ' this subdivision project was used as the basis of this study. ' This study utilized the Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS River Analysis System software. Design flows for this study were obtained from the offsite hydrology study by Cardiff Design Center, Inc dated October 2, 1989. A 100-year return period design flow ' of 2180 cfs was used to determine the maximum calculated water surface elevation along the proposed private road embankment. As modeled in the previous HEC-2 analysis by Cardiff Design Center, Inc, an additional flow quantity of 300 cfs was added ' at River Station 437, immediately upstream of the Wiegand Street channel crossing located south of the project site (reference City drawing 8281 R). This hydraulic study models nearly 2200 lineal feet of the creek channel and includes two culvert crossings: ' the Double LL Ranch Road culvert (2-12'x10' RCB) and the Wiegand Street culvert (4- 6'x8' RCB), as well as the channel improvements (rock channel lining) constructed as part of the Wiegand subdivision located to the south. ' RESULTS: The results of this study show that the proposed private road fill embankment will not ' encroach into the Escondido Creek channel 100-year area of inundation. ' HA02\W0RDPR0C\HEC2-C0V.D0C TM 3029: Private Drive Plan: Imported Plan 01 3/22/96 Riv Sta = 2300 to 130 PF#: 1 23~0 i i r 't i , ~ 3 a N \ N M O N to = r ' * \ CL) 7 .2 \ rY.: fix. t6 N N 11 f > (a 3 r •i ~ 1 O s- t :~h_ r F ~ / I~ r LLJ I 1 0 0 N O N t o o ' N N r \ ' O C C) ' 0 \ r U C 1] CL \ \ ` C (0 U c o a~ 0- N 1 O O O LO J ' O rn C) CD C) `O O (:U) U01l2A2IE] ' HEC-RAS Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 3/22196 River Sta. Q Total Min Ch El I W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft/s) (sq ft) (ft) ' 2300 2180.00 186.80 189.35 188.98 189.811 0.014367I 5.55 46-4-.60! 233.75 2200 2180.00 185.90 188.44 187.62 188.76 0.007515 4.54 502.10' 279.9-9- 2100.* 2180.00 184.95 187.67 186.93 188.00 0.007696 4.73 488.461 252.62 2000 2180.00 184.00 186.33 186.12 186.89 0.0166871 6.19 376.341 229.68 1900 2180.00 180.80 184.39 184.24 185.20 0.016585 7.32 317.761 186.21 1800 2180.001 180.00 182.48 182.35 183.23 0.0236081 6.99 314.03 176.84- 1763 2180.00'1 178.10 181.43 181.43 182.35 0.023267 8.08 295.201 165.62 1726 2180.00; 177.40 181.21 180.44 182.10 0.001047 7.54 288.95 176.83 1684.5 Bridge's ' 1637 2180.00'1 175.20 178.24 178.24 179.67 0.002323 9.58 227.48 103.12 1600 2180.00 172.50 176.36: 177.25 179.07 0.083563 13.21 166.51 96.49 1400 2180.00''1 167.90 173.781, 173.78 174.88 0.015493 8.92 288.00 141.11 1284 2180.001 165.80 171.67 171.87 172.77 0.021509 9.27 287.98 168.18 1100 2180.001 163.70 168.16; 168.29 169.03 0.018637 9.12 334.88 223.10 1000.* 2180.001 161.60 166.08; 166.34 167.16 0.018498 10.00 310.51 211.67 900 2180.00 159.50 163.72: 164.21 165.14 0.022151 11.44 281.40 227.54 800* 2180.00; 157.90 162.48! 162.49 163.45 0.011979 8.28 308.31 181.32 ' 700 2180.00 156.30 162.43 160.63 162.66 0.001895 4.07 607.81 230.39 639.5* 2180.00 155.50 162.43' 159.38 162.56 0.000776 3.12 815.21 268.43 579 2180.00] 154.70 162.43; 158.17 162.52 0.000387 2.54 1033.80 305.11 437 2480.001 152.25 158.82; 158.82 162.09 0.001747 14.52 170.77 187.61 412.5 Bridges 1 388 2480.00 151.65 157.10; 158.21 161.86 0.003252 17.50 141.74 137.76 ' 357 2480.001 149.90 155.33 156.66 161.03 0.195848 19.17 129.40 100.33- 280 2480.00 148.70 154.27; 154.50 155.52 0.025178 8.98 277.73 159.63 130 2480.001 147.00 151.36; 151.40 152.69 0.014609 9.40 278.54 118.04 1 1 w = 0 1 0 LO 1 T ' `n CD V- o o ~ N ' ' N ~ co O (B 1 I1 CL i LO 1 ~ ~ ch i E O O ' CU O i C O Q N cu CD i to i ' N CD M 1 N O O O O N O 0) CD rn rn O 00 1 (g) U011BA913 1 U) 'I (JJ « ■ o ~Y w v m I CD 0 T N ' co O T O I O 0 cu -0 I 1 1 Q I I E Lf) C O I C) G co N O O CY) O O C N Id I I I ` I ~ N a ai v ' N O O co O O i O co O Nr N O OD O O) O O O O co OO OD r r r r r ' (4) UOl;en913 I Iw m I ' o 0 T■ 0 N o ' N ~ co T ' O ~ C ' 0 O C O C) cn O T ~ C N co N > O L O Q , N i N ' O O N O M O ~ p O co N O co Cp m p m p co co co r r r r - r ' (4) U01leA213 Iw 0 0 1 Lf) 1 C) N OD ' co O , T ~ O I ^ I f..L ' I 0 i M Q tf) ' - O C O ~ t6 O , O C N co I > O Q ~ N i N , N LO O ~ 0 C) ~ O ' N O CO tp O) rn m co OO OO r' T r r' r l'~ ( ) uoi;enaI=l I I ' l) Cl) w U G7 m O o Lf) CO CF) O N ' N M ~ r O ~ II L O o 0 ' 0 o i M O C _E _ ' O c C O ~ O co O F~ co ' O o > ~ 0 L N N O ' N O co o G T 0 ' rn rn rn co OD OD NW 00 T T T T T T T T (4) uOIJen913 I I i Imo- ,ia c W • o • c I i U ~ m ' O O LO N p M 0 t: E Lo ' co ca co cn Q +i N N ' N C) m 0 0 ' to o to O CD co 00 (g) U014BA813 W U'~ m I o ~o LO CD o ~ - o N ' N M r O LL ' O o ~n M O E = co ' EL ~ m ' o > o Q N N > a LO Oi O ' N O O O O ' O 00 CO v N O 00 rn co co 00 co ti r r r r r r ' (4) U01;en913 1 1 I I I~ I W U m I ~ ~ I i O -O ■ 1 LO rn N i " M C~ T O ~ O I 1 0 E c C0 N (p l` o c0 O 1 aT a 0 a~ j N d7 0 O 1 N M O O ' O r 1 i O co co N' N O CC) O O 00 co co co 00 r- r- T r r r l"' r T l"' i i (4) U01;eA913 1 ' c to j U O C • - i ~ U c7 m I ~ I ' O 0 0 1 f C) Lo N ' N t 1 C) O t ' O to O n- N ;Ills i' > Q Ev r CD_ 0 ' o0 0 CY) cu CO a) co >f a O 1 ■ O ' O In O O LO O Q) Q) 00 00 1- N uoileA213 1 ' I U) co co c ~ C1 S2 ' co ■ o a~ O.Ne w mc I ' U j C7 i 0 ~o CD ■ po co ■ lD N st ' CN O s ~ O i ems` s O N O O r any E a) cu C: c 1 cu r ~ k cu t f f~ co O 1 - O O p M ` O ■ ■ O LO O LO O LO O O O 00 co f~ N r - r ()J) UOIJen913 I ~I m p r CD C) N ~ ' N O M r ' O f~ v 1 N O Q M O co co O co ~ C r u a~ 0 a~ 0 ' > N CL N O O p co O O ' 0) 00 00 r (;4) UOi;ena13 I ' v I'S OT w 13: m U 16 m O O CD ' O ~ O CD N Lo CN 'IT M ~ r ' O ~ °o c~ 0 O ' CL E LO O o co ~ °0 0 ~ M ~ cu Q ~ CD O > ' O N a I O CN LO O '4T M O rn O O ' o U') C) U*) o m co co ' U01~2A81=l I ) W _ C U O m I 0 0 IX) tr) ' o ~ o N C) N M ' O c fo o' O O co O Q c C) c O 0 c cu O C> o Q N N LO tt O N O O O o LO o in w Co r- co (4) u011ena13 Vr 2 i . O .Y W w U) C U CD ~ I I ' O O (D ' O O O N ' co O r ' O C) (l5 C 0 Q E co f4 N o CC O C ~ I I I L I I I O ' .j N C) CO O O O O O ' co co Co m U') r r r r ~ ' (4) U01len813 I I U) - w, co *CM cv m I ' o ~o ' o 0 rn U') N ' N CD M CD T I ~ I O I I..L Tt I y I I I 0^ ~ I i..1. I I I ' O U') 0 0 r O co I N I ^l i W > u O N t1') M m o0 O 0) OD ~ LO C) LO C) ~ r r r r r r (4) UOIJeA913 3■a~c Iw U O m I ' o ~o 0 ' o LO N ' M O r Cl C O co -Cl i E ' O O O C) C) '14' LO 0 Q i ~ M w+ co i i ' cu O ~ N O ' N O M O O ' I I O C) Lr) C) co o ~n co 00 r- ' W) UOl;en813 1 1 I c7 CD ■ p ~Y 1 ~~~U) U m 1 O CO ■ 1 1 C N ~ I co 1 N I I fQ , 1 I I i o o O ' v Q , ' O c ~ O ~ O ^ O t6 co I o M • I N co ./'L I i I . N O 1 co O p o N 1 1 O 1 O r co r- O Lf) CO COO t~ r r r r r 1 (g) UOIIBA913 i .w 3 U ~O m i ' O O O O _ N ~o ' N co r O ' c O fu O ' O Q E ' *O c 0 0 o > O ` o N ,r cu L a. 6 ' N O co v O O O N O ' O co to c u r r r r r r (U) uoileA213 I L 'wnO~c 1 I 0 LO LO 0 ' o LO m rn " N co O -LO 1 ` r O ' C O -a O O d E ~ I ' O lf) O Co O ch N `c U) I (D I ~ I L I O co ~O 1 I > I I ^ I TT VI O N CN N i co O O O N O -LO T LO O U') O LO co (0 T T T T T ' (4) UOl;en913 ) ~ I~ °■o~Y l iw mi i 0 0 O t ■ Cl -LO CD rn N ' N co O O LO T O { L O LO O Ca. C •k ' C O O Ca CD V- m CD co N co i O O N O M M i N i O -cl N O U') CD to ' (:U) UOIIBA919 I I ~ .r ~w I ~ ' 0 0 co CO rn N ~ ' N 0 M C) r C ' CD O (a .O O O O. E 00 0 ca Ul) v C U) O I A` I W I I •L I I..L I I O ce) O 0 M 0 i I I I i O tY O 0 N co co C ( co co CD CD co Aco ND U') T T T T T T T T U011BA919 1 I I w U m I I I o 0 t ~ o N O M ~ o I r ' O i c a- ~ ~ o ' O ~ ♦ ch a. •O~tn I ~ ' ♦ O CY) F1 N I O > O Q N N cu I > I ~ O ' N O C o i O ' O LO O U-) O r r r r r ' ()j) UOIIBA913 I 6 m I ~ i I ° O LO C ° N o O cu N coo Q - E U ° T to 7 7 cu a U) E ~ z> ■ co ■ ° D cn N CL i O , O C T ' O ~ O O CO (D ~ ►n T T T T T ' (4) UOIIBA913 1 I I iW 3■0 U ~ m 0 ~o 1 co CF) N o N_ Ch O r - C ~ Y t4 ~ O i a *k r I > O th O C U C) ' cu I ti. $ O cu (D a) cn ? N p N O O i Cl 1 i ' o CD C LO (g) UOIIBA913 1 I ~ I CU w 3 - in I i I 0 0 rn o N O ' N M O T ' O C ' o O ♦ c' Q E ° 00 (c M O Q ~ N ^L ° N O M o O o ' O ^o to o LO ° O LO LO (4) U011BA913 I Iw w iN~O~Y I I ' CD 0 co CD m N O N co O T /~cu I..L. 0 CULO O CU co a Cf) o ' M ^L ~ I..L ~ , O co QC~ O C ~ N o f O O LO O LO co co LO ~ R (g) UOIJen913 I I I m c in w ■ o0 co co _rn N o ~ ' N M O c~ a -CD o I o o ' E ' O c co 0 N d u CD o ' ~ O L i O 0 i M cu N O ~ M O ~ O N O O LO C) LO r CO LO L W) UOIIBA913 ~ c cn j U N ■ o ~~c I:"' c U ',3 II O o r (0 o d7 cfl N ' N co T ^c O a- O 0 0- E O ~ M O O co ~ O 0 0 1 M O -CD O ' O r co COD ~ ~ `n r r r r r ' W) UOIIBA913 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 2300 Profile: 1 3122196 W.S. Elev (ft) 189.35 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' VeI Head (ft) 0.47 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050, 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) ! 189.81 Reach Len. (ft) 88.00 100.00 124.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.014367 Flow Area (sq ft) 21.79 377.82! 4.99 ' Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 40.93 2129.78' 9.28 Top Width (ft) 233.75 Top Width (ft) 32.34 194.00 7.41 Vel Total (ft/s) 5.39 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 3.04 5.55 3.01 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 2.55 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.67 1.95 0.67 Crit W.S. (ft) 188.98 Wetted Per. (ft) 32.37 194.02 7.53 Conv. Total (cfs) 18187.4 Conv. (cfs) 552.7 17509.4 125.4 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 2200 Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 188.44 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.31 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 188.76 Reach Len. (ft) 87.50 100.00 120.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.007515 Flow Area (sq ft) 32.95 468.35 0.79 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 53.82 2125.35 0.82 Top Width (ft) 279.99 Top Width (ft) 76.44 200.00 3.55 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 4.34 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.63 4.54 1.04 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 2.54 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.43 2.34 0.22 Crit W.S. (ft) 187.62 Wetted Per. (ft) 76.46 200.34 3.58 Conv. Total (cfs) 25147.4 Conv. (cfs) 620.9 24517.0 9.5 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 2100.* Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 187.67 Element Left OB Channel Right OB VeI Head (ft) 0.33 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 188.00 Reach Len. (ft) 87.50 100.00 120.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.007696 Flow Area (sq ft) 45.97 434.82 7.67 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 108.49 2055.19 16.31 Top Width (ft) 252.62 Top Width (ft) 62.50 178.00 12.12 VeI Total (ft/s) 4.46 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 2.36 4.73 2.13 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 2.72 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.74 2.44 0.63 Crit W.S. (ft) 186.93 Wetted Per. (ft) 62.51 178.13 12.19 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 24849.7 Conv. (cfs) 1236.7 23427.0 186.0 1 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 2000 Profile: 1 3122/96 W.S. Elev (ft) j 186.33 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' VeI Head (ft) 0.56 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 186.89 Reach Len. (ft) 97.00 100.00 110.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.016687 Flow Area (sq ft) 41.78 319.09 15.47 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 149.22 1973.70 57.08 Top Width (ft) 229.68 Top Width (ft) 54.51 156.00 19.17 Vel Total (ft/s) 5.79 Avg. VeI. (ft/s) 3.57 6.19 3.69 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 2.33 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.77 2.05 0.81 Crit W.S. (ft) 186.12 Wetted Per. (ft) 54.53 156.02 19.23 ' Conv. Total (cfs) ! 16876.0 Conv. (cfs) 1155.2 15278.9 441.9 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1900 Profile: 1 3122/9 6 OB W.S. Elev (ft) 184.39 Element Left OB Channel 7103.00 Vel Head (ft) 0.81 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 185.20 Reach Len. (ft) 97.00 100.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.016585 Flow Area (sq ft) 28.18 289.31 0.27 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 61.93 2117.69 0.38 Top Width (ft) 186.21 Top Width (ft) 75.84 109.00 1.37 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 6.86 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 2.20 7.32 1.40 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.59 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.37 2.65 0.20 Crit W.S. (ft) 184.24 Wetted Per. (ft) 75.85 109.38 1.43 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 16927.7 Conv. (cfs) 480.9 16443.8 2.9 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1800 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 182.48 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.76 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 183.23 Reach Len. (ft) 31.00 37.00 48.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.023608 Flow Area (sq ft) 1.92 310.98 1.13 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 3.74 2174.07 2.19 Top Width (ft) 176.84 Top Width (ft) 8.08 164.00 4.75 Vel Total (ft/s) 6.94 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.94 6.99 1.94 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 2.48 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.24 1.90 0.24 Crit W.S. (ft) 182.35 Wetted Per. (ft) 8.10 164.16 4.78 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 14188.1 Conv. (cfs) 24.3 14149.5 14.3 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1763 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 181.43 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' VeI Head (ft) 0.92 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.0501 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 182.35 Reach Len. (ft) 44.00 40.00; 50.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.023267 Flow Area (sq ft) 52.23 233.251 9.72 ' Q Total (cfs) i 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 257.06 1883.96; 38.99 Top Width (ft) 165.62 Top Width (ft) 54.04 98.00' 13.59 Vel Total (ft/s) 7.38 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 4.92 8.081 4.01 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.33 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.97 2.38 0.72 Crit W.S. (ft) 181.43 Wetted Per. (ft) 54.07 98.07 13.66 Conv. Total (cfs) 14291.8 Conv. (cfs) 1685.2 12351-.01 255.6 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1726 Profile: 1 3122/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 181.21 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.88 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 182.10 Reach Len. (ft) 24.50 24.50 24.50 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.001047 Flow Area (sq ft) 288.95 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 2180.001 Top Width (ft) 176.83 Top Width (ft) 46.66 80.00 50.17 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 7.54 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 7.54 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.81 Hydr. Depth (ft) 3.61 Crit W.S. (ft) 180.44 Wetted Per. (ft) 80.00 Conv. Total (cfs) 67378.9 Conv. (cfs) 67378.91 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1684.5 BU Profile: 1 3/22196 W.S. Elev (ft) 180.46 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.43 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 181.90 Reach Len. (ft) 40.00 40.00 40.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.002775 Flow Area (sq ft) 226.85 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 2180.00 Top Width (ft) 79.33 Top Width (ft) 79.33 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 9.61 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 9.61 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.06 Hydr. Depth (ft) 2.861 Crit W.S. (ft) 180.46 Wetted Per. (ft) 90.771 Conv. Total (cfs) 41383.4 Conv. (cfs) 41383.4 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1684.5 BD Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 177.16 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' Vel Head (ft) ~ 3.78 Wt. n-Val. E.G. Elev (ft) 180.94 Reach Len. (ft) 40. 0.015 00 0.015 40.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.013040 Flow Area (sq ft) 139.80 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 2180.00 Top Width (ft) 79.33 Top Width (ft) 79.33 Vel Total (ft/s) 15.59 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 15.59 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 1.96 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.76 Crit W.S. (ft) 178.27 Wetted Per. (ft) 86.38 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 19090.6 Conv. (cfs) 19090.6 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1637 Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 178.24 Element Left OB Channel Right OB VeI Head (ft) 1.43 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 179.67 Reach Len. (ft) 37.00 37.00 37.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.002323 Flow Area (sq ft) 227.481 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 2180.00 Top Width (ft) 103.12 Top Width (ft) 17.11 80.00 6.01 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 9.58 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 9.58 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.04 Hydr. Depth (ft) 2.84 Crit W.S. (ft) 178.24 Wetted Per. (ft) 80.00 ' COnv. Total (cfs) 45229.0 Conv. (cfs) 45229.0 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1600 Profile: 1 3122/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 176.36 Element Left OB Channel Right OB VeI Head (ft ) 2.70 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 179.07 Reach Len. (ft) 198.00 200.00 202.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.083563 Flow Area (sq ft) 1.38; 164.60 0.53 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 4.23 2174.15 1.62 Top Width (ft) 96.49 Top Width (ft) 7.57 86.00 2.92 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 13.09 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 3.07; 13.21 3.05 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 3.86 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.181 1.91 0.18 Crit W.S. (ft) 177.25 Wetted Per. (ft) 7.58 86.34 2.94 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 7541.3 Conv. (cfs) 14.6 7521.1 5.6 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1400 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 173.78 Element Left OB Channel I Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.10 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 i 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) j 174.88 Reach Len. (ft) 108.00 116.00 128.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.015493 Flow Area (sq ft) 39.31 212.14 36.55 ' Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 149.57 1891.37 139.06 Top Width (ft) 141.11 Top Width (ft) 44.10 56.00 41.00 Vel Total (ft/s) 7.57 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 3.80 8.92 3.80 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 5.88 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.89 3.791 0.89 Crit W.S. (ft) 173.78 Wetted Per. (ft) 44.14 56.69 41.04 Conv. Total (cfs) 17514.1 Conv. (cfs) 1201.7 15195.31 1117.2 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1284 Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 171.67 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.10 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 172.77 Reach Len. (ft) 182.00 184.00 188.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.021509 Flow Area (sq ft) 43.36 176.80 67.82 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 186.12 1638.59 355.29 Top Width (ft) 168.18 Top Width (ft) 51.94 56.00 60.24 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 7.57 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 4.29 9.27 5.24 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 5.87 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.83 3.16 1.13 Crit W.S. (ft) 171.87 Wetted Per. (ft) 51.97 57.02 60.27 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 14864.5 Conv. (cfs) 1269.1 11172.8 2422.6 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1100 Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 168.16 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.88 Wt. n-Val. 0.045 0.050 0.045 E.G. Elev (ft) 169.03 Reach Len. (ft) 102.00 100.00 99.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.018637 Flow Area (sq ft) 105.68 132.40 96.79 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 516.35 1207.32 456.33 Top Width (ft) 223.10 Top Width (ft) 93.62 39.00 90.47 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 6.51 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 4.89 9.12 4.71 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 4.46 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.13 3.39 1.07 Crit W.S. (ft) 168.29 Wetted Per. (ft) 93.65 39.291 90.50 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 15968.9 Conv. (cfs) 3782.4 8843.8 3342.7 1 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 1000.` Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 166.08 Element j Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.08 Wt. n-Val. 0.043 0.045 0.043 E.G. Elev (ft) 167.16 Reach Len. (ft) 102.00 100.00 99.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.018498 Flow Area (sq ft) 52.07 132.23 126.20 ' Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 256.57 1322.37' 601.06 Top Width (ft) j 211.67 Top Width (ft) 48.47 39.50 123.69 Vel Total (ft/s) 7.02 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 4.93 10.00; 4.76 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 4.48 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.07 3.35 1.02 Crit W.S. (ft) 166.34 Wetted Per. (ft) 48.52 39.80111 12371 Conv. Total (cfs) 16028.4 Conv. (cfs) 1886.4 9722.71 4419.3 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 900 Profile: 1 3122/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 163.72 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.42 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 165.14 Reach Len. (ft) 113.00 100.00 94.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.022151 Flow Area (sq ft) 19.24 120.07 142.09 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 96.03 1373.42 710.54 Top Width (ft) 227.54 Top Width (ft) 22.37 40.00 165.17 Vel Total (ft/s) 7.75 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 4.99 11.44 5.00 ' Max Chl Dpth (ft) 4.22 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.86 3.00 0.86 Crit W.S. (ft) 164.21 Wetted Per. (ft) 22.43 40.35 165.18 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 14647.3 Conv. (cfs) 645.2 9227.9 4774.1 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 800.* Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 162.48 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.96 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 163.45 Reach Len. (ft) 113.00 100.00 94.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.011979 Flow Area (sq ft) 12.50 233.13' 62.68 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 41.56 1929.57 208.87 Top Width (ft) 181.32 Top Width (ft) 16.84 80.00 84.48 ' Vel Total (ft/s) 7.07 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 3.32 8.28 3.33 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 4.58 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.74 2.91 0.74 Crit W.S. (ft) 162.49 Wetted Per. (ft) 16.90 80.26 84.49 Conv. Total (cfs) 19918.3 Conv. (cfs) 379.7 17630.2 1908.4 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 700 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 162.43 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.24 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev 162.66 Reach Len. 66.00 60.50 (ft) (ft) 1 55.50 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.001895 Flow Area (sq ft) 23.26 479.79 104.76 ' Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 1.11 2174.01 4.88 Top Width (ft) 230.39 Top Width (ft) 17.93 120.00 92.46 Vel Total (ft/s) 3.59 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.91 4.07 1.76 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 6.13 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.30 4.00 1.13 Crit W.S. (ft) 160.63 Wetted Per. (ft) 18.10 120.27 92.50 Conv. Total (cfs) 50080.5 Conv. (cfs) 1021.3 44831.01, 4228.2 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 639:5* Profile: 1 3122/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 162.43 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' VeI Head (ft) 0.14 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 162.56 Reach Len. (ft) 66.00 60.50 55.50 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000776 Flow Area (sq ft) 27.44 619.99 167.79- Q-Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 44.60 1936.65 198.75 Top Width (ft) 268.43 Top Width (ft) 13.44 118.00 136.99 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 2.67 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.63 3.12 1.18 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 6.93 Hydr. Depth (ft) 2.04 5.25 1.22 Crit W.S. (ft) 159.38 Wetted Per. (ft) 13.94 118.25 137.05 Conv. Total (cfs) 78242.1 Conv. (cfs) 1600.8 69508.0 7133.3 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 579 Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) i 162.43 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 0.09 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 162.52 Reach Len. (ft) 160.00 142.00 118.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000387 Flow Area (sq ft) 23.51 752.57 257.72 Q Total (cfs) 2180.00 Flow (cfs) 30.90 1910.40 238.70 Top Width (ft) 305.11 Top Width (ft) 8.43 116.00 180.68 Vel Total (ft/s) 2.11 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.31 2.54 0.93 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 7.73 Hydr. Depth (ft) 2.79 6.49 1.43 Crit W.S. (ft) 158.17 Wetted Per. (ft) 9.76 116.34 180.77 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 110752.3 Conv. (cfs) 1570.0 97055.6 12126.8 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 437 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 158.82 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 3.27 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 162.09 Reach Len. (ft) 6.50 6.50 6.50 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.001747 Flow Area (sq ft) j 170.77 ' Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 2480.00 Top Width (ft) i 187.61 Top Width (ft) 82.49 26.00 79.11 Vel Total (ft/s) 14.52 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 14.52 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 6.57 Hydr. Depth (ft) 6.57 Crit W.S. (ft) 158.82 Wetted Per. (ft) 26.00 Conv. Total (cfs) 59328.3 Conv. (cfs) 59328.3 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 412.5 BU Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 159.15 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' VeI Head (ft) 3.48 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 162.64 Reach Len. (ft) 6.50 6.50 6.50 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.008549 Flow Area (sq ft) 165.61 Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 2480.00 Top Width (ft) 23.99 Top Width (ft) 23.99 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 14.98 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 14.98 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 6.90 Hydr. Depth (ft) 6.90 Crit W.S. (ft) 159.15 Wetted Per. (ft) 79.22 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 26822.2 Conv. (cfs) 26822.2 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 412.5 BD Profile: 1 3/22/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) 158.03 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 4.08 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 162.11 Reach Len. (ft) 36.00 36.00 36.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.010344 Flow Area (sq ft) 153.04 Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 2480.00 Top Width (ft) 23.99 Top Width (ft) 23.99 ' VeI Total (ft/s) 16.21 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 16.21 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 6.38 Hydr. Depth (ft) 6.38 Crit W.S. (ft) 158.56 Wetted Per. (ft) 75.02 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 24383.9 Conv. (cfs) 24383.9 1 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 388 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 157.10 Element Left OB Channel , Right OB Vel Head (ft) 4.75 Wt. n-Val. 0.015 E.G. Elev (ft) 161.86 Reach Len. (ft) 49.00 49.00 49.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.003252 Flow Area (sq ft) 141.74 ' Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 2480.00 Top Width (ft) 137.76 Top Width (ft) 58.76 26.001 53.01 Vel Total (ft/s) 17.50 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 17-.501 ' Max Chi Dpth (ft) 5.45 Hydr. Depth (ft) 5.45 Crit W.S. (ft) 158.21 Wetted Per. (ft) 26.00 Conv. Total (cfs) 43489.7 Conv. (cfs) 43489.7 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 357 Profile: 1 3122/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) i 155.33 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 5.70 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 161.03 Reach Len. (ft) 53.00 77.00 100.00 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.195848 Flow Area (sq ft) 129.40 ' Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 2480.00 Top Width (ft) j 100.33 Top Width (ft) 100.33 Vel Total (ft/s) 19.17 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 19.17 Max Chi Dpth (ft) j 5.43 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.29; Crit W.S. (ft) 156.66 Wetted Per. (ft) 102.80 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 5603.9 Conv. (cfs) 5603.9 1 Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 280 Profile: 1 3122/96 ' W.S. Elev (ft) I 154.27 Element Left OB Channel Right OB Vel Head (ft) 1.25 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 155.52 Reach Len. (ft) 168.00 150.00 135.00 ' E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.025178 Flow Area (sq ft) 0.40 275.90 1.44 Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 0.62 2477.15 2.23 Top Width (ft) i 159.63 Top Width (ft) 2.97 146.00 10.66 ' Vel Total (ft/s) j 8.93 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.55 8.98 1.55 Max Chi Dpth (ft) 5.57 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.13 1.89 0.13 Crit W.S. (ft) 154.50 Wetted Per. (ft) 2.98 146.76 10.66 ' Conv. Total (cfs) 15629.2 Conv. (cfs) 3.9 15611.3 14.0 ' Plan: Imported Pla Reach: 1 Riv Sta: 130 Profile: 1 3/22/96 W.S. Elev (ft) 151.36 Element Left OB Channel Right OB ' Vel Head (ft) ! 1.33 Wt. n-Val. 0.040 0.040 0.040 E.G. Elev (ft) 152.69 Reach Len. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.014609 Flow Area (sq ft) 1.85 255.37 21.32 ' Q Total (cfs) 2480.00 Flow (cfs) 5.98 2399.99 74.03 Top Width (ft) I 118.04 Top Width (ft) 2.72 84.00 31.32 Vel Total (ft/s) 8.90 Avg. Vel. (ftis) 3.23 9.40 3.47 ' Max Chl Dpth (ft) 4.36 Hydr. Depth (ft) 0.68 3.04 0.68 Crit W.S. (ft) 151.40 Wetted Per. (ft) 3.04 84.33 31.35 Conv. Total (cfs) 20518.5 Conv. (cfs) 49.5 19856.6 612.5 1