The URL can be used to link to this page

2007-562 G Ci p �ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ' Vy Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering August 4, 2008 Attn: Downey Savings 485 Santa Fe Drive Encinitas, California 92024 RE: Ann Harloff 1302 Encinitas Blvd. CDP 03-205 Grading Permit 562-G APN 259-121-29 Final release of security Permit 562-G authorized earthwork, seormbdedai tThe retaining wall, Inspectordhas erosion control, all as necessary to build the d project. the grading and finaled the project. Therefore, release of the remaining 25% security deposited is merited. Assignment of Account 1102047402, in the amount of$released gn itse has been cancelled by the Financial Services Manager and hereby document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Since ly, y L Bach Debra Geis rt inane Manager Engineering Technician Financial Services Subdivision Engineering CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Ann Harloff Debra Geishart File Enc. C14 recycled paper TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 40 1 14 1 1 h 'D 'INEERING SERVICES DEPARTMF 5 0 5 S.. VU��.,CAN AVE. ENCINITAS, CA 92024 GRADING PERMIT PERMIT NO. : 562GI 259-121-2900 PLAN NO. : - ---� PARCEL NO. CASE NO. : 03205 / CDP JOB SITE ADDRESS: 1302 ENCINITAS BLVD. APPLICANT NAME HARLOFF ENTERPRISES INC. PHONE NO. : 760-479-0778 MAILING ADDRESS : 2146 MANCHESTER STATEVECAE ZIP: 92007- CITY: CARDIFF PHONE NO. : 760-599-0755 CONTRACTOR : SIERRA PACIFIC WEST LICENSE TYPE: A LICENSE NO. : 59-7852A PHONE NO. . 8-259-8212 ENGINEER PASCO ENGINEERING / PERMIT IS ATE: 9 /07 PERMIT DATE: 10/1 /07 PERMIT ISSUED BY: INSPEC OR: RON BRADY ---------- --- PERMIT FEES & DEPOSITS ----- -- --------------------- ----- . 00 2 . GIS MAP FEE . 00 1 . PERMIT FEE . 00 3 . INSPECTION FEE 7 , 986 . 00 4 . INSPECTION DEPOSIT: 199 534 . 00 5 . NPDES INSPT FEE 1, 597 . 00 6 . SECURITY DEPOSIT . 00 7 . FLOOD CONTROL FEE 9, 457 . 00 8 . TRAFFIC FEE . 00 9 . IN-LIEU UNDERGRND . 00 10 . IN-LIEU IMPROVMT = . 00 ll . PLAN CHECK FEE . 00 .12 .PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT: ------ DESCRIPTION OF WORK ----- --- - --- ------ -------- PERMIT TO GUARANTEE BOTH PERFORMANCE AND LABONTROLEPERLAPPROVED GHRADIK , DRAINAGE, PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS AND EROSIO ALAN 5ED T MUST MAINTAIN W.AAFTIC.H. STANDARDS . LETTER DATED APPROVED TRAFFIC AUGUST 20 , 2007 APPLIES . - DATE -------- INSPECTOR' S SIGNATURE ---- ---- INSPECTION -- INITIAL INSPECTION COMPACTION REPORT RECEIVED ENGINEER CERT. RECEIVED ROUGH GRADING INSPECTION _0 FINAL INSPECTION --------------------------- I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THE APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND ANDEGRADINGMPAND WITH THE PROVISIONS ANDACONDITIONSSTATE LAWS REGULATING EXCAVATING ANY PERMIT ISSUED P SUANT TO THIS APPLICATION. q- 6- o7 DATE SIGNED SIGN E a �lo qW - y�q-,h n TELEPHONE NUMBER PRINT NAME CIRCLE ONE: 1 . OWNER 2 . AGENT 3 . OTHER - NGINEERING SER VICES DEPAR TMENT *� city" OJ Capital Improvement Projects Encinitas District Support Services Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering March 5, 2008 Attn: Downey Savings 485 Santa Fe Drive Encinitas, California 92024 RE: Ann Harloff 1302 Encinitas Blvd. CDP 03-205 Grading Permit 562-G APN 259-121-29 Partial release of security Permit 562-G authorized earthwork, storm t retaining rs bed pr drainage, . Te F eld Inspector approved control, all as necessary to build the des J the rough grading. Therefore, release of 75% of the security deposited is merited. Assignment of Account 1102047410,Services and is hereby releasedhnsiteentirety. cancelled by the Financial g The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, / ay bach Debra Geish / Finance Manager Engineering Technician Financial Services Subdivision Engineering CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Ann Harloff Debra Geishart File Enc. 0-633-2700 recycled paper TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 76 �`p� PASCO ENGINEERING, IN( 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 WAYNE A. PASCO (858)259-8212 R.C.E. 29577 pt FAX(858)259-4812 PE 1200 December 30, 2003 Engineering Department City of Encinitas 505 So. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 RE: HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS FOR 1302 ENCINITAS BLVD, ENCINITAS, CA The purpose of this letter is to address the hydrology and hydraulics of the improvements associated with a proposed access ramp at Harloff BMW located at 1302 Encinitas Blvd. HYDROLOGY All proposed grading for this project will be for the access ramp and no drainage patterns will be significantly altered as a result of the grading. Runoff will continue to be collected and conveyed to the existing detention n he volume of runoff generated as condition. Additionally,there is no measurable increase result of the proposed improvements. HYDRAULICS There are no drainage structures proposed as part of the improvements. The existing topography and drainage structures are adequate to convey and contain Qioo as they did prior to the proposed work. Based on the discussion in this letter it is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering, Inc. that the existing drainage system on t 100 as storm to will function to to adequately intercept, contain and convey flow from a year points of discharge. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, PASCO ENGINEERING, INC. Wayne Pasco,President RCE 29577 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Traffic Ramp Harloff BMW 1302 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California February 9, 2004 Prepared For: HARLOFF BMW Attention: Ann Harloff 1302 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California Prepared By: VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029 Job #04-116-P �- , INJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. V 2450 Vineyard Avenue Escondido,California 92029-1229 Job #04-116-P Phone (760) 743-1214 Fax(760) 739-0343 February 9, 2004 Harloff BMW Attention: Ann Harloff 1302 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas, California 92024 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED TRAFFIC RAMP, HARLOFF BMW, 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS, CALIF Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc.,. has ro epleted the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, incdgrafforaatopyy analyses and conclusions, and provides recommendations for th e proposed from as understood. In our opinion the planned traffic improvements presented feasible eport are a geotechnlcal viewpoint provided the recommendations incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The conclusions and recommendations provided in I of final development plans geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation and allow more accurate estimates of development costs. ct If you have any questions or need clarification, please do to youra nquiseS Ice. Reference to our Job #04-116-P will help toe expedite our We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. MIDp��O o CEG 980 z * CERTIFIED D nnis Middleton ENG_IMr-ERING CEG #980 DM/jt TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " " " " " Ill. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' IV. SITE INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • " " " " " 2 V. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A. Earth Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Groundwater and Surface Drainage . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • ' ' : 3 C. Slope Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 D. Laboratory Testing / Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Remedial Grading and Earthworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 B. General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE NO. 1 Soil Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gontent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum M . . 3 ty Tests Undisturbed.Chunk Samples) . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • . 4 Moisture-Density (Undisturbed , , • . . . . . . . . . . . . Expansion Index Test . . . . . . . . . • . . , , , , • . . . 5 Grain Size Analysis PLATE NO. Regional Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4 Test Trench Logs (with key) 5 Geologic Cross-Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED TRAFFIC RAMP HARLOFF BMW 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION cent The study location for this work includes a portion of a p address. A Rot localendexaMap the east side of Harloff BMW at the above-referenced showing the site location is enclosed with this report as Plate 1. We understand that an asphalt pavement ramp is planned in the northwest portion of the property that will connect the BMW dealership with the adjacent lot. Geologic mapping, test trench digging, and soil sampling and testing were among the activities conducted in conjunction with this effort which has resulted in the planning and construction recommendations presented herein. The scope of the report is confined to those areas planned for the new ramp as delineated in this report. Other portions of the property and existing structures/improvements not investigated are beyond the scope of this report. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The study location consists of a portion of a graded lot presently used as a storage area ng ng for new cars and parking lot for dealership has employees. lt Pasco Eng n'eer ngsa'nd conditions and proposed development been supplied by included with this report as Plate 2. The storage/parking lot was created by cut/fill grading techniques which higher filled to the west and south was cut down and lower ground to the ea st and Documentation pertaining to the creation of 9 feet in Test Trench lf 2r(T-2jew. The maximum exposed fill thickness was mea sured The western margin of the study location is marked by graded cut slopes that ascend he BMW dealership above. Maximum vertical slope heights reach westward to t approximately he feet with 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) gradients. The northern margin is 24 marked by a variable fill slope ranging to approximately 6 feet in vertical height with gradients approaching 2:1 maximum. The estimated cut-fill boundary through the study area is depicted on Plate 2. Project drainage is well development and flows to collection facilities in the northeastern portion of the storage/parking lot. 2 GE PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FEBRUARY PAGE E 2 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT y The stud location is planned for a paved ramp that will provide access between will - Paving upslope dealership and downslope storage/parking An estimted 2040 consist of asphalt over Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base materials.structural cubic yards of import soil will be required to complete will be construction order of finish feet design grades as shown. New vertical fill thickness maximum. Planned cuts are minimal and less than 5 feet maximum. Portions of an existing block wall, located at the top the lopeimprove concrete pavement at the dealership will be demolished to make room for IV. SITE INVESTIGATION Geotechnical conditions at the study location were chiefly determineod exposed rock.excavation All of 3 test trenches dug with a tractor-mounted�nretained representative rock/soil trenches were logged by our prod geologist 9 st who also samples for laboratory testing. Test trench locations are shown on test results ar Plate 2. Logs in a trenches are included as Plates 3 and 4. Laboratory following section. V. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS are The study area consist of portions of a previously graded lot. Formational l Rock units is not exposed on the westerly graded slope and underlie exl s g deposits. indicated at the site. A. Earth Materials Formational Rock (Tt) - Eocene age formational rock units are exposed on existing graded slopes and underlie project existing fills. These are sandstone units designated Torrey Sandstone which are Locally exposed in surrounding areas. Well developed exposures at the project site indicate d aWell cemented. Project medium grained rocks, are generally ma formational rocks are competent rocks that are performing well in exposed graded slopes and will provide excellent support for planned new fills and improvements. Fill - Existing fill deposits mantle eastern portions of the study location approximately as shown on Plate 2. The fill deposits were likely placed during original grading for the storage/parking lot areas. Documentation pertaining to PAGE 3 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, E C N engineering observation and testing for the existing fills are not available for review. Existing fills are on the order of 10 feet thick maximum at depth.n ere found to be generally loose at surface exposures to well compact The indicated subsurface relationship of project earth materials is depicted on Geologic Cross-Sections enclosed herein as Plate 5. B. Groundwater and Surface Drainage Groundwater was not encountered to the depths explored and is not expected to impact the planned improvements. However, the proper control of surface drainage is an important factor in the continued stability of the site. All surface run- off should be collected and diverted to existing drainage facilities. C. Slope Stability Landslides or other forms of instability are not in evidence at the study location. Existing graded slopes are also performing well with no indication of instability. D. Laboratory Testing /Results Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations were closely .examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test trench data and field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the following soil types: TABLE 1 Soil Type Description 1 pale brown fine grained poorly graded sand (Fill). 2 off-white medium sand (Fill/Formational Rock) 3 Brown clayey sand Fill The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation: 1. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 1 and 3 were determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The test results are presented in Table 2. PRELIMINARY GE INVESTIGATION PAGE 4 TION FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD TABLE 2 Soil Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Location T e Densit Ym- cf Content coo of-% T-2 @ 1%,' 1 112.7 16.2 3 T-2 124.0 11.1 3' . 2. Moisture Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Sam le In-place eaph the site were and moisture content of representative soil deposits ben determined from relatively unees i tbees It are presented n Table 3 and chunk using displacement test method. Th tabulated on the enclosedTest Trench Logs (Plates 3-4). TABLE 3 Field Ratio Of.ln-Place Dry Moiefure ` Field Dry "Max. Dry f]ensify To Max. Dry Sample Soil Content Density Density, " Density* Location T e w-% Yd- cf Ym cf Yd/Ym x 100 T-1 @ 1' 2 5.7 116.0 T-1 @ 2' 2 9.2 111.7 - T-2 @ 1'%' 1 6.1 1 05.6 112.7 93.7 T-2 @ 2'/z' 3 10.6 119.6 124.0 96.5 T-2 @ 4' 3 6.8 117.9 124.0 95.1 T-2 @ 6' 1 9.0 114.6 112.7 100+ T-2 @ 9' 2 6.2 102.9 - - T-3 @ 2' 1 7.7 104.2 112.7 92.4 T-3 @ 4' 3 12.9 116.8 124.0 94.2 T-3 @ 6' 2 7.2 93.3 - - T-3 @9' 2 6.2 112.2 - - * Designated as relative compaction for structural fills. Required relative compaction for structural fill is 90% or greater. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 5 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS FEBRUARY 9, 2004 3. Expansion Index Test: One expansion index test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 18-2. The test result is presented in Table 4. TABLE 4 Sample Soil Remolded Saturation Saturated ..,Expansion ,. Expansion :, Location T e w % % w % _ Index El Potential" T-2 @11/2' 1 8.5 50.2 19.2 1 very low (w) moisture content in percent. 4. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size analysis was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1. The test result is presented in Table 5. TABLES Sieve Size '/2!11 ;0220 #200 Location Soil Type T-2 1'/z' 1 100 1b0:1 99 .98 89 10,E VI. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing investigation, the construction of ramp improvements substantially as proposed is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The following geotechnical factors will most impact the planned road improvements and associated construction costs: Existing fills occur along the proposed ramp alignment which occur in a loose condition at the surface exposures becoming compact to well compact below. Site loose surface fills should be reworked and properly recompacted as recommended in the following sections. Underlying formational rock are competent units which will adequately support the planned improvements and associated structures. Gross instability is not indicated or expected within the existing project graded hillside terrain. 6 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FEBRUARY 9,PAGE E 6 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS Surface drainage control is important in the future performance of the project ramp improvements. Surface run-off water should not be allowed to penetrate and saturate the ramp subgrade. Import soil will be needed to complete grading and achieve design grades as shown. Import soils should conform to the requirements of the following sections. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent ohdesil designs and implemented) during the at the project site and should be considered g ro riate as construction phase. Added orno all)consultant nnthel f field at also be (grading and directed by the project geotec h pavement construction and should be anticipated: A. Remedial Gradina and Earthworks 1. Clearing and Grubbing: Surface vegetation, deleterious materials and debris should be removed from the roadway improvement areas, plus 3 feet outside the perimeter where possible, and as directed in the field. Construction debris generated from the demolition of existing site structures and improvements should be properly removed and disposed of from the site. Burial of trash/construction debris within the on-site new fills should not be allowed. Ground preparations should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field representative prior to remedial grading. Existing underground utilities in the ramp to the actual work.as should be further pot-holed, identified and marked p Inactive lines should be properly removed or abandoned as approved. Abandoned underground structures should also be removed and the generated voids properly backfilled with compacted soils in accordance with the recommendations provided herein. 2. Over-excavations and Removals: The surface exposures of existing site fills in planned ramp improvement areas, plus 3 feet outside the perimeter where possible, and as directed in the field, should be ripped and recompacted in- place a minimum of 2be necessary aslldirected n the field a d undercutting ground may of the cut g Y should be anticipated. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 7 FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS 3. Fill Materials and Compaction: Import soils are needed to complete grading and achieve final design grades. Import soils should be good quality select sandy granular deposits (SM/SW) with very low expansion potential (Expansive Index less than 21) and high Rrvaland arearovedaby tOhe Import pro ectssoils engidneee inspected, tested as necessary, pp prior to delivery to the site. Project fills shall be clean deposits free of vegetation, trash, debris, organic matter, deleterious materials and larger than 6-inch rock sizes. Uniform bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the grading operations. Site fills should be adequately processed, moisture conditioned to slightly (2%) above optimum levels, thoroughly mixed, placed in thin uniform horizontal lifts, and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557), unless otherwise specified. 4. Permanent Graded Slopes: Permanent project.graded slopes should be designed for 2:1 gradients maximum. Graded slopes constructed at 2:1 gradients maximum will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and surface failures for the anticipated maximum design heights. All project fill slopes shall be provided with a lower keyway. The keyway should maintain a minimum depth of 2 feet into the competent formational units or well compacted site fills with a minimum width of 12 feet. The keyway should expose firm formational units or well compacted site fills throughout with the bottom heeled back a minimum of 2% into the hillside and inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. Additional level benches should be constructed into existing fills/formational rock as directed in the field by the project geotechnical engineer, or his representative. Adequate benching should be provided into the existing graded cut slope in order to key-in the new fills into the existing cut slope. Developed benches should maintain a minimum depth of 3 feet into competent formational rock or as directed by the project geotechnical engineer. Fill slopes should also be compacted to 90% (minimum) of the laboratory standard out to the slope face. Over-building and cutting back to the compacted core, or backrolling at a maximum of 3-foot vertical increments and "track-walking" at the completion of grading is recommended for site fill slope construction. Geotechnical engineering inspections and testing will be necessary to confirm adequate compaction levels within the fill slope face. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 8 FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS 5. Non-uniform Subgrade Soil Transitioning: Subgrade e°nl transitioning from the proposed excavated cut to placed fills should not be permitted roadway improvements. The cut portion of subgrade transition areas should be undercut to a minimum depth of 12 inches and reconstructed to design elevations as compacted fills. There should be a minimum of 12 inches of under new ramp/improvement compacted soils below rough finish subgrade transition areas. 6. Surface Drainage 1 Erosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of the ramp and graded embankments is an adequate drainage. This can most effectively be achieved by adequate pavement surface cross-fall and the installation of drainage control arts ucted along the edges of the pavement. Drainage swales along the top of all graded slopes. Surface run-off should be collected and directed to a selected location in a d and Excessive be allowedflow over project slopes which could cau se erosion be 7. Asphalt Paving Recommendations: Specific based ontR v l e totsoftthe provided at the completion of rough grading import soils at near finish subgrade levels; however, the following structural sections may be considered for cost estimating purposes only (not for construction): A minimum section of 4-inches asphalt on 6-inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base may be considered for the on-site private ramp paving. Final design will also depend on the design TI and approval of the City of Encinitas. In the areas where longitudinal grades exceed 10 percent,each 2 percent should be added to the design asphalt thickness increase in grade or portions thereof. PCC paving should be considered for longitudinal grades over 20 percent. Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches. *. Basegrade and subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and the specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of the base layer or asphalt finish surfaces. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 9 FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS 8. Engineering Inspections: All grading operations including removals, suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures should be continuously inspected and tested by the project soils engineer and presented in the final as-graded compaction report. The nature of finish grade soils should also be confirmed in the final compaction/wall backfill report at the completion of grading. Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not limited to the following: Initial Inspection - After the grading/brushing limits have been staked but before grading / brushing starts. Keyway / bottom of over-excavation inspection - After the formational rock/compacted fill is exposed and prepared to receive fill but before fill is placed. Fill Inspection - After fill placement is started but before the vertical height of fill exceed 2 feet. A minimum of one test shall be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum. Subgrade inspections - Prior to the placement of base materials for proper moisture and specified compaction levels. Basegrade inspections - Prior to paving for proper moisture and specified compaction levels. B. General Recommendations 1. Adequate staking and grading control are critical factors in properly completing the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading control and staking should be provided by the project grading contractor or surveyor / civil engineer, and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Inadequate staking and / or lack of grading control may result in unnecessary additional grading which will increase construction costs. 2. Site drainage over the finished surface should flow away from roadway improvements in a positive manner and collected in suitable drainage facilities. Care should be taken during the fine grading phase and actual surfacing, not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. Water should not be allowed to penetrate and saturate the roadway subgrade. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10 FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS 3. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report. Final grading and improvement plans may be reviewed by the project geotechnical consultant for conformance with the requirements of the geotechnical investigation report outlined herein. More specific recommendations may be necessary and should be given when final grading and civil / architectural drawings are available. 4. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the project civil engineer, city inspector as well as the grading contractor is recommended in order to discuss grading / construction details associated with planned street improvements. VIII. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on all available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations. Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and / or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations are verified during the grading operation. In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner / developer to ensure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC., shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. PAGE 11 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FEBRUARY 9, 2004 1302 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD, ENCINITAS the Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., warrants that this report hness andn ompet ncelwith olf the limits prescribed by our client with the usual t horou g engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or Implied, is included or intended. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #04-116-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 'SPED %o DDZ q cEG 980 Z �t CERTIFIED ENGINEERING: s ExQ S-3r-rte' �� Dennis Middleton '9r�oFCAL\�oF2 CEG #980 �) R FE SS S. M hdi S. Shariat w No.46174 ~4 r_ Ike' 6174 � Exp.12.31-06 civil- , JA .� Steven J. Melze lam• St � 09$3 RG #6953 DM/SMSS/SJM/jt CAt.�� Distribution: Addressee (5) Pasco Engineering, Attn: Wayne Pasco / m I r-4l �. ` I o ;?-T^i cps �H 9 ya cf ✓ i._ A AVE ; ul �pLAT��E C1+LLE VPLLPHiA��!7� j r., r O N'I RD — y U �► l7 f RE•GIO AL NDEX '� PASSIFLOR P�/-�\ 1 i 4j oowA ST g-PYPPI i JOB #0411 Fl EOST < SUMMERSONG L ' - i8-1 r. ` m `_ rmn fTp c,:EwAR6OR OR �•l\ O HUMMIOCK LN_,� �I g L'''ar`RA� FFTT m ` 1,,' VMESS0.DR <2.,�4_-.:�'�+ SKYK � A VALLEDA LN 9' 1 - Q CO Y�GROV LN &.l J,Park Eotarrical " t�]' ! S \5 c�i_w �� `N (Ai L•E•^EWOOD'PL �, � �• w � "O ,� RED COACH,LN vyl .LL 97 T SNIEl.Og AVEyGPL� r s•( f WILL��Po �`i rl: t PR0.I EC-T X ENCINITAS BLVD LOCH"TON , imp J m ;l CRES OR CPLLE OROUIDEAS iy- D a 5 m (a �£C,S//.J - '. Z'ISCAND VIEW LN m NELW RD g, ELVA Cl NS'fP O' ND FEAR ♦ !b" r .� ' r ' N 4., < MACKIMIONCT '� m N•!\\3- l�� r _ , f/ Y CATHY LN z - �� O o O G �f 1 LN TORRE DR CARETTA DR m WARWICK AVE Sr -I y m CARDIFF DRI ••�I I t TENVS CLUB OR _ = — ni \ g Ali.� _ FFiEtp AVE .AAY LN I> 1RK.SHIREAVE m m o� ' r I Im GG / w LNG J \ Z `-. RAC/ _ f VP �,_� . �Cartfifl by the,Sea t 1 P�� \ I 01 ESiE;V5fA CT SS I I I SEA VILLA 25,000 T.. �••s 2080 ft ' i iem Naa 300a m MM o boo imo ®2002 DeLOrms.Topo USA®.Data copyright of content owner. a <oo bao bm loaa www.delorme.com N SCALE: 1"=30- tXXtS1 } CONMTE CHANNEL- .. - EXISTIN� 9GRT WALL ��r'.10"W 309.27, .::..,r,��_,.�,�..�.s;.. .�. .''EMS Gam- LEANOUi EXISTIN TO F S CURB � C T CL, STA 2+30.41 _EX. P_.O LOPE _ `t AC :PA"ENT S E ND� EX� RAMP N, a $ C EXISTING DETENTION BA, W \ , EXISTING AC ST'A, O+OO.00 DRAINAGE WAY ON SITE BENCH MARK-- ^ CORNER CONCRETE PAD ELEV 100.00 ASSUMED i EXIST MASONR7 F=k. VSQ< EXISTING CONCRETE L—, RIBBON DRAIN LEUCe07,a_>O EXISTING CONCH MN Test Trench Location IGeologic Cross-Section VICINITY MAP GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. GRAVELS M o MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel sand mixtures, little or no Ines. Fw.. oN OF COARSE 5% FINES) Silt gravels, gravel sand silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. U) O FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Y p LL z w LARGER THAN WITH GC Clayey gravels,gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. _ N NO. 4 SIEVE FINES Z LLav� ¢ _j = w SANDS CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. 0 _ CC W SANDS w z w MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. ¢ � OF COARSE 5% FINES) ¢ ~ < FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 0U � L SMALLER THAN WITH SC Clayey sands, sand clay mixtures, plastic fines. O NO. 4 SIEVE FINES 2 Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine w ML sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. u_ cc N SILTS AND CLAYS J O LU U) CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy U_ Q j LIQUID LIMIT IS clays, silty clays,lean clays. W ¢ 2 w LESS THAN 50% 0 = OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Z Z - o MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty O SILTS AND CLAYS soils, elastic silts. W it H Z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. FL 2 � = GREATER THAN 50% OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS GRAIN'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE 4 3/4' 3" 12" 200 40 10 SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS SILTS AND CLAYS E FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT ANDS, GRAVELS AND BLOWS/FOOT PLASTIC SILTS NON-PLASTIC SILTS VERY SOFT 0 ' '/` 0 - 2 VERY LOOSE 0- 4 y, _ y, 2 - 4 SOFT LOOSE 4 - 10 y, _ 1 4 - 8 FIRM MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 1 _ 2 8 - 16 STIFF DENSE 30- 50 2_ q 16 -32 VERY STIFF VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 1. Blow count, 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on 2 inch O.D. CL 70sampler (ASTM D-1586) 2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer 1. 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM D-1586) V Sand Cone Test ® Bulk Sample I with blow counts per 6 inches Chunk Sample O Driven Rings I I 246 = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches E & MIDDLETON KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS VINJ Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487) ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Ave., #102 Escondido, CA 92029-1229 PROJECT NO. DA—'- KEY Logged by: SJM Date: 1-9-04 FIELD T-1 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION N (Pcf) ( ) (ft) SPILL L FILL; 5.7 116.0 - _ 1 _ Fine grained poorly graded sand. Pale brown color. SM ❑ Moist. Loose. - - ST-1 - - 9.2 111.7 2 F1 SP — 3 FORMATIONAL ROCK: Sandstone. Medium grained. Off-white color. Blocky. _ 4 _ Cemented. Weathered. Locally rust-colored staining. - 5 - _ 6 _ End Test Trench at 3'. _ No caving. No groundwater. - 7 - - 8 - - 9 - Logged by: SJM Date: 1-9-04 FIELD T-2 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE (%) (Pcf) (%) DESCRIPTION lft) FILL: SM 6.1 105.6 93.7 _ 1 _ ❑ Fine grained, poorly graded sand. Pale yellow/tan ST-1 color. Moist. Medium dense to dense. - 2 - Clayey sand. Brown color. Moist. compacted. ST-3 SC 10.6 119.6 96.5 —3 - _ Silty fine to medium sand. Brown color. Moist. S 6.8 117.9 95.1 _ 4 _ Scattered pieces of asphalt. Medium dense. ST-2 _ 5 FORMATIONAL ROCK: 9.0 114.6 - Sandstone. Fine to medium grained. Off-white to tan _ 6 _ ❑ color. Some rust-colored staining. Cemented. Blocky. SP Some roots. - 7 - _ 8 _ End Test Trench at 10'. No caving. No groundwater. 6.2 102.9 --9 ,10 VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS Escondido, California 92029-1229 PROJECT NO. 04-116-P PLATE 3 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 iven Rings V Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sam le ❑ Chunk Sam le O Dr Logged by: SJM Date: 1-9-04 FIELD T-3 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION N (pcf) ( ) FILL: _ 1 _ rly graded sand. Tan color. Slightly SM Fine grained A ST-1 7.7 104.2 92.4 moist. Compacte . - 2 - ❑ - Clayey sand. Brown color. Moist to very moist. Firm to SC —3 stiff. ST-3 SID 12.9 116.8 94.2 - 4 - ❑ Sand. Fine grained. Tan color. Dry. (Running sand) ST-2 - 5 - SP 7.2 93.3 _ 6 - ❑ FORMATIONAL ROCK: Sandstone. Fine to medium grained. Off-white to tan _ 7 - color. Some rust and grey colored staining. Blocky.ST-2 - Cemented. _ 8 _ 6.2 112.2 - _ g _ ❑ End Test Trench at 9'/2. No caving. No groundwater. Logged by: Date: FIELD USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (^/,) (pcf) (ft) - 1 - - 2 - - 3 - - 4 - - 5 - - 6 - - 7 - - 8 - - 9 - VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS Escondido, California 92029-1229 PROJECT NO. 04-116-P PLATE 4 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 T Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sam le ❑ Chunk Sample (D Driven Rings 80 EXISTING GRADE �. ,� • �i�o�p0a� 60 -0:600A, FUCK D D 100 80 FORMA 60QrRi JOB #04-116-P 21U !M _.�l ".6 -0", Recording Re quested By: City Engineer 0 r-V When Recorded Mail to: City Clerk City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER'S I JSE ONLY Encinitas, CA 92024 PRIVATE STORM WATER TREATMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Project No. 03-205 CDP Assessor's Parcel No. 259-121-29 W.O.No.: 562-G THIS AGREEMENT for the periodic maintenance and repair of that certain Private storm water treatment facilities, the legal description and/or plat of which is set forth in Exhibits attached hereto and made a part hereof, is entered into by HARLOFF CHEVROLET INCORPORATED (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") for the benefit of future owners who will use the private storm water treatment facilities (hereinafter referred to as " Owner(s)", which shall include the Developer to the extent the Developer retains any owne rship interest in any land covered by this agreement. WHEREAS, this Agreement is required as a condition of approval by the City of Encinitas (herein referred to as "city") of a development project and pursuant to City of Encinitas Municipal Code Section 24.16.060 and Section 24.29.040; and WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property as described in Exhibit "A" that will use and enjoy the benefit of said storm water treatment facilities(s), said real property hereinafter referred to as the "property"; and WHEREAS, Property use and enjoy the benefit of certain facilities for storm water treatment and pollution control, said facilities described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof-, and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer that said private storm water treatment system be maintained in a safe and usable condition by the owners; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Developer to establish a method for the periodic maintenance and repair of said private storm water treatment facilities and for the apportionment of the expense of such maintenance and repair among existing and future owners; and WHEREAS, there exists a benefit to the public the private storm water facilities be adequately maintained on a regular and periodic basis in compliance with Exhibit "C", the City of Encinitas Municipal Code and other related City policies and requirements; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Developer that this Agreement constitute a covenant running with the land,binding upon each successive owner of all or any portion of the property. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION AS FOLLOWS: 1. The property is benefited by this Agreement, present of all or bound hereby any portion of the property are expressly Y for the benefit of the land. 2. The private storm water facilities shall be constructed by the Owner, its successors and assigns, in accordance with the plans and specifications identified in the Plan. 3. The cost and expense of maintaining the private storm water treatment facilities shall be paid by the owner of the heirs, assigns and successors in interest or each such owner. 4. In the event any of the herein described parcels of land are subdivided further, the owners, heirs, assigns and successors in interest of each such newly created parcel shall be liable under this Agreement for computed reflect hen c shares of expenses shall be comp such newly co d such pro rata share f expenses reat d parcels. 5. The repairs and maintenance to be performed under this Agreement shall be limited to the following: reasonable improvements and maintenance work to adequately maintain said private storm water treatment facilities in proper working order as determined by applicable City policies and requirements and to permit access to said facilities. Repairs and maintenance under this Agreement shall include, but are not limited to, repairing access roadbeds, repairing and maintaining drainage structures, removing debris, perpetually maintaining adequate groundcover and/or other erosion control measures within the private property in order to prevent sedimentation, and other work reasonably necessary and proper to repair and preserve the private storm water treatment facilities for their intended purposes and to prevent sedimentation in storm water runoff. The private storm water facilities shall be maintained regularly as necessary to keep the facilities in proper working order, with a minimum maintenance frequency of twice annually. In the event a maintenance schedule for the Ston-n the ter BMP will facilities o(including sediment removal) is outlined on the approved plans, 6. If there is a covenant, agreement, or other obligation for the construction of improvements imposed as a condition of the development, the obligation to repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities as herein set forth shall commence when improvements have been completed and approved by the City. 2 ent 7. Any extraordinary repair required to correct damage to said storm r their successors facilities that results from action taken or contracted for by the owners in interest shall be paid for by the party taking action or party contracting for work which caused the necessity for the extraordinary repair. The repair shall be such as to restore the storm water treatment facilities to the condition existing prior to said damage. g. Any liability of the owners for personal injury to an agent hereunder, or to any worker employed to make repairs or provide maintenance under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the owners for damage to the property of agent, or any such worker, or of any third persons, as a result of or arising out of repairs and maintenance under this Agreement, shall be borne, by the owners as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs and maintenance. Owners shall be responsible for and maintain their own insurance, if any. By this Agreement, the Developer does not intend to provide for the sharing of liability with respect injury property m other than that attributable to the repairs nd maintenance undertaken under this Agreement. 9. Owners shall jointly and severally defend and indemnify directors officers, agents City and engineer and its consultants and each of its officials, employees from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, expenses, personal injury and other costs, including costs of defense and attorney's fees, to the agent hereunder or to any owner, any contractor, any subcontractor, any user of the storm water treatment facilities, or to any other third persons arising out of or in any way related to the use of, repair or maintenance of, or the failure to repair or maintain the private storm water treatment facilities. 10. Nothing in the Agreement, the specifications or other contract documents or City's approval of the plans and specifications or inspection of the work is intended to include a review, inspection acknowledgement of a responsibility for any such matter, and City, City's engineer and its consultants, and each of its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents, shall have no responsibility or liability therefore. 11. The Owner, its successors and assigns, shall inspect the stormwater management/BMP facility and submit to the City an inspection report annually. The purpose of the inspection is to assure safe and proper functioning of the facilities. The inspection roads,s etcl cover the entire facilities, berms, outlet structure, pond s, Deficiencies shall be noted in the inspection report. 12. Chapter 11.12 of the Encinitas Municipal Code outlines in detail the nuisance abatement process and the City's authority to require correction of any property maintenance violation that is deemed a public health or safety folr abatement ment of any property to collect sums as appropriate for recovery of the CO maintenance violation should the property owner fail to voluntarily comply. 3 13. The Owner, its successors and assigns, hereby grant Permission to to the to the the s authorized agents and employees, to enter upon the Property management/BMP facilities upon reasonable notice whenever the City deems necessary. The purpose of inspection is to follow-up rOwnera deficiencies s successors and ass gnspoopies citizen complaints. The City shall provid e the of the inspection findings and a directive to commence with the repairs if necessary 14. In the event the Owner, its successors good working condition acceptablelto the City,tt storm Ci y r management/BMP facilities in go g ' its agents, or its contractors, may enter upon the Property and take the steps necessary to correct deficiencies identified in the inspection report and to charge the costs of such repairs to the Owner, its successors and assigns. In the event the CITY pursuant to this Agreement, performs work of any nature, or expends any funds in performance of said work for labor, use of equipment, supplies, materials, and the like, the Owner, its successors and assigns, shall reimburse the City upon demand, within thirty (30) days of receipt thereof for all actual costs incurred by the CITY hereunder. If said funds are not paid in a timely manner, City reserves the right to file an assessment lien on the real property with the County Recorder of County of San Diego.'It is expressly understood and agreed that the City is under no ob�gat�on1 facilities, City.and in no event shall this Agreement be construed impose any such obligation on 15. This Agreement imposes no liability of any kind whatsoever on the CITY and the Owner agrees to hold the CITY harmless from any liability in the event the storrnwater management/BMP facilities fail to operate properly. 16. It is the purpose of the signatories hereto that this instrument be recorded to the end and intent that the obligation hereby created shall be and constitute a covenant running with the land and any subsequent purchaser of all or any portion thereof, by acceptance of delivery of a deed and/or conveyance regardless of form, shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound by these presents, including without limitation, the right of any person entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement to institute legal action as provided in Paragraph 9 hereof, such 1 other cumulative and in at law or addition to other remedies provided in this Agreement and to a 17. The terms of this Agreement may be amended in writing upon majority approval of the owners and consent of the City. 18. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby. 4 19. If the Property constitutes a "Common Interest Development" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(c) which will include membership in or ownership of an "Association" as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(a), anything in this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, the following provisions shall apply at and during such time as (i) the Property is encumbered by a Declaration" (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(h),treatment facilities) is man ged and of ontrolled by an (including the private storm water Association: (a) The Association, through its Board of Directors, shall repair and maintain the private storm water treatment facilities and shall be deemed the "agent" as referred to in Paragraph 7 above. The Association, which shall not be replaced except by amendment to the Declaration, shall receive no compensation for performing such duties. The costs of such maintenance and repair shall be assessed against each owner and his subdivision interest in the Property pursuant to the Declaration. The assessments shall be deposited in the Association's corporate account. (b) The provisions in the Declaration provide ede Paragraph 8 of the Agreement n the Association and enforcement there of shall supersede its entirety. No individual owners shall have the right to alter, maintain or repair any of the Common Area (as defined in California Civil Code Section 1351(b) in the Property except as may be allowed by the Declaration. (c) This Agreement shall not be interpreted in any manner, which reduces or limits the Association's rights and duties pursuant to its Bylaws and Declaration. 20. It is understood and agreed that the covenants herein contained shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assignees of each of the owners. 21. The foregoing covenants shall run with and every bhall at nytime own benefit of the land of the owners and each person who portion of the property referred to herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the pas hav executed this Agreement This aA day of Developer- eloper* Ch vrol t, c rporated (n e, title) Signature of DEVELOPER must be notarized. Attach the appropriate acknowledgement. 5 ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California SS. County of before me,CJ t r On F. /y(� '^^ (NOTA ) l DA X? personally appeared s7L�' SIGNERS) F-1 personally known tome - OR - proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persorKS-) whose nametS) (D4fe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he she they executed the same in his/ er their authorized capacity(i�, and that by his her heir signatures( on the instrument the persona); or the entity upon behalf of which the DANIEIIEVY person() acted, executed the instrument. G0 mm.#1528884 N NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA N Son Diego Coe84 , MI Comm.Epues Nov.21,2008 WITNESS my hand and official seal. NOTA SIGNATURE OPTIONAL INFORMATION The information below is not required by law. However, it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this acknowl- edgement to an unauthorized document. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER (PRINCIPAL) DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT TITLE(S) PARTNER(S) NUMBER OF PAGES �] ATTORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR DATE OF DOCUMENT OTHER: OTHER L SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: RIGHT THUMBPRINT NAME OF PERSON OF S)OR ENTITY(IES) E L SIGNER o n 1°- APA 5/99 VALLEY-SIERRA, 800-362-3369 EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY APN: 259-121-29 ALL OF PARCEL 1 AND THE WESTERLY TAS COUNTY OPARCEL AN DIEGO, STATE MAP NO. 11149,IN THE CITY OF ENCIN , OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OF SANHE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF T 14, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH,RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WHICH LIES NORTHERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF 60 FOOT E OFFICE OF THE COUNTY SURVEYOR ROAD SURVEY NO. 458,FILED IN H OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY,U2O�3S CERTIFICATE COMPLIANCE RECORDED AR 7198D FILE NO 83-028901 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS LS 5211 p.06/30/09 TF OF CAL�F�� EXHIBIT 13' ALL-Q FEIGHT _ __ __ "- - _ INSTALL TYPE A4 STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT PER SDRSD JJE=218.10 RIh�220.60 T GAAS9 - `EXISTING AC -� LD�ED PAVED SPILLWAY E 'STING ION 8A5IAL EXISTING � � , TO �E PRO PLACE PIPE r .1 �5 x 5-' )("1 OISSIP� RAP 1 Y , C TRWT TYPE D-34 ' so, D=40 -.�. l W TYPE FEADWALL 10 LANDSCAPED Bw TMENT SWALE MQ 7Q: MODIFIM,WITH,! ■ TW, � 3 CITI' DF, THE INITAS 6 RYO,-PIPE77= 4 . INSTALL PCC (ASS GUTTER,_h4 . PER SDRSD G-l2, " INSTALL .1 " PVC ' STOW DRAIN PIPE '°•; u� FALL-APE F ST IN,CATC, -BASIN y FNST CKgj& GRATE W/ ROC BOTMf & �' FIL FABRIC IYR�PPED �. � , E i �11 /fin TWN7 SlPALE BOTTOM &`41 '�I TALL TYPE G-2 S �SL(JPES ' MAX SLOW � 6 GUTTER NOT",,710,9E WITHaff, T PlISSION THE TALL C" PERFORATED CITE``DE ®NCINI7 PV SUBDRAIN PIPE FLOGARD LOPRO t FILTRATION CHANNEL . "k, / i SYSF M FOR 10' . _ .1 5 x 1, RIP RAP j - Y DISSIPATER _ . ! D-40 �- c�vS r ra�E —� �I _ � _ �r f l 0 SAND S LS 5211 L EXISTING SDENTT -�OF—RAN iMOLMOR ROADWAY RWOSES PER DOC. NO. 8176-1 -7r -ej DATE MARCH 1Z 1961 ENCI NI TAO B_OULE_Vid ll V CALZF� _ NB- "W 974.62' �• _ 85ABS �E�NGB2iDMRING 535 N. HWY 101. STE. A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 PE 1200 G2 EXHIBIT "C" Maintenance Type Minimum Required Frequency Storm Water Best Management Practices; Grass Inspected monthly,repaswales,Desiltin basin Drainage Facilities,inlets,Mechanical filters, Inspected monthly, replstorm drain outlets per manufactures' reco Privately maintained,public storm drain Annually system through property Inspection and repair (as needed) of irrigation As needed sprinkler system for common landsca ed areas 8 Geotechnical Pavement Investigation Proposed paving Improvements Existing Parking Lot Harloff BMW Encinitas, California May 7, 2007 Prepared For: HARLOFF ENTERPRISES, INC. Attention: Ms. Ann Harloff 2146 Manchester Avenue Cardiff, California 92007 Prepared By: VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029 Job #07-201-P VIN E MIDDLETON ENGINEERI�G)�'0 v,. INC. ecard Avenue Escondido,California 92029-I229 Job #07-201-P Phone 17601 743-I2I4 Fax'760)739-0343 May 7, 2007 Harloff Enterprises, Inc. Attention: Ann Harloff 2146 Manchester Avenue Cardiff, California 92007 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION,E ENINITAS,O ED CALIFORNIA PAVING IMPROVEMENTS, EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARL Pursuant to your request, Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. has completed the enclosed Geotechnical Pavement Investigation for the proposed paving improvements of the existing parking lot at the above-referenced project site. The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, laboratory analyzes and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the planned parking improvements as understood. In our opinion, the existing parking lot is suitable for the planned improvements from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the final plans and implemented during the construction phase of the project. The conclusions and recommendations e ded to aid in preparation of final improvement plans indicated subsurface conditions and ar e m plans and allow more accurate estimates of construction costs. Thank you for choosing Vinje & Middleton if you have any questio Job #07 201nP concerning this report, please do not hesitate to call us. will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. yc �r p CEG` 80 Z 1 .. ennis Middleton tN GI EE_rRINU l CEG #980 OF C DM/jt TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - II. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. SITE INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Soils Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. LABORATORY TESTING I RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " " VII. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - VIII. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • " " " " " A. Remedial Grading And Subgrade Preparations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9 B. Pavement Structural Section Design . . . . . . • • • • • . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . . . . . . 11 C. General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X. LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE NO. Soil Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content 3 Moisture-Density Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Grain Size Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 R-value Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 pH and Resistivity Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 7 Sulfate Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Chloride Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' . . . 10 Pavement Structural Section Design . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' ' TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PLATE NO. Regional Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 Test Trench Logs (with key) . . • • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . 7-8 Design Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION PROPOSED PAVING IMPROVEMENTS EXISTING PARKING LOT HARLOFF BMW - ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION The property investigated in this work is a sheet graded surface on the lowest terrain in the eastern portion of the above-referenced auto dealership currently used as a parking lot. The site location is depicted on a Regional Index Map enclosed with this report as Plate We understand that the project parking lot is planned for surfacing with an asphalt paving and construction of the associated drainage improvements. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to determine existing soil conditions at the project site and evaluate their influence on the planned improvements. Test trench digging, soil sampling and testing were among the activities conducted in conjunction with this work which has resulted in the subgrade preparations and paving recommendations presented herein. II. SITE DESCRIPTION A Site Plan showing existing topographic features and proposed improvements was provided to us by Pasco Engineering, Inc. and is reproduced herein as Plate 2. As shown, the project site is a gently sloping, sheet graded ground surrounded by modest 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient cut and fill slopes. The slopes support a modest cover of vegetation. Minor run-off erosion was noted in the south-west portion, but overall slope instability is not in evidence. An entrance ramp provides access to the project area from upper site facilities to the west. The ramp is a paved drive atop a section of compacted fill that was placed in 2005. Testing and inspection services during grading of the ramp fill were provided by this office. An existing fence gate marks the eastern access to the parking lot from the adjacent private drive. A detention basin marks the northeast property. Site run-off flows over the unpaved surfaces t owards the detention basin andag grass-lined discharge swale. Local erosion of the basin structure is in evidence. 111. SITE INVESTIGATION Geotechnical conditions at the project parking lot were chiefly determined from exploratory excavations recently dug with a tractor-mounted backhoe at selected site locations. Test trenches were logged by our project geologist, who also supervised field in-situ testing and retained representative soil samples for laboratory testing. All trenches were backfilled ne(760)743-1214 V. iic A' MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229 'Pho '�' _ 2 GE GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY PAGE 2 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS - upon completion of our field work. Test trench locations are shown on the Site Plan (Plate 2) and were limited to accessible areas unoccupied by automobiles. Logs of the test trenches are enclosed with this report as Plates 3-6. Laboratory test data are summarized in a following section herein. IV. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Planned improvements consist of minor sheet grading of the existing parking lot surfaces and providing an asphalt paving finish. Significant grade alterations are not proposed with less than 12 inches maximum cut and fill grading. Associated improvements will include drainage facilities for control and disposal of surface run-off. A continuous channel grate inlet is proposed near the center of the parking lot with crushed rock bottom surrounding a perforated pipe discharging onto a new treatment swale planned along the southeast of the project. A 12-inch diameter storm drain pipe and associated catch basins will direct colucross-gutter is treatment swale to the planned between the detention basin at the northeast. A new concrete treatment swale and the detention basin at the eastern entrance as shown. V. FIN_ The project parking lot is sheet graded ground characterized by cut-fill surfaces. lls - Formational cut ground occurs on the we cut and fill II areas ahe mapped onethe enc lo underlie the eastern portions. Approximate Site Plan (Plate 2). A. Soils Conditions - Subgrade soil conditions were chiefly determined from observations of exploratory test trench exposures as well as field and laboratory testing. Trench exposures indicate that the existing lot surface is a cut-fill transition pad. Natural hillside terrain was initially removed from southwest areas of the site and placed as fill beneath the northeast portion. Natural areas of the site expose light- - colored medium grained sandstone units which occur in a massive and weakly cemented condition. Fill soils at the site consist chiefly of silty to sandy soils with minor amounts of included clay in a loose condition at the near surface becoming dense to well compacted below. Grading records for project earthwork beneath the sheet graded parking lot surface are not available for review. The compacted fill sections placed in connection with the construction of the western access ramp, - however, were tested and inspected by this office (see Plate 2). W Pv M1r)D1 FTON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-I214 f h 3 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION PAGE MAY 7, E 3 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS Subsurface water was not encountered in project test trenches and is not expected to impact the planned improvements. Details of site earth materials are given the enclosed Trench Logs, Plates 3-6, and additionally defined in a following sect VI. LABORATORY TESTING I RESULTS Based upon test trench exposures, project earth materials are grouped within the following soil types: TABLE 1 .:Soil T e Desciri tion - 1 Grey sandy gravel to gravelly sand (fill, aggregate/base materials) 2 yellow, tan fine sand to silty fine sand (fill, sandstone formational rocks) ~~ 3 brown to red brown clayey sand fill The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation: 1. Maximum Dry Density and optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 2 and 3 were determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The test results are presented in Table 2. TABLE 2 M�a�rEnum�Dry ; Opt�mumlo�sture Location :.Den it Yixi- cf .q.CQnfett T-1 @ 1'/z' 2 114.5 15.1 9.8 T-4 4' 3 130.2 2. Moisture-Density Tests: In-place dry density and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using the water displacement test method. Added field density tests were also performed at selected horizons using sand-cone D-1556. The test results are test equipments in accordance with he en presented In Table 3 and nd enclosed Test Trench Logs (Plates 3-6). Nl „,c A, Minni.LTVN ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214 4 GE GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY PAGE 4 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS TABLE 3 Field Ratio Of In-Place Dry Moisture Field Dry Max. Dry Density;To Max. Dry Content Density Density Density*' Sample Soil d_ cf Ym- c Yd/Ym X 100 Location Type w°!a 9.4 107.1 114.5 93.5 T-1 @ 2' 2 T- 2 @2'/Z' 3 7.7 119.8 130.2 92.0 2 - 114.5 Sample disturbed T-3 @ 2'/2' 8.5 T-4 @ 1'/2"" 2 7.9 107.3 114.5 93.7 10.0 113.2 130.2 86.9 T-4 @ 5' 2 3.7 109.9 114.5 96.0 T-5 @ 2' 2 13.0 103.0 114.5 90.0 T-5 @5' 3 9.4 124.7 130.2 95.8 T-5 @ 7' 2 6.6 109.5 114.5 95.6 T-6 @ 2' 2 7.4 111.1 114.5 97.0 T-7 @ 2' 2 7.7 107.0 114.5 93.4 T-7 @ 3' 2 12.2 107.9 114.5 94.3 T-7 @ 5' 3 11.2 122.8 130.2 94.3 T-7 @ 7' 2 8.4 108.8 114.5 95.0 * Designated as relative compaction for structural fills. ** Indicates field sand cone tests. Remaining tests are laboratory chunk density tests. Required minimum relative compaction for base layer and subgrade soils within the upper 12 inches is 95%. Below, subgrade compaction levels shall be 90% or greater unless otherwise specified. 3. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size test results are presented in Table en4 representative samples of Soil Types 2 and 3. T he TABLE 4 - Sieve Size 1' 1„ 3/a': All #4 #10 920 #40 9200, Location Soil Type Percent Passing T-4 @ 2' 2 100 100 100 100 97 95 92 76 14 4 91 T-4 4' 3 100 100 100 98 9 88. 73 38 VTNfE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. ' 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-1 21 4 _... 5 GE GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY PAGE 5 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS 4. R-value Test: Two R-value tests per-form on representative samples 301 of Soil Types 2 and 3 in accordance The test results are presented in Table 5. TABLE 5 Location; : Soil Type Description R-Value T-4 @ 2' 2 yellow tan silty fine sand 67 T-4 4' 3 brown to red-brown clayev sand 31 5. pH and Resistivity Test: pH and resistivity of a representative sample of Soil s el Type 3 was determined using Method esEMethod (CTM) 643cThe test result Culverts, In accordance with California is presented in Table 6. TABLE 6 Sam le Location. Soil T a ,` Minimum , Resistivi ,. OHM.-CM T-4 4' 3 728 7.11 6. Sulfate Test: A sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 3 in accordance with California Test Method (CTM) 417. The test result is presented in Table 7. TABLE 7 Amount of Water Sol uble Sulfate , Sam le Location Soil T e s in`Soil % Wei" hf 3 0.022 7. Chloride Test: One chloride test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 3 in accordance with California Test Method (CTM) 422. The test result is presented in Table 8. TABLE 8 - Amountof Water Solublechloride Sample Location Soil T e in Soil %hV Wei l - T-4 4' 3 0.020 & IVIIDDI ETON ENGINEERI\G, INC • 2430Viney�ard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214 Vtvit: 6 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY 7,PAGE E 6 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS VII. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT A site is considered to be corrosive to foundation elements, wails and drainage structures if one or more of the following conditions exists: • Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm (0.2% by weight). r • Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 500 ppm (0.05 % by weight). • pH is less than 5.5. For structural elements, the minimum resistivity of soil (or water) indicates the relative quantity of soluble salts present in the soil (or water). In general, a minimum resistivity value for soil (or water) less than 1000 ohm-cm indicates the presence of high quantities of soluble salts and a higher propensity for corrosion. Appropriate corrosion mitigation service measures for corrosive conditions should be selected dep ending on a desired environment, amount of aggressive ion salts (chloride or sulfate), p service life of the structure. Laboratory test results performed on selected representative site samples indicated that the minimum resistivity is less than 1000 ohm-cm suggesting a p for presence high quantities of soluble salts. However,t results less 2000 indicated ppm and chloride are „ greater than 5.5, sulfate concentrations are concentrations are less than 500 ppm. Based on the results of the corrosion analyses, the project site is considered non-corrosive. The project site is not located within 1000 feet of salt or brackish water. Based upon the results of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble sulfate SO4) d in the soil was found to be 0.022 percent by weight which is co negligible according to the California Building Code on the pH-Resistivity Portland result: Type II may be used. Table 9 is appropriate bas - TABLE 9 Gage. 18 16 14 ° 12, 10 8 m Design Soit Type � .. 3 Years to Perforation of Steel culverts 17 22 27 37 47 57 VIII. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing investigation,the planned parking lot improvements substantially as proposed are feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. Shallow loose fills over compacted deposits mantle the eastern portion of the parking lot, while competent - sandstone cut ground underlie the western areas construction he following factors are unique to the site and will most impact design procedures NIE & IVIIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. ' 2450Vinevard Avenue• Escondi�o,California 92029-1229 'Phone(760)743-1214 I 7 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY 7,PAGE E 7 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS - Shallow removals of upper loose fill deposits will be necessary in the project fill areas in order to construct stable subgrade soils suitable for the support of the proposed parking improvements. Elsewhere, undercutting the cut ground portions of the site and reconstruction to final design subgrade levels as compacted fills will be required for creating a uniform subgrade condition throughout the parking surfaces as recommended below. * Significant grade changes are not anticipated and final fine graded surfaces are expected to be near existing grades. Unusual grading problems are not expected. * Surrounding graded slopes are performing well and existing perimeter embankments will not impact or be a factor in improving the parking lot as currently planned. * Ground preparations and subgrade remedial grading operations should be " completed under continuous engineering observations and compaction testing of the project geotechnical engineer. * On-site soils range from sandy to clayey sandy deposits with different engineering characteristics. Subgrade preparations should create uniform soil conditions throughout the parking areas. For this purpose, added processing and conditioning efforts should be anticipated in order to manufacture a uniform subgrade soil mixture. Finish subgrade soils are expected to consist primarily of clayey sand (SP/SC) deposits. * Natural groundwater conditions are not expected to be a factor in the construction of the proposed parking lot improvements. Control of site surface drainage, however, is a critical factor in tu performance of project improvements.the proposed Surface run-off should be collected improvements as shown on the project grading and improvement plans. IX. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are consistent with project geotechnical conditions as determined in the foregoing site study. The recommendations are intended to allow more - accurate planning and should be incorporated in final plans and implemented during the construction phase. Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate as directed in the field by the project geotechnical consultant at the time of grading and paving constructions and should be anticipated: Vt�ie & I�1tnv�>�o� ENGINEERING, Itr�• • 2450Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214 Y 8 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY 7,PAGE E 8 - EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS - A. Remedial Gradina And Subarade Preparations Remedial grading techniques may be used in order to achieve design parking lot fine grades and improve subgrade soils conditions beneath the planned improvements. All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance with Appendix Chapter 33 of the California Building Code, City of Encinitas Grading Ordinances, the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the requirements of the following sections wherever applicable: 1. Clearing and Grubbing: Surface vegetation, debris and other unsuitable materials if any, should be removed from areas in the planned parking lot improvement areas. All existing underground utilities, pipes and buried structures / improvements in the project improvement areas should also be pot-holed, identified and marked prior to the actual work. Inactive pipes and utility lines should be properly removed or abandoned as approved. Abandoned underground tanks, pipes and structures should also be removed and the generated voids properly backfilled with compacted soils in accordance with the recommendations provided herein. ry Ground preparations should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer, or his designated field representative prior to the actual grading operations. 2. Removal, Over-excavations and Undercuts: Remedial removal and recompaction grading will be necessary to improve upper loose fills underneath the proposed parking improvements. Actual removal depths should be established in the field by the project geotechnical engineer at the time of earthwork operations based on subsurface exposures. Based on our limited exploratory exposures, approximate removal depths are expected to be generally on the order of 12 to 18 inches below the existing grades. However, deeper removals may be necessary based on the actual field exposures and should be anticipated. Bottom of all removals should also be additionally ripped and recompacted in- place to a minimum depth of 6 inches as directed in the field. Exploratory trenches excavated in connection with our study at the indicated locations were backfilled with loose and uncompacted deposits. The loose/uncompacted backfill soils within these trenches shall also be re-excavated and placed back as properly compacted fills as a part of the project grading operations. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. ' 2450Vineyard Avenue'Escondido,California 92029-1229'Phone(760)743-1214 9 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY 7,PAGE E 9 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS y Subgrade soil transition from excavated cut to placed fills should not be permitted underneath the proposed parking and drainage improvements. The cut subgrade portion of the project parking lot should be undercut to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the final rough finish subgrade levels and reconstructed to design elevations as compacted fills. In the underground utility and storm drain trenches there should also be a minimum of 12 inches of compacted fills below the pipe inverts unless otherwise specified or approved. 3. Fill Materials and Compaction: Removed soils are suitable for reuse as new compacted subgrade materials provided our recommendations for mixing and processing are followed. Site soils also include some clayey deposits which typically require additional processing and moisture conditioning efforts in order W to manufacture a uniform soil mixture suitable for reuse as new compacted subgrade. Manufacturing a uniformly mixed and well moisture-conditioned fill materials will also be very important when compacting subgrade deposits to higher (95%) compaction levels. Fill and subgrade soils should be moisture conditioned to slightly (2%) above optimum moisture contents, adequately processed, thoroughly mixed and mechanically compacted in thin (6 inches maximum) horizontal lifts to at least 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum density (ASTM D-1557) below the upper 1-foot and 95% within the upper 1-foot. 4. Engineering Inspections: All remedial grading and subgrade preparations including removals, suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures should be continuously inspected and tested by the ed project geotechnical cons of consultant pavement subgrade and final as-gra alsdw compaction report. Testing , p assist the contractor to achieve proper moisture and compaction levels. 5. Surface and Subsurface Drainage Control: Ponding or accumulation of surface water should not be allowed on the finish parking lot surfaces. Surface run-off over the improved areas should be collected and directed to a selected location in a controlled manner. Flood and storm water control facilities should be installed per the approved grading and drainage improvement plans. B. Pavement Structural Section Design The following structural section designs are based on results of R-value tests performed on selected samples of on-site earth deposits and indicated design traffic indices. Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion - of remedial grading and subgrade subgrade preparation tests so Id the actual finish subgrade soils. g � e(760)743-I2I4 y _ ViN1E & I�'IIDDLF;TON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vine�ard Avenue• Escondido,California aorn 920..)-1229 •Pion _e GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION PAGE 10 MAY 7, 2007 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS conducted to confirm and/or revise final structural section designs as necessary. A minimum section of 3 inches asphalt (AC) over 6 inches of Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base (AB) will be required and is specified herein when a lesser pavement section is indicated by the design calculations. Design calculations are enclosed with this report as Plates 7 and 8. TABLE 10 Design Traffic Index (TI) Design 5.0 5.5 Subgrade 4.5 R-value Parkin Stalls Drive Lanes, light traffic (Drive Lanes, heav traffic) 31 3"AC over 6"AB 3"AC over 6"AB 3"AC over 7"AB 67 3"AC over 6"AB 3"AC over 6"AB 3"AC over 6"AB AC =Asphaltic Concrete. AB = Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base. Design sections corresponding to an R-value of 31 may be initially considered for the entire parking areas for initial planning phase cost estimation purposes. Final pavement sections will depend on the actual R-value test results performed on finish subgrade soils and design TI values which may be different from those - assumed herein. Base materials shall conform to Caltrans Class 2 Aggregate Base specifications and should be compacted a to a minimum ement subbase density. Subgrade soils beneath the p layer should also be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches. Base and subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and minimum 95% compaction levels, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt layers. Base section and subgrade preparations per structural section design, will be required for all surfaces subject to traffic including travelways, drive lanes, driveway - approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches should have 12 inches subgrade compacted to a minimum 95% compaction levels and provided with a 95% compacted Class 2 base section, per structural section design. Provide 6 inches of Class 2 base under curb and gutters. Base layer under curb and gutters should be compacted to a minimum 95%, while the subgrade soils under curb and gutters may be compacted to a minimum 90% compaction levels. Appropriate recommendations should be given in the final as-graded compaction report. v,n,r R MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-I229 •Phone(760)743-I2I4 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION MAY 7,PAGE 11 11 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS - C. General Recommendations 1. All underground utility trenches should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the - maximum dry density of the soil except within the upper 1-foot under the pavement base layer where a minimum 95% compaction levels shall be required. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should be used. 2. Site drainage over the finished pad surfaces should flow away from structures and improvements in a positive manner. Care should be taken during the construction, improvements, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the design drainage patterns. 3. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report. Final civil drawings may also be reviewed for conformance with the recommendations of this report by the project geotechnical engineer. 4. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the owner or his designated representative, civil consultant and grading contractor is recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with planned parking and drive lane improvements. X. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available data obtained from pertinent reports and plans, subsurface exploratory excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The materials encountered on the project site er,and earthutilized materials may�vary in character testing harac believed r st cs representative of the total area; howev , between excavations. Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of t between l observations,xportory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, nt conclusions, and recommendations be verified immediately so that ainnnspect on can discrepancies are noted, we should b e co be made and additional recommendations issued if required. The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to insure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such _IZZ9•Phone(760)743-I2I4 ��INIE & IVIIDDLETON CNC,INEER[NG, INC. 24$0t me Y and Avenue•Escondido,California 9202 GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION PAGE 12 MAY 7, 2007 EXISTING PARKING LOT, HARLOFF BMW, ENCINITAS - as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control. This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #07-201-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. ED Geo, p CEG 180 Z CERTIFIED ennis Middleton ENGINEERING CEG #980 v'1, cu v1m� Na.48174 d �p.12.31.08 „t. S. Mehdi S. Shariat #46174 sT�T CtViL OQ�\ F OF CAL\4 Steven J. Melzer CEG #2362 a. CO CEFITI-FiED = ENGINEERIAIG GE Q- - DM/SMSS/it NSA Exp.5-31-07 Q OF CAL\FO - Distribution: Addressee (4) Pasco Engineering Inc., Attn: James Boeker (1, e-mail) c:/jt/myfiles/07u pdates,etc/07-201-P • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-I229 •Phone(760)743-I2I4 VrNiF & MIDDLETON E�c[r eeR[Nc, INC. im Q� \C A " CE - PL 1 y m-:._CORTE^i:�RDIN Q AC BgRCRONA ETESAy QYl 4i 3 REGION A1.19I) XMIAP� � �O �9 '� - I� �•�\/ r 1 —�°'�i$.-�O z CO�� y ChLE VALLARTA-�^�y 'OC N'NFf}�S,INCN, a U �. V&M JOB" #07=201=P PASSIFLO RAPL I •! p "� SSA� "op, . IA ST CuCFNH04 SUMMERSONGLN }A 1 > p'\O L� 5pm COACT Z z wow Cr 'GLEN nRBOR.DR O CT Hl1M1tdOCK LN,_`ti�5 (A COTTAGE GLENCT � /L /, \�4j jyUIO�Fi VANESSA CIR YaO�'aJ \•�C g0 =; SKYKNOCL'WAY•I_ O _ J 1 � g m V.tiLEnA_ ,O W} - _ F� // COIMiRY GROVE LN G0E �7 �� • -�� .. � � 3'-v_ gL�L ► FF�(A, AZURE_WAY/ s / Ouail.Park Eta 31 '-- G�?a t C Z c� U � �`\ 'EF1ElD —..4' LEAfzWOOO PL a den F( g g��E RED C04 CH LN . N z , 1.1._.1_1 _ G Z pa F � i SHIELDS AVF r,P,0' Cqw j c � i ;PC o: 5 Am K._ Ny�S yG2 06 ,1A+ > ,''z_ N'ltLOP $'"-_.__. `"� m 111��.� rrrNGR S'iTE X ENCINITAS BLVD`11 a, ri (—� O c 1 Q� 'Ax • z NUVEW OR ci W .. �, 0 _ yl`? : 10 O CALLE OROUFAS �%O y S O m ISLAND VIEW LN 7 P,"�- U o _.✓'"�1\Q ._ _ - � .._ I MELBA RD ��.__...."..-._a..�._._. LL 5 Io J a' j��ON w 2 m J'' ,_n I 1 0 _ ¢ I / ELVACT, �� z� mpw °' O � PPU \ �O-�.\- {Lz_L HEAD 406 f Im �01i --IT 1 1 1 �NO� .` `gZ MP.CKINNON CT ;O ! e lu Z \O CATHY LN Z . 3K \ O• ._,-__�_ •r✓ ROS 4c p 7o rY�',+t 1y< 9 O 4v D TORREY DR y{ _ f t S O MAY` \ x CPi2ETfA DR •f- }-_--- m � '�-� � m /'. m WARWICK AVE NOLBEY STS.... y m CARDIFF OR TENNIS CLUB DR K � H EOW!W`WAY m z iiz� jX SHEFFiEL�AyE \ JLOYLN N" 2 ... Qr a '!`i URKS�H_IRE AVE 1` \ 'm m pAG PQ" cS _ ...... a \�� Gy{TON A ! 4OA �,RpgLEy z° 11>1 c m GENIE Lf m z i)R { W i - - 5 � iCar.diff-\a 'A ,� EST VISTA CT i / _ -■ - - / ({� SEA 26,000 rN 2080 ft � VA 112E -' ®2002 WLorm�.Topo USA®.Data eopyrlpM of content owner. _ - www.delorms.eom - - ' .Yi,•.i i.v�eiA�Ni r'KA(:III.[NUI �U 0c MU11-1 Y!I'HOUi A °ERWT FROM THE CITY EXISTING CONCRETE CHANNEL j EX 4' WIDE LANDSCAPE S'NALE RE'NFCRCEO ERLAIN MTHP6'CLASS 11 BASE AND U EXISTING MASONRY SIGHT WALL - -yEp DWG NO 1531-G -------------------------- EXIS 214 CURB \GUTTER \ \ _ _-_-- - .� \ \` \ \\ -_218__--716 \ EXI\T,NG AC PAVk'ENT \I \\ FC 42t30__ \ \ \ 1 \ E \ \ \ , EXISTING AC J � PAVED SPILLWAY =62E A4 STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT PER SORSO I IE=215 10 RIM=220 60 \ o EXISTING XPAL-DRAIN \ X04 w \ E OUTLET PIPE I \ I ` II \ I \ EXISiI FENCE _ I PLATE 2 F I N Approx. location of test trench I I . \ r-222 v J - E INSTALL H F STORM N SORI H SD SIN ..,.. ! I IE=2191 RIM=22\15 r \ CL h \\ 6'W10 EANENT SWALE� I N1TH 4 DE BOTTOM R 4 1 SIDE ES(i�\MAX SLOPE !FL - �lpp��,, E MOOIFISp WITHOU SSION OF\THE Ty ! I CITY NCINITAS � I \ GRAPHIC SCALE X21 I \\ \ 0 20 40 60 !1! _1_270— \\ Scale: 1"=40' �l. 21/5 1 \\ \ 1/ J1 ft - 232 \ I E/22191 h i2195 I \\ \ I \ \ ! / / /x ---[z34— \ \ ._ \ \ — — — — — — — �— — — — — — — — — — I I QpOfESS/pN FO JUST;Al q! AS BUILT " A z No 68964 Exp 12/31/07 DA TEr � R C E NO 68964 'Tl O N\- JUS71N SUITER EXP 17-31-07 A�-OF CA-\f REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE BENCFTY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NC COUNTY BENCHMAFIG PLAN FOR CHIS SO IN TOP C SW COR EL CAMIN-1� ENCNI TAS BLVD RANCHO SANTA F, Co S D VERTICAL ( A P N #259-121-29 ELEV 119 476 PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,little or no fines. Q GRAVELS oc o MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures,little or no fines. J ON OF COARSE 5% FINES) a) g O FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel sand silt mixtures, non plastic fines. 0 u_ z u_ N LARGER THAN WITH GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. z O z ¢ NO. 4 SIEVE FINES Q J z SANDS CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. CC Q ~ > SANDS 0 M: CC w z W Fn MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. Q O OF COARSE 5% FINES) C ~ FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand silt mixtures, non plastic fines. OV O D SMALLER THAN WITH NO. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. Inorganic silts and very fine sands,rock flour, silty or clayey fine uJ ML sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. N SILTS AND CLAYS i O J CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,gravelly clays, sandy p -, Q > LIQUID LIMIT IS clays, silty clays, lean clays. rn Q 2 w LESS THAN 50% O I r0 Fn OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. z Z p = J N MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty CC F- ¢ SILTS AND CLAYS soils, elastic silts. C7 wrr0 w CC H z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity,fat clays. i GREATER THAN 50% LL r OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,organic silts. F- HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. GRAIN'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 4 3/4" 3" 12" _ 200 40 10 SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS SILTS AND CLAYS INE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE - F RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY ANDS, GRAVELS AND CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT NON-PLASTIC SILTS BLOWS/FOOT PLASTIC SILTS VERY SOFT 0 '/. 0- 2 VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 2 - 4 SOFT '/' ' '/' LOOSE 4 - 10 FIRM 1 A 1 4- 8 MEDIUM DENSE 10- 30 8- 16 STIFF 1 - 2 DENSE 30 - 50 16-32 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 1. Blow count, 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampler (ASTM D-1586) 2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer CL-700 I 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM D-1586) V Sand Cone Test Bulk Sample with blow counts per 6 inches ® Chunk Sample O Driven Rings I I 246 = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches VINJE & MIDDLETON KEY TO E!7!t Unified Soil Cl ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Ave., #102 Escondido, CA 92029-1229 PROJECT NO. Date: 4-19-07 Logged by: SJM FIELD T-1 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (%) (Pcf) (%) (ft) FILL: _ 1 _ r— Silty sand with rock ( may be Class 2). Grey color. Dry. SW/GM 9.4 107.01 93.5 Very firm. ST-1 - 2 - ❑ FORMATIONAL ROCK: 3 Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellowish - tan color. Highly SP _ weathered to 1'/2'. - 4 - Local rust-colored staining. No apparent structure. Grades moderately cemented at 1'/2'. Dense. ST-2 - 5 - L End Test Tench at 3'. No caving. No groundwater. rFDEPTHSAMV-07 Logged by: SJM FIELD T-2 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION PLE DESCRI PTION (%) (Pcf) (%) (ft) FILL: —1 Silty sand with rock(may be Class 2) Grey color. Dry. SW/GM Very firm. ST-1 ,2 _ _ Fine sand. Yellow-tan color. Moist. Medium dense. SP 7.7 119.8 92.0 ❑ ST-2 - _ 4 _ Clayey sand. Brown color. Includes asphalt debris and SC rock fragments to 6" diameter. Moist. Medium dense. 5 ST-3 - 6 - FORMATIONAL ROCK: - Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellow-tan color. Weathered. SP - 7 - Friable. Some rust-colored staining. No structure. - Medium dense. ST-2 - 8 - - End Test Trench at 3'. No caving. No groundwater. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC :' TEST TRENCH LOGS 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW - ENCINITAS Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 07-201-P PLATE 3 V Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings Date: 4-19-07 Logged by: SJM FIELD T-3 USCs FIELD DRY RELATIVE DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DESCRIPTION (%u) (pcf) (%) _ FILL: _ 1 _ Silty sand with rock. (may be Class 2). Grey color. Dry. SW/GM - Very firm. ST-1 2 sample _3 ❑ Silty fine sand. Yellow-tan color. Moist. Some small rock. SM/SP Medium dense to dense. ST-2 - 4 Silty sand with rock(may be Class 2). Brown color. Moist. SW/GM _ - 5 Tight. ST-1 _ 6 _ FORMATIONAL ROCK: Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellow-tan color. Some rust- Sp _ 7 _ colored staining. No structure. Weathered. Friable. Medium dense to dense. ST-2 - 8 End Test Tench at 3'. No caving. No aroundwater. rFDEPTHSAMPLE-07 Logged by: SJM FIELD T-4 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DESCRIPTION ("/,) (pcf) M (ft) _ FILL: _ 1 _ Silty sand with rock (may be Class 2). Grey color. Dry. SM/GM 7.9 102.3 93.7 Very firm. ST-1 - 2 - _ 3 _ Silty fine sand. Yellow-tan to brown color to moist. ST 2 ST-2 10.0 113.2 86.9 - - � mixed. Dense to very dense. - 4 - _ Clayey sand. Brown to red-brown color. Moist. Medium SC 5 dense to dense. ST-3 ❑ _ g - Fine sand. Light brown color. Slightly moist. SP 3.7 109.9 96.0 _ Somewhat blocky. Dense. ST-2 - 7 - =Test at 7'/2'. No caving. No groundwater. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. TEST 7REN,CH,LOGS 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW - ENCINITAS Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 07-201-P PLATE 4 7 Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rin s Logged by: SJM Date: 4-19-07 -- FIELD T-5 USCs FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (%) (Pcf) N (ft) FILL: _ 1 - Silty sand with rock (may be Class 2). Grey color. Dry. SW/GM _ - Very firm. ST-1 - 2 - ❑ SM/SP 13.0 103.0 90.0 _ 3 _ Silty fine sand. Yellow-tan color. Moist. FEdense medium - _ dense. Sc - 4 - Clayey sand. Red-brown color. Moist. Me3 9.4 124.7 95.8 dense. Some asphalt and wire. - 6 - FORMATIONAL ROCK: SP Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellow-tan color. Weathered. 6.6 109.5 95.6 - 7 _ ❑ Friable. Massive. Medium dense to dense. ST-2 - 8 - End Test Trench at 7'/2'. No cavin . No gra undwater. Logged by: SJM Date: 4-19-07 FIELD T-6 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (%) (Pcf) N (ft) FILL: _ 1 _ Silty sand with rock (may be Class 2). Grey color. Dry. T_1 GW/GM Very firm. 7.4 111.1 97.0 - 2 - ❑ Fine sand. Yellow-tan color. Moist. (Reworked, native).ST-2 3 Firm. _ 4 _ FORMATIONAL ROCK: Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellow-tan color. SP _ 5 _ Weathered. Somewhat blocky. No structure. Dense. _ - 6 - End Test Trench at 3'. _ 7 _ No caving. No groundwater. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW - ENCINITAS - Escondido, California 92029-1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 07-201-P PLATE 5 - T Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sam le 0 Driven Rings Logged by: SJM Date: 4-19-07 -- FIELD T-7 USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (%) (Pcf) (%) FILL: ST-1 SW/GM _ 1 _ Silty sand with rock (may be Class 2). _ 2 _ ❑ Silty fine sand. Yellow-tan color. Moist. Medium dense t2 SM/SP 7.7 107.0 93.4 dense. 12.2 107.9 94.3 - 3 - ❑ Clayey sand. Red-brown color. Moist. Small amo ST-3 SC _ 4 _ asphalt. Dense. _ 5 _ ❑ FORMATIONAL ROCK: 11.2 122.8 94.3 Sandstone. Fine grained. Yellow-tan color. Weathered. SP _ 6 _ Somewhat blocky. Moderately cemented. Dense. ST-2 - 7 8.4 108.8 95.0 End Test Trench at 8'. 8 ❑ No caving. No groundwater. Logged by: Date: FIELD USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (%) (Pcf) N - 1 - - 2 - - 3 - - 4 - - - 5 - - 6 - _ 7 - 7. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOG2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 HARLOFF BMW - ENCINITAS Escondido, California 92029-1229 ice 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 07-201-P PLATE 6 1 Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rin s CALCULATION SHEET Job #07-201-P Asphalt Over Class 2 Aggregate Base Design: Data: Subgrade R= 67; TI=4.5 Minimum Section = 3"A.C. over 6"Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032xT1x (100 - R)= 0.0032x4.5x (100 -67) = 0.48 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.46 = 2.54 GEAC =(TAC = 12) XGF = 3 = 12X2.54 = 0.63 GEAR = GETOT- GEAC = 0.48 (0.63 Use 3 inches AC over 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 Data: Subgrade R=31; TI=4.5 Minimum Section = 3"A.C. over 6" Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032xT1x (100 - R) = 0.0032x4.5x (100 - 31) = 0.99 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.413= 2.54 GEAC=(TAC= 12) XGF = 3 = 12X2.54 = 0.63 GEAR= GETOT- GEAC= 0.99 -0.63 = 0.36 w TAB= (GEAB = GFAB )X12 = (0.36 _ 1.1) X12 = 3.9SAY 4" IUse 3 inches AC over 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 Data: Subgrade R= 67 TI=5.0; Minimum Section = 3"A.C. over 6" Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032xT1x (100 - R) = 0.0032x5.0x (100 -67) =0.53 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.48 = 2.54 GEAC =(TAC - 12) X GF = 3 = 12 X 2.54 = 0.63 GEAB = GETOT- GEAC = 0.53(0.63 __ I Use 3 inches AC over 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 Base Data: Subgrade R=31 TI=5.0; Minimum Section = 3"A.C. over 6" Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032xT1x (100 - R) = 0.0032x5.0x(100 -31) = 1.10 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.413 = 2.54 GEAC =(TAC = 12) XGF = 3 = 12X2.54 = 0.63 GEAB = GETOT-GEAC = 1.10 -0.63 = 0.47 TAB = (GEAB= GFAB ) X12 = (0.47 _ 1.1) X12 = 5.1 SAY 5" LUse 3 inches AC over 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 Base PLATE 7 Data: Subgrade R= 67; T1=5.5; Minimum Section = 3"A.C. over 6" Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032 x TI x (100 - R) = 0.0032 x 5.5 x(100 -67) = 0.58 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.46 = 2.32 GEAC =(TAC - 12) XGF = 3 = 12X2.32 = 0.58 GEAR = GETOT- GEAC = 0.58 -0.58 = 0.00 LUse 3 inches AC over 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 Base Data: Subgrade R =31; T1=5.5; Minimum Section = 3" A.C. over 6" Cl. 2 base. Calculations: GETOT= 0.0032xT1x (100 - R) = 0.0032x5.5x (100 - 31) = 1.21 GF: From Cal Trans 1990 Edition, Table#608.413= 2.32 GEAC =(TAC = 12) XGF = 3 = 12X2.32 = 0.58 GEAR = GETOT - GEAC = 1.21 -0.58 = 0.63 TAB = (GEAR = GFAB ) X12 = (0.63 _ 1.1) X12 =6.9SAY 7" LUse 3 inches AC over 7 inches Caltrans Class 2 Base PLATE 8 HYDROLOGYSTUDY for HARLOFF BMW 03-205 CDP & DWG. NO. 1531-G & DWG.NO. City of Encinitas, CA PREPARED FOR: Harloff BMW, Inc. PO Box 2')0728 -- Encinitas, CA 92024 DATE: MAY 21, 2007 Q\-kOFESSjq JUST,�y CO 3 C 68964 t EXP f Z' OI^J4F. �P "9rlFOFCAVNN-'3 n 1 W. J STIN S ITER, RCE 68964 DATE HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SE_ 1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Existing Conditions 1.3 Proposed Project 1.4 Summary of Results and Conditions 1.5 Conclusions 1.6 References 2.0 Methodology 2.1 Introduction 2.2 County of San Diego Criteria 2.3 City of Encinitas Standards 2.4 Runoff coefficient determination 3.G Hydrology Model Output 3 1 Pre-Developed Hydrologic Model Output 3 2 Post-Developed Hydrologic Model Output 4.0 Hydraulic Calculations 4.1 - 85TH Percentile Storm and Treatment Swale Calculation 4.2 6" PVC Pipe 4.3 18" RCP Pipe 5.0 Appendix MAHydrology L HydrauliPE120200200 G P10 5 R .doc HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction This Hydrology Study for Harloff BMW located on Encinitas Blvd. has been prepared to analyze the hydrologic and hydraulic characteristics of the existing and proposed project site. This report intends to present both the methodology and the calculations used for determining the runoff from the project site in both the pre-developed (existing) conditions and the post-developed (proposed) conditions produced by the 100 year 6 hour storm. In addition this report will propose the sizing of all necessary storm drain facilities and storm drain piping necessary for the storm drain system to safely convey the runoff from the 100-year rainfall event. 1.2 Existing Conditions The property is geographically located at N 33°02'47" W 117 015'47' . The site is bordered by commercial development on the east and northeast sides of the site. The site is bordered by residential development to the west and northwest. The site is bordered by Encinitas Blvd to the south. The project site is located in the San Marcos Hydrologic - Area and more specifically, the Batiquitos Hydrologic Sub-Area (904.51). The project is located approximately 360' west of the intersection of Encinitas Blvd and El Camino Real. The existing project site consists of one lot which consists of two large developed areas connected with a ramp. The western area is fully developed as an automobile dealership. -- It is mostly impervious and gently slopes from west to east. Stormwater from the western subarea is collected in a brow ditch which flows e disturbed west aso a east ult then of the proposed north. The western subarea is development. The eastern subarea is currently an unpaved parking area for the dealership. Drainage from the ramp and parking area flows in a northeasterly direction across the subarea to an existing desilting basin. The existing desilting basin currently discharges directly onto the parking lot of the commercial property to the east (Bank of America). The runoff is then conveyed in a ribbon gutter to an existing SDRSD I-Box on the northeast corner of the parking lot. Runoff that reaches this catch basin is then conveyed in an existing 18" stormdrain pipe to an existing 60" stormdrain pipe in El Camino Real. The 60" stormdrain pipe flows north along El Camino Real. The existing drainage conditions downstream from the existing desilting basin are to remain the same. 1.3 Proposed Project The intent of proposed projects is to develop the eastern portion of the project site. The proposed development will include the construction of a parking lot and on-site storm drain improvements. The proposed storm drain system design includes the construction of a channel drain, a t_eatment swale, landscaped BMP areas, a type "F" catch basin, a type `B" cleanout, and MAHydrology&HydraullPE1#00\1 001GPM 5DRO 007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 necessary pipes and subdrains. The majority of the parkingo the treatment channel The drain with a gravel base and perforated pipe to convey runoft � pipe y treatment swale will flow to a type "F" catch basin. An lo RCP e will convey the treated runoff to a type "B" cleanout. Storm water, from thesite,hen will confluence onto the _ the treated runoff at this node. The runoff from the site w neighboring property as it does in the existing condition. Runoff will then be conveyed by an existing ribbon gutter to an existing type I catch basin which outlets to an existing 60"RCP pipe in El Camino Real. To address the storm water quality goals established for this development proposed _. permanent BMPs will be incorporated iandthe lands�a landscaped drain areas wellgbe installed to wide treatment swale with a 6' wide bottom p treat the runoff through flow-based filtration methods 1.4 Summary of Results Upon performing hydrologic analysis of the project site in both the proposed developed and existing condition the following results were produced. In existing conditions the hydrologic model included the analysis of the entire project site at two points of - discharge. Output data from the hydrologic analysis model of the project site in the existing condition indicates that the 100-year peak runoff flow of 15.80 cfs is generated by the western portion of the project site. The Tc for the western portion of the project site equals 9.80 minutes. The area of the western portion of the project site equals 3.77 acres. The eastern portion of the project site generates a flow of 4.80 cfs. The Tc for the eastern portion of the project site equals 7.82 minutes. The area of the eastern portion of the project site equals 1.99 acres. The total area of the existing conditions contributing storm water runoff is equal to 5.76 acres. The project site in existing conditions and the proposed project site discharge to two points. One point is to the north of e point of thetsrte afRunoffto the proposed development. The other p oint is the northeast comer this point will be affected by the proposed development. The output data, from the hydrologic analysis model of the proposed project, indicates that the 100-year peak flow is equal O1 a98 s fsThe Tc of the eastern The total area 7.70 of the proposed subarea is equal o minutes. 1.5 Conclusions The proposed storm drain system incorporates a channel drain to collect the 100-year peak flow from the majority of the proposed project site. The channel drain will discharge into a treatment swale. Before the runoff leaves the site, it will be conveyed by an 18" RCP pipe to a cleanout. The The treahment waleehas1been discharge si2:ed to accommodate the treated runoff at the cleanout. MAHydrology&HydraulicPE12020000 G2 HY b 0 21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 the 85th percentile storm event as well as the 100 year storm event resulting from the proposed development. MAHydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5121/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 1.5 References "San Diego County Hydrology Manual", revised June 2003, County of San Diego, Department of Public Works, Flood Control Section. "Drainage Design Manual", City of San Diego, April 1984, addendum March 1989. "Grading, Erosion and SediintControl De�lopment Departtment revised November Engineering Services and Community - 2002. "California Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. 2001-01, " California Regional Water Control Board, San Diego Region (SDRWQCB). "City of Encinitas Storm Water Best Management Practices Manual, Part II, Storm - Water Manual for New Development and Redevelopment, " City of Encinitas, Revised April 9, 2003. "City of Encinitas Storm Water Program Best Management Practices Manual, " City of Encinitas. "Chapter 20.08, Storm Water Management, Ordinance 2002-14, " City of Encinitas. MAHydrology&HydrauliPE12020000 GPM 5D2 .doc HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Introduction The hydrologic model used to perform the hydrologic analysis presented in this report utilizes the Ration Method (RM) equation, Q=CIA. The RM formula estimates the peak rate of runoff based on the variables of area, runoff coefficient, and rainfall intensity. The rainfall intensity (I) is equal to: I = 7.44xP6 xD-o-64' Where: I = Intensity (in/hr) P6= 6-hour precipitation(inches) D= duration(minutes—use Tc) Using the Time of Concentration (Tc), which is the time required for a given element of water that originates at the most remote point of the basin being analyzed to reach the - point at which the runoff from the basin is being analyzed. The RM equation determines the storm water runoff rate (Q) for a given basin in terms of flow (typically in cubic feet per second (cfs) but sometimes as gallons per minute (gpm)). The RM equation is as follows: Q = CIA Where: Q=flow(in cfs) C = runoff coefficient, ratio of rainfall that produces storm water runoff(runoff vs. infiltration/evaporation/absorption/etc) I = average rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the Tc for the area, in inches per hour. A= drainage area contributing to the basin in acres. The RM equation assumes that the storm event being analyzed delivers precipitation to the entire basin uniformly, and therefore the peak discharge rate will occur when a raindrop falls at the most remote portion of the basin of rainfall that becomes runoff or RM also assumes that the fraction the runoff coefficient C is not affected by the storm intensity, I, or the precipitation zone number. In addition to the above Ration Method assumptions, the conservative assumption that all runoff coefficients utilized for this report are based on type "D" soils. 2.2 County of San Diego Criteria As defined by the County Hydrology Manual dated June 2003, the rational method is the preferred equation for determining the hydrologic characteristics of basins up to approximately one square mile in size. The County of San Diego has developed its own tables, nomographs, and methodologies for analyzing storm water runoff for areas within M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 the county. The County has also developed precipitation isopluvial contour maps that show even lines of rainfall anticipated from a given storm event (i.e. 100-year, 6-hour storm). One of the variables of the RM equation is the runoff coefficient, C. Tne runoff coefficient is dependent only upon land use and soil type and the County of San Diego has developed a table of Runoff Coefficients for Urban Areas to be applied to basin located within the County of San Diego. The table categorizes the land use, the associated development density (dwelling units per acre) and the percentage of impervious area. Each of the categories listed has an associated runoff coefficient, C, for each soil type class. The County has also illustrated in detail the methodology for determining the time of concentration, in particular the initial time of concentration. The County has adopted the Federal Aviation Agency's (FAA) overland time of flow equation. This equation essentially limits the flow path length for the initial time of concentration to lengths of 100 feet or less, and is dependent on land use and slope. 2.3 City of Encinitas Standards The City of Encinitas has additional requirements for hydrology reports which are outlined in the Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance. Please refer to this manual for further details. 2.4 Runoff Coefficient Determination As stated in section 2.2, the runoff coefficient is dependent only upon land use and soil type and the County of San Diego has developed a table of Runoff Coefficients for Urban Areas to be applied to basin located within the County of San Diego. The table, included at the end of this section, categorizes the land use, the associated development density (dwelling units per acre) and the percentage of impervious area. MAHydrology&Hydraulics\120011200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/2112007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 3.0 HYDROLOGY MODEL OUTPUT 3.i Pre-Developed Hydrologic Model Output RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGR=iM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT - 2001,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2002 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2002 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: Pasco Engineering, Inc. 535 N. HWY 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** - * PREDEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR THE 100 YEAR STORM * HARLOFF BMW, 1302 ENCINITAS BLVD, ENCINITAS, CA * PE 1200 G2 - 04.04.07 ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: 1200PRE.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY:-1547-04/04/2007-------------------------------------- -------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ----------- ----------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.580 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.93 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) -(FT)- (FT)= ==(n)_= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1 . Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth) * (Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM T.tIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.16 TO NODE 1.15 IS CODE _ -21---------- ---------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 276.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 273.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 2.30 - URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.818 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.043 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.46 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.28 .. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.15 TO NODE 1.14 IS CODE =--52---------- -------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 273.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 272.20 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 104.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0144 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SU3AREA(CFS) = 2.28 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.12 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.82 Tc(MIN.) = 6.82 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.16 TO NODE 1.14 = 204.00 FEET. - FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.14 TO NODE 1.14 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.566 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.74 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.56 TC(MIN) = 6.82 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.14 TO NODE 1.13 IS CODE = 52 ------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 272.20 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 269.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 103.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0252 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 3.56 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.10 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.55 Tc(MIN.) _ LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.16 TO NODE 1.13 = 307.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.13 TO NODE 1.13 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.293 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 F.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.17 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.01 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) 4.73 TC(MIN) = 7.37 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.13 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE = 52 M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDFO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 ----------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< __ ---------__ =====D----------------==269.60 DOWNS = 266.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 130.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0277 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 4.73 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.47 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.63 Tc(MIN. ) = 7.99 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.16 TO NODE 1.02 = 437.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.02 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE =--81---------- ---------------- -- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<«< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.022 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : - USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 10232 TOTAL SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) 5.64 91 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ -- TC(MIN) = 7.99 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.02 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE =---1---------- ._ -- -------------------------------------------- -- -- ---- - >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 7.99 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.02 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.23 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 5.69 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.06 IS CODE =--21---------- -------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 276.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 273.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 2.30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.818 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.043 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.43 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.49 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.43 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.06 TO NODE 1.05 IS CODE = 52 -------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 273.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 272.40 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 101.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0129 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 2.43 M:\Hyd,ology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO doe PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.03 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD ?HYDROLOGY FANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.83 TC(MIN.) = 6.83 -- LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.05 = 201.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.05 TO NODE 1.05 IS CODE =--81---------- ._ ------------------ »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE-PEAK-FLOW<<<<< ----------------- -- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.560 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFTCIENTp= .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 1.41 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ 0.60 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.84 TC(MIN) = 6.83 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.05 TO NODE 1.04 IS CODE = 52 --------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< 272.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 271.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 99.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0141 3.84 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ - FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.36 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME (MIN.) = 0.70 TC(MIN. ) = 7.53 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.04 = 300.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.04 TO NODE 1.04 IS CODE =--81---------- ___________ __ ---- ----------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA T^ MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< L 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.221 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT O= .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) _ SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.23 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.98 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.03 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.83 TC(MIN) = 7.53 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.04 TO NODE 1.03 IS CODE =--52---------- ---------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 271.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 269.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) _ 1008300 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0140 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 2.48 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.67 Tc(MIN.) = 8.20 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.03 = 400.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.03 TO NODE 1.03 IS CODE =--81---------- ---------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE-PEAK-FLOW««<-------------------- - 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.941 M:\riydrology&Hydrrilics\l 01 \1 001G2 I 52DRO.007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.13 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.31 TOTAL RUNGFC(CFS) = 5.96 TC(MIN) = 8.20 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.03 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE = 52 -- - - ------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATUitAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 269. 60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 266.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 150.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0240 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 5.96 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.41 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.73 Tc(MIN.) = 8.93 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.02 = 550.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.02 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE =--81---------- -------------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< -- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.675 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.54 - TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.45 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.50 TC(MIN) = 8.93 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.02 TO NODE 1.02 IS CODE _ »»>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE««< - _-»»>AND_COMPUTE-VARIOUS-CONFLUENCED-STREAM-VALUES<<<<< ---------------- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 8.93 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.68 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.45 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 6.50 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 5.64 7.99 5.022 2 6.50 8.93 4.675 1.45 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 11.68 7.99 5.022 2 11.74 8.93 4.675 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: M:\Hydrology&Hydra:tics\1200\1:30 G2 HYDRO.doc FE#120C 1:17 Pt�i 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 11.74 Tc(MIN.) = 8.93 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.02 = 550.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.02 TO NODE 1.01 IS CODE =--52---------- -------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< -- ------------- , -m-_----------- --266.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 240.00 LD ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 165.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1576 NOTE: CHANNEL SLOPE OF .1 WAS ASSUMED 1IN7VELOCITY ESTIMATION CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 8.23 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.33 Tc(MIN. ) = 9.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.01 = 715.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.01 TO NODE 1.01 IS CODE-=--81---------- ----_--------------------------------- ____ _ ----- -------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.566 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 - S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.37 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.58 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 15.11 TC(MIN) = 9.27 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.01 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE =--52---------- ----------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< NSTREAM(FEET) = 212.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 240.00 DOW CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 280.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1000 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 15.11 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 8.79 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.53 Tc(MIN.) = 9.80 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.07 TO NODE 1.00 = 995.00 FEET. *****************************************************#********************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE-°--81---------- --------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.405 - *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 _ SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 30719 TOTAL REA RUNOCFS)FS) 15.80 0.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ TC(MIN) = 9.80 ___ --------------------+ ---------------- ---------- END OF HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR SUBAREA 1 BEGIN OF HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR SUBAREA 2 -------------------------------------+ M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PF#1200 1:17 PW 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.30 TO NODE 2.20 IS CODE 21 _ -- ---------------------- il --»»>RATIONAL-METHOD-INITIAL-SUBAREA-ANALYSIS<<<<<__-_____________________ *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 236.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 229.80 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 6.20 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOUNTYNUTES)NOMOGRAPH 6.761 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.595 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ 0.32 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.20 TO NODE 2.10 IS CODE =--52---------- - »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< 229.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 224.20 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ - CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) _ 100.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0560 NOTE: CHANNEL FLOW OF 1. CFS WAS ASSUMED IN VELOCITY ESTIMATION CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.55 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.47 Tc(MIN.) = 7.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.30 TO NODE 2.10 = 200.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.10 TO NODE 2.10-IS-CODE- 81---------- ______ ----------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.358 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENTO SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = .4100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC 11) SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.21 _ TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.94 TC(MIN) = 7.23 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.10 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE --5----------- ---------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< 224.20 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 220.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 115.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0365 1.94 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) _ FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.27 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.59 Tc(MIN.) = 7.82 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.30 TO NODE 2.00 = 315.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE =--81---------- -------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< M:Wydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 ':17 PM 5/21 2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENS TTY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.095 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.87 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.82 -- TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.74 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.76 TC(MIN) = 7.82 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.00 TO 'NODE 2.00 IS CODE =--81---------- ------------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< - 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.095 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 10995 TOTAL SUBAREA RUNO(CFS)FS) 4.80 .04 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ TC(MIN) = 7.82 ----------- ---------------------+ __ _ END OF HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR SUBAREA 2 I I --------------------------------------- -+ -- +--------------- END OF STUDY SUMMARY: 7 82 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.99 TC(MIN.) _ PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.80 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc - PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 3.2 Post-Develoned Hydrologic Model Output (100 Year Storm) RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE - Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2001,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2002 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2002 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: Pasco Engineering, Inc. 535 N. HWY 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * POSTDEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS FOR 100 YEAR STORM * * HARLOFF BMW, 1302 ENCINITAS BLVD, ENCINITAS, CA * PE 1200 - 05.21.07 FILE NAME: 1200POST.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 10:58 05/21/2007 ------------------------------------------------------------ _ __ ---------- ---------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -,. 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2.580 - SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 3.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C II-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED -- *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.016/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: - 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth) * (Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.14 TO NODE 2.13 IS CODE = 21. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : - USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 235.80 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 229.60 M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 6.20 2,744 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) _ -w *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-^MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.043 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.13 TO NODE 2.12 IS CODE = 52 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE NATURAL VALLEY CHANNEL FLOW««< >>>>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 229.60 DOWNS TREAM(FEET) = 225.40 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 86.20 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0487 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 1.56 - FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC) = 3.61 (PER LACFCD/RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL) TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.40 TC(MIN.) = 6.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.14 TO NODE 2.12 = 186.20 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.12 TO NODE 2.12 IS CODE = 81 ------------------------------------------ »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.798 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 ` S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.93 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.44 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.25 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.00 TC(MIN) = 6.40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.12 TO NODE 2.11 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "" »»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< »»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)««< ---------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 225.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 222.00 - FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 185.00 MANNING'S N = 0.009 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 9.78 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.00 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.71 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.14 TO NODE 2.11 = 371.20 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.11 TO NODE 2.10 IS CODE = 51 ----------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< _ »»>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 222.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 221.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 102.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0098 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 4.00 "Z" FACTOR = 4.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.030 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 500.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUF.) = 5.265 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4100 M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc -- PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 6.00 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLCW(CFS) _ TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.37 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.44 TRAVEL TIME(MIN-) = 0.72 Tc(MIN. ) = 7.43 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.00 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0 06.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.25 PEAK FLOW RPTE(CFS) _ END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAUL-CS: 2 37 DEPTH(FEET) = 0.44 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) _ LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.14 TO NODE 2.10 = 473.20 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.10 TO NODE 2.10 IS CODE = 81 - w -------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.265 ~ *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.25 TOTAL AREA(ACR7S) = 1.37 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.25 TC(MIN) = 7.43 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.10 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------------------------ - >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< »»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)««< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 219.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 218.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 97.00 NLANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.94 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.25 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 TC(MIN.) = 7.70 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 2.14 TO NODE 2.00 = 570.20 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.02 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 81 ------------------------------------------------- »»>ADDITICN OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.144 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 1.62 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.75 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7 .88 TC(MIN) = 7.70 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2.01 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------- »»>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.144 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8200 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 - SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.26 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.10 M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 _ HYDROLOGY STUDY hxHarloff BMW pE10000u TOTAL AREA(ACRES) 2.01 TOTAL n000FF(CFo) ~ 8.98 rC(MIN)~~~�~7.7n~�~~~�~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~�~~~�~~~~~~~~~~~~~~�~~~~�~~~~~~ END or azoox somMAnx: � Oz z�<szm ) � 7 .70 � TOTAL AREA(ACRES) ~ ' PEAKFLOW oArE(ors) u.yo~~~~~~~~~~~��~~~~~�~~��~~~~~�~~~�~~~~�~~ END OF nazIomeL METHOD AoaLxszo - _ _ _ ` _ - _ _ _ - _ M:\Hydrology� u�n�mozHYoRo�� - ' ' ps#1uoot17pmmr1/2oor HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 J.0 HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS M:\Hydrology&Hydraulics\1200\1200 G2 HYDRO.doc PE#1200 1:17 PM 5/21/2007 35TH PERCENTILE PEAK FLOW AND VOLUME DETERMINATION Modifier Pational Method - Effective for Watersheds < 1.0 mil Note:Only Er.'er Values in Boxes-Spreadsheet Will Calculate Remaining Values Project Name HARLOFF BMW Work Order Jurisdiction JCity of Encinitas BMP Location IBMP Treatment Swale 85th Percentile Rainfall = 0.60 inches (from County Isopluvial Map) Developed Drainage Area 1 2.0 Jacres -- Natural Drainage Area F=0 acres Total Drainage Area to BMP = 2.0 acres Dev. Area Percent Impervious = 95 % Overall Percent Impervious = 95 % Dev. Area Runoff Coefficient= 0.82 Nat. Area Runoff Coefficient= 0.41 Runoff Coefficient= 0.82 Time of Concentration t 7.7 minutes (from Drainage Study) RATIONAL METHOD RESULTS Q = CIA where Q = 85th Percentile Peak Flow(cfs) C = Runoff Coefficient I = Rainfall Intensity (0.2 inch/hour per RWQCB mandate) A= Drainage Area (acres) V= CPA where V= 85th Percentile Runoff Volume(acre-feet) C = Runoff Coefficient P = 85th Percentile Rainfall (inches) A= Drainage Area (acres Using the Total Drainage Area: C = 0.82 1 = 0.2 inch/hour P = 0.60 inches A= 2.0 acres Q= 0.33 cfs V= 0.08 acre-feet Ucing Developed Area Only: C = 0.82 1 = 0.2 inch/hour P = 0.60 inches A= 2.0 acres Q= 0.33 cfs V= 0.08 acre-feet Grassy Swale Design Spreadsheet Given: Design flow 0.33 cfs Residence time (req) 9 minutes Trapezoid Channel Design Parameters: y 0.25 feet t 8 feet w 6 feet z 4 ft/ft A 1.75 sq ft Find Qmax of channel: Find Velcoity in channel V=Q/A - Q= (1.49/n) *A* R^(2/3) *s^.5 Therefore: n 0.2 V= 0.188571 fps s 0.01 ft/ft(long. Slope) r 0.225806 ft Q= 0.48345 cfs Required Length of Channel: L=vt Therefore: L= 101.8286 L= 100 S Height Qpeak = Peak flow rate, cfs d 1 — 1 - SS1 S52 I W Diagram of Swale Variables Used in Spreadsheet Worksheet Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet PRIORITY BMP TREATMENT SWALE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Elevation range: 0.00 ft to 1.25 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 0.00 1.25 0.00 10.00 0.035 2.00 0.25 3.00 0.00 - 7.00 0.00 8.00 0.25 10.00 1.25 - Discharge 6.25 cfs Results Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Water Surface Elevation 0.48 ft Flow Area 2.76 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 7.11 ft Top Width 6.94 ft Height 0.48 ft Critical Depth 0.37 ft Critical Slope 0.027096 ft/ft Velocity 2.26 ft/s Velocity Head 0.08 ft Specific Energy 0.56 ft Froude Number 0.63 Flow is subcritical. Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 J5/21/07 Page 1 of 1 12:12:56 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury.CT 06708 (103)755-1666 Cross Section _ Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol--1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet PRIORITY BMP TREATMENT SWALE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 0.48 ft Discharge 6.25 cfs 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 c 0 ca W 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 g p 10.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 Station (ft) 05121/07 Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 12:12:59 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Page' of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet PRIORITY BMP TREATMENT SWALE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Section Data _ Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 0.09 ft -- Discharge 0.33 cfs 1.4 1.2 1.0 $0.8 C 0 c>s 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 g 0 10.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 Station (ft) Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Page 1 of 1 ,2:12:05 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) r 55-1666 Worksheet Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet PRIORITY BMP TREATMENT SWALE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Water Elevation Input Data Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Elevation range: 0.00 ft to 1.25 ft. Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness 0.035 0.00 1.25 0.00 10.00 2.00 0.25 3.00 0.00 7.00 0.00 8.00 0.25 10.00 1.25 Discharge 0.33 cfs Results Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.035 Water Surface Elevation 0.09 ft Flow Area 0.40 ftz Wetted Perimeter 4.76 ft Top Width 4.74 ft Height 0.09 ft Critical Depth 0.06 ft Critical Slope 0.047029 ft/ft Velocity 0.82 ft/s Velocity Head 0.01 ft Specific Energy 0.10 ft Froude Number 0.49 Flow is subcritical. Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Fage 1 of 1 12:12:21 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (20;s)755-1666 Worksheet Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my docu men ts\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet 6" PVC PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 6.00 in Results Depth 0.50 ft Discharge 0.81 cfs Flow Area 0.20 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 1.57 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 0.45 ft Percent Full 100.00 Critical Slope 0.008870 ft/ft Velocity 4.13 ft/s Velocity Head 0.26 ft Specific Energy FULL ft Froude Number FULL Maximum Discharge 0.87 cfs Full Flow Capacity 0.81 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 12.14 16 Page 1 of 1 12.14:16 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Cross Section Cross Section for Circular Channel Project Description Project File cAdocume-1\bardol 1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet 6" PVC PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 0.50 ft Diameter 6.00 in Discharge 0.81 cfs 0.50 ft 6.00 in 1 V L H 1 NTS FlowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Academic Edition Page 1 of 1 12:14:21 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Worksheet Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 _ Worksheet CHANNEL DRAIN Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.040 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 1.00 ft Bottom Width 1.00 ft Results Discharge 1.79 cfs Flow Area 1.00 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.00 ft Top Width 1.00 ft Critical Depth 0.46 ft Critical Slope 0.072209 ft/ft Velocity 1.79 ft/s Velocity Head 0.05 ft Specific Energy 1.05 ft Froude Number 0.31 Flow is subcritical. HowMaster v5.17 05121'07 Academic Edition 12:18:41 PM iiaestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755- 566 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Rectangular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1lmy documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet CHANNEL DRAIN Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.040 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 1.00 ft Bottom Width 1.00 ft Discharge 1.79 cfs 1.00 ft 1 - V N 1.00 ft H 1 NTS FlowMaster v5.17 05121107 Academic Edition page 1 of 1 12:18:45 PM Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (20°';755-1666 Worksheet Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haeated\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet 8" PVC PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 8.00 In Results Depth 0.67 ft Discharge 1.75 cfs Flow Area 0.35 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 2.09 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 0.60 ft - Percent Full 100.00 Critical Slope 0.008756 ft/ft Velocity 5.00 ft/s Velocity Head 0.39 ft Specific Energy FULL ft Froude Number FULL Maximum Discharge 1.88 cfs Full Flow Capacity 1.75 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.010000 ft/ft RowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Academic Edition Page 1 of 1 12:19.28 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Cross Section Cross Section for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:ldocume�1\bardol�1\my documents\pascolhaested\haesied\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 - Worksheet 8,, PVC PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 0.67 ft Diameter 8.00 in Discharge 1.75 cfs 0.67 ft 8.00 in 1 N V H 1 NTS Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Page 1 of 1 12:19:31 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1666 Worksheet Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fr.t2 Worksheet 18" RCP PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 18.00 in Discharge 6.25 cfs Results Depth 0.83 ft Flow Area 1.01 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 2.52 ft Top Width 1.49 ft Critical Depth 0.97 ft w Percent Full 55.54 Critical Slope 0.006347 ft/ft Velocity 6.20 ft/s Velocity Head 0.60 ft Specific Energy 1.43 ft Froude Number 1.33 Maximum Discharge 11.30 cfs Full Flow Capacity 10.50 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.003541 ft/ft Flow is supercritical Academic Edition HowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Page 1 of 1 12:20:34 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (203)755-1665 Cross Section Cross Section for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\docume-1\bardol-1\my documents\pasco\haested\haested\academic\fmw\1200.fm2 Worksheet 18" RCP PIPE Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 0.83 ft Diameter 18.00 in Discharge 6.25 cfs 18.00 in 0.83 ft 1 N V H 1 r NTS Academic Edition FlowMaster v5.17 05/21/07 Page 1 of 1 12:20:37 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 (^03)755-1666 HYDROLOGY STUDY for Harloff BMW PE 1200 G2 7.0 APPENDIX M.\Hyarology&HydraulicPE1200\1 00 001G RO.d PM 5D07 i.7 7 54 bA cq� L 4 Yc g Si Fc� 93� m _ O a ,s'r �A3 Ssa I?es yRyl z o U �I if cn cn ca . a o Imperial County N sL•su N ?b 3 tr,, j!(-....., •n�Q,. •�• ..w..:,w .......... ,.J!•s•1••~ 3 • .. f!'.........•• .Y...... _. :a• •.! �.. F .54.911 , .54.91 L .. •... O ¢ S�.•.' R- _ ;x,,43:0...• o -� � _ s m a .......; � E\ w Y� AE.LLL A£.LLL V � T C C OU � g Q ._ f•I � t�•l � � h _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - Cd ca en SS a Lt L cd iD _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ` _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ cis rn imperial County _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CId 3 fill fit JI unty Imper4 CC) ILI tp _ . es _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - aw .r,...........e.a_� �=CC=w�G .�w.s sew■raw.�'.a.'C'-'.�1.^�'.�","��a—ia 1.��^.iGdR�.��Ci.�_ ONE �'��i'.■r"R�i■oaaCGau.a aeG—icy=�� s�s�a �'-�aM inaa■►,ate■aas �.■Ri s �. �aaa►�. a■a•/■ .odo��a. wn■an��..i�ri��iiR/�aia,�o / r�nt.,,;A ....�� Cam.5�..�...t............0 .tt....NUN NOMNo ago rUWAlM MiAs��rii��u.riurni lon ��.u��r�u��iu.►�a�.�..� u �nn.n...o�nu i��lr��rvr _MW A®ui!►.=Kum�r�ml��ml�n®m EM�.■�■.■��.'�'■��■.wr�.■r��r ._w�..w��ww■.._�I,aR_�-wwa.■■.■..- _�aao ,. R.1! ■.■ate ��,�■�ir �..� ��.�.� a�a�a■■!at�att�at�aa Ra.t�..•R��w,��%fR'i��,aaala aaaa/aaa.aae�-u�—aalaaa�.��a6�=S�0 MME ■tats a/—,IS��• <��/��■H-aLLLSa/��f=»��a ■ maano�■■��f�O ��=��//�aa_►��_ ��'��..N��—'Ors. �L-'CL•�SpC GGCG:i= ��.+�..�T_ "'�= ��■o�aCi■■�Ci..no�fiia _ sta■t.a�■�iita.at� ttaa■■■■aaa.miatat.t� C.�,..,_ �� "'iv�ji■��,�.a��_C.�aa■r■■-.a.asas��s = —_s J.Tar�n.�t.��a wrs �'- � �.... w■■s;`oa�ia� tatC�a�■a�� ir"G'.aa�ar�'aC'■■°a=`�as.�..�—�=�C■�r+�■�� tm ■�■ttta■ta � I11�a► a'�w ■s■t. at■a�aattata al■a■a a■I.sat� Cat■t�at■ar�.■�� o� '��'r�.��'��CC��s�� ■�tas'J'��ws�� ■�.aa w.sss ®�fLw�IL��ww� aa�� LLLf�1��s�tsw CCU:�� i��CM.�.�.=. .'� .��..CC� C.n.�...... ..�.. R 'i'sib' r��=s.r.��►i=Ci't�s�� ..n ■..,u..an� .�►�rrirr��r��■i■■iCiii��i nu°mum w� .IBM . ran. r NINO /./ // _ w C3 o °? c n qu C, en N I/1 00 W � Oo oO p Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O_ to M N •� � v O C1 tHj CA w N w V• [� O D\ 00 00 OG 00 aC H U O O O O O O O O O p O O O y n C O L1. C •rr- ' y v o U N d C* +C O M _ C/)Cl. u vi .. �• i"00. O O O oo N oo cO O N in O O O C O - •�c 3 a� e`a O .b C a .0 w C, 'H d O M U M r > OR o0 00 •� . M �. C O O O O C O = C b U p G O C O O w -0 in E O O e3 ►� C:. *• O O v'I O O v1 O v'1 O O V1 O O h M v v o0 oc O� O\ V CD ... N N v1 �p 00 O ' 0 t�COD M V Et p d az � � E.1►""� io C Hr- O 1�1 H y y y •I.V. � � ILI W Ci a .� a a a A A A A o � c o •� A A A A A C, v1 O o U V g' b G° o . co m U rz C _ rJ Co C in CA y p, C � �°'' � �' z V O .a V vl a ° r o r 0.Cw v . r O `' o � o z: U cz C7 O C7 3 cl z t~ o O C a) R b •C c' ai < •O C N C:s es o to W y y N 61 W 'C3 b •'. y h •U H V •� (� MU EE O N O U u cz En CL ti A A A a a a Q 0 ° � °' U U U U U f) z - 2003 REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT 200-1.6.3 Quality Requirements Page 45 - First paragraph, second sentence change "60 days" to "30 days". 200-1.7 Selection of Riprap and Filter Blanket Material Table 200-1.7 Rip Filter Blanket Upper Layer(s) Velocity Rock Class Rap (3) Nleters/Sec (2) Thic Option 1 Optio Lower k- Sect. 200 n2 Option 3 (Ft/Sec) Nes (4) Sect.4 (5) Layer (1) s 00 (6) 171 (4) 2 (6-7) No. 3 Backing 0.6 5 mm(3/16") C2 D.G. ---- 2.2 (7-8) No. 2 Backing 1.0 6 mm(1/4") B3 D.G. ---- 2.6 (8-9.5) Facing 1.4 9.5 mm (3/8") ---- D.G. ---- - 3 (9.5-11) Licyht 2.0 12.5 mm('/z") ---- 25mm(3/4"- 1-1/2") ---- 3.5 (11-13) 220 kg (1/4 Ton) 2.7 19 mm(3/4") ---- 25mm (3/4"- 1-1/2") SAND 4 (13-15) 450 kg (1/2 Ton) 3.4 25 mm(1") ____ 25mm(3/4"- 1-1/2") SAND 4.5 (15-17) 900 ka (1 Ton) 4.3 37.5 mm(1-1/2") ---- TYPE B SAND 5.5 (17-20) 1.8Tonne (2 Ton) 5.4 50 m m(2") '--- TYPE B SAND See Section 200-1.6. see also Table 200-1.6 (A) Practical use of this table is limited to situations where "T" is less than inside diameter. (1) Average velocity in pipe or bottom velocity in energy dissipater,whichever is greater. (2) If desired rip rap and filter blanket class is not available,use next larger class. (3) Filter blanket thickness= 0.3 Meter(1 Foot) or "T", whichever is less. (4) Standard Specifications for Public Works Constriction. (5) D.G. = Disintegrated Granite, lmm to 10mm. P.B. = Processed Miscellaneous Base. 8 Z;0- £9L£- 019-09L xn3 Z9 L£- OL9 -09L auOgd 1TINiZTt trZOZ6 YO 'SD}Iul0u3 • N alms 'ID88 OUIWDO 13 -N Z£L �.�' 11Al� BuutanunS • om oru Z 37 6uluwald PUDI • > Bullsaul6u3 11A10 50 -£Z-ZO :31Y0 101d ,, ., a03 'a0 03dY05ONtii1 Al1N3NYWa3d SI 103POad 3141 1LLNn HLMOaO ..- ....".`, tt 511Qa00N Y 3OtA0ad Ol MNIVINiV14 38 -nvHS SY3w 030335OW&H 318YN 30N0ad 01 SlIOS 3NnVS 9Nia3A00 NO ONIHOVM 77T '1N3W1S1Y'OV Hd S1N3WON3WY 1105 30 N0111tlOY 3141 'q 6038 033S OaVVn ♦YS ION 1118 dAVO V 30NOad of 3anision IIOS 30Yan5 3141 QNILSIV(N 1W f :A8 9NILNVid d ?1 li lYH1 p5 S110S 3141 JNINOL1i0N00 T \ \ �. \ 130 S 30)i } ! a03 318Y11nS SI 1 ` IWi aY Ndi 3AOSV „Y. W311 ONisn an XV3a8 ION TItM lYH1 SY3aY Jmov a °q 5MP'Zl4S- ll- laglDl :3WVN 3113 ~� \ ` ' r l :9 NYHL a3d331S 53dp'S ONIXIYM N0Ya1 'n � 'i, f � :30 NOLLYN18101100 ANY A8 031NY1d 38 01 33Y3anS 3HI 9N1N3HOnOH 't 210 A :A8 ON1033SOSUH Z Z ' m_ 1333 OZ = HONI l 01 WWd O tld 3WdUcl 38 T1YHS 03033SOaH 38 Ol SY3w '3UOV Wd 'sgll O09 Z (1333 NI) 30 31Ya 3141 31Y O3nddY anHdlnS Sgt Him '0-0 -9 T P '31Y31nS 31YHdSOHd WnINOWWV 30 ONIISSNOO 83Znila33 ♦g CA 3 11;11 i1V ONIOC138 N --------------- {OS 3141 OINi M 09 Otw OZ 0 t 0 OZ - - - -- -- -- r�r -. err ... �` - � � . o i z' I3YIN03 0100 -103J , I MYULS 3H1 01 MOHONY 38 ISnW II 03Sn SI MYa1S N3HM o �......_ _ . -- o0S OIHd�2i0 ---_ f � � � ' 1= 1 � � � ( "lYla31YW 438(3 03nddY ATIYQnnYaOAH 403 'laYd a0 TIY �! "" -.. `` — r..._.. �// i i 1r i! > 1 ( °aaruusens 38 AYW (MY2il5) HOinW 9 3dl.l. '3a0Y aid �ql N0103S -ssouo _- r 000'Z NYHI SS31 ON 30 UVH 3141 lY 03nddY WWI! t 3dAi N411VW3Q3 0I1NtlS „. _. / ;' j ' r✓ ' "t]Oi.'OYa1NOO 3HL 30 N0113a0Sitl 3141 !Y Aaan S 033SOapAH (&N ad0NO L'oI �0-3Hi uY � N4L�•IdN - _ _ - � ; � � ( ; , ( 141 OI O3OOY 38 AY" SLN30Y JN _ F t �r (1 OVI NOLLYWILM 3� ln9 a0Y (INV OQOd 30 IN3WlWd30 N011YV4H0d 0JYIINF/S k13n0 HSYAA3d0'1S _ _ i �'' i YI __._- _1 -- - -- - ,- � 1 !'� i %� � ' Na0,3nY0 3141 H1N1 S�13NIYlNOJ.O3N3dONn Ni 311S 80P +� ( / /r ' ; ! 1 j ' 3H1 Ol 031.a0dswa1 38 TIYHS swIa31YW 033s TM ! z NOIlV 701 H0`N31118311Y1�i10k3ddY L Ly" "� - 000 ___ __ - -- 7C1�35 30 N3eNl} I i r 0 m - --- _f$. _ . __ _ _ __.: _ _ 0 Slt ONnO ` f // A8 83N113 AaG 03�nddY30NYlY HUOVS ONIXl3 N30Q lal N Y 9-„L ZIa011 I a / HIIM OaLY1n00N1 38 1SnW NOLL03SWS SIHI 30 Y W311 44 n ( j / I a3OI53a a0 133415 onand V a3HIl3 WO 318SIA NC}'11 ON SI 3O33SOaOAH 0N138 Y3aY 3141 3a3NM 13 a1OQl ll y w _ O iW0 � AYW NOI103S8nS SIHI 30 3 ONY `3 `O '0 SW311 '6 311 t ' ! I VQ370Hda0WiO .30 3aOY aid 6411 Z/t I ! (1N3W3S'd3 30VdS N3d N 03IIIWa3dyiNeN (jdtONS l3daYO) W11S5A1Y 30 3aotl 3d 8411 £ J r` AaY0Nn0. 3 �_. W rnmoY 30 3a0Y aid '$ql M 'P On 5N00 3oNYa�S Y01Na0.:JnY*3Ti1 Y d v 100H05 330 3a0Y a3 aql OZ p Y!0 / riYo '3110533 OaapZ dO 3a0Y 83 -•.__ � ( �, plQ 3504 30 3aQY aid ' ql Qa :N`dHl SS31 ON 30 1SISNQO 1lYHS X1104 033S 't ,. :9NVA01103 3HL 11Y 30 ISSN00 INNS XIW JNI033SOa0AH '£ - �� i L~r H1MOao 03O33SOaOAH 3anlonals O3 °Q0 dpy -- . -- ``�' .. %-' L T ; 3141 30 HiM0a0 3141 ao3 13A31 Wnvado 3141 lY IIoS 'MLLN301S3a d " ' —'°- .,_____- ;;„ w __. -� ,{. """ ``� r .� 3HL 30 13A31 3an1S�W 3Wl NtY1N1YW ilYH5 N011Y0i8ai z O3SOd0ad ONn02p X3 3dOlS X 9GZ M o t_. -. _ ..... T - ! In j ' AVO 3141 A8 (3AOaddV S �_..._� _::. __ "" -�~ T . .. .... i COW tYla31YW 3141 d0 a31'JYaYH3 1NY.LSIS3a NOSOa3 Wa38 ONOO HQNI -9 a0 ONO g' T 1 L 140110 �. 31'41 01 3na NOISOa3 Ol lOT8nS ION 51 UOIS ONttOaO X3 �E- T MO?1 SL-0 SS3lN ' 31YMS 03Nn -ssvHo �'' ,S �° "' *' �. -_ . _ _._._ N ,1, n SY3aY 1(10 NJ 11401314 NI 3a0W a0 1333 g 8 T 03SOdONd 30 SliWn �. '� °� OZ£ -- �T .. T'' OlN HONK N r.. *a `- T ft T +�= -` old HQNI-£ i r y� F _ Tits NI .. T f --,--- � ; 1314 NJ 3�lOW a0 133d JNO11Lp �, T T j �� a Z£ r SY3aY I •38Y A3Hi N3HM , 30 ainn •: .�.� SY �' __ T -' 'r .i. i 1+ �";° a3d331S a0 (71YQLLa3A 01 iVINOZIHOH) t'9 MOV80 3aY 1YHL 53dOlS TIY OI 63nddY 38 11YHS ONO3350aOAH ONE! 111 L4 T I t £'6t£ 6 - .9 49'67,£ £ ; 'A T Jl ,8'Bif N 30- 1H9144 0178lid ONY 30NVVIN3 Noubnwswo 03ZIIIGVIS N33M138 NOLUSNIV81 31Vldd08ddV 30LAOdd l) 'HOWUl 3H1 O1NI '110S 031VAYOX3 11 0N31X3 ONY 3ON-B 3dfM 3H1 , 3141 1OVd)YOO ONY 11100VO '6 01 0198V 183171d 3H1 HOVIlb' 'f (Wo Ot) Nl J, 1L - Ill =1. - 'N0;0Z AVM -30 1 008 0178nd Naoa o3HSlldo „z /t 31-4-08d li XI AM ,Ot a_ uF�itl�tl LkrLkritt NIW WOd .10 3N17 3H1 SNOW ONV' ROW 3dO1Sdn HQN3W 'SLSOd 3H1 (WO Ot AS 00 N1 * AS J, AVM -30 N1W,OZ 01 9NQN33 3NIM 31dVIS 'Z V 31VAVOX3 ONY S150d 13S 't -IH018 3119nd 3AISOa3 ION SI HQLla „030YN9 -SY„ NI 30VNIYaO 30 A LI0013A IVH1 03NIWa3130 SI 11 31 03111W0 38 AYW 114310430110ANOU 3anL •Z 'a0103dSNl Puy 1933NION3 30 TdAOaddV H11M 'SNOIONOO 01313 Iii 01 033100A klIHDnS 38 AYW Hopi? 30 NOLLYNnoUN00 't ><T 31VOS ON ai v is 3lVOS ON lisvis I NIN,6t (W089 0N11SiX3 T T` r � T • 1tla31Yl t+t- N21US ISIX4Al S ,0q•nc4c�A£'°•.3'.3 cal) LINt1 �� tr ti ' oxnv N %Z c��ti= 1 gel w .. �Qa IW ,_a;p rn �a1w %l T (aE7t?ld a3 ji ja) �,�, esl °£££ (8415) ,0 0�2=GVa N ♦ j HoWcl 03a3AOo- - - -- _ ._..,..,•.a .. � . , at s >, M hm cload Z d Iuvo v W3SV3 3005 v T138 OY kvdSV3 ,OZ LS'BLZ M„9£, S.SON NIYW NaLYM A� :IN3WV SIHI NIHLIM 031Y00� "N Z °� oAd ,,$ °ISO(3 (,.; b'OZ£ =13 a IN W35Y3 unun?6' Oli a z£ — 9,� g ZL M lip i/ t Ott -SO aid 90'£ =�3 �i3M3S ..8 'ISIX3 d. l _ ZI. do IPIiCI �3H �Jti' 1 N J � 31Y05 ON ,09'1W = NOL1YA313 'SNVId IN3W3AOadhI83d 31OHNVN 30 d01 si k3ANns S►Hl aO3 ANVWHON38 '30NYaV3ddV UO1S lYanIVN 3HI OIWLW Ol 83O80 NiW 10 rn '30VU0 2130Nn „9 031an8 Ho110 3JVNiYaO = 38 01 M0�1 0Y8 83MOl :310N NI 03NJtS30 38 01110145 S3dOlS 3l8YLaYA \\ // 'S1N3WnNor4 Oa003a aNno3 NONA 031OVa1Oad 1 9=1, dYW a3d 3aY S3NIl A183d0ad 3141 NO NMOHS S30NYISia ONV °3011DYNd IN3W30VNVW IS38 HOJ V3aY ('0,l 'OS aid T) SDNI�Ua 'Al83dOad 3141 3O A3Aans AWONn08 V ION SI dYW SIMI UVOSaNYi OINO 30NVHOSIO -nYHS SNIVaO 3004 aOHONY 'SYlINON3 30 Allo W0HA IIWa3d s/M 03umon lYla31YW NOIIVa1113 -018 I` oa 'lYna3lNl ,04 IY 031HJn14oIH '1334 0'Z SiYn03 lYAa31Nf 8n01NO3 O3AOaddV AINnOO ' 83HLO as SSYaO 3AIIVN ti00Z `b AYW 09Wa03a3d J 3AanS 01313 OIHdVa00dOl 38 01 ION 38Y A' 3 WL3) 30LloYad IN3W39VNVW 1538 1SOd 403 3aY S3H0lI0%S3lYMS ASSYaJ S310N 33S 03alnb3a 31 *XVVi) HOIH SOYB Z S31ON ,�r�VN� '1N3W30a03N138 34111 ('XYYd} WOIH SJY(3 30Y38ns 'ISIX3 3O NOIIVA313 lOdS S'OZ4 3Nn 8nO1NO0 ,Z - -- _.. 03138V1 3Nn anOlNOO ,pl --- - -OZ4.- 3Nn AaVONnOL3 AiN21d0ad 'dVW OIVS NOW 031YOS 1N3W3SV3 3O NOLLV001 '919Z1 dVW NO NMOHS SY IN3W3SV3 33VdS N3d0 t't 9t$Zt dYW aid 1N3W3SV3 OVON 31VAlad 03SOdO8d Zt 30 N3d 38M V aOOM t t HOIIO 30VNIVaO 313NONOO of a3W603SNYa1 IVDIU0313 Q lsod a8vno 1d131"I OYd 313aONOO NO 1NV80AH 3813 X08 NOLLONnr A! 3lgYo 3AlYA 0-LU X08 4313N N31VM 313NONOD a 3-IOHNYW a3M3S 3AIG IlYWdSV O 133a1S 03AVd LIVHdSV O f]N3031 HOIIO MOUE gL -0 lonalSNOo tt INa38 313NONOO HONI -9 lona15No0 0t '3dOlS .40 NOLLona sNoo 8313Y 6 Al31Yia3WWI NOLLYZn18YIS 3dOlS 11VISNi '133HS SIHI 11V130 aid 3ON33 1l1S 11VI5NL 1331-11S SIHI L 11Y130 aid VIVO X03HO OY8 13AYND IIVISNI '133HS SIHI IIY130/� aid 30NVaN3 NOL10na swo 03Zn18YiS 11V1SNl �J '„Y„ 11V130 aid NO IlYalll3 -018 a31YMW401S 403 Holm O3Nn -SSYa9 llV1SN1 L / '%9'0 0 3did NIVaO (O'6 'HOS) S8V JO QAd .,£ TLVISNI 'SNiVNa V3HV „ 9 iiV1SNl £ SNOIIYON3 NO33a a33NION3 S1O5 aid aO 3SY8 II 10 A ONOO aZ NOLL03S NIW /M kVM3AIH0 J0 3dVOS0aVH Ood lonalSNOo ti=r t+t -3 OSaOS aid NOadV AYM3A{aO u-9 J, Iona sNoo 3NOa 39 01 MOM �; 34 Z 133HS. N"0 =Z dX3 N"01 43 SY101100 --v '11S'W :W trV n1Y0 09' = a33NiON3 N 1VOL1a3A goNgamd 11 31sno I-10 1 3 61 �31Y0 :31Y0 'ON °3'Q'a i - NINOZIaOH �y �+ 0 0 E 6 . Ae :� :31VO .�„ Y118Ya8tlW 311Ya 30 ON3 H1nOS :80J NVId '101 JAQCJ NOIS063 V ONKIV J0 a3A08ddb 030N V04003N d0 NOISIA83dn5 830Nn aMW38d SWd 's -Q -O 0 31OHNYW 30 dOl S3ON3a333a 31Y0 03AOaddY SNOISIA3a )W" HON38 3lY0 =8Z 'ON ONimvda IMNI 'dd3d S3�il12M ON1833NION3 S .UNION- 40— A l.lo S''1VAOUddd — — lano3s 'nY ONY 03131dAO3 SI 103POad 3HI 111Nn '3t'11dVQSONVI IN3NYWa3d 3141 SI 9NI033SOa0,tH Wl-m SY3W Z;0- £9L£- 019-09L xn3 Z9 L£- OL9 -09L auOgd 1TINiZTt trZOZ6 YO 'SD}Iul0u3 • N alms 'ID88 OUIWDO 13 -N Z£L �.�' 11Al� BuutanunS • om oru Z 37 6uluwald PUDI • > Bullsaul6u3 11A10 50 -£Z-ZO :31Y0 101d ,, ., a03 'a0 03dY05ONtii1 Al1N3NYWa3d SI 103POad 3141 1LLNn HLMOaO ..- ....".`, tt 511Qa00N Y 3OtA0ad Ol MNIVINiV14 38 -nvHS SY3w 030335OW&H 318YN 30N0ad 01 SlIOS 3NnVS 9Nia3A00 NO ONIHOVM 77T '1N3W1S1Y'OV Hd S1N3WON3WY 1105 30 N0111tlOY 3141 'q 6038 033S OaVVn ♦YS ION 1118 dAVO V 30NOad of 3anision IIOS 30Yan5 3141 QNILSIV(N 1W f :A8 9NILNVid d ?1 li lYH1 p5 S110S 3141 JNINOL1i0N00 T \ \ �. \ 130 S 30)i } ! a03 318Y11nS SI 1 ` IWi aY Ndi 3AOSV „Y. W311 ONisn an XV3a8 ION TItM lYH1 SY3aY Jmov a °q 5MP'Zl4S- ll- laglDl :3WVN 3113 ~� \ ` ' r l :9 NYHL a3d331S 53dp'S ONIXIYM N0Ya1 'n � 'i, f � :30 NOLLYN18101100 ANY A8 031NY1d 38 01 33Y3anS 3HI 9N1N3HOnOH 't 210 A :A8 ON1033SOSUH Z Z ' m_ 1333 OZ = HONI l 01 WWd O tld 3WdUcl 38 T1YHS 03033SOaH 38 Ol SY3w '3UOV Wd 'sgll O09 Z (1333 NI) 30 31Ya 3141 31Y O3nddY anHdlnS Sgt Him '0-0 -9 T P '31Y31nS 31YHdSOHd WnINOWWV 30 ONIISSNOO 83Znila33 ♦g CA 3 11;11 i1V ONIOC138 N --------------- {OS 3141 OINi M 09 Otw OZ 0 t 0 OZ - - - -- -- -- r�r -. err ... �` - � � . o i z' I3YIN03 0100 -103J , I MYULS 3H1 01 MOHONY 38 ISnW II 03Sn SI MYa1S N3HM o �......_ _ . -- o0S OIHd�2i0 ---_ f � � � ' 1= 1 � � � ( "lYla31YW 438(3 03nddY ATIYQnnYaOAH 403 'laYd a0 TIY �! "" -.. `` — r..._.. �// i i 1r i! > 1 ( °aaruusens 38 AYW (MY2il5) HOinW 9 3dl.l. '3a0Y aid �ql N0103S -ssouo _- r 000'Z NYHI SS31 ON 30 UVH 3141 lY 03nddY WWI! t 3dAi N411VW3Q3 0I1NtlS „. _. / ;' j ' r✓ ' "t]Oi.'OYa1NOO 3HL 30 N0113a0Sitl 3141 !Y Aaan S 033SOapAH (&N ad0NO L'oI �0-3Hi uY � N4L�•IdN - _ _ - � ; � � ( ; , ( 141 OI O3OOY 38 AY" SLN30Y JN _ F t �r (1 OVI NOLLYWILM 3� ln9 a0Y (INV OQOd 30 IN3WlWd30 N011YV4H0d 0JYIINF/S k13n0 HSYAA3d0'1S _ _ i �'' i YI __._- _1 -- - -- - ,- � 1 !'� i %� � ' Na0,3nY0 3141 H1N1 S�13NIYlNOJ.O3N3dONn Ni 311S 80P +� ( / /r ' ; ! 1 j ' 3H1 Ol 031.a0dswa1 38 TIYHS swIa31YW 033s TM ! z NOIlV 701 H0`N31118311Y1�i10k3ddY L Ly" "� - 000 ___ __ - -- 7C1�35 30 N3eNl} I i r 0 m - --- _f$. _ . __ _ _ __.: _ _ 0 Slt ONnO ` f // A8 83N113 AaG 03�nddY30NYlY HUOVS ONIXl3 N30Q lal N Y 9-„L ZIa011 I a / HIIM OaLY1n00N1 38 1SnW NOLL03SWS SIHI 30 Y W311 44 n ( j / I a3OI53a a0 133415 onand V a3HIl3 WO 318SIA NC}'11 ON SI 3O33SOaOAH 0N138 Y3aY 3141 3a3NM 13 a1OQl ll y w _ O iW0 � AYW NOI103S8nS SIHI 30 3 ONY `3 `O '0 SW311 '6 311 t ' ! I VQ370Hda0WiO .30 3aOY aid 6411 Z/t I ! (1N3W3S'd3 30VdS N3d N 03IIIWa3dyiNeN (jdtONS l3daYO) W11S5A1Y 30 3aotl 3d 8411 £ J r` AaY0Nn0. 3 �_. W rnmoY 30 3a0Y aid '$ql M 'P On 5N00 3oNYa�S Y01Na0.:JnY*3Ti1 Y d v 100H05 330 3a0Y a3 aql OZ p Y!0 / riYo '3110533 OaapZ dO 3a0Y 83 -•.__ � ( �, plQ 3504 30 3aQY aid ' ql Qa :N`dHl SS31 ON 30 1SISNQO 1lYHS X1104 033S 't ,. :9NVA01103 3HL 11Y 30 ISSN00 INNS XIW JNI033SOa0AH '£ - �� i L~r H1MOao 03O33SOaOAH 3anlonals O3 °Q0 dpy -- . -- ``�' .. %-' L T ; 3141 30 HiM0a0 3141 ao3 13A31 Wnvado 3141 lY IIoS 'MLLN301S3a d " ' —'°- .,_____- ;;„ w __. -� ,{. """ ``� r .� 3HL 30 13A31 3an1S�W 3Wl NtY1N1YW ilYH5 N011Y0i8ai z O3SOd0ad ONn02p X3 3dOlS X 9GZ M o t_. -. _ ..... T - ! In j ' AVO 3141 A8 (3AOaddV S �_..._� _::. __ "" -�~ T . .. .... i COW tYla31YW 3141 d0 a31'JYaYH3 1NY.LSIS3a NOSOa3 Wa38 ONOO HQNI -9 a0 ONO g' T 1 L 140110 �. 31'41 01 3na NOISOa3 Ol lOT8nS ION 51 UOIS ONttOaO X3 �E- T MO?1 SL-0 SS3lN ' 31YMS 03Nn -ssvHo �'' ,S �° "' *' �. -_ . _ _._._ N ,1, n SY3aY 1(10 NJ 11401314 NI 3a0W a0 1333 g 8 T 03SOdONd 30 SliWn �. '� °� OZ£ -- �T .. T'' OlN HONK N r.. *a `- T ft T +�= -` old HQNI-£ i r y� F _ Tits NI .. T f --,--- � ; 1314 NJ 3�lOW a0 133d JNO11Lp �, T T j �� a Z£ r SY3aY I •38Y A3Hi N3HM , 30 ainn •: .�.� SY �' __ T -' 'r .i. i 1+ �";° a3d331S a0 (71YQLLa3A 01 iVINOZIHOH) t'9 MOV80 3aY 1YHL 53dOlS TIY OI 63nddY 38 11YHS ONO3350aOAH ONE! 111 L4 T I t £'6t£ 6 - .9 49'67,£ £ ; 'A T Jl ,8'Bif N 30- 1H9144 0178lid ONY 30NVVIN3 Noubnwswo 03ZIIIGVIS N33M138 NOLUSNIV81 31Vldd08ddV 30LAOdd l) 'HOWUl 3H1 O1NI '110S 031VAYOX3 11 0N31X3 ONY 3ON-B 3dfM 3H1 , 3141 1OVd)YOO ONY 11100VO '6 01 0198V 183171d 3H1 HOVIlb' 'f (Wo Ot) Nl J, 1L - Ill =1. - 'N0;0Z AVM -30 1 008 0178nd Naoa o3HSlldo „z /t 31-4-08d li XI AM ,Ot a_ uF�itl�tl LkrLkritt NIW WOd .10 3N17 3H1 SNOW ONV' ROW 3dO1Sdn HQN3W 'SLSOd 3H1 (WO Ot AS 00 N1 * AS J, AVM -30 N1W,OZ 01 9NQN33 3NIM 31dVIS 'Z V 31VAVOX3 ONY S150d 13S 't -IH018 3119nd 3AISOa3 ION SI HQLla „030YN9 -SY„ NI 30VNIYaO 30 A LI0013A IVH1 03NIWa3130 SI 11 31 03111W0 38 AYW 114310430110ANOU 3anL •Z 'a0103dSNl Puy 1933NION3 30 TdAOaddV H11M 'SNOIONOO 01313 Iii 01 033100A klIHDnS 38 AYW Hopi? 30 NOLLYNnoUN00 't ><T 31VOS ON ai v is 3lVOS ON lisvis I NIN,6t (W089 0N11SiX3 T T` r � T • 1tla31Yl t+t- N21US ISIX4Al S ,0q•nc4c�A£'°•.3'.3 cal) LINt1 �� tr ti ' oxnv N %Z c��ti= 1 gel w .. �Qa IW ,_a;p rn �a1w %l T (aE7t?ld a3 ji ja) �,�, esl °£££ (8415) ,0 0�2=GVa N ♦ j HoWcl 03a3AOo- - - -- _ ._..,..,•.a .. � . , at s >, M hm cload Z d Iuvo v W3SV3 3005 v T138 OY kvdSV3 ,OZ LS'BLZ M„9£, S.SON NIYW NaLYM A� :IN3WV SIHI NIHLIM 031Y00� "N Z °� oAd ,,$ °ISO(3 (,.; b'OZ£ =13 a IN W35Y3 unun?6' Oli a z£ — 9,� g ZL M lip i/ t Ott -SO aid 90'£ =�3 �i3M3S ..8 'ISIX3 d. l _ ZI. do IPIiCI �3H �Jti' 1 N J � 31Y05 ON ,09'1W = NOL1YA313 'SNVId IN3W3AOadhI83d 31OHNVN 30 d01 si k3ANns S►Hl aO3 ANVWHON38 '30NYaV3ddV UO1S lYanIVN 3HI OIWLW Ol 83O80 NiW 10 rn '30VU0 2130Nn „9 031an8 Ho110 3JVNiYaO = 38 01 M0�1 0Y8 83MOl :310N NI 03NJtS30 38 01110145 S3dOlS 3l8YLaYA \\ // 'S1N3WnNor4 Oa003a aNno3 NONA 031OVa1Oad 1 9=1, dYW a3d 3aY S3NIl A183d0ad 3141 NO NMOHS S30NYISia ONV °3011DYNd IN3W30VNVW IS38 HOJ V3aY ('0,l 'OS aid T) SDNI�Ua 'Al83dOad 3141 3O A3Aans AWONn08 V ION SI dYW SIMI UVOSaNYi OINO 30NVHOSIO -nYHS SNIVaO 3004 aOHONY 'SYlINON3 30 Allo W0HA IIWa3d s/M 03umon lYla31YW NOIIVa1113 -018 I` oa 'lYna3lNl ,04 IY 031HJn14oIH '1334 0'Z SiYn03 lYAa31Nf 8n01NO3 O3AOaddV AINnOO ' 83HLO as SSYaO 3AIIVN ti00Z `b AYW 09Wa03a3d J 3AanS 01313 OIHdVa00dOl 38 01 ION 38Y A' 3 WL3) 30LloYad IN3W39VNVW 1538 1SOd 403 3aY S3H0lI0%S3lYMS ASSYaJ S310N 33S 03alnb3a 31 *XVVi) HOIH SOYB Z S31ON ,�r�VN� '1N3W30a03N138 34111 ('XYYd} WOIH SJY(3 30Y38ns 'ISIX3 3O NOIIVA313 lOdS S'OZ4 3Nn 8nO1NO0 ,Z - -- _.. 03138V1 3Nn anOlNOO ,pl --- - -OZ4.- 3Nn AaVONnOL3 AiN21d0ad 'dVW OIVS NOW 031YOS 1N3W3SV3 3O NOLLV001 '919Z1 dVW NO NMOHS SY IN3W3SV3 33VdS N3d0 t't 9t$Zt dYW aid 1N3W3SV3 OVON 31VAlad 03SOdO8d Zt 30 N3d 38M V aOOM t t HOIIO 30VNIVaO 313NONOO of a3W603SNYa1 IVDIU0313 Q lsod a8vno 1d131"I OYd 313aONOO NO 1NV80AH 3813 X08 NOLLONnr A! 3lgYo 3AlYA 0-LU X08 4313N N31VM 313NONOD a 3-IOHNYW a3M3S 3AIG IlYWdSV O 133a1S 03AVd LIVHdSV O f]N3031 HOIIO MOUE gL -0 lonalSNOo tt INa38 313NONOO HONI -9 lona15No0 0t '3dOlS .40 NOLLona sNoo 8313Y 6 Al31Yia3WWI NOLLYZn18YIS 3dOlS 11VISNi '133HS SIHI 11V130 aid 3ON33 1l1S 11VI5NL 1331-11S SIHI L 11Y130 aid VIVO X03HO OY8 13AYND IIVISNI '133HS SIHI IIY130/� aid 30NVaN3 NOL10na swo 03Zn18YiS 11V1SNl �J '„Y„ 11V130 aid NO IlYalll3 -018 a31YMW401S 403 Holm O3Nn -SSYa9 llV1SN1 L / '%9'0 0 3did NIVaO (O'6 'HOS) S8V JO QAd .,£ TLVISNI 'SNiVNa V3HV „ 9 iiV1SNl £ SNOIIYON3 NO33a a33NION3 S1O5 aid aO 3SY8 II 10 A ONOO aZ NOLL03S NIW /M kVM3AIH0 J0 3dVOS0aVH Ood lonalSNOo ti=r t+t -3 OSaOS aid NOadV AYM3A{aO u-9 J, Iona sNoo 3NOa 39 01 MOM q Encinita .; Map DISCLAIMER: This map should n ®t be used for Engineering, Survey, or Site - Specific Analysis. Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provident, nevertheless, some information may not be accurate. The City of Encinitas assumes no liability or responsibility nricinn from +hp i mp of nr raiiancr? r mnn this infnrmnfinn - Map Coordinates: Stateplane NA ®83 Feet, CA Zone 6 - Parcel lines are not survey accurate, and some parcels can be positionally off up to +1- 40 feet - Photo flight dates: April 2005. 3 inch pixel resolution. - ®rthophoto and Topo positional accuracy meet the precision adequate to support National Map Accuracy Standards for 1" = 100' mapping. DISC This map should not be used for Survey', or Engineering, Site-Specific Every reasonable effort has been made to assure the accuracy of the data provided; nevertheless, some information may not be accurate. The City of Encinitas assumes no liability or responsibility arising from the use of or reliance upon this information. - Map Coordinates: Stateplane NA ®E3 Feet, CA Zone 6 - Parcel lines are not survey accurate, and some parcels can be positionally off up to +/- 40 feet - Photo flight dates: April 2005. 3 inch pixel resolution. ®rthophoto and Topo positional accuracy meet the precision adequate to support National Map Accuracy Standards for T' = 100' mapping. miGrshA�P +nnxnars�risrn �r;i� mYrr