HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 SILVERLEAF CIR; SOILS; PCR01021; Soils ReportSOILS/AS GRADED
. REPORT
LA COSTA GLEN
·CB001508
{PCR01021)
- - ---·· .. . ---'.... "' -~-.. ~---·-----=· ·--~--···------'-•' ...........,_ ... "--'--'---'-· ··---------'-'·-~-. ------·. ~-~~~-----------··
I
If
I
I'
.1.·
.1·
I
I
1·
.1
1·
I
) '
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-1.
Leighton and Associates
GEOTECHNICALCONSULTANTS
.-,
----1-1 ::;;;;: .
~ '=----== -~ . S.;:-
A GTG Company
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
~II::--~ ------------A GTG Company
Leighton and Associates
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
FINAL AS-GRADED REPORT
OF ROUGH-GRADING,
GREEN VALLEY, CT 92-08
(PROPOSED LA COSTA GLEN)
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
January 28, 1999
Project No. 4960134-002
Prepared For:
CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES, L.L.C.
7707 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, California 92009
3934 Murphy Canyon Road, #8205, San Diego, CA 92123-4425
(858) 292-8030 • FAX (858) 292-0771 • www.leightongeo.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.I
~Ill=--~--.:::: . ----=-.
Leighton and Associates
A GTG Company January 28, 1%9% o TE c HNI c AL co N s u LT ANT s
To:
Attention:
Subject:
Continuing Life Communities, L.L.C.
7707 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, California 92009
Mr. D.ick Bishop
\
Project No. 4960134-002
Final As-Graded Report of Rough-Grading, Green Valley, CT 92-08, (Proposed La Costa
Glen), Carlsbad, California
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. has provided geotechnical
services during the rough-grading operations of the Green Valley CT 92-08 (Proposed La Costa Glen)
project, Carlsbad, California. The accompanying final as-graded report summarizes our observations, field
and laboratory test results and the geotechnical conditions encountered during rough-grading of the subject
site which included mass-grading to achieve sheet-graded pads and observation and testing of the proposed
widening ofa portion of El Camino Real. ·
Since the site has been sheet graded, comprehensive lot-specific geotechnical recommendations concerning
future development of individual lots/units have not been included in the accompanying report. However, it
is our understanding that a hospital type structure is proposed for Lot 6 and as such, is subject to special
considerations under Section 1634A of the 1995 California Building Code and Section 1636 of the 1998
California Building Code. These considerations are addressed as part of the following report. In addition,
for planning purposes, we present preliminary design recommendations for typical one-, two-and three-
story residential and commercial structures. Lot specific recommendations based on the actual design and
location of the residential and commercial structures and other site improvements should be provided by a
qualified geotechnical consultant prior to continued site development.
, If you have any questions regarding our letter, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to
be of service. r
Distribution: (6) Addressee
3934 Murphy Canyon Road, #B205, San Diego, CA 92123-4425
(858) 292-8030 • FAX (858) 292-0771 • www.leightongeo.com
.J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADING OPERATIONS ...................................................................................... 3
2.1 SITEPREPARATIONANDREMOVALS .................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 FILL SLOPE KEYS·············································································································································· 4
2.3 FILL PLACEMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 4
2.4 CUT/FILL TRANSITIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 4
2.5 FlELDDENSITYTEsTING .............................................. ; ................................................................................... 5
2.6 LABORATORYTESTING ..................................................................................................................................... 5
2.7 GRAD:i:;:DSLOPES ............................................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY ............................. _ .................................. ; ....................................... 7
3.1 AS-GRADEDGEOLOGICCONDITIONS ................................................................................................................ 7
3.2 GEOLOGICUNITS .............................................................................................................................................. 7
3.2; I UndocumentedFill (Unmapped) .............................................................................................................. 7
3.2.2 Colluvium/Slopewash(Map Symbol Qsw) ................................................................................................ 7
3.2.3 Alluvium-(Map °Symbol-Qal) .............................. -.. ··························-····························-························8
3.2.4 TorreySandstoneFormation(MapSymbol-Tt ....................................................................................... 8
3.2.5 Del Mar Formation (Map Symbol -Td) ................................................................................................... 8
3.3 EXPANSIONPOTENTIAL .................................................................................................................................... 8
3.4 GEOLOGICSTRUCTURE .................................................................................................................................... 9
3.5 LANDSLIDESANDSURFICIALFAILURES ............................................................................................................ 9
3.6 FAULTING .............................................................. -.......................................................................................... 9
3.7 SEISMICITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 9
3. 7.1 Seismic Considerations.......................................................................................................................... I 0
3.7.2 Liquefaction .......................................................................................................................................... JO
3.7.3 DynamicSettlement ............................................................................................................................... JI
3: 7.4 Seismic Design Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 11
3.8 GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................................ 12
3.9 SETTLEMENTMONUMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 12
4.0 CONCLUSIONS. ................................................................................................................................................ 13
4.1 GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.2 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 13
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS. ................................................................................................................................... 15
5.1 EARTHWORK .................................................................................................................................................. 15
- I -
~DI=--~ ------; ----=
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
Table of Contents ( continued)
5.1.J
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
Site Preparation .................................................................................................................................... I 5
Excavations .................. : ........................................................................................................................ 15
Fill Placement and Compaction ............................................................................................................ 16
Cut/Fill TransztionLots .......................................................................................................................... 16
5.2 FOUNDATIONDESIGNCONSIDERATIONS. ..... -......•............................................................................................. 16
5.2.1 Foundation Design -Light Commercial Buildings .............................................................................. 16
5.2.2 FoundationDesign-ResidentialBuildings ........................................................................................... 17
5.2.3 Floor Slab Design -Commercial and Residential ................................................................................. 17
5.2.4 Settlement .............................................................................................................................................. 18
5.3 FOOTING SETBACK .......................................................................................................................................... 18
5.4 LATERALEARTHPRESSURES .............•.............•.....•..........•........................................•.....................•.............. 19
5.5 RETAINING WALL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS. ......•.......................................................................................... 19
5.6 PRELIMINARYPAVEMENTDESIGN ................ , ................................................................................................. 20
5.7 SURFACEDRAINAGEANDLOTMAINTENANCE ............................................................................................... 20
5.8 GRADED SLOPES ............................................................................................................................................. 21
5.9 TYPEOFCEMENTOFCONSTRUCTION .............................................................................................................. 21
6.0 CONSTRUCTION.OBSERVATION ................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 1 -Site Location Map - 2
Table 1 -Seismic Considerations-Rear of Text
Plates 1 through 19-As-Graded GeotechnicalMaps -In Pockets
Appendices
Appendix A -References
AppendixB-SummaryofFieldDensityTests
Appendix C -Laboratory Testing Procedures and '.fest Re~µlts
Appendix D -General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading
Appendix,E ~ Seismic Considerations
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has performed
geotechnical observation and testing services during the rough-grading operations for the proposed La
Costa Glen project (a.k.a. Green Valley), located in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). Included in this phase
of work was the rough-grading for a portion of the proposed widening of El Camino Real from Sta. 90+52
to Sta. 136+00. This final as-graded report of rough-grading summarizes our geotechnical observations,
geologic mapping, field and laboratory test results and the geological conditions encountered during rough-
grading operations for the proposed Green Valley/La Costa Glen project. In addition, this report provides
conclusions and preliminary recommendations for the continued development of the site. As of this date,
rough-grading operations have essentially been completed on the subject site.
Since this site has been sheet graded, comprehensive lot-specific geotechnical recommendations concerning
future development of individual lots/units have not been included in the accompanying report. This report
does include planning level foundation design considerations for one, two, and.three-story residential or
light commercial structures, retaining wall design parameters, structural setbacks, etc. We understand that a
2 story health care facility and a 2 to 3 story residential, individual living units, as well as 1 story individual,
attached/detached villa structures are planned for the site. However, since geotechnical conditions vary
across the site, final design recommendations should be based on the actual design and location of the
proposed structures and other site improvements by a qualified geotechnical consultant prior to site
development.
The 40-scale grading plans for Carlsbad tract 92-08 Green Valley, and the 40-scale improvement plans for
El Camino Real, both prepared by P&D / CTE Engineers, (P&D, 1998) were utilized as base maps to
present the as-graded geotechnicalconditions and approximate locations of the field density tests within the
limits of this phase of grading for the subject tract. The As-Graded Geotechnical Maps are presented as
Plates 1 through 19 and are located in the map pockets at the rear of this report.
-1-
I
I
I
I
:1.
I
·I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BASE MAP: Thomas Bros. GeoFinder for
Windows, San Diego County, 1998, Page 1147
:\ ro ectsl&a(l996)\960134.002\draftin \960~34sl.cv5
Green Valley
(Proposed La Costa Glen)
Carlsbad, California
lL
lL <{ ::) l-i6 (f)
!!:!~ zs z ...J
LU co co BLUE HERON
Approximate
Site Location
SITE
LOCATION
MAP
0
~ 0 (f)
(f) o, ...J c9-'
(f)
~ 9
(
2000 4000
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
PROJECT No.
4960134-002
DATE
January, 1999 FIGURE No. 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADINGOPERA TIONS
Rough-grading operations for the subject site began on August 10, 1998 and are essentially complete as of
the date of this report. The grading operations were perfo1med by Signs and Pinnick, Inc., under the
observation and testing services of Leighton and Associates, Inc., (Leighton). Our field technicians and
geologist were on site on a full-time and as-needed basis, respectively, during grading operations. Rough-
grading operations included the removal of potentially compressible soil~ and undocumented fill soils to
competent material, the preparation of areas to receive fill, the placement of fill, the construction of fill
slope keys, the excavation of formational material to achieve design grades, overexcavation of transition
lots, and panel and subdrain placement. Up to approximately 25 feet of fill was placed and approximately
40 feet of cut excavated within the limits of the subject tract during this phase of rough grading. Cut and fill
slopes with maximum heights of up to 5 0 feet were constructed during this phase of grading.
2.1 Site Preparation and Removals·
Prior to grading, the areas of proposed development were stripped of surface vegetation and organic
debris and trash. Removals of unsuitable and potentially compressible soil, including
undocumented fill, topsoil, colluvium/alluvium, slopewash, and weathered formational material,
were made to competent material in all areas proposed for structural fill. Removals of the
unsuitable and potentially compressible soil was made in accordance with the recommendations of
the project geotechnicalreport (Appendix A) and field recommendations made during the course of
grading.
Removals along the eastern portion of the subject site adjacent to the existing drainage course were
generally completed to within± 2 feet of the ground water table. Due to the saturated conditions in
this area, portions of the removals were completed utilizing a CAT 345 track excavator.
Oversized asphalt concrete, rubble, and organic debris that were previously placed on site were
encountered within the southeastern portion of the .. site during rough-grading. This material was
thoroughly mixed and was not suitable as fill material and was disposed of offsite. In addition,
abundant oversized concrete rubble and pre-cast concrete piles were also encountered in this area.
This material was separated and placed as fill within the deeper fill areas in accordance with the
recommendations outlined in AppendixD.
Prior to the placement of the additional fill soils necessary to achieve the design grades for the
.proposed El Camino Real widening, removals of potentially compressible alluvium/colluvium,
organic, and weathered bedrock materials were completed. Saturated soils were remove~ and
thoroughly mixed with more suitable fill material until the optimum moisture contents· were
achieved and placed as compacted fill soils. Organic rich material excavated as part of the removals
along the Proposed El Camino Real widening was placed within the design open space to
precipitate the re-growth of riparian vegetation.
Removal areas flatter than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertiQal) or within 1 foot (vertical) of the encountered
water table, were scarified a minimum of 12 inches and moisture-conditionedas needed, to obtain a
near-optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction as
-3-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.2
2.3
2.4
4960134-002
determined by ASTM Test Method Dl557-96. The steeper natural hillsides were benched to
competent material prior to fill placement. Representative bottom elevations in the removal areas
are shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 19).
Removals of the topsoil, colluvium/alluviuin and, slopewash, and weathered formational material
were generally on the order of approximately 5 to 10 feet in thickness as recommended in the
project supplemental geotechnical investigation {Appendix A). The previously placed
undocumented fill was removed either to competent formational material and/or competent fill.
Fill Slope Keys
Prior to the construction of fill slopes (including fill-over-cut slopes) that were placed above natural
ground, a fill slope key was constructed. The keys were excavated at least 5 feet into competent
material along the toe-of-slope, a minimum of approximately 15 feet wide, and angled a minimum
of 2 percent into-the-slope. The cut/fill contact in the fiU-over-cutslopes was,angled approximately
2 percent into-the-slope prior to the fill placement. The fill slope keys constructed during rough-
grading are presented on the GeotechnicalMaps (Plates 1 through 19).
Fill Placement
After processing the areas to receive fill, native soil was generally spread in 4-to 8-inch lifts,
moisture conditioned as needed, and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density
in accordance with ASTM Test Metho~ Dl557-96. In order to reduce the time for post-
construction settlement, the approaches and abutments for the Calle Barcelona and Levante Street
Bridges were. surcharged with fill soils and survey monuments installed in accordance with the
recommendations provided in the project supplemental geotechnicalreport (Appendix A).
Compaction was achieved by use of heavy-duty construction equipment. Areas of fill in which
field density tests indicated less than the recommended relative compaction, the soils exhibited
nonuniformity, and/or showed· an inadequate or excessive moisture content, were reworked,
recompacted, and retested-until the recommended relative compaction and near-optimum moisture
content was achieved.
Cut/Fill Transitions
Due to the presence of a sj:eep slopewash/bedrock transition in many areas proposed for
development, an overexcavation was made where this transition was encountered. The
overexcavation generally consisted of a 10 foot removal and recompaction in order to reduce the
effects of differential settlement due to the differing engineering characteristics between the
slopewash material and the bedrock. Due to the extent of the overexcavations, the actual limits of
the overexcavations are not shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps. However, the
approximate removal bottom elevations are shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1
through 19). As the actual locations of possible future structures and final grades were not known at
the time of rough-grading, the cut portion of Lot 4 was overexcavated approximately 10 feet and
-4-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.5
2.6
2.7
4960134-002
replaced with compacted fill soils in order to reduce differential settlement across the fill/bedrock
transition.
Field Density Testing
Field density testing was performed using the Nuclear-Gauge Method (ASTM Test Methods
D2922.,.96 and D3017-96). The approximate test locations are shown on the As-graded
Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 19). The results of the field density tests are summarized in
AppendixB.
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory maximum dry density tests of representative onsite ·soils were performed in general
accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-96. The laboratory test results and a brief description
ofthe laboratory test procedures are presented in Appendix C.
Graded Slopes
In general, graded cut slopes within the tract were geotechnically evaluated .in·.the field and
considered grossly and surficially.stable from a geotechnical standpoint (Leighton, 1998a). Cut and
fill slopes within the tract were constructed with slope inclinations of 2: I (horizontal to vertical) or
flatter, during rough-grading operations. As anticipated, several areas of undocumented fill soils,
collµvium/alluvium,and/or potentially adverse bedrock conditions existed within the slopes located
along the western boundary of the subject site. In order to mitigate these conditions, a series of
stability-fill slopes were constructed as shown on the. As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1
through 19). The contact between the relatively dense Tertiary Torrey SandstoneFormationand the
overlying slopewash material was exposed in several of the backcuts for this stability fill. As these
contacts may be areas of future seepage due to the location of the site in relation to the natural
drainage patterns, a series of vertical panel drains were installed at several locations in order to
·· minimize·the potential for-future ground water-buildup behind these fill slopes. Where necessary,
The panel drains were spaced approximately 25 feet apart and extend upward to approximately 5
feet below finish grade elevation.These drains were extended downward and tie into the subdrains
-located at the base of the fill slope keys. The approximate locations of the fill slope.key subdrains
are as shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 19) located at the rear of the
text.
-5-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
Minor cut slopes in the tributary canyons on the western side of the site expose friable slopewash
materials. In areas where these slopes an: located above either future open space, areas with no planned
development; or proposed parking areas,. stabilization fills were not constructed at the request of the
owner. In order to improve the foundation~haracteristicsof the soils at the top of slopes where a brow
ditch is planned, the upper 5 feet of soil at the top of slope was removed and recompacted. Because of
the friable nature of this slopewash material, some minor sloughing and increased erosion may be
experienced over time.
-6-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.1
3.2
4960134-002
3.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC SUMMARY
As-graded Geologic Conditions
The as-graded conditions encountered during grading of the subject tract were essentially as
anticipated. A summary of the geologic conditions including geologic units, geologic structure and
faulting is presented below. The as-graded geologic conditions of the tract are presented on the As-
graded GeotechnicalMaps (Plates 1 through 19).
Geologic Units
The geologic units encountered during rough-grading of the Green Valley/La Costa Glen project
were essentially as anticipated and consisted of undocumenteq fill, topsoil, colluvium/slopewash,
alluvium, the Torrey Sandstone Formation,and the Del Mar Formation. The approximate limits of
the geologic units encountered during rough-grading are presented on the As-graded Geotechnical
Maps (Plates 1 through 19) and discussed below.
3 .2.1 Undocumented Fill (Unmapped)
Undocumented fill soils were encountered at several locations within the subject site. The
majority of the undocumented fill material was located within southeastern portion of the
site. Based on observations made ·during the· course of grading up to approximately 5-8
feet of undocumented fill was encountered in the southeastern portion of Lot 4. It appears
that much of this material was derived from off site sources as it generally consisted of
oversized asphalt concrete debris mixed with varying amounts of large organic debris such
as· tree-stumps and large branches. Due to various site specific constraints, this material
was removed and hauled off site for disposal. In addition to this concentrated area of
debris, ·scattered oversized rock and a large number of pre-cast concrete piles were
encountered during grading operations. The oversized rock and concrete pieces were
separatedand placed withinthe deeper fill areas:ofthe subject site in accordancewith the
.recommendations provided in the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications provided
in the project geotechnicalreport and at the rear of this text as Appendix D.
3.2.2 Colluvium/Slopewash(Map Symbol Osw)
Colluvium/slopewash was encountered mantling the majority of the site. 'As encountered,
the upper 3-5 feet of this material was found to be loose or soft to medium dense, silty sand
and slightly clayey sandy silt. In most areas of the site, removals of this ·unit were on the
order of 5 feet in thickness. However, removals in areas near the bedrock/colluvium
transition were made to a maximum depth of 10 feet.
~7-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.3
4960134-002
3 .i.3 Alluvium (Map Symbol -Oal)
Moderate amounts of alluvial soils were encountered in and adjacent to the drainage that
parallels El Camino Real. Typically, these soils consisted of medium to dark brown, moist
to wet, loose to medium dense, clayey to silty fine sand and sandy clay. The upper 3-5 feet
of this unit was typically characterized by abundant organic debris. Alluvial soils, as
-encountered during rough grading, were generally limited to the lower portions of the main
drainage course of the subject site. Differentiation between the alluvial and the
colluvial/slope wash materials was difficult given the interfingering nature and limited
extent of the alluvium .. Therefore, this unit was only mapped separately where encountered
ih the main drainage course on site and is included as slope wash where encountered
elsewhere and shown on the As-Graded Geotechnical Maps located at the rear of the text
(Plates 1 through 19). Removal of the potentially compressible alluvial soil in these areas
were on the order of approximately± 3 to 5 feet below original ground surface elevation.
Due to the shaliow groundwater and saturated conditions as well as the relatively thick
section (upwards of 125 feet) of the alluvial soils exposed in· and adjacent to the main
drainage course, some of these soils were left-in-place as shown on the As-Graded
GeotechnicalMaps (Plates 1 through 19).
3 .2.4 Torrey Sandstone Formation (Map Symbol-Tt))
The Tertiary-aged Torrey Sandstone Formation is the bedrock unit that underlies the
majority of the subject site. As encountered, this unit consisted mainly of a light brown to
gray-brown, poorly to moderately cemented silty sandstone with lesser amounts of
. inter bedded sandy siltstone to slightly clayey sandstone.
3.2.5 DelMarFormation(Map Symbol.,_ Td)
The Del Mar Formation, as encountered during grading, generally consists of gray, very
dense, friable to moderatelyweltcemented~ silty,.fine-to medium-grained silty and clayey
sandstone interbedded with·lesser amounts of olive-gray and red-brown, hard siltstone and
claystone. Scattered cemented zones within the Del Mar Formation are described in the
type section. However, material requiring heavy ripping was not encountered during this
phase of grading.
Expansion Potential
Based on the results ·of expansion testing of representative finish grade soils (Appendix C), the
majority of the finish grade soils have a very low to low potential for expansion (based on UBC
Standard 18-2).
-8-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
4960134-002
Geologic Structur~
Based on our geologic mapping during the rough-grading operations, literature review and our
professional experience on nearby sites, bedding on site is flat lying to slightly dipping to the
southwest.
Landslides and Surficial Failures
Based on our review of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and our geologic mapping
during rough-grading, there was no indication of ancient landslides within the graded portions of
the subject property. Localized surficial failures are present on some of the natural slopes ( open-
space area) adjacent the property boundaries. These features, which are part of the natural
weathering phenomena of these steep natural slopes, do not adversely impact the proposed
development. E.va}uation of these features Was beyond the scope of this .report as they are located
in undeveloped areas outside the limits of this phase of grading.
Faulting
By-definition of the State-Mining and Geology Board, an active fault is one which has had surface
displacement within the Holocene Epoch (roughly the last 11,000 years). The State Geologist has
defined a potentiallyactive fault as any fault which has been active during the Quaternary Period
(approximately the last 1,600,000 years). These definitions are used in delineating Earthquake
Fault Zones as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Geologic Hazard Zones Act of 1972 and as revised
in 1994 (Hart, 1994). The intent of the act is to require performance of fault investigations on sites
located within Special Studies Zones to preclude new construction of certain inhabited structures
across the trace of active faults. The subject site is not included.within any special study zones as
created by the Alquist-Priolo Geologic Hazard Zones A~t.
Our review of geologic literature pertaining to the site area indicates that there are no known major
active faults on or in -the immediate vicinity of the site. Evidence for active for faulting was not
encountered during our field investigation .. The nearest known active fault is the offshore extension
of the Rose Canyon fault zones located approximately 5 miles west of the site. Because of the lack
of known active faults on the site, the·potential for surface rupture atthe site is considered low. The
seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake on one
of the active regional faults.
Seismicity
The site can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of Southern
California. Table 1 (rear of text) indicates potential seismic events that could be produced by the
maximum credible and probable earthquakes. A maximum credible earthquake is the maximum
expectable earthquake given the known tectonic framework. A maximum probable earthquake is
the maximum expectable earthquake produced from a causative fault during a 100-year interval.
-9-
I
I
I
I
I
1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
Site-specific seismic parameters included in Table I are the distances to the causative faults,
earthquake magnitudes, and expected ground accelerations (Appendix F).
As indicated in Table 1, _the Rose Canyon Fault Zone is considered to have the most significant
effect at the site from a design standpoint. A maximum probable earthquake of Richter
Magnitude of 5.7 on the fault could produce a peak horizontal ground acceleration at the site of
approximately 0.21g. From a probabilistic standpoint, the design earthquake per UBC, 1997,
Section 1631 ( defined as a IO percent probability of exceedance in 50 years) could produce a peak
horizontal ground accelerationof0.22g at the site (Blake, 1998). The upper-bound earthquake per
UBC, 1997, Section 1631 (defined as a lO percent probability of exceedance in 100 years) could
produce a peak ground acceleration of 0.28g at the site (Blake, 1998). The predominant period
of the upper-bound earthquake is 0.25 to 0.35 sec9nds (Seed, et.al., 1969). The effect of seismic
shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the Uniform Building code or state-of-the-art seismic
design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California.
Secondary effects associated with severe ground shaking following a relatively large earthquake
which may affect the site include ground lurching and shallow ground rupture, soil liquefaction
and dynamic settlement, seiches and tsunamis. These secondary effects of seismic shaking are
discussed below. ·
3. 7.1 .Seismic Considerations
The principal seismic considerations for most structures in Southern California are surface
rupturing of fault traces and damage caused by ground shaking or seismically induced
ground settlement. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low
since active faults are not knoWn to cross the site. Lurching due to shaking from distant
seismic events is not considered a significanthazard, although it is a possibility throughout
the Southern California region. Hazard from seiches and tsunamis is not present as the site
is located away from the immediate coastal area and there are no large standing bodies of
water in or nearthe site.
3. 7 .2 Liquefaction
. Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to
earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils underlain by a
near surface ground water table ate most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of
most ~ilty clays and clays deposited in fresh water environments are not adversely affected
by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is characterized by a total loss of shear strength in the
affected soil layers, thereby causing the soil to flow as a liquid. This effect may be
manifested at the ground surface by settlement and/or sand boils.
Based on the results of our subsurface exploration (Appendix B), and observations made
during grading, shallow ( <50 feet) groundwater conditions are not present in the western
portion of the subject site which includes the area of the proposed Health Center facility
located on Lot 6. As such, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction of the soils in
-I 0-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
the area of the proposed Health Center facility is considered very low. However,
colluvial/alluvial soils as encountered along the eastern portion of the subject site (in and
immediately adjacentto the main north south trending drainage course) generally consisted
of relatively loose, clean to silty, fine-to-medium grained sands. Groundwater was
encountered aiiyWhere from 2 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface in this area
during grading operations.
The .results of our liquefaction analysis indicate that there is a low to moderate potential of
the design earthquake affecting the onsite colluvium/alluvium immediately adjacent to the
main drainage course. Thus, in the event of a major earthquake, the existing alluvial soils
may liquefy. However, these soils are covered with a relatively thick layer of compacted
fill soils and recent studies (Ishihara, 1985) have shown that a surface layer of compacted
fill (on the order of 15 to 20 feet proposed for this site) will not cause significant
liquefaction-induced damage to. relatively lightly-loaded surface structures. Accordingly,
we do not recommend special foundation design in this area.
3. 7.3 Dynamic Settlement
Based ort the observations during. site grading, results of our previously conducted
subsurface exploration, and liquefaction calculations, the eastern portions of the proposed
development area underlain by saturated alluvial or slope wash deposits and have a
potential for dynamic settlement as a result of ground shaking by the maximum credible
earthquake event. Dynamic settlement due to the design earthquake event has been
calculated in accordance with Tokimatsu and Seed, 1987. The results of our analysis
indicate total dynamic settlement at the site due to the design earthquake event is negligible
in the area of the Health Care facility and formational materials (western) portion of the
site but may reach on the order of 1/2 to 1 foot in areas of deeper alluvium. The average
return period.of this design event is approximately 500 years or a 10 percent probability of
exceedance in 50 years. However, due to the broad nature of the alluvial valley and the
previous seismic history of the deposits, we estimate the magnitude of differential dynamic
settlement caused by the design seismic event to be less than approximately 1/2 to 1 inch in
a horizontal distance of 100 feet across the site.
3. 7.4 Seismic Design Criteria
The soil parameters in accordance with the 1997 UBC and the 1998 California Building
Code (Section 1636) are as follows:
Soil Profile Type (Table 16-J) = S0
~eismic Zone (Figure 16-2) = 4
Seismic Source Type (Table 16-U) = B
Slip Rate, SR, (Table 16-U) = 1.5mm per yr (CDMG, 1996)
-11-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
3.8 Ground Water
Ground water was encountered at several locations during grading operations on site. ShaUow
groundwater was located along the eastern portion of the project adjacent to the main drainage
course at elevations as shallow as ±2 feet below existing ground elevation at the northeastern end of
the project to 4 to 5 feet deep at the southwestern portion. Relatively minor, perched groundwater
conditions were also encountered at several locations at or near the contact with the underlying
bedrock formations. Surficial and or shallow groundwater conditions were encountered during the
removals and construction operations for the Levante Street and Calle Barcelona Bridge abutments
and approaches. In order to create a relatively stable platform from which to complete the
recommended removals and to place additionaLfill S(}ils, a mat system was installed consisting of a
lower layer of Amoco 2000 geotextile covered by a minimum of 12 inches of 1 inch minus gravel
covered by another layer of Amoco 2000 geotextile. This mat was installed in several other
locations along the proposed El Camino Real widening where surficial .or shallow ground water
conditions made grading operations difficult. The approximate locations were this system was
necessary is shown on the As-Graded O~otechnical Maps provided at the .rear of the text (Plates 1
through 19).
It should be noted that ground water seepage sometim~s occurs in localized areas, especially in
slopes, after the completion of grading and establishment of site irrigation and landscaping. If these
conditions occur, recommendations to mitigate the seepage (by providing a subdrain system to
collect ground water or other appropriate methods) can be made on a case-by-case basis. Subdrains
were installed in the keys associated with the stability fill slopes as part of rough-grading
opei;ations. The locations of all subdrains placed during this phase of grading are shown on the As-
Graded GeotechnicalMaps (Plates 1 through 19) located at the rear of the text.
3.9 Settlement Monuments
At the completion of the first phase of site grading, a series of settlement monuments were installed
to monitor the performance ofthe deeper-fill and surcharge areas. These monuments are currently
monitored on a weekly basis. Prior to the completion of the recommended settlement monitoring
· period; the surcharge fills on Levante ·Street ·were removed to facilitate site -access. Due to the
removal of the surcharge fill soil, the.initial monuments placed.along.the.Levante Street approach
and abutments were demolished. Replacement monuments were installed to continue to monitor
. the, ongoing settlement and. a .longer settlement monitoring period--is now anticipated. The
approximate locations of the settlement monuments are indicated on the As-Graded Geotechnical
Maps (Plates I .through 19). As noted in our. Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, we have
anticipated, that 6 to 10 inches of settlement may occur in response to the fill and foundation loads
and on the order of 10-15 inches of settlement may occur at the two bridge abutments. As stated in
the Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation approximately 90 percent of this anticipated
settlement inay occur during fill placement with the remainder occurring over the next 6 to 9
months. Monitoring of the settlement monuments should be continued until data analysis indicates
that the primary settlement is essentially complete.
-12-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
4.1 General
Rough-grading of Green Valley/La Costa Glen was perfonned in general accordance with the
project geotechnical reports (Appendix A), geotechnical recommendations made during the course
of the grading, and the City of Carlsbad requirements. It is our opinion that the subject tract is
suital;>le for its intended use. ·However, since the specific development of each lot is not known at
this time, we-recommend the geotechp.ical conditions on each lot be evaluated on a lot-by-lot basis
. in concert with the ·development plans to provide lot-specific geotechnical and foundation
recommendations for the proposed structure(s) and improvements. The following is a summary of
our conclusions concerning rough-grading of the Green Valley/La Costa Glen project.
4.2 Summary of Conclusions
Geotechnical conditions encountered during rough-grading were generally as anticipated. The
following presents a -summary of the most significant conclusions: Because of the sheet-graded
condition of each .planning area, the geotechnical conditions on each individual parcel should be
reviewed and evaluated by a geotechnical consultant on a lot-specific basis to provide actual
foundation and other design recommendations.
o Potentially compressible undocumented fill, topsoil, colluvium/slopewash and weathered
fonnational material were removed to competent material and or bedrock during rough-
grading.
· ·o · Site preparation and removals were geotechnicallyobserved.
o · The fill slopes and fill-over-cut slopes constructed above natural ground were constructed with
fill·slope keys. The keys were excavated a minimum of 5 feet into competent material along
the toe-of-slope (with the exception of the fill-over-cut slopes), a minimum of 15 feet wide and
angled approximately 2 percent into-the-slope. ·The··cut/fill contact in the fill-'over-cut slopes
were angled approximately2 percent into-the-slope prior.to the fill .placement.
o . Fill soils were derived from onsite soils. Fill.soils were .tested.-to ·have at least 90 percent
relative compaction(based on ASTM Test Method D1557-96) and a near-optimum moisture
content in accordance with the recommendations of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix
A) and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad.
o Cut/fill transitions were overexcavateda minimum of 5 feet below the sheet-grade elevations in
. areas where colluvium was exposed and a minimum of 10 feet below the sheet grade elevations
where bedrock was exposed extending a minimum of 5 feet outside any proposed building
footprints. This was done in order to mitigate the steep bedrock transition and relatively large
difference in engineering properties between the slope wash and bedrock materials.
-13-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
o Landslides or surficial slope failures were not encountered during rough-grading operations.
o Faults or evidence of faulting was not encountered during rough-grading.
o Ground water was encountered during the rough-grading operations along the eastern portion
of the project in the area of the main drainage course. However, provided the
recommendations outlined in the.following section are adhered to, it is our professional opinion
that grounqwater should pose no significant constraint to future site development. Localized
seeps may occur after periods of heavy rainfall or after the establishment of site irrigation. If
seepage does occur, additionalrecommendationsshould be provided.
o A series of settlement monuments have been constructed in the deeper fill areas and along the
proposed bridge abutments. Construction of the proposed structures on these lots (Lots: 6-9),
should be delayed until monitoring indicates that the primary settlement is complete.
o Unless large structures or heavily loaded columns are proposed, the anticipated residential and
.light commercial structures may be founded on conventional, shallow, spread footings with a
slab-on-grade floor slab.
o The location of the proposed Health Care facility has been addressed in accordance with the
. mostrecenteditionofthe 1998 CaliforniaBuildingCode.
-14-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.1
4960134-002
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Earthwork
Recommendations for future earthwork should be provided by the geotechnical consultant based on
lot-specific grading and improvement plans. We anticipate that future earthwork on the lots will
consist of.site preparation, possible minor re-grading, trench and retaining wall excavation and
backfill. We recommend tha,t earthwork on site be performed in accordance with the following
recommendations, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and
Grading Specifications of Rough Grading included in Appendix D. In case of conflict, the
followingrecommendationsshall supersedethose in AppendixD.
5 .1.1 Site Preparation
Due to-the-length of time ·anticipated between the constructioll'and placement of fill soils
on the graded pads and development of the lots, surficial soils of the graded pads may
become desiccated. If the length of time between the completion of grading and the
construction of the proposed improvements is longer than 6 to 12 months, or if the near-
surface soils are disturbed or desiccated, we recommend that the areas of proposed
development be scarified a minimum·of 12 inches, moisture-conditionedto near-optimum
moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on
ASTM Test Method DI 557-96).
If additional grading (such as fill placement) is planned on the site, the areas to receive
. structural .fill or engineered structures should be cleared of subsurface obstructions,
potentially. compressible material (s1.J.ch as topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, weathered
formation material, and desiccated fill soils) and .stripped of vegetation, prior to grading.
Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of off site. Holes resulting
from removal·of buried obstructions which extend below finish site grades should be
replaced with suitable compacted fill material. Areas to receive fill and/or other surface
·. improvements should ·be scarified .to .a minimum depth of 6 inches, brought to near-
optimum moisture condition, and· recompacted to at least 90·percent relative compaction
(based on ASTM TestMethod_D1557-96).
5 .1.2 Excavations
' Excavations of the on site materials may generally be accomplished with conventional
heavy-duty earthwork equipment.
Due to the relatively high-density characteristics and coarse nature of the on site soils,
temporary excavations, such as utility trenches with vertical sides in the on site soils,
should remain stable for the period required to construct the utility provided they are free
of adverse geologic conditions. However, in accordance with OSHA requirements,
excavations between 5 and 15 feet in d~pth should be shored or laid back to inclinations of
-15-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
1 : 1 (horizontal to vertical) if workers are to enter such excavations. For excavations deeper
than 15 feet~ specific recpmmendations cau be made on a case-by-case basis.
5 .1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction
The onsite soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of
organic material, debris, and rock fragments larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension.
All fill soils should be brought to near-optimum moisture conditions and compacted in
· uniform lifts to at least90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum
dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-96). The optimum lift thickness required to
produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction
equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts.not exceeding 4 to 8 inches in
compacted thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should ·be performed in general
accordance with the current City .of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction
practices, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications of Rough Grading
presented in AppendixD.
5.1.4 Cut/Fill Transition Lots
Based on the current project grading plans and:observations made during the course of
grading, all known transitions ·have been mitigated during the course of this phase of
grading. However, should the proposed building locations change or pad grades be altered
appreciably from those existing at the issuance of this report, proposed plan changes should
be reviewed by this office and additional recommendations may provided.
.. 5.2. Foundation Design Considerations
Building locations and types for the entire project were not finalized as of the date of this report.
However, based on our review of the current site development plans, we anticipate that both
commercial and residential type buildings will be constructed onsite. We have assumed, based on
the current site development plans;.:that .the residential structures will :be one-to three-stories in
height'.and utilize slab-on-grade, .wood-frame-and stucco construction .. The anticipated light
commercial.buildings.will-.be. one-.to two-stories in 'height and also utilize slab-on-grade, wood-
frame and stucco -construction. For planning purposes, the following design parameters may be
utilized.
5 .2.1 Foundation Design -Light Commercial Buildings
We anticipate that the proposed commercial buildings ( one to two story structures) will
utilize a combination of continuous perimeter footings and conventional interior isolated-
spread footings for building support. The following recommendations are based on the
assumption that soils of very low to low expansion pot1;Jntial (50 or less per UBC 18-1-B)
will be in the upper 4 feet of pad grade. Footings bearing in properly compacted fill should
-16-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.2.2
5,2.3
4960134-002
extend a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, footings
may be designed using an allowable soil-bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot.
The allowable soil-bearing pressure may be increased by 500 psf for each additional foot of
foundation embedment to a maximum allowable-bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per
square foot (psf). This value may be increased by one-third for loads of short duration
including wind or seismic forces. Continuous perimeter footings should be reinforced by
placing at least two No. 5 rebar near the top and two No. 5 rebar near the bottom of the
footing, and in accordance with the structural engineer's requirement. We recommend a
minimum width of24 inches for isolated-spread footings.
FoundationDesign-Residential Buildings
We anticipate that the proposed residential buildings will be one-to three-story buildings,
utilizing wood-frame and stucco construction. In addition we have assumed that
construction will utilize conventional, continuous footings· and_ isolated-spread footings .
. Footings bearing informational or properly compacted fill soils with a very low to low
expansion potential should extend a minimum of 12, 18, or 24 inches below the lowest
adjacent soil grade for one, two, and or three-story structures, respectively. At this depth,
footings may.be designed using an allowable-soil bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square
foot. This value may be increased by one-third for loads of short duration including wind
. or seismic forces. Footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15 or 18 inches, for one,
two, and three-story structures, respectively. Continuous footings should be reinforced by
placing at least one No. 4 rebar near the top and one No. 4 rebar near the bottom of the
footing, and in accordance with the structural engineer's requirement. Isolated-spread
footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. A grade beam reinforced with No. 4
rebars top and bottom should b~ placed at the garage door opening. Garage slabs should be
isolated from stemwall footings by 3/8-inch felt and quarter-sawn.
Floor Slab Design-Commercial and Residential
"-All slabs should have a minimum:thickness of A:inches and be reinforced at slab midheight
with No. 3 rebars at 18 inches on.center (each way) or No. 4 rebars at 24 inches center
··:(each way). Additional reinforcement and/or concrete thickness to accommodate specific
loading conditions or anticipated settlement should be.evaluated by the structural engineer
based on a modulus of sub grade reaction of 100 kips per cubic foot. We emphasize that is
the responsibility of the· contractor to ensure th_at the slab reinforcement is placed at
midheight of the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand (S.E.
greater than 30) to aid in concrete curing, which is underlain by a 6-mil (or heavier)
moisture barrier, which is, in turn, underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand to act as a
capillary break. -All penetrations and laps in the ·moisture barrier should be appropriately
sealed. The spacing of crack-control joints should be designed by the structural engineer.
Sawcuts should be made within 24 hours of concrete placement. Our experience indicates
that use of reinforcement in slabs and· foundations will generally reduce the potential for
drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the
concrete cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a
-17-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.2.4
•:;'
4960134-002
high cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal
aggregate size and rapid moisture loose due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions
during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can
also be expected. The use of low slump con.crete (not exceeding 4 inches at the time of
placement) can r~duce the potential for shrinkage cracking.
Moisture barriers can retard, but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the
· underlying soils up through the slab. We recommend that the floor covering installer test
the moisture vapor flux rate prior to attempting application of the flooring. "Breathable"
· floor coverings·should be considered if the vapor flux rates are high. A slip sheet should be
used if crack sensitive floor coverings are planned.
Settlement
The grading operations were performed to provide a total and.differential settlement of less
than I' inch and ½ inches respectively in ·a horizontal distance of 100 feet across the
structure. · Long slender structures may-need some method of isolation to tolerate
differential settlement over cut-fill transitions. These should be evaluated on a case-by-
case basis when final building plans are designed.
5.3 Footing Setback
We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural
footings and settlement-sensitivestructqres. This distance is measured from the outside edge of the
footing, horizontallyto the slope face ( or to the face of a retaining wall).
Slope Height Recommended Footing Setback
<5 feet 5 feet minimum
5-20feet 7 feet minimum
>20feet H/3, where His the slope height,
notto·exceed 10 feet for 2: 1 slopes
· We ·should note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and
_ improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pavement, underground utilities, etc.)
· constructed within this setbackarea may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement.
-18-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
5 .4 Lateral Earth Pressures
The recommended lateral pressures for granular site soil ( expansion index less than 50 per UBC
18-2) and level or sloping backfill are as follows:
I Equivalent Fluid Weight (pct)
Conditions Level 2:1 Slope
Active 35 55
At-Rest 55 65
Passive 350 150
(where ground slopes down)
I
To. design an unrestrained wall, such as cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may be used. For a
restrained retaining wall, such as a basement wall, the at-rest pressure should be used. Further, for
sliding resistance, the. friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. Inc
combining the total lateral resistance, the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should be
-reduced by 50 percent.· Wall footings may be designed in accordance with structural considerations.
The passive resistance val~e may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration
including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance between foundation elements providing
passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the depth of the elements to allow full
development of these passive pressure. The total depth of retained earth for design of cantilever walls
should be the vertical distance below the ground surface measured at the wall face for stem design or
measured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding. All retaining structures should be
providing with a drainage blanket or drains (as indicated in Appendix D) and appropriately
-waterproofed. Surcharge loading effects from adjacent structures should be evaluated by the
geotechnical and structural engineers.
5.5 Retaining Wall Design Considerations
Embedded structural walls ·should ·be: designed -for . ..lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The.
magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the.wall can yield under load.
-If the·wall can yield enough to mobilize the full.shear strength-of.the .soil, it can be designed for
"active" pressure. If the 'wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot
be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at rest"
conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the
"passive" resistance.
For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above
the static ground.water and backfilled with soils of very low to low expansion potential is provided in
Section 5.4. The equivalent fluid pressure values assume free-draining conditions. If conditions other
than those assumed above are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on
an individual-case basis by the geotechnical engineer1 All retaining wall structures should be provided
with appropriate drainage. The outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical
drainage design is illustratedin Appendix D.
-19-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
Wall backcut excavations less than 5 feet in height can be made near vertical. For back cuts greater
than 5 feet in height, but less than 15 feet in height, the back cut should be flattened to a gradient of not
steeper than 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical) slope inclination. For back cuts in excess of 15 feet in height,
specific recommendations should be requested from the geotechnical consultant. The granular and
native backfill soils should be compacted to &t least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM
Test Method D l 557-96). The granular fill should extend horizontally to a minimum distance equal to
one-halfthe wall height behind the walls. The walls should be constructed and backfilled as soon as
possible after backcut excavation.· Prolonged-exposure of backcut slopes may result in some localized
slope instability.
Foundations for retaining walls in competent formational soils or properly compacted fill should be
embedded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, an allowable bearing capacity
of 2,000 psf may be assumed.
5.6 PreliminaryPavementDesign
·Final pavement designs will be calculated utilizing R-value tests taken on the street subgrade soils
upon completion of the street improvements operations. For city streets, this calculation is typically
done by the City of Carlsbad. Prior to placement of structural pavement sections, the upper 12 inches
of sub grade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-96. If fill is required to reach subgrade
design grade, fill placement should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented
in Section 5.1.3. The aggregate base material should conform to and be placed in accordance with,
current Caltrans specifications and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction.
·. We recommend that the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks be designed by the civil engineer or structural
engineer. We-sQggest controljoints .. at approp:i;iate intervals as determined by the civil or structural
engineer be considered. We also suggest a minimum thickness of 4 inches for sidewalk slabs.
In pavement areas adjacent to heavily watered landscape areas, we recommend some measures of
moisture · control to be taken-to prevent .the .. ,subgrade_. soils . from: becoming saturated. It is
. recommended that the concrete curbing ·separating the landscaping :area· from. the. pavement extend
below the ·aggregate base to help seal. the ends ·of the sections'where .heavy-Jandscape watering may
... , .have access.to the aggregate.base. Concrete swales should-be .designed in roadway or parking areas
subject to concentrated surface runoff:
5. 7 Surface Drainage and Lot Maintenance
Surface drainage should be controlled at all times. Positive surface drainage (such as drainage swales
or area drains) should be provided to direct surface water away from the top-of-slopes and all
structures toward the street or other suitable collective drainage facilities. Surface water should not be
allowed to pond adjacentto footings. We recommend that all structures be fitted with eave gutters with
downspouts connected into a collective drainage system.
-20-
I
I
,1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
5.8 Graded Slopes
It is recommended that all graded slopes within the development be planted with drought-tolerant
ground cover vegetation as soon as practical to protect against erosion by reducing runoff velocity.
Deep-rooted vegetation should also -be established to protect against surficial slumping.
Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine grading and construction unless
supported by appropriately designed retaining structures.
5.9 Type of Cement of Construction
Laboratory testing of representative onsite soils indicate a negligible concentration of soluble sulfates
in the soils existing at finish grade elevations. Accordingly, typical Type 1/11 cement may be used for
concrete in contact with onsite soils. Other geochemical-considerations were previously addressed in
the project supplemental g~otechnical investigation (Appendix A).
-21-
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
6.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
The presence of our field representatives at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional
advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's work. Although the
observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not
guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractor's work,
nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their responsibility if defects are
subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction
of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this
report are based on test results and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and
represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications.
It should also be noted that the foundation design considerations provided in Section 5 .2 of this report are
for planning purposes only. Final. building types, exact locations and structural plans for individual
buildings were not available at the time this report was prepared. At such time . .that structural plans are
available, lot-specific foundation recommendations can then be provided.
-22-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
''
'~ ,'v' ~,,'
,, -' " , ~", '' "
,,,i
Potential
Causative
F~ult
Rose Canyon
Coronado
Banks
(Offshore)
Elsinore
San Jacinto
San Andreas
After Blake, 1998.
4960134-002
TABLE 1
SEISMIC P AR.AMETERS FOR ACTIVE FAULTS
La Costa Glen
~-'' ,, , Maximum
Probable Upper-Bound
" Maximum Probable Earthquake Ground Earthquake
· Event Acceleration Event
" , ' ,,
Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal
Distance from Ground Ground Ground
Fault to Site Richter Acceleration Acceleration Acceleration
(Miles) Magnitude (Gravity) (Gravity) (Gravity)
5 5.7 0.2·1
20 6.3 0.08
0.22 0.28
25 6.4, 0.07
48 6.9 0.05
68 7.3 0.04
-23-
I
:I
I
1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A;
I
.
. i
I
I
' -I
;
I Iii .
' I.
i
-t . .----------~---~~~ I.
I
I
I
I
I
1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Blake, 1996, EQFAULT, Version 2.2.
~--, 1998, FRJSKSP
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
California Building Standard Commission, 1998, 1998 California Building Code.
California, State of, Department of Transportation, 1986, Bridge Memo to Designer's Manual.
4960134-002
~--, 1987, Peak Accelerati9n from Maximum Credible Earthquakes in California, Modified from
Maul chin and Jones, CDMG Map Sheet 45.
---, 1988a, Standard Specifications,dated January 1988.
---, 1988b, Highway Design Manual, 4th. Ed., dated August 5, 1988.
CDMG, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, Open-File Report,
96-08.
Eisenberg, L.I., 1985, Pleistocene Faults and Marine Terraces, Northern San Diego County, in Abbott, P.L.,
Editor, 1983, On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego
County, San Diego Association of Geologists Fieldtrip Guide, pp. 87-91.
Eisenberg, L.I., and Abbott, P.L., 1985, Eocene Lithofacies and Geologic History, Northern San Diego
County, in Abbott, P.O. Editor, 1983, On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in
Northern San Diego County, San Diego Association of Geologists Fieldtrip Guide, pp. 19-3 5.
Hart, 1985, Fault Rupture Flazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972
with Index to Special Study Zone Maps, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines
and Geology, Special Publication 42, revised 1997.
ICG, Inc., 1989, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation Green Valley Property, Carlsbad, California, Job
No. 04-7350-002-01-00,dated October 19, 1989.
International Conference of Building Officials, 1994 and 1997, Uniform Building Code.
Ishihara, K., 1985, ''Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes", Proceedings of the Eleventh
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, A.A. Belkema
Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
A-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
APPENDIX A (Continued)
Kennedy, M.P. and Tan S. S., 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County,
California; Plate 2 -Geologic Map or the Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe 7.5' Quadrangles,
San Diego County, California: California Pivision of Mines and Geology, DMG Open-File
Report 96-02
Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1996, Sµpplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Green Valley, C.T. 92-08,
Carlsbad, California,ProjectNo. 4960134-001,dated July 11, 1996.
---, 1998a, Recommendations for Stability Fill, Green Valley (Carlsbad Tract No. 92-08), Carlsbad,
California,ProjectNo. 4960134-0~2,datedAugust 11, 1998.
~~-, 1998b, Revised Recommendations for Stability Filf'Slopes Western Portion of Lot 9, Green
Valley(C.T. 92-08), Carlsbad, California,ProjectNo. 4960134-002, dated August 21, 1998.
---, 1998c, Additional Recommendations for Stability Fill Key, West of Proposed Crib Wall, Lot 5,
Green Valley, (C.T. 92-08), Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4960134-002, dated September
23, 1998.
---, 1998d, Removal of Abutment Surcharge, Proposed La Costa Glen Drive and Calle Barcelona,
(Carlsbad Tract No. 92-08), Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4960134-002, dated October 28,
1998.
P&D Consultants, Inc., 1995, Green Valley Master Tentative Map, CT. 92-08, Sheets 2 and 3, dated
October 16, 1995.
---, 1998a, Improvement Plans for El Camino Real, CT 92-08, Green Valley, 30 Sheets, Drawing No.
349-3B,datedJuly 15, 1998.
-~-.~ 1998b;Grading Plans for Carlsbad Tract 92-08, 37 Sheets, Dri:iwing No. 349-3A, Unsigned
Undated.
Seed, H. B.,.Idriss, I. M., and Kiefer, F. W., 1969, Characteristics of Rock Motions During Earthquakes:
Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations, ASCE, vol. 95, No. SM5, Paper 6783, pp.1199-
1218. .
Tokimatsu and Seed, H. B., 1984, Simplified Procedures for the Evaluation of Settlements in Clean Sands:
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. UCB/EERC-84/16, October 1984.
A-2
l 0
0
_, ·n J
0
B
0
0
0
D
-0
0
0
0
[t
;)
I -
' l
1
Iii
- - - - -_,_ ,_ ---___ , ____ _
01/27/99
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ----------------------.. -----------'----------~-----------------------------------------........................ ... -.. ----_,_ -----..
1 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 53.Q 2 112.3 121..5 7.6 8.5 92 2 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 56.0 2 113.1 121.5 8.5 8.5 93 3 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 57.0 2 109.6 121.5 6.9 8.5 90 4 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 2 114.2 121.5 7.3 8.5 94 5 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 59.0 2 110.7 121.5 8.8 8.5 91 6 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEA.ST OF LOT 9 61.0 2 113.5 121.5 7.0 8.5 93 7 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 61.0 2 109.0 121.5 7.7 8.5 90 8 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 63.0 2 111.9 121.5 7.4 8.5 92 9 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 62.5 2 110.9 121.5 8.2 8.5 91 10 N 08/10/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 49.0 2 115.8 121,.5 8.6 8.5 95 11 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 58.0 3 112.8 121.0 11.8 12.5 93 12 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 64.0 3 108.8 121.0 12.7 12.5 90 13 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 61.0 3 114.1 121 .• 0 11. 1 12.5 94 14 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 55.0 3 106.0 121.0 12.4 12.5 88 RT ON 15 15 N 08/11/98 CF MID .EAST OF LOT 9 55.0 3 110.5 121.0 11.3 12.5 91 RT OF 14 16 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 57.0 3 109.3 121.0 11.2 12.5 90 17 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 63.0 3 112; 7 '121.0 13.0 12.5 93 18 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF ~OT 9 59.0 3 115.0 121.0 12.5 12.5 95 19 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 62.0 3 111.8 121,0 11. 7 12.5 92 20 N 08/11/98 CF MID EAST OF LOT 9 52.0 3 110.0 121.0 11.2 12.5 91 21 N 08/11/98 CF NORJijEAST OF LQT 9 63.0 3 109.1 121.0 13.7 12.5 90. 22 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT'9 65.0 3 113.0 121.0 12.8 12.5 93 23 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 63.0 3 115.1 121.0 11.9 12.5 95 24 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 58.0 3 109.7 121.0 12.4 12.5 91 25 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 56.0 3 116.2 121.0 11.0 12.5 96 26 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 56.0 3 111.1 121.0 12.7 12.5 92 27 N 08/11/98 CF NORTAEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 3 114.1 121.0 13.0 12.5 94 28 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 62.5 3 110.6 121.0 11.5 12.5 91 29 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 64.0 3 109.2 121.0 14.0 12.5 90 30 N 08/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 64.0 3 112.9 121.0 12.9 12.5 93 31 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 58.0 5 115.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 94 32 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 66.0 5 111.5 122.0 11.8 11 . 0 91 33 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 56.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 34 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 65.0 5 112.4 122.0 11.0 11.0 92 35 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 60.0 5 104.1 122.0 10.1 11.0 85 RT ON 36 36 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 60.0 5 114'.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 RT OF 35 37 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 66.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.9 11.0 91 38 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 61.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 92 39 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 62.0 5 113.5 122.0 12.0 11.0 93 40 N 08/12/98 CF MID OF LOT 9 62.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 41 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 54.0 5 105,4 122.0 11.8 11.0 86 RT ON 42 42 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 54.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.5 11.0 90 RT OF 41 43 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 113.7 122.0 11. 7 11.0 93 44 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 58.0 5 115.5 122.0 12.0 11.0 95 45 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 110.8 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 46 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 58.0 5· 109.9 122.0 rn.6 11 .. 0 90 47 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OP LOT 9 55.0 5 112.2 122.0 11.9 11.0 92
- - - ----,_!_ -- - --· - ---· -
01/27/99 Page No. 2 SUMMARY OF FIELD DEN$ITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY D~NSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE bf ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX. F·IELD OPT COMP ------------... ---------------.. ----------.. ----.. -------.-------... , ... ----------------------------------------------------
48 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 111.4 122.0 9.9 11.0 91 49 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 57.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 50 N 08/12/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 9 60.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.4 11.0 90 51 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 63.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 52 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 66.0 5 116.3 122.0 12.1 11.0 95 53 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 58.0 5 110.3 122.0 13.0 11.0 90 54 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 58.0 5 113.6 12?.0 11.7 11.0 93 55 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 65.0 5 112.5 122.0 12.6 11..0 92 56 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 66.0 5 110.3 122.0 13.5 11 .0 90 57 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 5 111. 1 122 .. 0 12.4 11.0 91 58 N 08/13i98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT ·9 64.0 5 114.7 122.0 11.3 11.0 94 59 N 08/-13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 65.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 60 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 61.0 5 113.2 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 61 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 5 113.0 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 62 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 57.0 5 112.5 122.Q 11.5 11.0 92 63 N \)8/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 ·59.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.8 11.0 90 64 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 5 111.1 122.0 13.2 11.0 91 65 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 61.0 5 116:3 122.0 12.5 1LO 95 66 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 63.0 5 102.5 1.22.0 11.1 11.0 84 RT ON 67 67 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 63.0 5 111.3 122.0 12.6 11.0 91 RT OF 66 68 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 57.0 5 115.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 94 69 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 62.0 5 113.3 122.0 13.1 11.0 93 70 N 08/13/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 9 58.0 5 112.5 122.0 12.7 11.0 92 71 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 62.0 5 113.6 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 72 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 65.0 5 112.0 122.0 11. 7 11.0 92 73 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 60.0 5 110.8 122.0 . 10.2 11.0 91 74 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 56.0 5 111.0 122.0 13. 1 11.0 91 75 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 58.0 5 114.4 122.0 12. 1 11.0 94 7.6 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF .LOT 8 62.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.6 11.0 95 77 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 62.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.9 11.0 90 78 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 64.0 5 112.5 122.0 12.6 11.0 92 79 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 61.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.5 11.0 93 80 N 08/14/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 65.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.2 11.0 90 81 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 58.0 5 106.1 122.0 10.7 11.0 87 RT ON 82 82 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 58.0 5 112.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 92 RT OF 81 83 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 54.0 5 114.3 122.0 11.2 11.0 94 84 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 54.0 5 110.0 122.0 12.3 11.0 90 85 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 64.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.4 ·11.0 93 86 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 58.0 5 113.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 87 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 60.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 88 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 65.0 5 116.0 122.0 11.4 11.0 95 89 N 08/14/98, CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 63.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.1 11.0 92 90 N 08/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 8 60.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.6 11.0 90 91 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 64.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 92 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 64.0 5 113.5 122.0 10.1 11.0 93 93 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 66.0-5 112.5 122.0 11.6 11.0 92 94 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 63.0 s-116.4 122.0 12.4 11.0 95
- -- ---,_ ---... ------- -
01/27/99 Page No. 3 . SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-96013.4-02
NAME: GREE"N VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ·------------LOCATION-------------~ TEST SOIL DRY DENSIT'Y(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF El,.EV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -----------.. -----------------------. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
95 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 62.0 5 '114.3 122.0 9.8 11.0 94 96 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 63.0 5 109.4 122.0 12.1 11.0 90 97 N 08/17/98 CF SLOPE OF LOT 9 64.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.6 11.0 93 98 N 08/17/98 CF SLOPE OF LOT 9 64.0 5 110.8 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 99 N 08/17/98 CF SLOPE OF LOT 9 58.0 5 111.3 ·, 122.0· 12.3 11.0 91 100 N 08/17/98 CF SLOPE OF LOT 9 66.0. 5 112.7 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 101 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 68.0 5 111.9 122.0 9.7 11.0 92 102 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 67.5 5 115.0 122.0 9.9 11.0 94 103 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 66.0 5 105.2 122.0 13.0 11.0 86 RT ON 104 104 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 66.0 5 115.4 122.0 12.4 11.0 95 RT OF 103 105 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 67.0 5 112.0 122.0 11. 7 11.0 92 106 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 66.0 5 114.3 122.0 12.5 11.0 94 107 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 66.0 5 109.9 1i2.o 13.2 11.0 90 108 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 67.0 5 111.5 122.0 12.6 11.0 91 109 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 64.0 5 113.5 122.0 13.1 11.0 93 110 N 08/17/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 9 60.5 5 109.9 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 111 .N 08/18/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 58.0 5 111.4 122.0 11.9 11.0 91 112 N, 08/18/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 66.0 5 116.0 122.0 12.4 11.0 95 113 N 08/18/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 64.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 114 N 08/18/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 69.0 5 110.0 122.0 9.5 11.0 90 115 N 08/18/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 8 69.6 5 112.4 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 116 N 08/18/98 CF N_ORTH OF LOT 8 68.0 5 117.2 122.0 11. 1 11. 0 96 117 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 9 52.0 5 111.5 122.0 11.0 11.0 91 118 N 08/18/98 CF tOT 9 64.0 5 114.3 122.0 12.3 11.0 94 119 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 9 65.5 5 110.2 122.0 11.4 11. 0, 90 120 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 9 62.0 5 113.5 122.0 13.7 11.0 93 121 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 64.0 5 113.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 · 93 122 N 08/11.1/98 CF LOT 7 65.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.8 11.0 90 123 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 60.0 5 115.9 122.0 11.5 11.0 95 124 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 62.0 5 112.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 125 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 64.0 5 119.6 122.0 12.4 11.0 98 126 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 65.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 127 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 58.0 5 109.8 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 128 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 58.0 5 115.0 122.0 10.4 11.0 94 129 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 57.0 5 111.4 122.0 11 .8 11.0 91 130 N 08/18/98 CF LOT 7 57.0 5 112.4 122.0 10.0 11. 0 92 131 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 50.0 5 113.2 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 132 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 48.5 5 111.1 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 133 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 48.5 5 103.0 122.0 11 .8 11.0 84 RT ON 134 134 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 48.5 5 110.8 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 RT OF 133 135 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 52.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.0 11.0 93 136 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 46.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.0 11.0 90 137 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 52.0 5 111.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 92 138 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 52.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.6 11.0 95 139 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 53.0 5 109.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 140 N 08/19/98 CF DESILT BASIN WEST OF LOT 8 54.0 5 113.0 122.0 10.2 11.0 93 141 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 34.0 5 109.3 122.0 9.6 11.0 90
--------· .. ---· - ---1111: -- -
01/27/99 Page No. 4 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST· TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOll DRY DENS.ITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ---------.... ------------------------------------------------------------, _____ --------------------------------------
142 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9. 36.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.9 11.0 93 143 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 38.0 5 115.4 122.0 9.6 11.0 95 144 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF L:OT 9 38.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 145 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST ·oF LOT 9 39.0 5 111.9 122.0 11.4 11.0 92 146 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 44.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 147 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 42.0 5 112.6 122.0 9.3 11.0 92 148 N · 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 46.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 149 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 48.0 5 113.9 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 150 N 08/19/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOT 9 50.0 5 112.5 122 .• 0 10.1 11'.0 92 151 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 40.0 5 110.8 122.0 9.9 11.0 91 152 .N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 42.0 5 104.1 122.0 10.7 11.0 85 RT ON 153 153 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 42.0 5 110.2 122.0 9.8 11.0 90 RT OF 152 154 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 46.0 5 111.8 122.0 11.6 11.0 92 155 N· 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 46.0 5 117 .5 122.0 10.8 11.0 96 156 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE !;AST OF LOTS 8 AND, 9 48.0 5 114.4 122.0 11.9 11.0 94 157 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 50.0 5 110.7 122.0 9.5 11.0 91 158 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 52.0 5 113.5 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 159 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 AND 9 53.0 5 116.0 122.0 11. 1 11 •. 0 95 160 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE EAST OF LOTS 8 ANP 9 53.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.4 i 1.0 90 161 N -08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 46.0 5 111.9 122.0 11.8 11.0 92 162 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 48.0. 5 118.3 122.0 12.6 11.0 97 163 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 50.0 5 110.1 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 164 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 50.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.8 11'.0 93 165 N 08/20/98 CF Sl::OPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 50.0 5 110.9 122 •. 0 11. 7 11.0 91 166 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 52.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.6 11.0 9Q 167 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 54.0 5 111.1 122.0 HJ.2 11.0 91 168 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 57.0 5 115.2 122.0 10.5 11.0 94 169 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 60.0 5 112.0 122.0 11.1 11.0 92 170 N 08/20/98 CF SLOPE NORTHEAST OF LOT 9 56.5 5 114.8 122.0 12.3 11.0 94 171 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 65.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.6 11.0 93 172 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 52.0 5 11.1.0 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 173 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 54.0 5 112.0 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 174 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 100.4 122.0 9.6 11.0 82 RT ON 175 175 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 111.3 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 RT OF 174 176 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 58.0 5 116.1 122.0 10.3 11.0 95 177 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 60.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.8 11.0 93 178 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 63.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 179 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 63.5 5 111.0 122.0 12.1 11.0 91 180 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 60.0 5 111.9 122.0 11.5 11.0 92 181 N 08/21/9~ CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 48.0 5 112. 7 122.0 12.5 11.0 92 182 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 50.0 5 116.3 122.0 11.0 11.0 95 183 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 184 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 55.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 185 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 111.3 122.0 12.1 11.0 91 186 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 52.5 5 112.0 122.0 11.8 11.0 92 187 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 57.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.5 11.0 95 188 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 58.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 90
... --------· - -.. ... - -.. ----
01/27/99 Page No. 5 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FiELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -------------------------------------------------------------...................... ------------------------------------------
189 N 08/21/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 56.0 5 113. 1 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 190 N 08/21'/98 CF WEST SIDE OF LOT 9 60.0 5 111.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 191 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 62.0 5 104.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 85 RT ON 192 192 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 62.0 5 111.4 122.0 8.6 11.0 91 RT OF 191 193 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 59.0 5 113.1 122.0 9.5 11.0 93 194 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 61.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.1 11.0 90 195 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 61.0 5 115.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 196 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 65.0 5 111.5 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 197 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 SLOPE 53.0 5 113.1 122.0 9.7 11.0 93 198 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 SLOPE 55.5 5 111.8 122.0 9.9 11.0 92 199 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 SLOPE 55.5 5 111.0 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 200 N 08/24/98 CF WEST OF LOT 9 SLOPE 43.5 5 110.3 122.0 11. 1 11.0 90 201 N. 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 46.0 5 115.0 122.0 12.5 11.0 94 202 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 48.5 5 109.4 122.0 9.3 11.0 90 203 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 50.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.1 11.0 93 204 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 51.0 5 111.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 205 N· 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 53.0 5 112.4 122:0 9.7 11.0 92 20q N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9· 53.0 5 111,8, 122.0 10.'5 11.0 92 207 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 56.0 5 116.0 122.0 10.0 11.0 95 208 N 08/24/98 CF EAST·SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 56.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.2 11.0 93 209 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 59.0 5 114.9 122.0 9.6 11. 0 94 210 N 08/24/98 CF EAST SLOPE LOTS 8 AND 9 58.0 5 117 .1 122.0 10.8 11.0 96 211 N 08/24/98 CF DESHT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 48.0 5 112.1 122.0 9:9 11.0 92 212 N 08/24/98 CF DESI~T BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 48.0 5 115 .2 122 .. 0 10.2 11.0 94 213 N 08/24/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 48.0 5 103.5 122.0 9.5 11.0 85 Rt ON 214 214 N 08/24/98 CF DESI LT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 48.0 5 112. 7 122.0 9.3 n.o 92' RT OF 213 215 N 08/25/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 50.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 216 N 08/25/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 53.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.6 11.0 90 217 N 08/25/913 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 56.0 5 109.8 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 218 N 08/25/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 57.0 5 116.4 122.0 9.4 11.0 95 219 N 08/25/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 60.0 5 111. 1 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 220 N 08/25/98 CF DESILT BASIN EAST OF LOT 8 62.5 5 117 .5 122.0 10.2 11.0 96 221 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 63.0 5 113.7 122.0 10.9 11. 0 93 222 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 60.0 5 109.4 122.0 9.4 11.0 90 223 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 61.0 5 112. 7 122.0 9.6 11.0 92 224 N 08/25/91;1 CF EAST OF LOT 8 61.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.3 11.0 90 225 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 62.0 5 115.2 122.0 11.4 11.0 94 226 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 64.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 227 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 8 66.0 5 11~.5 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 228 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 7 63.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.4 11.0 90 229 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 112.4 122.0 9.3 1-1.0 92 230 N 08/25/98 CF EAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 110.3 122.0 10 .• 6 11.0 90 231 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 60.0 5 112.0 122.0 12.1 11.0 92 232 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 62.0 5 99.3 122.0 11.6 11.0 81 RT ON 233 233 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 62.5 5 110.3 122.0 12.2 11.0 90 RT OF 232 234 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 64.0 5 113.5 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 235 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 66 .. 0 5 115.8 122.0 9.5 11.0 95
---· --- ---·-1------.. -111!1 -
01/27/99 Page No. 6 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN· VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST •-----------LOCATION---------·-~--TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(~f) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH , DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -----------... -..... --....... ----------------------------------------------------------'------------------------------
236 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 66 •. 0 5 113.8 122.0 9.9 11.0 93 237 N 98/25/98 CF NORTHEASJ OF LOT 7 67.0 5 111.1 122.0 9.8 H.O 91 238 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 67.0 5 114.9 122.0 10.4 11.0 94 239 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 109.9 1.22.0 11.5 11.0 90 240 N 08/25/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 63.5 5 113.6 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 241 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 65.0 5 116.6 122.0 10.6 11.0 96 242 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 67.0 5 111. 1 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 243 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 114.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 94 244 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 77.0 5 111.5 12~.o 10. 1 11.0 91 245 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF-LOT 7 71.0 5 115.3 122.0 9.6 11.0 95 246 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST, OF LOT 7 78.0 5 110.9 122.0 9.4 11.0 91 247 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 78.0 5 112.7 122.0 10.3 11.0 ,92 248 N 08/26/98 Cf . NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 108.3 122.0 11.2 11.0 89 RT ON 249 249 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 112. 7 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 RT OF 248 250 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 114.6 122 •. 6 11.5 11.0 94 251 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 77.0 5 1-14.4 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 252 ,N 08/26/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 71.0 5 111.4 122.0 9.6 11.0 91 253 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 105.2 122.0 10.5 11.0 86 RT ON 254 254 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 110. 7 122.0 9.7 11.0 91 RT OF 253 255 N .08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 63.0 5 112.7 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 256 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 63.5 5 116.3 122.0 10.4 11.0 95 257 N 08/26/98 CF NO~THEAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 110.0 122.0 11.4 11.0 90-258 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 64.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 259 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 113.7 122.0 11.2 11.0 93 260 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 111.4 122~-o 9 • .9 11.0 91 261 N -08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF tOT 7 64.0 5 113.9 122.0 12.0 11.0 93 262 N 08/2,6/9~ CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 111.3 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 263 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 114.7 122.0 9.6 11.0 94 264 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 71.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.1 11.0 92 265 N 08/2(,/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 71.5 5 109.3 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 266 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 267 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 95 268 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 109.4 122.0 9.1 11.0 90 269 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 270 N 08/26/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 0.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.3 11.0 93 271 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 79.5 5 115.0 122.0 10.4 11.0 94 272 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 81.0 5 110.1 122.0 13. 1 11.0 90 273 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 82.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.2 11.0 92 274 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 83.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 275 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 66.0 5 110.2 122.0 9.7 11.0 90 276 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 69.0 5 113.5 122.0 9.2 11.0 93 277 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 68.0 5 110. 7 122.0 10.1 11.0 91 278 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 66.0 5 114.3 122.0 11.5 11.0 94 279 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 67.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.9 11.0 90 280 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 70.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 281 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 81.0 5 113.3 122.0 9.2 11.0 93 282 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 81.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 90
.. -- --- ---- -----.. -.. --
01/27/99 Page No. 7 SUMMARY OF FIELD .DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST -----------~LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIElD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
283 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 75.0 5 111.1 122.0 9.5 11.0 91 284 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 77.0 5 112.0 122.0 11 .3 11.0 92 285 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 78.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.2 11 .0 95 286 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 74.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.7 11.0 90 287 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 76.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.5 11.0 93 288 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 69.0 5 111.4 122,0 11.4 11.0 91 289 N· 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 84.0 5 114.2 122.il 10.8 11.0 94 290 N 08/27/98 CF LOT 7 80.0 5 111.2 122.0 9.3 11.0 91 291 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 79.5 ? 104.1 122.0 9.0 11.0 85 RT ON 292 292 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 79.5 5 111.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 RT OF 291 293 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 81.0 5 113.8 122.0 9.4 11.0 93 294 'N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 79.5 5 110.0 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 295 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 81.5 5 114.3 122.0 11.8 11.0 94 296 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 73.5 5 110.8 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 297 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 72.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 90 298 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF L,OT 7 75.0 5 1()6.6 122.0 9.5 11.0 87 RT ON 299 299 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 77.0 5 113.2 122.0 10. 1 11..'0 93 Rl OF 298 300 N 08/27/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 77.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 301 N 08/28/98· CF NORTH OF LOT 7 70.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 302 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 71.5 5 111.4 122,0 11.8 11.0 91 303 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 63.0 5 114. 7 122.0 12.4 11.0 94 304 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 64.5 5 111.4 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 305 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 64.5 5 113.5 122.0 12.6 11.0 93 306 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF .LOT 7 67.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.5 11.0· 92 307 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 69.0 5 109.6 122.0 9.8 1r.o 90 308 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 69.5 5 115.5 122.0 9.9 11.0 95 309 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 70.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 310 N 08/28/98 CF NORTH OF LOT 7 70.5 5 110.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 311 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 66.5 5 110·.5 122,0 11.8 11.0 91 312 N ()8/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST. OF LOT 7 70.0 5 113. 1 122.0 10. 1 11.0 93 313 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 72.0 5 112.5 12~.o 9.7 11.0 92 314 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 99.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 81 RT ON 315 315 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 105.2 122.0 12.4 11.0 86 RT ON 316 316 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 RT OF 315 317 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 318 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 72.0 5 109.4 122.0 9.7 11.0 90 319 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHW~ST OF LOT 7 73.5 5 113.9 122.0 11.5 11.Q 93 320 N 08/28/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 112.0 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 321 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.0 5 113.7 122.0 9.7 11.0 93 322 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 72.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 323 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 75.0 5 109.6 122.0 9.5 11.0 90 324 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 73.5 5 114.3 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 325 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 74.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.4 11. 0 92 326 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 64.5 5 111.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 327 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 113.3 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 328 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 109.9 122.0 9.8 11.0 90 329 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 65.5 5 115.9 122.0 9.0 11 .0 95
---------_ 1,_ - -- - - - --
01/27/99 Page No. 8 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
·PROJECT NUMBER: 04--960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TE.ST TEST , --------·---LOCATION --------------TEST SOI.L DRY DENSITY(pcf) .MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE ·oF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MA.X FIELD OPT COMP _,_ -... -... ---------------.. ---------.------------------------------.---.---------.. ---_,_ -----_________ ,., __ ---------------
330 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 69.5 5 111. 1 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 331 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 62.0 5 114. 7 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 332 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF ·LOT 7 64.0 5 111. 1 122.0 11. 1 11.0 91 333 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 66.0 5 110.0 1.22.0 9.8 11.0 90 334 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 68.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 335 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 67.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 336 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 68.5 5 116.0 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 337 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 70.0 5 107.4 122.0 10.6 11,0 88 RT ON 338 338 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 70.0 5 111.9 122.0 11.8 11.0 92 RT OF 337 339 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 70.5 5 111.4 122.0 12. 1 11.0 91 340 N 08/31/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 71.0 5 118.3 122.0 13.2 11.0 97 341 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 53.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.4 11.0 90 342 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 55.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 34'3 N . 08(31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 58.0 5 113.6 122.0 9.5 . 11.0 93 344 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 61.0 5 114.3 122.0 9.7 11.0 94 345 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 60.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 346 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 67.0 5 112.0 122.0 10.3 11.0 92 347 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 65.0 5 115.9 122.0 11.4 11.0. 95 348 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF ,LOT 7 70.0· 5 109.6 122.0 10.5 11,.0 . 90 349 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 72.0 5 113 • .9 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 350 N 08/31/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 7 72.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 351 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 50.0 5 112. 1 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 352 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 54.0 5 110.2 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 353 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 57.0 5 114.9 122.0 10.4 11.0 94 354 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE' OF LOT 7 53.5 5 106.3 122.0 8.2 11.0 87 RT ON 355 355 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 53.5 5 110. 7 122.0 10.0 11.0 91 RT OF 354 356 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 53.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 357 N 09/01/98, CF E. SLOPE OF LQT 7 55'.0 5 112. 7 122.0 12.6 11.0 92 358 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 57.5 5 114.2 122.0 10·.5 11.0 94 359 N 09/01/98 CF E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 60.0 5 110,.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 360 N 09/01/98 CF · E. SLOPE OF LOT 7 . 56.0 5 113.8 122.0 9.4 11.0 93 361 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 113.7 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 362 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 109.9 122.0 11.1 11.0 90 363 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 110.7 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 364 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 71.0 5 111.4 122.0 11.8 11.0 91 365 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 115.9 122.0 9. 1 11.0 95 366 N 09/01/98 CF NO~THEAST OF LOT 6 72.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.4 11.0 92 367 N 09/01/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 72.0 5 113.6 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 368 N 09/01/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 74.0 5 109.8 122.0 8.7 11. 0 90 369 N 09/01/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 76.0 5 117.1 122 .• 0 9.3 11.0 96 370 N 09/01/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 76.0 5 111.0 122.0 10.0 11.0 91 371' N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 67.0 5 103.3 122.0 8.0 11.0 85 RT ON 372 372 N 09/01/98 · CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 67.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 RT OF 371 373 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 114.3 122.0 10.5 11.0 94 374 N 09/01/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 66.0 5 117.2 122.0 9.8 11.0 96 375 N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 75.0 5 113.3 122.0 9.9 11.0 93 376 N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 73.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.7 11.0 93
-- ------,_ --· ---- - -- - -
01/27/99 Page No. 9 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST 'TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.....................
~77. N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 76.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.3 11.0 90 378 N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 78.5 5 116.0 122.0 11.4 11.0 95 379 N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 84.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 380 N 09/01/98 CF LOT 6 84.0 5 112.6 122.0 9.3 11.0 92 381 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 66.5 5 111.5 122.0 9.7 11.0 91 382 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 68.0 5 113.5 122.0 10.1 11.0 93 383 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 70.0 5 110.0 122.0 11.2 11.0 90 384 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 72.0 5 116.0 122.0 10.,2 11.0 95 385 N 09/02/98 OF SOUTH OF LOT 7 74.0 5 114.8 122.0 11.4 11 .0 94 386 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LQT 7 76.0 5 110.2 122.0 9.4 11.0 90 387 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 77.P 5 108.9 122.0 10.3 11.0 89 RT ON 388 388 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH-OF LOT 7 77.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.7 11. 0 93 RT OF 387 389 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH. OF LOT 7 71.0 5 109.9 122.0 1.1.5 11.0 90 390 N 09/02/98 CF SOUTH OF LOT 7 75.0 5 112.7 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 391 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 70.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 392 N 09/0~/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 82.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 393 N 09/02/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 80.0 5 110.0 122.0 12.6 11.0 90 394 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 76.0 5 111.9 122.0 12.2 11.0 92 395 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 75.0 5 116.0 122.0 11.8 11.0 95 396 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 84.0 5 109.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 397 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 86.0 5 118.5 122.0 11.5 11.0 97 398 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST QF LOT 9 87.0 5 112.2 122.0 11.9 11.0 92 399 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 76.0 5 106.5 122.0 10.9 11.0 87 RT ON 400 400 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 76 .. 0 5 116.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 RT OF 399 401 N 09/02/98 CF STAB I LI TY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 68.0 5 114.4 122.0 9.7 ~1.0 94 402 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 78.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.8 11 .0 90 403 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 84.5 5 111.1 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 404 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 85.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.9 11.0 93 405 N 09/02/98 CF STABI~ITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 76.0 5 111.6 122.0 10.1 11.0 91 406 N 09/02/98 CF STABrLITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 88.0 5 112.7 122.0 9.6 11.0 92 407 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 88.0 5 111.1 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 408 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 65.5 5 114.7 122.0 11.6 11.0 94 409 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 80.0 5 109.4 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 410 N 09/02/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 90.0 5 113.4 122.0 12.0 11.0 93 411 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 92.0 5 111.8 122.0 11.3 n.o 92 412 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 92.0 5 105.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 86 RT ON 413 413 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 92.0 5 115.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 94 RT OF 412 414 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 93.0 5 109.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 415 N 09/03/98 CF STABilITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 92.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 416 N 09/03/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 92.0 5 111.1 122.0 12.0 11.0 91 417 N 09/03/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 98.0 5 111.9 122.0 11. 7 11.0 92 418 N 09/03/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 100.0 5 109.7 122.0 10.8 11.0 90 419 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 102.5 5 113.5 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 420 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 107.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 421 N 09/03/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 97.5 5 106.0 122.0 8.4 11.0 87 RT ON 422 422 N 09/03/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 97.5 5 109.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 RT OF 421 423 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 106.0 5 113.8 122.0 12.1 11.0 93
--- - ---·-- -- - --- - - - --
01/27/99 Page No. 10 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATJON --------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(~f) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE c;>F ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -----------------------------------------------------------------------.. -------------------------------------------·
424 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 108.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 95 425 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 110.0 5 112.1 122.0 11.9 11.0 92 426 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE 'WEST OF LOT 9 98.0 5 111.1 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 427 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 105.0 5 113.8 122.0 9.3 11.0 93 428 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 107.0 5 109.3 122.0 9.8 11.0 90 429 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 111.0 5 114. 7 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 430 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 115.0 5 109.6 122.0· 9.1 11,0. 90 431 N 09./03/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 104.0 5 111 •. 8 122.0 11.5 11.0 92 432 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF · LOT 9 94.0 5 110.2 122.0 13.2 11.0 90 433 N 09./03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 104.0 5 115.9 122.0 9.6 11.0 95 434 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 103.0 5 110.8 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 435 N 09/03/98 GF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 102.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.o 11.0 93 436 N 09/03/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 84.0 5 103.0 122.0 12.7 11.0 84 RT ON 438 437 N 09/03/98 CF STABI.LITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 75.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.9 11.0 91 438 N 09/03/98 CF ST-ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 84.0 5 113.3 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 RT OF 436 439 N 09/03/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 70.0 5 115.4 122 •. 0 12 .• 0 11.0 95 440 N 09/03/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOP~ WEST OF LOT 9 82.0 5 110.9 122.0 9.7 11.0 91 44~ N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 109.5 5 113.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 442 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 110.0 5 110.8 122.0 9.6 11.0 91 443 N 09./04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 97.0 5 115.9 122.0 11.8 11.0 95 444 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 88.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 445 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF l:OT 9 82.0 5 115. 7 122.0 9.7 11.0 95 446 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 86.0 5 109.4 122.0 10.4 11.0 90 447 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9• 93.0 5 111.0 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 448 N, 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 70.0 5 113.6. 122.0 12.8 11.0 93 449 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 72.0 5 109.6 122.0 11.6 11.0 90 450 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 9 73.0 5 114.9 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 451 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOTS 8 & 9 76.0 5 112.6 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 452 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOTS 8 & 9 73.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 453 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SlOPE WEST OF Lots 8 & 9 71.0 5 113.8 122.0 11 .a-11.0 93 454 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOTS 8 & 9 71.0 5 110.8 122.0 13.1 11.0 91 455 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOTS 8 & 9 73.0 5 114.7 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 456 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 81.0 5 112.4 122.0 12.0 11.0 92 457 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 85.0 5 109.7 122.0 11.6 11.0 90 458 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 90.0 5 105.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 86 RT ON 459 459 N 09/04/98 CF STAB! LITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 90.0 5 113.7 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 RT OF 458 460 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 100.0 5 109.3 122.0 13.7 11.0 90 461 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 97.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 462 N 09/04/98 CF STAB! LITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 93.0 5 111.4 122.0 11.8 11.0 91 463 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 49.5 5 119.2 122.0 9.1 11.0 98 464 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 52.0 5 118 .• 3 122.0 10.7 11.0 97 465 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 55.0 5 112.5 122.0 14 .. 8 11.0 92 RT ON 466 466 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 55.0 5 116.3 122.0 13.2 11.0 95 RT OF 465 467 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 58.0 5 117.6 122.0 12.7 11.0 96 468 N 09/04/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 60.0 5 119.6' 1?2.0 13. 1 11.0 98 469 N 09/04/98 CF STAB! LITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 92.0 5 110.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 470 N 09/04/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 87.0. 5 113.6 122.0 10.9 11.0 93
--- -- -·-- ---· -.. - - -- - -
01/27/99 Page N9. 11 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST~
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX · FIELD OPT COMP ------.---"': ----------... ---------------------------------------------------.. ----·----1--------... ' _,_ --.. ... --------------
471 N 09/08/98 CF LOT 7 79.0 5 112.1 122.0 11.7 11.0 92 472 N 09/08/98 CF LOT 7 79.0 5 111.4 122.0 10 .• 8 11.0 91 473 N 09/08/98 CF, LOT 7 81.0 5 113 •. 8 122.0 12.2 11.0 93 474 N 09/08/98 CF LOT 7 83.0 5 109.6 122.0 11 . 5 11.0 90 475 N 09/08/98 CF LOT 7 84.0 5 106.3 122.0 10. 1 11.0 87 RT ON 476 476 N 09/08/98 CF LOT 7 84.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.4 11.0 92 RT OF 475 477 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 101.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.7 11.0 90 478 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 102.0 5 113.7 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 479 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 107.0 5 111.1 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 480 .N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 99.0 5 114.7 122.0 12.4 11.0 94 481 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 85.0 5 · 109.3 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 482 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 94.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 483 N 09/08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST .OF LOT 7 105.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 484 N 09/,08/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 112.0 5 112,4 122.0 10 .. 6 11.0 92 485 N 09/08/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 81.0 5 115.9 122.0 12.4 11.0 95 486 N 09/09/98 CF STAB I LI TY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 7 112.0 5 109.6 122:0 11.4 11.0 90 487 N 09/09/98 CF LA GOSTA GLEN ABUTMENT 56.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 488 N 0?/09/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN ABUTMENT 58.0 5 115.2 122.0 10.9 11.0 94 489 N 09/09/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN ABUTMENT 60.0 5 111.4 122:0 11.8 11.0 91 490 N 0.9/09'/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN ABUTMENT 62.0 5 117.1 122.0 12.7 11.0 96 491 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 48.0 5 116.4 122.0 10.9 11.0 95 492 N 09/09/98 · CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 50.0 5 120.0 122.0 11.3 11.0 98 493 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSlA GLEN 52.0 5 116.8 122.0 10.6 11.0 96 494 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE .ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 54.0 5 f18.3 122.0 9.7 11 .. 0 97 495 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGJ: ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 51.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.8 11.0 95 496 N 09./09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 55.0 5 119. 7 122.0 10.6 11.0 98 497 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 56.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 95 498 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 58.0 5 117 .2 122.0 10.5 11.0 . 96 499 N 09/09/98 CF BRIDGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 59.0 5 111.5 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 RT ON 500 500 N 09/09/98 CF BRl'DGE ABUTMENT LA COSTA GLEN 59.0 5 118.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 97 RT OF 499 501 N 09/11/98 CF tA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 45.5 5 119.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 98 502 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 48.0 5 117 .4 122.0 9.8 11.0 · 96 503 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 5i.o 5 116.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 504 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 53.5 5 117.9 122.0 10.7 11. 0 97 505 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 56.0 5 118.7 122.0 10.0 11.0 97 506 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 58.0 5 117.4 122.0 10.5 11.0 96 507 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 61.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 RT ON 508 508 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 61.0 5 117 .2 122.0 10.2 11.0 9.6 RT OF 507 509 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 60.0 5 118.3 122.0 9.9 11.0 97 510 N 09/11/98 CF LA COSTA GLEN BRIDGE ABUTMENT 62.0 5 116.0 122.0 10.4 11.0 95 511 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 68.0 5 112.6 122.0 12.2 11.0 92 512 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 67.5 5 110.2 122.0 11.6 11.0 90 513 N ' 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.8 11.0 93 514 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 111.5 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 515 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 63.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.8 11.0 93 516 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 62.0 5 114.8 122.0 12.3 11.0 94 517 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 65.0 5 111.8 1?2.0 10.6 11.0 92
-.. - - --·---- - - -- --- - -
. 01/27/99 Pag~ No. 12 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION --,-----------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pc:f) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FJELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ---.-----... ------------------------------------------------------·-------------------------·----------....... ------------
518 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 65.0 5 112.7 122.0 11. 7 11.0 92 519 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF ~OT 7 67.0 5 111. 1 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 520 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 7 69.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.8 11.0 93. 521 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 62.0 5 113. 1 122.0 10.6 11..0 93 522 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 64.0 5 110.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 523 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 64.0 5 115.9 122.0 12.4 11.0 95 '524 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 66.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 ·525 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 68.0 5 109.9 122 •. 0 12.8 11.0 90 526 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 70.0 5 116.4 122.0 10.9 11.0 95 527 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 68.0 5 111.4 122.0 1·1. 1 11.0 91 528 N 09/11/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 74.o 5 114.2 122.0 9.6 11.0 94 529 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 70.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 530 N 09/11/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 72.0 5 114.4 122.0 11.4 11.0 94 531 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 75.Q 5 112.6 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 532 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 75.5 5 114.4 122.0 11.8 11..0. 94 533 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 76.0 5 106.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 87 RT ON 534 534 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 76.0 5 111.3 122.0 12.1 11.0 91 RT OF 533 535 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 74.0 5 11L5 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 536 N 09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 76.0 5 113.8 122.0 1.0.9 11.0 93 537 N ·09/14/98 CF SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 75.0 5 109.6 122.0 11.8 11.0· 90 538 N 09/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 75.0 5 112.0 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 539 N 09/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 78.0 5 114.4 122.0 11. 7 11.0 94 540 N 09/14/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 7 78.0 5 110.9 122.0. 13.0 11.0 91 541 N 09/14/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 80.0 5 113.0 122.0 12.8 11.0 93 542 ·N 09/14/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 82.0 5 111.1 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 543 N 09/14/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 80.0 5 113.0 122.0 13.3 11.0 93 544 N 09/14/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST ,OF LOT 7 84.0 5 109.4 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 545 N 09/14/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 86.0 5 112.6 122.0 12.2 11.0 92 546 N 09/14/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 82.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.9 11.0 91 547 N 09/14/98 CF NORTHWEST OF LOT 7 82.0 5 114.8 122.0 12.7 11.0 94 548 N 09/15/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 86.0 5 111.2 122.0 11.6 11.0 91 549 N 09/15/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 90.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 550 N 09/15/98 CF ST AB I LITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 93.0 5 110.2 122.0 10.4 11.0 90 551 N 09/15/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 95.0 5 111. 9 122.0 13.6 11.0 92 552 N 09/15/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 97.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.2 11.0 90 553 N 09/15/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 92.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.4 11.0 93 554 N 09/15/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 99.0 5 106.4 12?.0 9.2 11.0 87 RT ON 555 555 N 09/15/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 99.0 5 112. 7 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 RT OF 554 556 N 09/15/98 CF STABI~ITY SLOPE SOUTHWEST OF LOT 7 98.0 5 109.3 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 557 N 09/15/98 CF LOT 6 83.0 5 113.9 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 558 N. 09/15/98 CF LOT 6 83.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.3 11.0 95 559 N 09/15/98 CF LOT 6 83.0 5 111.0 122.0 10.0 11.0 91 560 N 09/15/98 CF LOT 6 85.0 5 113.1 122.0 11. 1 11.0 93 561 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 85.0 5 113.2 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 562 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 85.5 5 109.4 122.0 10.8 11.0 90 563 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 86.0 5 116.3 122.0 13.0 11.0 95 564 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 86.5 5 112.6 122'.0 12.7 11.0 92
---· --- - - -- --... -·-- -- -
01/27/99 Page No. 13 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP --------------------------------------------------------------, ________ ------------------------------------------
565 N 09i16/98 CF LOT 6 87.0 5 110.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 566 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 87.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 567 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 6 87.5 5 113.2 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 568 N 09/16/98 CF DE SILT BASIN LOT 4 70.0 5 110.5 122.0 9.6 11.0 91 569 N 09/16/98 CF DE SILT BASIN L;OT 4 72.0 5 110.0 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 570 N 09./16/98 CF DE SILT BASIN LOT 4 74.0 5 112. 7 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 571 N 09/16/98 CF DE SILT BASIN LOT 4 80.0 5 104.2 122.0 9.8 11.0 85 RT ON 572 572 N 09/16/98 CF DE SILT BASIN LOT 4 80.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.7 11. 0 93 RT OF 571 573 N 09/16/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 77.0 5 112.4 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 574 N 09/16/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 72.0 5 114.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 94 575 N 09/16/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 75.0 5 109.6 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 576 N 09/16/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 78.0 5 113. 1 1?2.0 11. 7 11.0 93 577 N 09/16/98 CF NORTHEAST OF LOT 6 78.0 5 110.7 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 578 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 4 85.0 5 t13.1 122.0 11.2 11.0 93 579 N 09/16/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA STATION 27+00 76.0 5 109.4 122.0 10.1 11.0 90 580 N 09/16/98 CF LOT 4 . 84.0 5 111.9 122.0 11.7 11.0 92 581 N 09/16/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 6 77.0' 5 116.8 122.0 12.8 11.0 96 582 N 09/16/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 6 79.0 5 109.9 122.0 13.7 11.0 90 583 N 09/16/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 6 78.0 5 110.7 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 584 N ·09/16/98 CF SOUTHEAST OF LOT 6 82.0 5 113 • .5 122.0 11.5 11.0 93 585 N 09/16/98 CF STABILITY FILL WEST OF LOT 6 90.0 5 109.4 122.0 10.1 11. 0 90 586 N 09/16/98 CF STABILITY FILL WEST OF LOT 6 92.0 5 112.5 122.0 9.7 11.0 92 587 N 09/16/98 CF STABILITY FILL WEST OF LOT 6 101.0 5 114.7 122.0 11.8 11.0 94 588 N 09/16/98 CF STABILITY FILL WEST OF LOT 6 103.0 5 110.7 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 589 N 09/16/98 CF STAil IL ITY FI LL WEST OF LOT 6 96.0 5 11.2. 7 122.0 12.1 1'1.0 92 590 N 09/16/98 <;F STABILITY FILL WEST OF LOT 6 103.0 5 113.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 591 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 75.0 5 114.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 592 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 80.0 5 110.0 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 593 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 82.0 5 113. 7 122.0 9.4 11.0 93 594 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 87.0 5 110.7 122.0 rn.5 11.0 91 595 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 83.5 5 114.4 122.0 11.3 11.0 94 596 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 79.0 5 104.9 122.0 12.7 11.0 86 RT ON 597 597 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 79.0 5 109.9 122.0 11.9 11.0 90 RT OF 596 598 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 88.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.6 11. 0 93 599 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 85.0 5 110.7 122.0 13.0 11.0 91 600 N 09/17/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 85.0 5 112.5 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 601 N 09/17/98 .CF EAST OF LOT 4 87.0 5 112. 7. 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 602 N 09/17/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA STATION 26+50 83.5 5 115.0 122.0 11.8 11.0 94 603 N 09/17/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA ST A TI ON 25+50 86.5 5 110.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 604 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 88.p 5 110.8 122.0 12.5 11 .0 91 605 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 82:0 5 113.7 122.0 10. 1 11.0 93 606 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 72.0 5 110.3 122.0 13.5 11.0 90 607 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 74.0 5 114.8 122.0 9.6 11.0 94 608 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 76.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.8 11.0 91 609 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 78.0 5 110.2 122.0 11.3 11.0 90 610 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 80.0 5 112.5 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 611 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 82.0 5 105.0 122.0 12.6 11.0 86 RT ON 612
- ----- - - - -- - - - --- - ---
'01/27/99 Page No. 14 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS.
PROJECT-NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION --" ---·-------, TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH -DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE PIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -------------------------___ . _________________ , ------------------------............ --------: ---------------.. ------· .. -----
612 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 82.0 5 111.5 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 RT -OF 611 613 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 85.0 5 114.0 122.0 12.8 11.0 93 614 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF tOT 4 SLOPE 86.0 5 109.9 122 .. 0 10.9 11.0 90 615 N 09/17/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 SLOPE 88.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.8 11.0 92 616 N 09/17/98 CF LOT 5 95.0 5 114.8 122.0 12.7 11.0 94 617 N 09/17/98 CF LOT 5 97.0 5 109.8 122.0 9.9 11.0 90 618 N 09/17/98 CF LOT 5 98.0 5 110.9 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 619 N 09/17/98 CF LOT 5 97.0 5 113.2 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 620 N 09/17/98 CF LOT 5 95.5 5 114.2 122.0 9.2 11 .0 94 621 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 76.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 622 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 90.0 ~ 110,3 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 623 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF ~OT 4 84.5 5 113.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 624 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 91.0 5 110.9 122.0 12.8 11.0 91 625 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 73.!) 5 112.0 122.0 11.4 11.0 92 626 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 78.5 5 11_0·.1 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 627 N 09/18/98 CF EA$T OF LOT 4 87.5 5 113.9 122.0 9.7 11.0 93 628 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 90.5 5 107.4 122.0 10.8 11.0 88 RT ON 629 629 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 90.5 5 111.4 122.0 11.6 11.0 91 RT OF 628 630 N 09,/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 81..5 5 112.5 122.0 12.0 11.0 92 631 N 09./18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 115.0 2 111.2 121.5 5.5 8.5 92 632 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9. 129.0 2 109.3 121.5 6.2 8.5 90 633 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 143.0 2 11Q.8 121.5 5.9 8.5 91 634 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 146.5 2 113.3 121.5 6.4 8.5 93 635 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 139.0 2 110.4 121.5 6.2 8.5 91 636 N .. 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 123.4 2 111.9 121.5 5 .(> 8.5 92 637 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 118.0 2 111.9 121.5 6.9 8.5 92 638 N 09/18/98 CF TOP OF SLOPE LOT 9 106.0 2 109.5 121.5 6.6 8.5 90 639 ·N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 84.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 640 N 09/18/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 86.0 5 111.5 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 641 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 72.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 642 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 75.0 5 110.2 122.0 11.4 11.0 90 643 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 78.5 5 116.0 122.0 10.7 11.0 95 644 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 79.0 5 110.9 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 645 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 82.0 5 113.1 122.0 10. 1 11.0 93 646 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 82.0 5 109.6 122.0 9.9 11.0 90 647 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 85.6 5 112.0 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 648 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 87.0 5 112.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 92 649 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 89.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.8 11.0 90 650 N 09/18/98 CF EAST SIDE OF LOT 4 91.0 5 115.2 122.0 11.4 11.0 94 651 N 09/21/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 102.5 5 112. 7 122.0 12.7 11.0 92 652 N 09/21/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 105.0 5 114.2 122.0 10.8 11.0 94 653 N 09/21/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 105.0 5 110.7 122.0 9.9 11.0 91 654 N 09/21/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 107.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.4 11.0 93 655 N 09/21/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 105.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.6 11.0 90 656 N 09/21/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE LOT 5 110.0 5 112.1 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 657 N 09/21/98 CF STABI.LITY SLOPE LOT 5 108.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 658 N 09/21/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 4 88.0 5 113.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 93
--· --· ----·-----11111 - - - - -
01/27/99 Page No. 15 SUMMARY 01' FIELP DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST -------a----~OCATION --------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ---------------------------------------------------------------·----· ----------------------------------------------
659 N 09/21/98 CF SLOPE E. OF LOT 4 90.0 5 114.2 122.0 9.4 11.0 94 660 N 09/21/98 CF Sl0PE E. OF LOT 4 90.5 5 111.2 122.0 12.3 11.0 91 661 N 09/21/98 CF ~OT 4 90.0 5 113.8 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 662 N 09/21/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 1'11.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 663 N 09/21/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11 .5 11.0 91 664 N 09/22/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE LOT 5 110.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.0 11.0 95 665 N 09/22/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT 5 112.0 5 113.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 93 666 N 09/22/98 CF STAB! LITY SLOPE LOT 5 113.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.5 11.0 90 667 N 09/22/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT 5 104.0 5 114.1 122.0 9.2 11.0 94 668 N 09/22/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 92.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.6 11.0 92 669 N 09/?,2/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 92.0 5 110.8 122.0 12.4 11 . .0 91 670 N 09/22/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 0.0 5 113.6 122.0 12.6 11.0 93 671 N 09/23/98, CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT 5 113.0 5 106.4 122.0 12.7 11.0 87 RT ON 672 672 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOP-E LOT 5 113.0 5 110,.8 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 RT OF 671 673 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB IL !TY SLOPE LOT 5 115.0 5 114.4 122.0 11.9 11.0 94 674 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT 5 115.0 5 110.2 122 .. 0 12.3 11.0 90 675 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB IL !TY SLQPE LOT 5 118.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 676 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT 5 118.0 5 109.3 122.0 11.4 11.0 90 677 N 09./23/98 CF ST AB I L !TY SLOPE LOT: 5 128.5 5 112.5 122.0 10.8 11.0 92 678 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE LOT 5 130.0 5 110.8 122 .• 0 12.6 11.0 91 679 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB IL !TY SLOPE LOT·5 130.0 5 113.5 122.0 11.5 11.0 93 680 N 09/23/98 CF STAB! LITY SLOPE LOT 5 132.0 5 114.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 94 681 N 09/23/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE i..oT 5 124.0 5 110.4 122.0 10.0 11.0 90 682 N 09/23/98 CF STAB IL !TY SLOPE LOT 5 126.0 2 110.3 121.5 9.1 8.5 91 683 N 09/23/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 5 129.0 5 111.2 122 .• 0 11.0 1.1.0 91 684 N 09/23/98 CF ST AB IL !TY SLOPE LOT 5 131.0 5 110.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 91 685 N 09/24/98' CF EAST OF LOT 4 77.0 5 113.6 122.0 12.2 11. 0 93 686 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 79.0 5 114.2 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 687 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 81.0 5 111. 7 122.0 9.9 11.0 92 688 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 82.0 5 109.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 689 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 84.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 690 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 85.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.3 11.0 90 691 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 85.0 5 112.0 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 692 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 91.0 5 109.4 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 693 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 87.0 5 114.2 122.0 10.9 11.0 94 694 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 86.0 5 105.9 122.0 13.8 11.0 87 RT ON 695 695 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 86.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.6 11.0 90 RT OF 694 696 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 87.0 5 113.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 93 697 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 88.0 5 111.8 122.0 11.0 11.0 92 698 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 88.0 5 112.6 122.0 10. 1 11.0 92 699 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 86.5 5 110.2 122.0 9.7 11.0 90 700 N 09/24/98 CF EAST OF LOT 4 90.0 5 110.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 701 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 88.0 5 113.0 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 702 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 88.0 5 109.4 122.0 11. 1 11.0 90 703 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 90.0 5 110.7 122.0 12.5 11.0 91 704 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 87.5 5 114.3 122.0 9.6 11.0 94 705 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 90.0 5 112.4 122.0 10.5 11.0 92
-- ---- ----- ----· --- -
01/27/99 Page No. 16 SUMMARY OF FiELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ---~--------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ----------.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.. ----------
706 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 93.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 707 N 09/2~/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 94.0 5 109.8 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 708 N 09/25/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 91.0 5 109.9 1:t2.o 11.8 11.0 90 709 N 09/25/98 CF E. ·SIDE OF LOT 4 93.0 5 113.1 122·.0 10.7 11.0 93 710 N 09/25/98 CF E. SlDE OF LOT 4 92.0 5 114.8 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 711 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 63.0 5 116.0 122.0 12.7 11.0 95 712 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 65.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.4 11..0 93 RT ON 713 713 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 65.Q 5 117.1 122.0 13.6 11.0 96 RT OF 712 714 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 65.0 5 118.0 122.0 12.0 11.0 97 715 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 68.0 5 115.4 122.0 11. 7 11.0 95 716 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIQGE ABUTMENT 70.0 5 117.2 12.2.0 10.8 11.,0 96 717 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 72.0 5 112. 7 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 RT ON 718 718 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 72.0 5 116.3 122.0 12.5 11.0 95 RT OF 717 719 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 72.0 5 116.8 122.0 11.3 11.0 96 720 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 74.0 5 117.5 122.0 10.2 11.0 96 721 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 63.0 '5 119.7 122.0 10.3 11.0 -96 722 . N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMl;NT 63.0 5 115. 7 122.0 12.4 11.0 95 723 N 09/28/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 65.0 5 117:9 122.0 11.6 11.0 97 724 N 09./29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 67.0 5 115.8 122.0 10.8 11.0 95 725 N 09(/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELQNA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 68.5 5 120.0 122.0 11. 7 11.0 98 726 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 70 •. 0 5 117 .5 122.0 10.5 11.0 96 727 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 75.0 5 116.4 122.0 10.3 11.0 95 728 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 78.0 5 11Q.O 122.0 12.7 11.0 90 RT ON 729 729 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCElONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 78.0 5 117 .0 122.0 11.8 11.0 96 RT OF 728 730 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCEl.:ONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 80.0 5 115.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 95 731 N 09/29/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 92.0 5 112.0 122.0 12.~ 11.0 92 732 N 09/29/98 CF E. SIDE OF lOT 4 94.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.8 11.0 91 733 N 09/29/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 92.0 5 113.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 734 N 09/29/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 91.5 5 110.7 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 735 N 09/29/98 CF E. SIDE OF LOT 4 95.0 5 113.8 122.0 11.1 11.0 93 736 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 65.5 5 116.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 95 737 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 66.0 5 117 .4 122.0 11.0 11.0 96 738 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 66.0 5 115.4 122,0 9.6 11.0 95 739 N ·09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 82.0 5 118.5 122.0 10,0 11.0 97 740 N 09/29/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA BRIDGE ABUTMENT 84.0 5 115.9 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 741 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 111.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 742 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 114.9 122.0 11.2 11.0 94 743 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 111. 1 122.0 10.6 11.0 91 744 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 113. 1 122.0 9.8 11.0 9;3 745 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 109.3 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 746 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 110. 7 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 747 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 93.0 5 116.3 122.0 9.1 11.0 95 748 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 112. 7 122.0 10.3 11.0 92 749 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 113.8 122.0 11. 7 11.0 93 750 N 09/30/98 CF LOT 4 93.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.8 11.0 90 751 N 09/30/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 6 68.0 5 102.5 122.0 10.4 11.0 84 RT ON 752 752 N 09/30/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 6 68.0 5 111.2 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 RT OF 751
-- -----------·--.. ----·-
01/27/99 Page No. 17 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN· VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP --------------·---------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------------------
753 N 09/30/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 6 72.0 5 11~.6 122.0 12.3 11.0 93 754 N 09/30/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 6 75.0 5 110.2 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 755 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 102.0 5 107.2 122.0 10. 1 11 .0 88 RT ON 756 756 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 102 •. 0 5 111.5 122.0 12.2 11.0 91 RT OF 755 757 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 106.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.6 11 .0 93 758 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 109.0 5 111.1 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 759 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 104.0 5 114.9 122.0 12. 1 11.0 94 760 N 10/01/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 106.0 5 110.2 122.0 11 .1 11.0 90 761 N 10/01/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 104.0 5 113.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 93 762 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY Sl:.OPE . WEST OF LOT 4 106.0 5 110.0 122.0 13.4 11.0 90 763 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF l.:OT 4 110.0 5 112.Q 122.0 12.2 11 .0 92 764 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF !:.OT 4 106.0 5 115.8 122.0 9.1 11 .0 95 765 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF l.,OT 4 111.0 5 111.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 766 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF l:OT 4 108.0 5 113.4 122.0 11.4 11.0 93 767 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT .4 109.0 5 105.9 122.0 12.6 11.0 87 RT ON 768 768 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 109.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 92 RT OF 767 769 N 10/01/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 113.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.8 11.0 91 770 N 10/01/98 CF STABI-LITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 111.5 5 113.5 122.0 10.5 11.0 93 771 N 10/05/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA 92.0 5 111.4 i22.o 10.2 11.0 91 772 N 10/05/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA 93.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 773 N 10/05/98 CF CALLE BARCELONA 93.0 5 109.9 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 774 N 10/05/98 CF CALLE 'BARCELONA 95.0 5 114.~' 122.0 11.4 11 .. 0 94 775 N 10/05/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE W. SIDE OF LOT 4 115.0 5 113. 1 122.0 10.6 '11.0 93 776 N 10/05/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE W. SIDE OF LOT 4 118.0 5 112.5 122.0 10. 1 11 .0 92 777 N 10/05/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE w: SIDE OF LOT 4 120.0 5 1·10. 7 122.0 9.7 11 .0 91 778 N 10/05/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE W. SIDE OF LOT 4 120.0 5 109.4 122.0 11 .5 11.0 90 779 N 10/05/98 EF STAB I LI TY SLOPE W. SiDE OF LOT 4 122.0 5 113.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 78Q N 10/05/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE W. SIDE OF LOT 4 124.0 5 109.3 122.0 12.0 11.0 90 781 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 126.0 5 104.8 122.0 10.7 11,0 86 RT ON 782 782 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 126.0 5 111.4 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 RT OF 781 783 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 128.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 784 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 130.0 5 111.9 122.0 9.6 11.0 92 785 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 126.0 5 111.1 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 786 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 132.0 5 115.2 122.0 10.2 11.0 94 787 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 135.0 5 109.6 122.0 12.6 11 .0 90 788 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 135.0 5 113.7 122.0 10.4 11.0 93 789 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 138.0 5 111.9 122.0 9.9 11.0 92 790 N 10/05/98 CF SLOPE LOT 4 135.0 5 114.2 122.0 10.8 11.0 94 791 N 10/05/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 138.0 5 112.0 122.0 12.6 11.0 92 792 N 10/05/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 140.0 5 115.0 122.0 10.8 11.0 94 793 N 10/05/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE LOT 4 142.0 5 109.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 90 794 N 10/05/98 CF ST AB I L ITY SLOPE LOT 4 144.0 5 110.9 122.0 12. 1 11.0 91 795 N 10/05/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE LOT 4 139.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 796 N 10/05/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 145.0 5 110.0 122.0 11.4 11.0 90 797 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 120.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 798 N 10/06/98 CF ST AB I LI TY SLOPE LOT 4 127.0 5 109.4 122.0 9.8 11.0 90 799 N 10/06/98 CF ST ABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 142.0 5 113.9 122.0 11.4 11 .0 93
-·-- - -- - - --· --·--·-----·
01/27/99 Page No. 18 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST -------------LOCATION --------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MQI$TURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE bF ELEV(ft) TYP~ FIEtD MAX FIELD OPT COMP -----------------------... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
800 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE LOT 4 145.5 5 114.2 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 801 N 10/06/98 CF STAB I L ITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 125.0 5 111.8 122.0 12.2 11.0 92 802 N . 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 125.0 5 110.2 122.0 10.1 11..0 90 803 N 10/06/98 CF STABIUTY SLOPE WEST OF -LOT 4 146.0 5 105.9 122.0 11.6 11.0 87 RT ON 804 804 N 10/06/98 CF ST AB 11 ITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 146.0 5 114.8 122,0 10.9 11.0 94 RT OF 803 805 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 135.0 5 110.3 122.0 13.5 11.0 90 806 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 130.0 5 112.6 122,0 12.4 11.0 92 807 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 129.0 5 111.0 122.0 9.9 11.0 91 808 N 10/06/98 CF STABlLITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 150.0 5 113.0 122.0 11. 7 11.0 93 809 N 10/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 153.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 810 N 1Q/06/98 CF STABILITY SLOPE WEST OF LOT 4 130.0 5 111.9 122.0 9.7 11.0 92 811 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 122+50 60.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 812 N 10/07/98 CF EL GAMINO REAL STATION 121+85 62.Q 5 111.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 813 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 120+35 62.5 5 113.8 122.0 12.3 11.0 93 814 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REA~ STATION 119+20 62.0 5 110.8 122.0 10. 1 11.0 91 815 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL SlATION 122+15 64.0 5 112.1 122.0 9.7 11.0 92 816 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 121+00 65.0 5 111.1 122.0 10.2 11.0 91 817 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 119+65 66.0 5 109.3 122.0 11. 0 11.0 90 818 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 118'+60 63.0 5 112.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 819 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 121+55 68.0 5 111.5 122.0 9.9 11.0 91 820 N 10/07/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 12_0+05 68.Q 5 1,13.5 122.0 11. 7 11.0 93 821 N 10/08/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 118+50 65.0 5 114.0 122.0 11 .2 11.0 93 82~ N 10/08/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 119+00 63.0 5 111.4 122.0 9.4 11.0 91 823 N 10/08/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 112+5!) 68.0 5 111.5 122 •. 0 12.3 1'1.0 91 824 N 10/08/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 104+50 64.0 5 115.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 95 825 N 10/09/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 115+80 65.0 ·5 11b.5 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 826 N 10/09/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 114+60 76.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.8 11.0 93 827 N 10/09/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 109+90 63.0 5 115.5 122.0 10.1 11.0 95 828 N 10/09/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 113+10 68.0 5 111.5 122.0 11 .8 11.0 91 829 N 10/09/98 CF EL ·CAMINO REAL STATION 111+60 73.0 5 112.5 122~·0 12.3 11.0 92 830 N 10/09/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 108+60 68.0 5 109.3 122.·0 10.6 11.0 90 831 N. 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 88.0 5 113.7 122.0 10 .. 8 11.0 .93 832 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 105.4 122.0 11.6 11.0 86 RT ON 833 833 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.1 11.0 90 RT OF 832 834 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 114.7 122.0 11 .5 11.0 94 835 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 111.4 122.0 12.3 11.0 91 836 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 113.2 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 837 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 109.6 122.0 12. 1 11.0 90 838 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 111.9 122.0 9.8 11.0 92 839 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110.7 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 840 N 10/09/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 113.8 122.0 9.1 11.0 93 841 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 113.2 122.0 9.8 11.0 93 842 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 843 N 10/12/98 C.f LOT 4 92.0 5 115.0 122.0 11. 7 11.0 94 844 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 845 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 110.9 122.0 9.5 11.0 91 846 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.3 11.0 93
------:-;,----·-_, _, -/--·---
01/27/99 Page ·No. 19 SUMMARY OF F.IELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION ------------·--TEST SOIi, DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIEIID OPT COMP ---------· --------------------------------------------------------·-----------------------------------------------
847 N 10/12/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 109.3 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 848 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 106+30 62.0 5 111,9 122.0 10.6 11. 0 92 849 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 107+75 64.0 5 110.5 122.0 12.9 11.0 91 850 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL ST A TI ON 109+45 70.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.3 11.0 91 851 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 72.0 5 113.0 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 852 ,N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 76.0 5 106.0 122.0 11.6 11.0 87 RT ON 853 853 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 76.0 5 1'11.5 122.0 9.6 11.0 91 RT OF 852 854 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 78.0 ~ 114.4 122.0 10.9 11.0 94 855 N 10/12/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 68.0 5 110.3 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 856 N 10/1~/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 68.0 5 113.6 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 857 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 72.0 5 109.4 122.0 11.3 11. 0 90 858 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 74.0 5 111.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 859 N 10/1·3/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 73.0 5 11Q.~ 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 860 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL 78.0 5 114.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 94 861 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 102+35 62.() 5 113.2 122.0 12.4 1'1.0 93 862 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 103+45 64.0 5 109.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 90 863 N 10/13/98 Cf. EL CAMINO· REAL STATION 104+10 64.0 5 114.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 94 864 N 10/13/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL STATION 102+70 66.0 5 110. 7 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 865 N 1:0/13/98 CF LOT 4 93.0 5 113.6 122.0 12.5 1,1.0 93 866 N 1'0/13/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 110.8 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 867 N 10/13/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 112. 7 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 868 N 10/13/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.7 11.0 90 869 N 10/13/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 104.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 86 RT ON 870. 870 N 10/13/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 RT OF 869 871 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 113.5 122.0 12.7 11. 0 93 872 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 109.5 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 873 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 11L3 122.0 11.2 11.0 91 874 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 114. 7 122.·0 9.8 11.0 94 875 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 93.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 876 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 113. 1' 122.0 11. 1 11.0 93 877 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110.8 122.0 12.0 11.0 91 878 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 109.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 879 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 114.8 122.0 9.8 11.0 94 880 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 93 881 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 113.3 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 882 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 109.3 122.0 11.3 11.0 90 883 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 114. 7 122.0 , 10.5 11.0 94 884 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 89.0 5 110.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 885 N 10/14/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.2 11.0 93 886 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 90.0 5 113.2 122.0 9.7 H.O 93 887 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 106.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 87 RT ON 888 888 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 110.2 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 RT OF 887 889 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 112. 7 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 890 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 111. 1 122.0 10.2 11. 0 91 891 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 112.6 122.0 12.7 11.0 92 892 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 109.4 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 893 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 101.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 93
--· .. ---· .. - --·-,--,--. . -- --
01/<27/99 Page No. 20 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCAlION --------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF .,
ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ------------.. -. ---·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------.. --------------
894 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 114.9 122.0 10.9 11.0 94 895 N. 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 111.3 122.0 12.7 11.0 91 896 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 897 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 109.4 122.0 11.3 11.0 90 898 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 113.2 122.d 12.9 11.0 93 899 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 114.4 122.0 13.8 11.0 94 900 N 10/15/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110. 7 122.0 12.0 11.0 91 901 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 113.1 122.0 12.7 11.0 93 902 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.9 11.0 90 903 N" 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 114.2 122.0 11.3 11.0 94 904 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 103.0 122.0 9.1 11.0 84 RT ON 905 '905 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 111.4 122".0 10.2 11.0 91 RT OF 904 906 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 113.3 122.0 10.9 11.0 93 907 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 110".0 122.0 11.. 7 11.0 90 908 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 114.3 122.0 9.0 11.0 94 909 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 112.2 122.0 10. 1 11.0 ?2 910 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 110.8 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 911 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 92.0 5 112.0 122.0 9.7 11.0 92 912 N 1,0/16/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 913 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 113.5 122.0· 9.5 11.0 93 914 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 93.0 5 110.7 122.0 10. 1 11.0 91 915 N 10/16/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.2 11.0 92 916 N 10/19/98. CF LOT 4 93.0 5 113.2 122.0 10 •. 7 11.0 93 917 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 110.3 122.0 11:.5 11.Q 90 918 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 110.7 122.0 9.8 11.0 91 919 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 112.0, 122.0 10.6 11.0 92 920 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 110.6 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 921 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 102.0 5 111.0 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 922 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 115.2 12_2.0 10.5 11.0 94 923 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 92.5 5 118.5 122.0 11. 7 11.0 97 924 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 111.8 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 925 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 109.9 122.0 11. 7 11.0 90 926 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.2 11.0 93 927 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 115.9 122.0 9.1 11.0 95 928 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 95.5 5 '1.12.6 122.0 9.6 11.0 92 929 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 111.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 930 N 10/19/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 112.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 93 931 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 112.0 122.0 11.0 11.0 92 932 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 109.4 122.0 12.5 11.0 90 933 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 111.1 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 934 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 99.5 5 104.2 122.0 10.4 11.0 85 RT ON 935 935 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 99.5 5 110.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 91 RT OF 934 936 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 95.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.5 11.0 90 937 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 113.1 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 938 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 99.0 5 112.0 122.0 11 .2 11.0 92 939 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.8 11.0 90 940 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 114.3 122.0 12.7 11.0 94
- - -_, ,_, -· -·------··----- -
01/27/99 Page No. 21 SUMMARY OF FIELD DE~SITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-990134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ---------•--'LOCATION--------~---'--TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ---------.. -.. ---------... --------------------------------------------·----.. ---___ , '--------------------.. ----------·-
941 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 94.0 5 114.8 122.0 12.7 11.0 94 942 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 96.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 943 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 98.0 5 112.1 122.0 9.5 11.0 92 944 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 100.0 5 117.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 96 945 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 97.0 5 110.2 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 946 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 100.5 5 111.9 122.0 10.0 11.0 92 947 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 101.0 5 108.7 122.0 11. 7 11.0 89 RT ON 948 948 N 10/20/98 CF LOT 4 101.0 5 113.8 122.0 10.9 11.0 93 RT OF 947 949 N 1-0/20/98 CF LOT 4 102.5 5 109.9 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 950 N 10/?0/98 CF LOT 4 102.0 5 112.6 122.0 9.6 11.0 92 951 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 135.0 ,5 112.0 12,2.0 12.5 11.0 92 952 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 136.0 · 5 109.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 953 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 141.0 5 j13.4 122.0 11.0 11 .0 93 954' N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 140.0 5 111.4 122.0 10.4 11.0 91 955 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 145.0 5 114.3 122.0 9.8 11..0 94 956 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 148.0 5 111.8 122.0 10.3 11.0 92 957 N 10/21/98 CF SLOPE W. OF LOT 4 150.0 5 110.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 958 N 10/21/98 CF LOT 4 103.0 5 110.7 122.0 9.7 11.0 91 959 N 10/21/98 CF LOT 4 104.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.1 11.0 9~ 960 N 10/21/98 CF LOT 4 102.0 5 110.7 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 961 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 105.0 5 112.6 1?2.0 10.7 11.Q ?2 962 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT-4 107.0 5 107.7 122.0 9,8 11.0 88 RT ON 963 963 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 107.0 5 111.4 ·122.0 10.7 11.0 91 RT OF 962 964 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 108.'0 5 110.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 965 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 110.0 5 114.3 122.0 12.3 11.0 94 966 N 10/22,98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 113.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.5 11.0 93 967 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 115.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 968 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 117.0 5 111.1 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 969 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 120.0 5 115.9 122.0 12.2 11.0 95 970 N 10/22/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 125.0 5 111.4 122.0, 11.4 11.0 91 971 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 127.0 5 114.8 122.0 9.8 11.0 94 972 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 129.0 5 110.2 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 973 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 113.0 5 113.9 122.0 10.9 11.0 93 974 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE SE OF LOT 4 1'18.0 5 110.7 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 975 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N. OF LOT 5 106.0 5 112.6 122.0 10. 1 11 . 0 92 976 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N. OF LOT 5 110.0 5 116.0 122.0 9.8 11.0 95 977 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N. OF LOT 5 125.0 5 111.3 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 978 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N~ OF LOT 5 105.0 5 109.3 122.0 12.4 11.0 90 979 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N. OF LOT 5 117.0 5 112.2 122.0 12.0 11.0 92 980 N 10/23/98 CF SLOPE N. OF LOT 5 130.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 981 N 10/27/98 FG LOT 9 70.0 5 113.1 122.0 10.8 11.0 93 982 N 10/27/98 SF LOT 9 54.0 5 111.5 122.0 12.4 11.0 91 983 N 10/27/98 SF LOT 9 58.0 5 110.3 122.0 9.7 11.0 90· 984 N 10/27/98 SF LOT 9 45.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.2 11.0 92 985 N 10/27/98 FG LOT 9 69.0 5 114.9 122.0 11.5 11.0 94 986 N 10/27/98 FG LOT 9 67.0 5 110.7 122.0 10.3 11.0 91 987 N 10/27/98 FG LOT 9 66.0 5 113.2 122.0 11.8 11.0 93
----,_ -·----·--.. ----·----
01/27/99 Page No. 22 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ·~-----------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER META DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD MAX FIELD OPT COMP ---............ ---------------------' --------__________ , -----------------------........ -------------............. ----------....................
988 N 10/27/98 SF LOT 9 64.0 5 109.8 122.0 9.6 11.0 90 989 N 10/27/98 SF· LOT 9 73.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 990 N 10/27/98 SF LOT 9 80.0 5 110.5 122.0 11.4 11.0 91-991 N 10/28/9~ SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 · 80.0 5 114.3 122.0 10. 1 11.0 94 992 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 90.0 5 110.5-122.0 11.5 11.0 91 993 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 19.0 5 114.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 94 994 ·N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE -W. OF LOT 9 92.0 5 113.0 122.0 9.8 11.0 93 995 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 95.0 5 111.8 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 996 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 82.0 5 109.6 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 997 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 113.0 5 116.-3 122.0 10-.6 11.0 95 998 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 119.0 5 110..8 122.0 9.8 n .. o 91 999 -N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT 9 110.0 5 11.0.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1000 N 10/28/98 SF SLOPE W. OF LOT '9 107.0 5 113.9 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 1001 N 10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 99+35 65.0 5 110. 7 122.0 12.7 11.0 91 1002 N .10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 97+70 70.0 5 10(>.3 122.,0 10.5 11.0 87 RT ON. 1003 1003 N 10/29/98 CF EL ·CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 97+70 70.0 5 110.2 122.0 10.2 11.0 90 RT OF 1002 1004 N 10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 96+25 72.0 5 113.6 122.0 9.8 11.0 93 1005 N 10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 95+05 74.0 5 112.4 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 1006 N 10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 93+70 77,0 5 109.9 122.0 9.1 11.0 90 1007 N 10Z29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 124+50 53.0 5 115. 7 1,22.0 9.8 11.0 95 1008 N 10/29/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 125+85 53.0 5 111.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 91 1009 N 10/29/98 Cf EL ·CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 125+10 56.0 5 112.6 122.0 11.3 11.0 92 1010 N 10/29/98 CF · EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 128+35 50.6 5 109.3 122.0 10.6 11.0 90 1011 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 129+80 53.0 5 113.8 122.0 12.4 11.0 93 1012 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 131+70 48.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1013 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 133+20 48.0 5 111.8 122.0 11.8 11.0 92 1014 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 126+75 57.0 5 110.7 122.0 9.6 11.0 91 1015 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 129+20 57.0 5 114.2 122.0 9.0 11.0 94 1016 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 130+95 54.0 5 116.0 122.0 10.2 11.0 95 1017 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 132+40 56.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 1018 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 134+30 42.0 5 112. 7 122.0 9.4 11.0 92 1019 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 133+70 45.0 5 110.9 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 1020 N 10/30/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 132+90 48.0 5 113.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 1021 N i-1/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 134+15 50.0 5 112.0 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 1022 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 131+55 52.0 5 113.5 122.0 9.8 11.0 93. 1023 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 125+55 57.0 5 109.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1024 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 128+05 58.0 5 115.0 122.0 9.6 11.0 94 1025 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/S. 126+35 57.0 5 112.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 92 1026 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/$. 124+25 57.0 5 111 .4 122.0 11.4 11.0 91 1027 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO .REAL WIDENING/STA 91+80 72.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1028 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 92+55 -74.0 5 113.0 122.0 10.5 11.0 93 1029 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 90+75 76.0 5 111.8 122.0 9.5 11.0 92 1030 N 11/02/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 98+40 70.0 5 110.9 122.0 11. 7 11.0 91 1031 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 96+60 75.0 5 106.3 122.0 9.7 11.0 87 RT ON 1032 1032 -N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA. 96+60 75.0 5 113 .1 122.0 10.6 11.0 93 RT OF 1031 1033 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 95+80 72.0 5 112.5 122.0 11.5 u.o 92 1034 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA. 94+60 77.5 5 109.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 90
--.... -- --_, ------· -· --...
01/27/99 Page No. 23 SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
PROJECT NUMBER: 04-960134-02
NAME: GREEN VALLEY
TEST TEST TEST TEST ------------LOCATION--------------TEST SOIL DRY DENSITY(pcf) MOISTURE(%) REL(%) REMARKS NUMBER METH DATE OF ELEV(ft) TYPE FIELD M,(\X FIELD OPT COMP ---------.. -.... ____ , _____ -...... .. -.. , .... -----.. -. ---------------...... -.. -.... --.--------':"' ""· -------------------------.... --....................
1035 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 92+10 76.0 5 115.5 122.0 11.3 11.0 95 1036 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 91+50 80.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 1037 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO. REAL WIDENING/S. 100+10 67.0 5 113. 1 122.0 9.6 11.0 93 1038 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 98+80 70.0 5 110.8 122.0 10.5 11.0 91 1039 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 96+05 78.0 5 116.0 122.0 11.5 11.0 95 1040 N 11/03/98 CF EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING/STA 93+05 80.0 5 112.5 122.0 10.0 11.0 92 1041 N 11/04/98 SF SLOPE FACE WEST OF LOT 9 82.0 5 113,6 122.0 11.3 11.0 93 1042 N 11/04/98 SF SLOPE FACE WEST OF LOT 9 87.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.8 11.0 90 1043 N 11/04/98 FG LOT 9 68.0 5 112.6 122.0 9.9 11.0 92 1044 N 11•/04198 FG LOT 9 66.0 5 109-.6 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1045 N 11/04/98 SF SLOPE FACE EAS,T OF LOT 9 54.0 5 114. 7 122.0 11.0 11.0 94 1046 N 11/04/98 SF SLOPE FACE EAST OF LOT 9 60.0 5 1'12.2 122.0 12.4 11.0 92 1047 N 11/04/98 FG LOT 8 70.0 5 110. 7 122.0 11.5 11.0 91 1048 N 11/04/98 FG LOT 8 67.0 5 110.3 122.0 9;8 11.0 90 1049 N 11/04/98 FG LOT 7 71.0 5 113.6 122.0 11.5 11.0 93 1050 N 11/04/98 FG LOT 7 72.0 5 110.3 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1051 N 11/05/98 SF SLOPE FACE EAST OF LOT 9 59.0 5 112.6 122.0 12.5 11.0 '92 1052 N 11/05/98 SF SLOPE FACE EAST OF LOT 9 52.0 5 116.0 122.() 11.3 11.0 95 1053 N 11:105/98 SF SLOPE FACE EAST OF LOT 9 51.0 5 109.4 122.0 9.6 11.0 90 10~4 N 11/05/98 SF LOT 8 SLOPE FACE 51.0 5 113.6 122.0 10.5 11.0 93 1055 N 11/05/98 SF LOT 8 SLOPE FACE 52.0 5 112.5 122.0 9.8 11. 0 92 1056 N 11/05/98 SF LOT 8 SLOPE FACE 50.0 5 109.4 122.0 11.4 11. 0 90 1057 N 11/05/98 SF LOT 8 SLOPE FACE 58.0 5 114.7 122,0 12.3 11.0 94 1058 N 11/05/98 FG LOT 7 76.2 5 112.4 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 1059 N' 11/05/98 FG LOT 7 81.6 5 109.6 122.0 11.5 11.0 90 1060 N 11/05/98 FG LOT 7 80.2 5 113.6 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 1061 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 73.6 5 109.7 122.0 10.7 11.0 90 1062 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 84.6 5 113,8 122.Q 9.8 11.0 93 1063 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 82.0 5 106.1 122.0 10.5 11.0 87 RT ON 1064 1064 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 82.0 5 110.3 122.0 11.8 11.0 90 RT OF 1063 1065 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 74.0 5 111.9 122.0 10.7 11.0 92 1066 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 73.0 5 110.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 91 1067 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 86.0 5 115.0 122.0 10.6 11.0 94 1068 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 79.5 5 113.8 122.0 12.5 11.0 93 1069 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 76.0 5 110.0 122.0 10.0 11.0 90 1070 N 11/06/98 FG LOT 7 76.0 5 112.6 122.0 9.7 11.0 92
C
I i
' t.
Iii
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4960134-002
APPENDIXC
LabClratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials
were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-96. The results of these tests are presented
in the table below:
MaximumDry Optimum Moisture
Sample Number Sample Description Density (pct) Content(%)
1 Light orange-brownSM 125.0 11.0
2 Light brown, SM 121.5 8.5
3 Light brown SP
'
121.0 12.5
Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion
Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to
approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation or approximately 90
percent relative compaction. The prepared I-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an
equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The
results of these tests are presented in the table below:
Sample No. Location Expansion Potential
E-1 East portion Lot 6 Low
E-2 Southwest portion Lot 6 Low
E-3 West portion Lot 7 VeryLow
E-4 Northern portion Lot 7 VeryLow
E-5 Lot8 Very Low
E-6 West portion Lot 7 Very Low
E-7 Lot9 Very Low
C-1
D
Iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Pagel of 6
1.0
3030,I094
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING
General
1.1 Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and
earthwork shown on the approved grading ,plan(s) and/or i.ndicated in the geotechnical
report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations cqntained in the
geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the
geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the
earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result
in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the
recommendations in the geotechnical report( s ). · ·
1.2 The Geotec_hnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall
employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The
Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical
report( s )and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions,
and recommendations prior to the comIJJ.enceIJJ.entofthe grading.
Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work
plan" prepareq by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel
to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing.
During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe,
map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design
assumptions. If the observed conditions ate found to be significantly different than the
interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform
the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed
conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be
geotechnically observed, mapped, elevation!l recorded, and/or tested include natural ground
after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial
removal" areas, all key bottom~, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill.
The Geotechnicai Consultant shail observe hie moiiture:.conditioningand processing of the·
subgrade,and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the
attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to
the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequentbasis.
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 2 of6
2.0
3030.1094
1.3 The Earthwork Contractor. The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified,
experienced, and knowledgeable irt earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of
ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill.
The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these
Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely
responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications.
The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a
work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of
work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to
commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical
Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in
advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and
accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware
of ali grading operations.
The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and
methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and
agency ordinances,. these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved
geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical
Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition,
inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in
a quality .of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant
shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until
the conditions are rectified.
Preparation of Areas to be Filled
2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious
material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to
the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant.
The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaJuate the extent of these removals depending on
specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic
materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter.
Nesting of the organic materials shaU not be allowed.
If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor'shall stop work in the
affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper
evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area.
As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline,
diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered
to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids
onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment,
and shall not be allowed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GE;NERAL.EARTHWORKAND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page3 of6
3.0
3030, (094
2.2 Processing; Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the
Geotechnical Consultant shall be scar'ified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing
ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section.
Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or
clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that
would inhibit uniform compaction.
2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the
approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy,
organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to
competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading.
2.4 Benching; Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal
to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or bepched. Please see the Standard Details
for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and
at least 2 feet deep, into ·competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant.
Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as
otherwise recommended by the Oeote\;hnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping
flatter than 5: l shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade
for the fill.
2.5 Evaluation/ Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and
processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations
recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable
to receive filL The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical
Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for
determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches.
Fill Material
3.1
3.2
General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other
deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to
placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high
expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical
Consultant or mixed with other spils to achieve satisfactory fill material. . . . . . . . . . .··
Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum
dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location,
material~, and placement · methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical
Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not
occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified
fill. Oversi?:e material shall .not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within
2 feet of future utilities or underground construction.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page4 of6
4.0
3030.1094
3 .3 Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall
meet the requfrements of Section 3.1. The potential import source sl)all be given to the
Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that
its suitability can be determined and appropriatetests performed.
Fill Placement and Compaction
4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per
Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The
Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading
procedures can adequately compac:t the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly
and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout.
4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed,
as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum.
Maximum. density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in
accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method
D1557-91),
4.3
4.4
4.5
Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly
spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density
(ASTM Test Method I) 1557-91 ). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be
either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently
achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity.
Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above,
compaction of slopes ~hall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot
rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing
satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of
grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of
maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-9L
Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill
soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests
shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction
test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test iocations shall be
selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to
inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 5 of6
5.0
6.0
3030.1094
4.6
4.7
Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in
vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a
guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope
face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill
construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical
Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these
minimum standards are not met.
Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate
elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate
with the project surveyor to assure· that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the
Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a
minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than
5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided.
Subdrain Instalfation
Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the
grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional
subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions
encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for
line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the
Contractor for these surveys.
Excavation
Excavations, as well as over-excavation for · remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the
. Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans
are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by· the Geotechnical
Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut
slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope ~hall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the
Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the
slope, unless otherwise recommended by th_e Geotechnical Consultant.
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I
I
I
I
I
LeightQn and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page·6 of6
7.0 Trench Backfills
1.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
3030.1094
The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench
excavations.
All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material
shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to I
foot over the top of the conduit and dehsified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and
densified to a minimum of 90 percent of m~ximum from I foot above the top of the
conduittothe surface.
The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical
Consultant.
The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least
one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill.
Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard
Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the
Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative
compaction by his alternative equipment and method.
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
PROJECTED PLANE
1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE
OF SlOPE TO APPROYED GROUND
·--------
NATURAL
GROUND
~ -
2' MIN.
HEIGHT
REMOVE
UNSUITABLE
MATERIAL
FILL SLOPE
FILL-OVER-CUT
SLOPE
KEY DEPTH
CUTl'ACE
8HM.L BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR
TO FLL PLACEMENT TO ASSURE
ADEQUATE GEOLOGIC CONOmONS
PROJECTED PI.ANE . 1·ro 1 MAXIMUM FROM
TOE OF SLOPE TO
APPAO\IED GROUND
2'MIN.
KEY DEPTH
KEYING AND· BENCHING
CUT FACE
TO BE.CONSTflJCTEO PRIOR
TO FLL PLACEMENT /-:::::-
BENCH HEIGHT '
/ CUT-OVER-FILL
SLOPE
For Subdrains See .
Standard Detail C
BENCHN3 8HAU. BE DONE WHEN SLOPES
ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1
MINIMUM BENa-t HElC3HT SHALL BE 4 FEET MINIMUM FIU. WIDTH SHALL BE g FEET
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING [][!].
SPECIFICATIONS U
STANDARD DETAILS A
REV.4111'-6_
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FINISH GRADE
----------10· MIN----coMPA.CTED FILL·-----SLOPE ..=-..=----------:-------------------------------------~ -----------------FACE ------------. ------. ------: ---------==~==-=_An _____ =-= n-----=-· -=--a--=-------::-.:;.e:: . . --. ------. ---------- . ---------'----------~ --------------_ ~=-=--::;~ -·. ~: ~u· J:_:-·-===3=-:r...::========? --------------D-o------. -------~----------:10· MIN~ __ ::;;2:: __ ...., __ -:---: ----~-----:-~;:--------· . ------~--------------.-A• MIN ---15• MIN·--------=-----=-· ------~ ---------. --.....-. ··--.
-=----. _-_-_-_----=----. -~------. ~ ~---------------~---------~ -------. ~-. ------. ------·
--------___ 7 _---__ ""?S---_-_-_-_;_-_-_ . _ _Q ___ -·-------~--------=-----. = -=---=--~-OVERSIZE • __ ;....;.... ___ :__ _ _.: _____ ~ __ _.__c...._. . JETTED OR FLOODED
.,;___-:: L-.:_-_'-:..WINDROW :-_.:_-_-'-_...:.___-__ -...::.---:..._.;.;.. -.----G~NULAR MATERIAL
• Oversize rock Is .larger than 8 inches
In largest dirnensf?n. .
• Excavate a trench in the compacted
fill deep enough to bury all the rock.
• Backfill with granular soil jetted or
flooded In place to fill all the voids.
• Do not bury rock within 1 o feet of
- . finish grade.
• Windrow d buried roc1c shall be
parallel to the finished slope fill. ELEVATION A-A'
PROFILE. ALONG WINDROW
---
JETTED OR FLOODED
GRANULAR MATERIAL
OVERSIZE
ROCK DISPOSAL
_A~-_-_-- -
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING rnITJ
SPECIFICATIONS U
STANDARD DETAILS e·
-4/95
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
CAL TRANS CLASS II
PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK
(9FT.3/FT.) WRAPPED IN
Fil. TER FABRIC
FILTER FABRIC
(MIRAFI 140 OR'-.
APPROVED "'COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL
EQUIVALEN1) BE MINIMUM &-DIAMETER
SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED
CANYON SUBORAIN OUTLET DETAIL PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL 0
DESIGN
FINISHED
GRADE
PE;RFORA TED PIPE &·· MIN.
1--20' MIN.~
NON-PERFORATED 5' MIN. &•+ MIN.
CANYON SUBDRAINS
FOR PIPE SPECIFICATION
FILTER FABRIC
(MIRAFI 140 OR
APPROVED
EQUIVALENT)
#2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER
FABRIC OR CALTRANS CLASS 11
PERMEABLE.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING [fj[I]
SPECIFICATIONS ~ U
STANDARD DETAILS C
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
OUTLET PIPES
414' NON-PERFORATED PIPE,
100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY,
30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY .... ~--BACKCUT 1 :1
-Jr.--OR FLATTER
• SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION -Subdraln collector pipe shall be Installed with perforations down or,
unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated
pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least a perforations uniformly spaced per foot.-Perforation shall
be ¼" to ½" If drilled holes are .used. All subdraln pipes shall have .a gradient ~ least 2% towards the
outlet.
• SUBDRAIN PIPE -Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM 02751, SOR 23.5 or ASTM 01527, Schedule 40, or
ASTM 03034, SOR 23;5, Sched~le 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe.
• All outlet pipe shall be placed In a trench no wider than twice the subdrain pipe. Pipe shall be in soil
of SE>30 jetted or flooded in place except for the outside 5 feet which shall be native soil backfill.
BUTTRi:SS OR
REPLACEMENT FILL
SUBDRAINS .
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING rnCTJ SPECIFICATIONS ~ U
STANDARD DETAILS D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RETAINING WALL DRAINAG.E DETAIL
RE°T AiNING W Ai.L
WALL. WATE~P~_~PFING
PER ARCHITECT'S
SPECIFICATi_QNS-~
FINISH GRADEi
· SOIL l;JACf(Fl,LL, COMPACTED .TO .
90 PERCENT;RELATIVE COMPACTION*
,~14•~1~1./2~ CLEAN GRAVEL":* ..
4•·.(MIN.l DIAMETER PER FORA TED. ---'-<, . --~-------,-----·· 'PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40. OR.
~?-=t-?-=-==~:t~· =· ==t~=~=t~::;:~:§:~
EQUJ.V ALENT) WITH PERF08ATIONS
ORIENTED; oowti 'AS DEPICTED: M·1NiMu.._.· -i: _-PERc~NT GRADIENT'.
TO SUITABLE OUTLET ------------------------------·----=~==-==-==-=--::~OMPAOTED FILL=-===-==-= -----------~'-=---~~-=~=-~--------
NOT TO SCALE
·SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTAANS
CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL
U.S. Standard
Sieve Size
l"
3/4"
3/8"
No. 4
No .. 8
No. 30
No. 50
No. 200
% Passing
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
0-7
0-3
Sand Equivalent>75
COMPEfE.NT' ~EDROCk OR MATERIAL
AS EVALUATED BY ·THE GEOTECHNICAL
CONSULTANT
* BA$ED ON ASTM D 156'7
**IF CALTRAN~ CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL
(SEE GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF
3/4•;..1.:112• GRAVEL, FiLTER FABRIC MAY BE
DELETED. CAL TRAN·s CLA$S 2 PERMEABLE
MA°fEJ:UAL SHOULD BE COMPACTED_ TO eq.
P~RCEN1fRELATIVE COMPACTION*
NOTE:COMPOSITE DRAINAGE PRODUCTS SiJCH AS MIRADRAIN·
OR J-DRAIN MAY 8E useo AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OR
CU\SS 2. INSTALLATION SHOULD Be PERFORM:D ·IN ACCORDANCE
WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIRCA TIONS.
Iii
' I l .
'
.,
r I
E
I
I
I
1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-1
I
_DATE: Thursday, January 21, 1999
*************************************
*
*
*
*
*
*
EQFAULT
Ver. 2.20
*
*
*
*
*
* *************************************
(Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From Digitized California Faults)
SEARCH PERFORMED FOR:
JOB NUMBER: 960134-002
JOB NAME: La Costa Glen/ Green Valley
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.0775 N
LONGITUDE: 117.2666 W
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1994) Horiz. -Alluvium
UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGSCE.DAT
SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 1
-----------------------------.--------------------------------------------I jMAX. CREDIBLE EVENTI MAX. PROBABLE EVENTI
J I APPROX. 1--------------------1 -------------------1
I ABBREVIATED !DISTANCE I MAX. I PEAK I SITE I MAX. I PEAK I SITE I
I FAULT NAME I mi (km) I CRED. I SITE I INTENS I PROB. I SITE I INTENS I
I I I MAG. jACC. gl MM I MAG. !ACC. g MM I
1--------------------------1---------I-----I------I------I -----1------------1
jSAN ANDREAS -Coachella I 74 (119) I 7.lOj 0.0321 V I 7.lOj 0.032 V I
1----------------·r-------t--------1----1------1--·---1 -----1------------1
jsAN ANDREAS -San Bernardi I 68 (109) I 7.30j 0.0421 VI I 7.30j 0.042 VI I
1------------------. -------1---------1-·--1------1-----------1------------1
jSAN ANPREAS -Southern I 68 (109) I 7.401 0.0461 VI 7.30j 0.042 VI I
1----------------------------1 -----------1-----1------1-----------1------------1
jSAN ANDREAS -Mojave I 86 (139) I 7.lOj 0.0261 V 7.lOj 0.026 V I
1-------------------------1--------1-----1------1-----------1------------1
I.SAN ANDR-E~S -1857 Rupture! 86 (1:3'9) I 7.80j 0.0481 VI 7.Soj 0.037 V I
1--------------------------1--------1-----1-----1-----------1------------1
I IMPERIAL I 99 (160) I 7.001 0.0201 IV 7.001 0.020 IV I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------I------1-----1------------1
jSUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jaj 83 (134) I 6.60j 0.0171 IV I 5.90j 0.009j III I
1------:-------------------1--------1-----1------1------1-----1------1------1
jSUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacl 78 (126) I 6.60j 0.0191 IV I 6.lOj 0.0121 III I
1-------------------------1---------1-----1------1------1-----1------1------1
jSAN JACINTO -~ORREGO I 63 (101) I 6.601 0.0251 V I 6.101 0.0161 IV I
1--------------; ___________ , _____ ----1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1
jsAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I s1 ( 82) I 6.001 0.0391 v I I 6.201 0.0231 IV I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1
SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 48 ( 77) I 7.201 0.0601 VI I I 6.901 0.0461 VI I
-- - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - -· - --· · I -- - ----- - - I - - - - -·I - - -- - - I - - -- -- I I - -- -- I -- - - - -I ------I
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VAi 50 ( 80) I 6.90.j 0.0441 VI 11 6.801 0.0411 V I
--------------------------1---------1----------1------11-----1------1------1
sAN JACINTO-SAN aERNARDINol 6s (104) I 6.10 0.0261 v I I 6.101 0.0261 v I
-------------------------------------1 · -, ------- -1------11-----1------1-- ----1
LAGUNA SALADA 84 (135) I 7.00 0.0251 V 11 6.301 0.0131 III I
---------------------------------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1
ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN s3 ( as> I 6.aol 0.0371 v 11 6.201 0.0221 Iv I
----------------------------------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1
ELSINORE-JULIAN 2s ( 41) I 1.101 0.1221 viI I I 6.4oj 0.0601 VI I
-1 - - -- - - -- - - - -- - -- --- -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - I - - ---I - - - - - - I - - -- - -I I -- -- - I -- - - - - I - -- -- -I
I ELSINORE-TEMECULA 2s ( 41) I 6 .-00 I o. 096 I VII 11 6. 30 I o. 062 I VI I
I ------· ------------------- ---------I -----I - - - - --I -. ----I I -- - - - I ----- - -I ------I
!ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 39 ( 63) I 6.~ol o.ossj VI I 6.3oj o.o36j v I
1------------------------------------·1---.·. 1------1------1-----1------1------1
!WHITTIER 58 ( 93) I 6.8Qj 0.0341 V I 5.901 0.015 IV I
1----------------------------------1-----1------1------1-----1------------1
!BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 92 (148) I 6.401 0.0131 III I 6.401 0.013 III I
1-------------------------!--------1-----1------1------1-----1------------1
jCHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinol 54 ( 88) I 6.'701 0.0331 v I s.soj 0.012 III I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------1------1-----1------------1
!EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 40 ( 65) I 6.501 0.0411 V I 5.701 0.020 IV I I ---- ----------------------I ------- ---I· - - ----I - - - - - - I -- - - --I -----I - - - -- - -- - -- - I
jELMORE RANCH I 82 (132) I 6.601 0.0181 IV I 5.401 0.006 II I
1-------------------------1---------1-----1------1-----1-----1------------1
jCORONADO BANK I 20 ( 32) I 7.401 0.1971 VIII I 6.301 0.083 VII I
1--------------------------1--------1-----1------1------1-----1------------1
!NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshorl 11 ( 17). I 6.901 o.2s2j IX I 5.8oj 0.112 VII I
1--------------------------1 ----------1------1------1------1-----1------------1
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-----------------------------DETERMINISTIC. SITE PARAMETERS -----------------------------
Page 2 ---------------------------------------------------------.-------------------IMAX. CREDIBLE EVENT I IMAX. PROBABLE EVENT I I APPROX. I -------------------I I -------------------I ABBREVIATED !DISTANCE I MAX. I PEAK I SITE 11 MAX. I PEAK I SITE I I FAULT NAME I mi (km) I CRED. I SITE I INTENS 11 PROB. I SITE I INTENS I I I I MAG. JACC. gJ MM 11 MAG. jACC. gj MM I
1-------------------------1 --------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 JROSE CANYON I 5 ( 8) I 6.901 0.3971 X 11 5.701 0.2071 VIII I
1------------------. -------1--------· 1---· -1------1------11-----1------1------1 !CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 86 (139) I 6.soJ 0.0141 IV 11 5.001 0.0041 I I 1-----------------.-·-----l---------i-----1------1-----I 1-----1------1------1 JcuCAMONGA I 77 (123) I 7.001 0.0251 v 11 6.101 0.0121 III I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------t------11-----1------1------1 !HOLLYWOOD I 91 (146) I 6.401 0.0121 III I I 5.301 o.0051 II I 1--------------------------1---------1-----I--· A.-1------11-----1------1------1 !MALIBU COAST I 98 (158) I 6.701 0.0141 IV 1·1 4.901 0.0031 I I 1------· ---------------· ---1--· ------I-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.BasJ 53 ( 85) I 6.901 0.0411 V 11 5.601 0.0131 III I
!-------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 JPALOS VERDES I ~1 ( 67) I 7.101 0.0671 VI I I 6.201 0.0301 V I !------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !RAYMOND I 86 (139) I 6.50I 0.0141 IV 11 5.ooJ o.oo4J I I
1-------, ------------------1---------1---·-1------1------11-----1------1------1 JsAN JOSE I 74 (120) I 6.5oj 0.0181 IV I I 5.ooJ o.oo5J II I !-------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 JSANTA MONIC,,. I 95 ,(154) I 6.601 0.0131 III 11 5.501 0.0061 II I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !SIERRA MADRE I 77 (124) I 7.00I 0.0251 V 11 6.201 0.0131 III I
1-------------------------1--------· I----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !VERDUGO I 89 (143) I 6.,oJ Q.016J IV 11 5.201 o.oo5J II I 1-------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !COMPTON THRUST 62 (100) I 6.8ol o.0441 VI I I 5.80I 0.0201 IV I
I----·-------------------------------1 . ----I------I------l l-----1------1------1 .JELYSIAN PARK THRUST 65 (105) I 6.7oj o.0381 v 11 5.001 0.0181 IV I 1-------------------.---------------1·----1------1------11-----1------1------1 JBURNT MTN. 79 (127) I 6.401 0.0161 IV I I 5.101 o.oo5J II I
1-----------------------------------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !CLEGHORN 82 (133) I 6.501 0.0161 IV I I 6.001 0.0101 III I
I-------------·-----·-----------------I-----I ------1------11-----1------I------I J·EUREKA PEAK a1 (131) I 6.401 0.0151 IV 11 5.101 o.oo5J II I
!--------------------------·-------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !·HELENDALE -s. LOCKHARDT 92 (148) I 7.101 0.0241 IV 11 5.401 o.oo5J II I
1-----------------------------------1-----1------.1------11-----1------1------1 j JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) I 98 (157) I 6. 70 I O. 015 I IV II 5. 20 I O. 004 I I I 1-------.------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------ILANDERS I 89 (144) I 7.3oj o.o3oj v, 11 5.201 o.oo4J I
1--------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11---.-1------1------ILENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN! 95 (153) I 7.3oj 0.0271 v I I 5.5oj o.oo5J II
,---------·---------------1--------1-----1------1----.-11-----1------1------INORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (I 91 (146) I 6.7ol o.016J IV II 5.201 o.oo5J II
1--------------------------1---------1-----1-----1------11-----1------1------INORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (I 85 (136) I 7.00J 0.0221 IV I I 5.601 0.0071 II
1--------------------------1---------I-----I------I------I 1-----1------1------IPINTo MOUNTAIN I 74 (120) I 7.ooJ o.029J v 11 6.101 0.0131 III
1--------------------------1---------r-----1------1------11-----1------1------IEMERsoN so. -COPPER MTN. I 97 (156).1 6.901 0.0191 IV 11 5.301 o.oo4J I 1--------------------------1---------I-----I------I------I 1-----1------1------
************************************~****************************************
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 3
-END OF S]i:ARCH-50 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 5 . 1 MILES AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.397 g
LARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.207 g
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE vs. ACCELERATION
100
90 ,..-----_
~ '--..../
w 80
u z
<( 70
0 w w 60 u
X w
LL 50
0
~ 40
..,.J
ill 30,
<(
ill
0 20 0::::
D..c..
10
8.o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
ACCELERATION ( g)
BOORE. ET AL(1997) NEHRP C (520) EXPOSURE PERIODS:
25 years 75 years
50 years 100 years JOB No.: 960134-002
-~-----------------
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE vs. ACCELERATION
1 QQ I I I I I I I I. I I i i i i i i i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I
,,,--..,. 90
-~
'--.-/
w 80
u z <( 70·
LL 50
0
~ 40
_J
-~ 30\
OJ ~ 20 ====1=~~~s:s:~-tl====tl ===-I
1 o I I I I
8.o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
ACCELERATlON . (g)
BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP C (520) EXPOSURE PERIODS:
25 years 75 years
50 years 100 years JOB No.: 960134-002
-~~-------~--~-----
AVERAGE RETURN PERIOD vs. ACCELERATION
10000000 8
6 ./
4 L/
~
---.. 2 (I)
I....
0 1000000 8 Q)
-,/
/ V
>-. 6 -.....____.,
4 1./
/
0 2 0 -100000 8 0:::: w 6 o_
4
V
/ ,.
,
V
/
/ z 2 0::::
=:) 10000 8 I-w 6 0:::: 4
,, ,,,
/.
'' '. , ,
" '
/ w 2 C)
<( 1000 0:::: .8
/
/
/
w 6 ,
~ 4 /
2
100 8
I
I
6 "
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1·.0 1 .1 1 .2 1 .3 1 .4 1 .5
ACCEL~RAT.ION (g)
La Costa Glen / Green Vall~y
BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP C (520) JOB No.: 960134-002
- - - -1111 - - -·-· ·-- - - - - - - ---
AVERAGE RETURN PERIOD vs. ACCELERATION
10000000 8
6
4 ~
----2 (f)
I.,_
0 1000000 8 G)
>, 6
'-----" 4
_/ ,..---
/ /
--,/
/
/
0 2
0 -100000 8 O'.'.: w 6 Q_ 4
./
/ /
,
/ ,,,
z 2 /
O'.'.: :'.:) 10000 8 I-w 6
/
,
O'.'.: 4 ./ ,,,-
w 2
C)
·-/
/ <{ 1000 8 O'.'.: w 6
~ 4
2
100 8
/
''" ,
/,
I
I
6
4 111111111 '1111 I 1111 11111111 111111111 1111111 11111111 1111111 111111 11111 111111111 111111111 111111111
o.o o. 1 0.2 o.3 o.4 o.5 o.6 o.7 o:·s o.9 1.0 1 .1 1.2 1 .3 1 .4 1.s
La Costa Glen / Green Valley
BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP C (520)
ACCELERATION ( g) :
JOB No.: 960134-002
~----~-------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
I
1·
I·
I
I
I
I
SAN FRANCISCO
SITE LOCATION ( + ):
Latitude -33.0775 N
Longitude -117 .2666 W
La Costa Glen / Green Valley
0 50
SCALE
(Miles)
FRISKSP FAULT MAP
JOB No.: 960134~002
100
f.
JT
~t-~)_-.
.,J"--. ·. ,._ -!~ '·-·.
,.,
... _ ..... --.. -·..-
·' ___ .,..
I',-··-. .. -
.·f·.·.' , I •.· / /,,,.--··-·--..-.I
,·
~
~· v
)
I
,.
.,
/
/
' .
. . .
•. ~, ;'_.J ... --~ ~,; ..
I
I
I
I
I qrt:l , .. ~--~
•. , V,J •....
·' ;--,-·~/-
t ·t• . -~, ; _j ll ' •
.. ;. 'LO . . ·; o,
• o,oB.
,
. /;,_.-,_ ~ "
I • (316
I
I /
I /
I
/
. '
. '
r
r •
e '2,17
I
•
, , .
' . -..
\
. '
.,
Af .,
,,. i
·-·,.
.
\
--
'· ..
•
----·------· . ' Q,11 ;
' . ,·~r·"r·· ' ·,;'-'-· t·. ' -~~ _;;.;;..-,.: ._,., .. -.. ·,.---~ .
. • caos
·-~------... h~----· ---~--
.~ . ,,.
. .
.. : ' ;, .· ..• ·. '}> ·~ ;,
, . ' • > :~~-J. . ··; . . . . ' , --. '' . . ' . ,. .-. . . . .--
. ~. -·:. .... / .. _,__:..-; . ;;:'; ''.:.r: .. ,· . .. . .. ·, ._, __ ..
. . . \ -
i,. · • q\3 ·,, __ . : • : : . ...::1e . ' . .. ··' :t.: ,• ,. 'O" l .:
)
.. .,.
I
•£:AO
,·
_ . c?{o
~ -. . . ,.,_--,..0.,01 -··
··. ,..._-, • ?!-(b. _,,___,,.
LOT.. .4-.!-~~'!;_. -~-_.-,.--
----------. .
, . -----.. _ e04b -·· .. _., ... --Y .
. .,; . ·---\
/
_ .... -
' ;,
r··--.-: t '• -.. :.
. . . . ...•. '_. .. : ·, __ ,; ; . ' .·qi{,>"-'
t '·~ ' -· ,, . . . ._, ;.·-.-..
' ,
-I• -· ! .
·,
, . .
. I. .
,· ·.-· , .
-·· -...
•
,,.-c·
\
\ . \
... \--
\ ---·
-\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
0
0
\
Af
,, ,,
II (0 '
0 . 0 .-/ --. ,,
-
., -. ' -" . ~.-i
·j .. : ;-,
/' ,, . ···-~
"
1
' ..,
~--~ ... ·i
· 706 •
· •14'3
r) • eb1 .,-· ·-----;;;~---~e~.~~~: .---eMO ... • ,
< - • -I •
~ .··\
' I
I
.
;1
,{ . . .
'
. .
_______ ..... _
•.
I
ry-----,-11--
-
•
,
' ' ', "
' .
·'
C
/
i
;
I
I \ C
\ \
\ ., .... , \ .•70.8 -.. . ·\.-
1-4 eE:i'\4. _,
<D
0
\
\
\
\ . · .. '02.
"' Ol .
135
ebSB
,··\
.~-
•100
e bB.5 .. r
' 12• 11i'Nt PEN DEt,· .
ON SH££i J.. ;.f/l\ -.
e7O5
r "17 ·I. . .
'
• 1tt '"
e6C!G
\ •. e 697
GRA0£0 SWALE
'P£1?"0£TAIL
e606
, LON_ $.Y££T 3 ----. 2K ~------
/
,.
/
• ,32.
---
• b'L'L
/
· .ro2-1
• ee\.\, ·
eb'Ll
12• 11i'Ali. PER.
ON SH££T .J
e6b3
•
_,_,r·--~---~ ·• _.,./ ,-
..
~ ..
· ebG2.
..
. . ' eS'lo.. · -
-~-·,-~---~-
' I
/ ,,-..-
....•.. __ .; ... -
'
.. ~'l,
e /,-10
_.,
i I \
. \.
\ t1Jo,oo ~ s.s'H
~1'fft-I½' C. •
ebDI
GRAOED SWALE PcR 0£TAIL ,
ON SHEET 3
500
• ,34: .
I •-
• \ . I . .
," I • ,· ! . /·
~-.=r .. I O ·es' ••
• bOO · .• 59b H ~ . l.·3%l
...... , •601 'p I . I . •0
1019• . . . ~4q . •591 APRON INLET •5 I . · lI¾f., ---_ . ....,._
11
11
,.,
. ,,. ,{6 , ..
-.. , I
I
\
.es
HP
~ ..... ·.-~
. ':. ~----::i ...
~
~·
~ .. · r-
,/ .. ,
\ .•....... ···-
----~-l ~ 90--1----------l ___ .::::::..::::.~ - ------.. (. ------~ --·----___ .... __
... 90 20.
-~~· .... ~ ·-.,.:P .. L;,:;:~~.:..:E...:..2--r------,~'--'""'T':'--------, ~· §slA=-:::~::,R/::~~:~;~2 JG:,::= 1·~:,N~;:= :~~:M
~ r ~ 1-L-E-IG_H_T_O_N_A_N_D_A_S_S._O_C_IA_T_E_S_, -, N-C-.---;
~ ENGINEER OF WORK
"
------7 ~--~' --.
LOT 3
(OPEN SPACE)
I
I
o~= ,... - 0
.'°.----+--.. so-----;;;·;;;:-----,;,:,-~--~
SEE SHEET 3
f 0 ..
, _ _. \-· l. ' . ' ' '.
NOT£· ALL
. CARLSBAD STD.
SIL TING BA.J( NS.· PER . . . · .....
NO. 0$~3 (MODIFIED AS SHOWN}
-' -.
''"" : :: ;, i . •'. , t
'· ; .. ,.;_,..,
~ l .
--
.125'
/ .-----------------· ·:; ' "AS BUILT"
-~,· ,.
/ ·! . ,;:.-,•
........ . :·DATE ·. · · •_> .·). -(,, 1--------------~l 'lci
REVIEWED BY: • . . : ':.-,: }jf
'--~
INSPECTOR DATE ' · rt-===r===r=======================r===r===c===c==Jr.:I ===:::::::;1~~;;:;:::~;;;:::::;;:;::;:::;;;;:::;;::::;;:::;;;::;:;;;::;-;:::;::;;;;;:;:::11·11-sH4EET CITY OF CARLSBAD· ~· l---t--f----,---'----'----------1-----1---11--~--l----1 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT : ..
1---t--f------'---:--------1-----1---11-----+----I
. 40' o· 40'
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 "a40'
80' 120· ------
RCE __ _ EXP. ___ _ . ..
~· :S\,ff},,,vo, ""'. 38396 /MT£ .• · (~~~MA~:..-~. . 02!~t;';;~0TRACT 92-'os
•,." COUNlY· OF·SAN DIEGO "R1800 1'49+9.1• CT 92-08 GREEN. VALLEY
~. LOCATION: ' ~NJ5~lN~~!~.~£C,~~~ '0~ £L CAMINO R~ & t----t-----t------------.c--... -. -,----t---t--r-+---+----1 APPROVED: L!,OYD B. HUBS~. . . . ',.' !<·; :,:·i)
· .· P&D / CTE ENGINEERS, 1 RECoRos FROM: couN'JY or SAN '01Eoo. NAO a:s cokrRoL aooK . . . ,;, c1TY ENGINEER RCE 23889 EXP. 12-31-0,: , .. o».rt, ,,
401 WEST ''A" STR££T, SUITE 2500 . / \
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 . •
TEL: (619) 2.J2-4466 FAX: 234-3022
DWO: 75131\131GR004.DWG · .. XREF: 75131\ACAO\GR0\13.""1 · .we LOC:0,0
nAT~• 7 /17 /QR Cl T C'/"AI C, 1 /1 01:"\/ -. ~ ,,.. l
., ,. ,.· : ,,,-_, ..
ELEVATION: ., . DATE
. ENGINEER Or 1WORK -, ._,} ·ci... ..
-.· .). -,,,., ., I
.) ·,
. ' I .
REVISlbN DESCRIPTION ; . -..._·,.
INITIAL . DATE INITIAL
-; . -J . Cll'I' ·~PRo\/AL
_, -,, . -.:,§ --~ ·, \
r ~
r
~ . ,.
'
'.
. '
' . . I
'
' ,.
I
' . I
)
' ' ,.
\
'• 1 ·' j .
r
'
__ , /
I c,---•• / --'----..
. '•.-... ,. . . .:··". ,. ',., ..... . . e, . ·· •...
\
,·
~-------· -1-I
i
i
\j
:"'t
I ' I '-
N a, ,, ,
/ ./ ,
---
•b45
' . ·f..
--:. . . '
' -. l, •
12' TRAIi. PER ON SH££T .
.,
--· -. -.... -~-94 -
( ----\ -------,·
• , : I I r. I
I I
I
I
I I (.) -----113.5'
I I
~ I I
,:§ I . ~
&l
~ .Z...
[
10'xl ; 1/4 TON RIP RAP
EN£ Y DISSIPATOR {TYP£ I}
PE. STD DWC D-40, 5.4' L_. ~. r. 'CK, WITH ; LAY£R FILTER
l-,EGEND 'KET 10' THICK UPPER
. YER OF 3/4• DIA, GRAVEL
AND 1.0' THICK LAYER
GEOLOGIC UNITS
Af
Gal
(xSW
1t
Tck
Artificial fill
Quaternary Alluvium (circled where buried)
Quaternary Slope Wash (circled where buried)
Tertiary Torrey Sandstone (circled where
buried)
Tertiary Del Mar Formation (circled where
buried
MAP SYMBOLS
Geologic contact (dashed were approximate,
dotted where buried, queried where uncertain)
OF SANO
• 0,
.I ....
-~---. ----
,•
NOTE:
BASIN TO HAVE PERUANENT F£ 'CING WITH VEHICULAR
ACCESS PROVISIONS IN ACCO NC£ WITH SDRSD U-6
OR AS APPROVED BY THE C. ENGINEER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE
'\
'
. _--,---, ~ BEND OUT TO ~ tFORM OPENING
•
R/W
II
2 tr:;;
\
Approximate limits of grading (this phase) AMP DEBRIS ROCK CAGE
UNPERFORATED SECTION
• RISER
PLAN
~-r-~[~;,)"
10' 30• . 2
tr:;::
Approximate location of cut/fill transition
r825<8J Approximate limits of geotextile placement
.1010 Approximate location of field density test
<:>
• I ... -5££· DETAIL A DETAIL A
i6 ..,+---+--r--·-....
,!i 16 "> (~3~z~·~TY.~P~=~t;;,-10• SLOTS, AT QUARTER '>= <'i ,:. . POINTS AROUND CIRCUMFERENCE. ~ ~ t 32• ROW SPACING, STAGGER ll: "' ALTERNATE ROWS •
, ' '
•
Approximate removal bottom elevation CONNECTING RING L3"X3"X1/4•
SHOP RIVETED, SPOT WELDtO OR
LOCKWELDED TO 48" C.U.P.
TYPE 'B' BROW
DITCH PER D-75
f22!ZI Approximate location stability fill key
1--,_ Approximate location of subdrain with direction
-of flow indicated
EB Approximate location of settlement monum'[mt
r • --
As-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL MAP
Green Valley
Carlsbad Tract 92-08
Carlsbad, California
:J-,4 EVENLY
AT 12• JMX C TO C
SP.ICCO \\
5-/4 AT g• n=~:::::::::j CALLE
BARCELONA 6-"4 E'VCNLY
SPJ..cCO
• . , .
7-1/2·
4'-•
'£CT/ON
.P. RISER
JUNCTION BOX
EXISTING
HEADWALL AND PIP,:-
(18"-24"')
(SEE CALTRANS DETAIL D-96)
SECTION A-A.
NOT TO SCALE
PLATE 1 NOT TO SCALE· --.,, .,.-
~r~s;l§i~1§1~-~~~-ui~~~~:~:!:~-~~~'~H~~~4~G~:~:~~;:~:~:~,~~~:::~,~~~J~~~F~s~,~~~:E~~·~·'!S-1~·-:t4~~~-~;~AgmJ:~N~:~~~:!S~~;:~-~~~,~~!=1:~o~-~M~~~~,~-~-:_~::·~·-~7:-_: ... _~~--;~ __ -_-_-___ -___ _
•• h < • •• ·-·
~-BARR/CR PLANTING TO PROTECT umGATION AND SLOP£ P/ANTING
PER I.AND SCAPE AND /RIGA TION Pl.ANS
DECOMPOSED CRAN/TE-4•
DEEP GRAD£ 2 BUFF COLOR. SLOP£ SURCADC J/8• PER FOOT TO DRAIN
323. 16'
FINISH GRAI)£-:-SEE PLAN FOR HT. OF
SLOP£
NOT£: .
I. TH£ R£V£GETATION AREAS BETWEEN TH£ TO£ OF SLOPE AND
THF: EXISTING RIPARIAN VEGETATION WILL 8£ GRADED TO MEET
TH£ ELEVATION OF TH£ EXISTING RIPARIAN ARF:A. . .
2. PROPOSED MmGATION AREA GRADING Will DAYLICHT EXISTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR GRADE WITHIN ±0.2' FEET. umGATION AREA'
FINISH GRADING WILL BE UNIFORM AND WILL NOT DEVIATE FROU.
PROPOSAL CONTOURS IN £XC£SS OF 0.25' IN ANY LOCATKJN.
/· 3. NO GRADING IN THE WETLANDS AREA UNLESS SHOWN_,ON THIS
PLAN OR OTHERWISE APPROVF:D BY CITY.
r··--"l'"~--•
. ..-"·.
n
1 '.' ,: ;,_
'
--I --_.,.-----··1
FG
TYPE 'B' BROW
DITCH PER D-75
SECTION C-C
NOT TO SCALE
2:t
.: [ < ' '
--
7'
J' 6"
t
J' ! ~·-.8" ~Jf!l,~6.
SECTION D-D
NOT TO SCALE
~. •.
\ \ I
' r J
OPTION I:
J" 470-C-2000 CONCRITE OR
3• 2S()Q PSI AIR-PLACED
CONCRETt WITH 1 112• X 1 112• .
17-GNJE: STUCCO NETTING
/J BAR 0
16· o.c. • "' -
3• 470-C-2000 CONCRETE OR
3• 2500 PSI AJR-PUCED
CONCRETE WfTH 1 112• X I 112•
17-GAGE STUCCO NETTING
OPTION II:
FG
--
m
l
o·
FG
TYPE 'B' BROW DITCH PER 0-75
SECTION £-E
..
SPLASH .WALL. DETAIL ,. _ -~--. -. -~ .. ---
NOT TO SCALE .. · ·-· -. . ..~ . . . --. -
.. -.-
31.06' -··
--.... -'!!._s ___ _
---... ___ 5 ·--
EL
--. NOJ'45'53 W ---
REAL l. 1 :
•
NOTE: All TEMPORARY D£SIL TING BASINS PER
CA,RLSBAD STD. NO. DS-3 (MODIFIED AS SHOWN)
1'
-,
.. / ............
I
PEN.SPACE)
...,..~" '. .
RIP RAP ENERGY OISSIPATOR
PER STD DWG 0-40. 5.4'
TH/l~Jf/HI TH 2 LA YER FIL TfR BLANKET
RC£ ___ \
UPPER LA YER OF J/4" DIA .
ND 1.0' THICK LOWER LE-.U •·
. Fi 7 19\~li'.fifei Iii" MICJl1'>4,.S
SE£ DWG J49-J
FOR BRIDGE DETAILS
"AS
EXP. ..,_ __ _
'
., .
.DATt
. ")_.; ~~
/.\t --~ .. ,-
, -.i:
,_ ' '
'.-·j
.,,:-~--,~
. "~~ '-11 ::i _'.. +.;
l ·.o .. ,,,}
'); ·, '; . "• .
..
'
,
•. . ~
;~
..
. '
j
' '·;
. .\: ., .
·:~ . ,,
,.
<
.,
~1
GRADttJ<swALE
I
l •
40• . o· -----40' 80' 120'
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 "=40'
REVIEWED BY:
INSPECTOR
· DATE 1
. . ,j
. NOT TO SCAL£
, .. .,_ .,_ ·. '
t---+---+--'-;--:---------+----+---+--+--~ ~3 CITY OF . CARI.SBArl) Ll._j ENGINEERING. DEPARTMENT· . , .
2~-0~
NA TN£ UPLAND
PLANT/NC PER
LANDSCAPE AND
IRRIGAnoN PLANS · BENCHMARK :.-:,,, .. ' ·-~==-========. ===. ==-:::t-;.1 ~r;.;
GRADING PLANS FOR: ·. .. • . ) . . j '
12' R.O. W. D.G. TRAIL .~ ENGINEER OF WORK . .
,,_.
NOT TO SCAL£ .· ·
'-
i l .. }·,-r'----+---1-----------...;,.----+-..._-'--l>---+--+--.:...i
.\, }t----t---''-t--------,.--,.----:-,-'----t----t----,---t---t--1 ' : \ i-------1--------------------t----i---t---1 ·-.. 1 ,_; t----t---+-------,--~--~c----,--;r---+--+--,,--'-:--t----1 , , , _,,,·· r _ .. _
. .; '
DATE
REVISION OESCRIPiflQN . .
\ :-' .
D,t.lE INITIAt DATE
OTHER APPROVAL ,
CARLSBAD TRACT,. 9 .. 2r.ba··· :8., 1•.·/ /I· :
CT 92-08, GREEN VALLEY • > · . t · f.t,~
APPROVED: LLOYD B. HUBBS
(f_ i. C ;.,.,, ~-'"
CITY ENGINEER RCE 23889 EXP: 12 .. 31..;01.. ·. :o:,ue: -•·
DWN BY: -~-1 '• PROJECT NO. : < ORAW!J;l~; t-19 . = :;--. Cr 92.:..oa . · .349;R3/r, \
'
. . \ ~-
·'->a~.~---,i :Vj: _;;;,~ ii::.~~~-';,:,~ ~\ .. ~~{ c -~ A ~ . i ~ ~~~~---.,~-~:·~~.f.:.,~ '~·~;~ ... ~ •i t?<
•• t ' ' ' ....... »-.,
I
\ ...
' ..
' •'
!'>-,--,---.
' '. •.·-·
r
'
' .
. '
''
'' '>
; ; --1 ,· /
. ,,?
,, e~~
,...., _ _.•~•--..... •-...C.L
·1
•
I
'
_,
. \(.
;,, .
PLATE 4 l 1.
PROJECT: 4960134-002 SCALE: 1"=40' DATE: 1-21-99
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
£NG/NEER OF WORK
' '
OANl£L A L££ R.C.£ 38396 DAT£
£XPIRES ON 3/31/01
--l.-.
,, ;,j; •·
-·"""·.,·
..
' <:::. .. , ··· .··
'~
,,
.. ;. -'
; ., -' . ,•
::, '-~-?
NOTE.'.
\
1. THE REVEGETATION ARDIS BETWEEN TH£ 10£ OF SLOP£ AND
TH£ -EXISTING RIPARIAN VEGETATION WILL 8£ GRADED TO MED'
THE ELEVATION OF THE £XISTINC RIPAlr/AN AR£4.
2. PROPOS£D MfTIGATION AR£A GRADING WILL DAYLIGHT EXISTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR GRADE WfTHIN .t:0.2' F££T. MIT/CATION AR£4
FINISH GRADING WILL 8£ UNIFORM AND WILL NOT DEVIATE FROM
PROPOSAL CONTOURS IN £XCESS OF 0.25' IN ANY LOCATION.
3. NO GRADING IN TH£ WGLANDS AR£4 UNLESS SHOWN ON THIS
PLAN OR OTH£RWIS£ APPROV£D BY CITY.
' . . ·'• .
,
,,
_!tJ.,,
6 3 "·
'
Qsw·
. . '. -" -.
. .
,.
,./,,,
'
' : . . .
' V
t
•
:.:· ..
.(-_ .. -·
' ' . ' : ,' . ,-, .
' .·.,,,
,_. -·' :, ' .. . -/,,
··:-. -; . \
'';
., ' '·, . ~-.
' '
. ." L. ' ' -~ .
-~-.
' .
. -~ ''· .
'. ·"
; ,,_, ! .. • / -' 'I \ I
' .
. ,, .
. •:
; ....
' J. .•
. , -~
l . ·-
\
j
I ''
I
' ' , .. ' •
40' o· 40' 80' 120' ------GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=40'
' -'/
. '
"'* .. ··.-.... ,,.. '"" • . . ' .
'
• r---.....;.-,-______ __;,.....;.""'"---..;..;;.,1;,
"AS BUILT" -, · i ;_;
' ' ' • 1 • 'IV
·":
RCE_·~--EXP·--'--'---'-. ' . '
t--REVI_E_W-ED-----8-Y:'"". ---..,..,.,,-;.......,.,-....,...·,.-, ·-.. _-i,._HI['
,, _,---· ·.· .. '" -·'-.
,,
!
-----------------------------------------------------. -_-__ ------------:-. --:\--: .. ,--,_=--=----=--.-=----:. "'.= .... --:. -=---=,-::-:.-. -. :k---=-----,-,_ --:, -. --:_ --::...,_:::-.. --: .. -:-------: .• :--:-.-. -:,.___:----:--:::::.""'--__ :--:-: __ --_--__ _,:;-, ,;-;. !---=--:-\ -----:--:------1_;-----:,,~_-;-----------:--:----:.,~---' I ' ~ J .t-.;-J ; .,,............ 1 --;,. '--·-},------~--,,~ -~ .._,.. f· ........, ' '
1i.· • ; ' -
•.
' -'
-----
... ~ ..
,· ,•
',
' ,,---·--· --_ _,. -
-~ f . '·---··
_,/' I
f \J
i
, ,.
' ,
t
/ '._
·,
'
'
-----.,_ --;;, ~ '
VJ· I , -
;~ ·I :3: I r--. .
'
\
. ; •.;,-:·.
,1AJ~ -•. _ -.,. .;. .
_.,.,,.;-;:,,£ • ..">°'.
/ . ; / -· ot•
/
I "/
\
" /
,.-
,-
,
/
,/
, -~---
,
,
/
• ,
.--
/
.. ~;~ -.
./
/
/
' / , ,
. /.··
/ I
/• \
--· l\cia)· "'"'' ·.--· '"""
' \
' ' ..
. ' ~ \
\
' -\
'
l
\
·,.
~ ---
\
\' _,
., -.: "
\,
... --
I
I
!
'
. ~ ' ' i ---..... ~--_/_
q
Tt? __
' ' ' ' \ . I
I __ , ,
('":;. .< I, /' . ,.
'-~ . / ·-· __ ,.,. . ' .
.! I
. ,~ -
((
~-0, '
\ \ . \. -~
~')
\ '
\ .•. ---· Afu.
• ,
'.
' ' i
' ,,
i . • .
·-
-,,
>·•-•' : ;,, ( -, .
P·
' ,,
' '
F •
1 . '~
•
i ' I
' \,_
---··• r •"
__ ,
/
-,-
,. _,
•
•••• ••
--
·, 121.67
CURB
A~l+OO . 1 -iT . ~}
\
12+00 I) -J3+00
f .... , ,'!> ..
• ••
• • •• .. _;' ,, -·' ---· .. ,-<
• • •
--.. 575
"' --~11 •-'..-s+-.'-".-:.--.; -• n4\ \. "' .. . . "'\ ' . . . . . .. • • • •• • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •'
.,,,-. ,.
-' . ~ '1( •
Af
PROJECT: 4960134-002 SCAJE: 1"=40' DATE: 1--21-99
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ... .. .
i
• '
\
ENGINEER· OF WORK
DANl£L A. L££ R.C.£. 38396
EXPIRES. ON J/31/01
'-?·
t~_J'. .. ,.:i ... ·,_< DWG: 75131\131GRD05.DWC lr!R~F': !-,~3~_,,,,.,,,n~·~.owp. LOC:0,0
t .. OATF'· 7 /17 /QR Pl T _ c:.r:f -~ 1 -· l -
_' -..,_
DAT£
•
• •
4ID·· -.
-.. , .
• • •
• • •
• • • • q40 •
• •
No, 38396
Exp. 3/31/01
-. . ___.__..,,_
..--· ·111119-
l ' \ ' ' I
,,/
·---...._ .
'
• "~ 0 ·"' '. 1 . ;t-J .. i'-'.-' /·-.
•••• •• 15+00
LOT 4 • -cr3B
•
i
' j
'
-c:::. " > , : .... _ .. -,,_f:) -.' . ;1; o1-" -
_--'(
' : ..
' • i~
l ' "'\ I • ' -~ ,,
t'.' ..
'
. " -
. ' . '
,-
' . .,,,,,,,.... ---,,. '
··------~J~~~ --
,.;.t~,l!:\I' --'
' '.,_-
.. ·~
:. . : . ·-·.' . ·:
·,. _ _.... • ,,_J ,,
"· -~
7' .. ' •• •
-I
-·
'
. ' ---·,,
'~~/-\ .. . ' "<' --.,
·--' ··-. . • . . -
,;i''
:; .:
----\
'' ·t. . .-~-. . .. ,, .
\ . . . ;
'
··---~--_,_,
57 .
. .... -.. ..-...
J./ •• ,. •.
' -. {'
' . '
"• · .. -" -'l2.3 -
. t:
--·-· 101:-
->;
.. .
40' ·o· 40' 80' 120' -----GRAPHIC-SCALE: 1 • •40'
-A
__ .v•·
--C,
•
RCE_· __ _
' j
, \
"4.S
•
r·,
C .: '• ') , ._
-:.--.
BUILT":
EXP·--'-----
-~D BY:··.
INSPECTOR
\ ', ' \ ..
' ' f • .-
' !J \ --~--
'
\ ..
\
l----+-----+-----'-~------------'-'----.--,-i-:------4--+'-'---'-I----I w CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
GRADING PLANS FOR: _ ( >: ·· · /
CARLSBAD . TRACT . 92~08
'
. '
1---t---+-----'--'---'--'-----,-...;..----'-----'l---+---l----'+'--'-I ~ r
' ' CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY
APPROVED: LLOYD 8. HUBBS -.
'':-·
' . '
', -~ -,
--~
,
' l
~ ·-
'' -' i
. ·t
-\ .
i < -, ,, it' ' .
'1 ·
~·
\·v
. ' ·-.v r! '.. I t .
i
,.,
,' .,
~:
>
.. ;..-,
<o , '
!tj . "'1-~ _ ... ,1 . · +-,.9. le """ , fro ,. -
-~-.
,-
!
~ ,,_.,,
. f
-·-
t;' . . ,,. .. _., ,•-J· ·,, ..
c._,.....
f, ' \
'. l ·. ,.
' ~--·
;:: ·· ;-·. r;)-_ .
'l ~ /· .
·\'·_. fl· "'~~. •'(
-~
tr;.·
··.~
~ . .
0)
,, .,-.,_ ..
.. Cit ATE~
::::::: ---
' '•\.'
,;
'
PROJECT: 4960134-002 I SCALE:
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB
.
1"=40' ( DATE: t-21--99
TDRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM -11 if--=.::: LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . • --.
£NG/NEER OF WORK
No. 38396.
Exp. 3/31/01
DANIEL A. LEE . R.C.£. 38396
EXPIRES ON 3/31/01 -
,,_. ... •.
~
~:, -· _ fo~esf ~f'J;frr. ~'fr,'Jf!fERS, INC. f :1 • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101
i,
' •
.·
,-. ;
(
I
'
'
:-. .. .-• --~ _,
•' •'
' . . '
I
·~--:i -1-·----~
T ·' J1Af----.. :__ ..
._· i ;, ...
) . '
.. :, . :.'
I . _, ",
. , .. ·,_,,,,.,;_;.; ~-
, .. , .. ; ·, -
,}, ~-,·.-,
. .
~ . ,·
-.,~
'
'.
. \ .·•
I
·-~,;_. .. -
_,_ .... --.-,,_.,_ ... -
/
\
.' . :'. .
:l.Ot,:12
: (OPEN SPACE)
·i:;,.t·_-~:, -. ~ ·-. '.~"",::,l'.-'.~~}_:_t'Y:
• -:_ ... , 'ry
-· -·
., ;-, .
' '
. /. ..
' -;: ... '•.• · .
' .
...... , .
.,
' ~.
._.-.,:· , ... ~--
. '',,·
. .,,· --~·-~:
!,_
f ' .
,i,;·
... ;, :
. ' ' \ ,.·
. " ".
') . -· ...•... ·· ...
l-"'t, · TEL: (619) 232-4466 FAX: 234-3fJ22 ) . ) (-----------------------------·--------.. -.... -------------ii,o,,-~.,, ~~/ ~SJ13_.,1~1}1CR~~~-E!~ .... x.R~;: .?:,131\ACAD~G,RA0\13,G!Wl.OWG LOC:o,o ' -' , . \ '/
,
'.
' -·-,
r ,,, .
' 'ti~··-·
. , ,_
;
.~--,.
' -~,.
.. -·_,.
'
)
\
·.
/ . J ...
' -,: . .--y-.,-.,
-' _· -(.:-../...,., . . .· . } ' r,rr-_ . , ,-I
/.· .("' ~-~~..(~· . .-.. ~r• " ·-.
' ' ' \'
' .
. ,.
.. -..-·
.-. ' ..
·,.
·, l
•' r_ ••
:\ -f .-
'
. ; 40'
•
BRIDGE O[T. . l . .
PU? OltG J -J
, ...
-).
I
''
\ •,:,
~-1'.i.il . .' . :c' .. ' ,::t·. -,, ~:. ~ . ' .• -.:~
f , j;) ··:,_.,.' ,j-1 C · ;
~IN TO HAVE PERMANENT F[NC/NG . ' .· ~: t ,':ii :fl
'WITH VEHICULAR ACCESS PROVISIONS , ' . ''\Ai.~!,.···.· .... --~~ :::~
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SORSO U-6 OR;-' \, O,(· .'.,,_.,·i), .. ~.i?.'.71-/,.. 'j
·. ~ ~;~";tcfffN"{:%vf11Y £NG/N~&R . ·_ . ·_ : l ~,i, . ~l~ '~
'J I \ · ', · ·· · .. ·RIP"¥. . ''
; . I ; 0/SSI, '.i
\. '· PER ,.~
:.~"1_.-. ·.8.8~ ·,.:
;· .. c..-~-rli. TE'R -'~
-.. •11-//CJ( .J
~~ ~-o,-f'! \,\
. '1.0~ ll-lt. ; ,, ..•. ::° .. ,. · .Off S-1NI) ']
.; !1 ,.• , • :2/, • 01 :.,_~ • '[_.~'.:-(" ·~ ', , :~~
L
.•.
·L. 0 T. '.· 1. ._ ,.;::;~·.,·5;t::.i-1!·:t:r' ·· :;l 'ri'• ,•,'.t','.,, ,r~,,·~:·._· ... ~ .... •,:,>_,•·'"," -:::i--··· _'·.,~ ·:,•1
(OPEN S'P~~t) ~:f: · :.~-:-.,If'. ,·/,}'. ~ il
. . .. . -r·
',
d • ',' '
-<,_, ,,
' ..
. r·
', •
' ,;-: 0
-·, , .. · . . •
', --, .
-r;. ·, •
. ,._
,.> ..
JOIN tit CAMINO Rt:AI.. GRADIN(;;
tj-;_,a PE_R DWG NO • .J49-.J8 ,:· .
,. ~--.
I •
. ;._ ,. ': ·,. ·,
·-/
!'
-• .. ;
oi 40'
.
80'. ---
,
·-· . '
,.,;. -..
'
/~CE __ _
120'. ----REVIEWED BY:
·GRAPHIC: SCALE:· 1• .. 40•
-~'--f_-..:"·-~~,;~;~,,i.~;,,-t'.<:,,t-C::i.l.,_i'.,;.; .1:.~,:· .'.,:;.,_• --,, _. _:-,.,c', -:, ) . '\.<"_ -·. . --\
/,,P._P_R_o_VE_o_:_·_U.....;O_Y_o_._e_._.-!1.....:.U .. B_BS_ ... :·_,.;.._.·-',_.,._,.r_·.;.·-:,~0:;f;'}:t~.!;' • \
CITY ENGINEER RCE 23889 'EXP. 12-31-0l. ",·:OAT£::,,.,..: ·' . .
OWN BY; ---I .. PROJECT NO. ;;
CHKO BY:---,.-. c·r.-.·92:....·:·oa· .\,c RV'WO BY: . . · .. , . : ·~J; ; ,,;
I
' ,,
' ,_
• '
'
/
.
-_,
\ ,.
·'
' ' . ' r.,,
·}· .i>. LOT §\<
• ' ' --• J ._;,.,. :__ •• ·._ •. I
/
/
·\_··
r. -· .-------~-
'---_:...,-,'."' \
" \
\-.
·, e..r .
-• 1s-5 '1 \--.1 1 +,. c;, \ I ' 0 iot~ __ _e,-~ ~ 0. --) l\ \" <t. "1-'t'' ----~--_.) . \
I '-,'·
! • . '---··--\--..
C
.....
' --. • 1 •
,SJ) pp•
<;e~ (frcf ~e.,
• •
\
\' .,
\
\
\
~ \
r
•
' '
1
II/ti
PLATE 5 .... ~ ,., . + 19 ,_-. --~·
! ' PROJECT: 4960134-002 SCAI.E: 1 "=40' .-
DATE: 1-21-99 -;:::;I · =:;;: --ENGINEER/GEowmsT: JGFIKAB DRAFnNG Bv: JLBIKAM =-=.::::t----------...1..-...;..;..;..;;_,;;,:;;;;,;:;.;;;;,_-1
a =.:: LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEER OF WORK
DANIEL A. L££ R.C.£. .JB396 DAT£
__ EXPIRES ON 3/31/01
No. 38396
Exp, J/31/01
,,.,._ .\.
.,'I'-. ' '
I
\
(
I\> l ~ .
• I
I
·1b4
I
I
I
I
I'
• • • • • • •
55q •
''
.----
.. -..
• • •
f
/
·'
/~ _,
j
" ,;t
.
-.
< ...
\
., . ,_-
6. ,·.-:
• •' • -~ I • -,, ' --'~,
\
-. ' -;
• '
/' T
-. ·" -.,.___ •\
-'
40' o· -40' ·80' .120' -------GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 "-40' ·, . ,. -.
' '
REVIEWED BY:
"AS
·~
l
'·
I . ,._
'
"
..
...
•,
' .. . .
!,,. '· -~· '
""
,, ,V ". --,. . r . ,
I
•' -/~'. •, . /
, ,
/ ,. / I I
I
' I : ./
/. / .·/ I, ,,;) (. .
'/ ,-' / -)
,' .l //:·~ //
.,/ . ''. /
/ . '
I
/,
I
:; ' j
.--·
i----..__
',~o.·-.. ·.
. '
.. ,
•,
~:
\ \.
\
' i
., _,.,. ·, · ... a .. ·•.O,·
,_. ---:·· ~ ----, -,..,,...,,
' ·' / __ .... -. c.···
-· • >'' ,,.,
.,
\
·, '
' \ ..
\·,\ .. \ '
"•,\' ·,·\ '. ".
(
\
.r
' . '
-· .,./
I '
. .
'
' '
,·
\
. -·
' '·
.·,
•
'
,
\
,
' \
I
}
I
/ ' -. .. . . . . -t--·.
' PLATE 8
~IR:;-PROJECT: 4960134--002 I ScALE: 1"=40' I DATE: 1-21-99
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB I DRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM =--.::: LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . ;;-,-
. . --' ., . ,
ENGINEER OF WORK
OAN/£L A; LE£
EXPIRES ON J/J!/01
. R.C.£. JBJ96 . OAT£
'
No. 38396
Exp. 3/31 /01
. ,_. ,----
'
P&D / CTE ENGINEERS,:::JNC.0
·, ,_
401 Jff:ST ''.-4" STREET. SUIT£ 2500 , .
SAN 0/EGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 -. . . ~Jc.
,TEL: (619} 232-4466 FAX: 2344.,_3022 ;
.
. i
·.". .·;--.·
" ,;;,_
. ,
/,
I
r /
' l i ;, f
''
I
' I
. ' ( ·-:::.-
~--., ' :-;-_-:< .
'
·. t . "'· .. ·•
. : ,
. ,·
,
/
\
'' '
!
,.. --·--:--:---· '-,.
., . ,
~t:>~·--· . ;:>?:~~
_,, .. ,,~
' I
.-r .. Ii
'
·.,
'·'J · ·,'·:1f:.,
I
.
..
-•,
1:: ,
.
.,, . .._:!· ,' ' . : : ' ,(
. .
' . .
,,
I
(
~ ·, .. •
'•
''-i
/
~--'
'
/ /
' .
•
f
" .
•
I
··~·~--. .,..,
; . '-· --
,,,!
. ,
' . :'-,' ..
--:;_-· '\ /
. ·.··\'
M \
'," ~,:
•
' ., . -.~.
.\." .,
. I
l ' l
I ·•:.w+ . . ·\ ' . . . ' : \ '' . ·\ ..
•.
.. .
·•..,.
\.
. .
I
j
'
"
,:
,' .
'
I
\
\ ·1
·-.:·. ,·
• \
\ \
j ' . ,.,
. ".
1 ,f
j
\
J
\
..... } . ··~
. ,• ' .........
' '
I ,/·
' \
'
~
( J,.
' ' ' 1
· 1
./:
' ' '·
\
\
.\
I ' '
\
'.
i ' I
!·
!
l . ... )
'
.. , ' ' · \ F,G 106.~1•, ' ., , . \ ', .. '
\ ' .
i / ~ /:t
..... ' \
',
' •
\
.. _
' )
··(
\
\ .
I '
I
,,
' '
' • '\ _
i
J I
. ,~.\~-~ .
\
I
\
'\·· .
' \ . \
' ·. \
\
..... '
•
\ '· \\ .. ,.· . ' ' :
·. ·7J
.
\
..
't
\
I
\
' .. . .. . .iA\ ·f\· '. ·' :\ .... . .. ·' ·::.£</.·
...
. : ~ ~/ t~-:J~-:.;~~>?-.'.~-.
-.... , .. -~--~ .:
'
•
40' 80' ---
. •.
·. ' \.· '\ ,, . ~--<
•. ·---
120·.
.. RCE ...c· ..:....,-,---
----REVIE~D BY:.
GRAPHIC SCALE: .
·,
: ;DAlE INIJ!AL,.:.
.. o~
•
C~TY ENGINEER ·RCE 2388
D~ . BY: .,.._ .-'-,. · ..,...,.. .. 1
..,-IHI'"'_ "'-ll....;¢'..:·llCHKD BY:.-...,.'...,.···.,
~VA£-vv«l BY:
BUily' ,
/
'
.f.. ,
EXP·--'---OAlE 't'·
·,;.,.·
'I • ' f
OAlE·..c..~
ORA v.lNG: NO. '
349~3,!; ' . -. ,' .... ··:· '.
t ·;.
-;, i J. ,'' ,~·.·,
i '. }! ..
I
' .
I
h ' L .
I r·
I 1:
\
' '
r
Ii '
. ._
_c/ ,.-.--
' ,
.,..,.
/~ /-~
j'
..,.
-~
'
. ---,.--__ .;_ -,
':-
/,/
. , . I . 01 3J! 'f&"'
0 •:,J.
0
I 'v .
~~b ' . ,.
c' /0 .
>1 • Lfi IL~
:J.L
L!,"J
:J.J
Lf''O.
I
\
-------.-. --4~ .·· ---
...
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOC/A TES, INC.
. '
I .
-
. .·p,10./ CTEENGINEERS, /Ne.;·.
401 HE'ST ')1 " STREET. SU/'T'f: 2500
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101 ·
TEL•. , (619) 232-4466 FAX:. 23.4-3022
. '
.. DY«)! 7&1~1\1310RD09.DWG XREF:. 7111,
:._'IT", ..., 1,.-, lr.O ru .,. ,n,.. ~1 r. • /4 OC-\i
\ORAD\1310RAO.DY«) .tOC! 0,0
. '1 .. ,
.-70
SW
/ /
. . ' ' ....... , ,,
' .
e3ob'
· .: -_ '-·.--,;-; :r .. ·f · .....
LOT 2.
(OPEN SPACE)
. · ENGINEER · QF ,,WORK ~~ESs,~ .
ff} . ' . @
DANIEL A LEE .
EXPIRES ON 3/31/01,
.. : ·,,-,, ,:· :,. -.:r:· '. ..
-, ' ·, ;('
'
R.C.£. 38396 DA TE: -~
I '' ,,..;..,,· ,. ..... ,_,
L~_'·-~\_,:,;.
~ ·· No. 38396'' I~
··"' ' Exp. 3/31/01 ' '!lJ.
.-., -,
~
." ..,_ ' .
,· ·;, ,· \'-.
"·I ., ,_:_ :~··j_;:_,,\,: :--··
I _.• , ____ ,. '
\
\ \
\
\ .-325
\. . .
' .. ·· .. '
•
I ·•
,_:::__
·.
., . :.•
. ().
-·-----~--'--.. .,._
l'. -.-,-
e 01· ·
' ' ' . ; ..
..... ,
; . ~ ''
•'
,, ' .. -
>":'
• 2.1.i>ti;: . ' ·.·,, .
, ..... '
'.; ..
::--;/-·.
~/{'_.
··" ..
t.')," .,
. "
. ·. ,\ . l ,'! • --,,-_
. '
:-.-l ; '
' >
'
' ·, .....,1.,.. .. .. ...,._
-· ,. 7_' .. _ • .,;.
'l-i( , _ _. ' ' ~, t:-"--.,..,,,_,, -
.. ---·
\
40' o· 40'
\
/
' I '\~
, .. ·.
SD PP
5eL fro/;Je.
Si\+'.-. '
80' 120' . · ---- -GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"•40' ·
--------'
---
\. j
. •
·--~ .
·@··'. ·. ;: $ '''' ···•·· .,,. ' •''. ' .
... _ ....
---: . -. i;\ . :i"-.·,;,W;-. _,, -
----
t. "' ,,
. . _ ... . <
.. (.'I
........
' .
·v"( _.0,....-<
... ·-,R.
' ' ' . ·; . ,-"~-~ ..... · . ·,.
7R!i TllltJFE - - -Oe,_Nl~HO_.ric/QJ.S_.·. __ .. --~--·::~: ____ . \ 1 r-:-:-:--~-~
. ' I , . ... •
'·: ',° .. .,, . " . '
"AS BUil T"
·.:r,
"'~'
RCE _ _;___ /EXP. ___ _
/~
. •,,,:"}
DATE.•. . ' . ·, '
REVIEl'i£D BY: ..
------------\. .· ---,'"--' · .... ·,:_:'_t,
DATE ;' INSPECTOR
·SHEEl " ~ CITY OF CARISBAD l-:.--4 -'-"--l-----"-,-----,---'--'--l'-------...,...;.-;1---+--;,----;---,--; · ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT .... ::==:~~~===f==~~
t==:t==:t========::==·=· =~====~r=· --=· =t===t==~:;:q· :GR~~ARL;~;;~RAcT\ .. ->~oa::·i
1-.......:..+-+---'-:----'--":c,""'"'..;..' ".-:",---,.i..'_;;_---,-'-::-+--i-7'1---'n .. ~-.. cf'.-gz; . .'.oa GREEN VALLEY ·, ,<':.;/,~,·.? ,D:;;y
AP~?-~: LLOYD Ei. HUBBS , \ . : :k , . ~, ;~'it'i
CITY ENGINEER RCE 23889 EXP. 12-31-0l" t)ATE<'
.. -, .
O\\N BY: ' PROJ CT NO. · ·. . DRAYt!NG,Jil ~~. ~r; CT 92~08.iJt.,i, 349~~).
)"• .,
? . . .. ' . J
'·' I
T
' . '
' ' .. r
' '
. r :
,. ,,
' . '.
. . .,
~-t.·0-~ .2
(OPEN_,SPACE)
/
. ,;./. ..-.. ,-.. ,,..
./'
/,
:.-<
.. PL ...... Ar_e_1_0 ______ -.-____ ~ __ N_.o__,r~-: =.=::UR PROJECT: 4960134--002 ScALE: 1"=40" DATE: 1-21-99
!!'"oi. --ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAFTING BY: JLB/KAM l =-=== .,_ ____________ .,_ __________ .....
· s •..: LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
. -----, ~-,";-, ... , .. r,~;,~
Ii. ·. P&D. / CTE ENtllNEERS, IM
• 401 HEST "A" STREET, SUIT£ 2500
,SAN OICGO. CALIFORNIA 92101
. • . TEL: (619) 2.12-4466 FAX: 2.14-3022
DWG:. 75131\131GRll.12.0WG XREF:
-----•--•-::. yl-,; • -• I~
) ~-...
. ----\ ~'>AD\131GRA
·-
. ,A;-:--
l '
. , .....
. A'
__ .,..
. . •
< T _...--! l -
, .
. -~-:-~·:" ~· "r, __ ._
___ , .
/
• • •
•
. . . . .. :-:., .... ' .-.. :,: ...... ~. *'"' ,', ~--·-··· > _' -:--····~·~_-.·-:-oi
.... ··.'/
..---/ _-_. :,
..
I lb .
/
,_. ---~-f
F. -......... -. U·~-...,...-----···-·-.·------~• •• .. ------::: ---· .
I e?'L --1 -~. QI
' ··. ----~-_.,,--· .. ·----.......... __ _ --
,'\' ·.;··-~.
. ·---~~~--. . >: .. ;·-t--~~--":;'-°'ir-;~~~··.:..-;-.,+'· C.:'~·.:.. ,.,,7-., •• 'oq .· . ..,
.;.>" · .
<1e1b • ,,,,,,: .•. ___ ,,_,,.
.,-~15 ;L,,,-o . . ..
-e\12..b ' .· ;// [El
/ . ., ·.,·
'.:./ . ,, .
----------------
T No.
· .. , •
ALL; TEMPORARY DESIL TING BASINS PER
CARL$BAD STD, NO, DS-3 {MODIFIED AS SHOWN).
,.'....,.
'
··, ::.;._:_
..
-ENGINEER> OF·· WORK
OANl£L A. LEE
EXPIRES ON J/Ji/01
•
R. C.E. .J8J96 ... ,.'. \
-~ .
• ')~_,,_'/:·'-.-I
',
• ""
..._%_·.,; .
~ , .. ' . .
-! :-. ; ~>,1, ..
-,_(
___ ;._.-• ---
___ , .
. . ., .. -:; .
·.
\'.' ..... -· '
•: . -•.
~-< . . . . .
. ' ..
·"'-:' < ·.-...<_-_,,.
"'-;-,,_.
'·
'•: ...
. :,, ;--~-t•., ... ~--~· >.-·.
I•
.. , .. :~-~ .. ,.
•
...J--9 ~~ ........ . '. .. '-..
·~o~ '• '· •
. i TYPE "B,-5• c. 0.
! '· --r.-.· -----·-11------"--~J ., :1
_______ .... , 'j ---~ .-.,
--.;;;;;;;:____ . -----1 -·--.;: --: _J ,;:-:__ ~
. -·-..
. ,-.: --'~ --··
._..._ ""--:--:-·---------.
........ :. .
·--.
·--·--~----.. '• ... ~---·-... . ......
. ·-
. ~ .... (
. \,;: ... {'---_--.
-----~
. /, '
/ .
··-'.,.:.
r .
~~.: -
·"AS
EXP, ___ ,.....
, . ' . l
,,
'
_-> .I .. ,, ~-::;--1 . ·. DATE•" ... i'
.-: ;:· ---. '·,: .. ; '
. '
. .
" . '
'.
'
.
-
\
.,
..
., .. :·
~-· . -
I'',")
,.'i· ·,, :.,
DETAIL
1H. 349-J
NOTE:
BASIN TO HA VE PERMANENT FENCING
WITH VEHICULAR ACCESS-PROVISIONS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SORSO U-6 OR
AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEERt' ·
OR HIS REPRES£NTA nVE ' ··
. . · ···-""". ·.. .-,_
. . •.
.-~ . ---\.•_ ..
., ('
' r· j
.. ' . ___ 1 ,' :-:[" .... -·-,._.) :' .,
• t·'
' . . '
. ,;,.-
\-,,
'
' ,··-~
. / --
l'.·
-,.. ~
, .,, '
._~----,...---
. -~------· l
' . ·----•. --------.:.,__ ·, -~--, . /'•1 • \ -....._~ I' , _. • --•· 'J .,·,,· •• ' •
. ' -,----,, . J7' . . ·-···•.,··. --~ .· .·. · ...
.' ,. I \-:~, ~~ ·.,, • _,·
. . A
ENGINEER OF WORK
l·
-~ ... ..--
,
No. 38396
Exp. 3 /31 /01
DANIEL A.. l.£E R.C.£. J8J96 OAT£
EXPIRES ON J/JT/01
'•
P&D / CTE ENGINEERS, INC.
401 IJf'ST ':.!" STREET, SUITE 2500 · ··· · ·
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101 . · . · /
TEL: (619) 2.J2-4466 FAX· 2.J4-l022
I
.. ·--¥-~--..
DWG: 75131\131GRD11.DWG XREF: 75131\ACAD\GRAD\131GRAD.DWG 1 """"-r -.. -.. --· ---.. -. ,. ----)'
, ...
)
.,_,,...,,.r ·..------· ' \...., -
..
35' PCC
EUERGENCY
OVERFLOW
··1; ..
. L· ··OT ... '·1·.· ""' /-: ,..~ + -:··,;_'<'f: ·, .
,. -·' '' . , ·.-l.
' ''·" '
, ·:-·<(OPEN .SPACE);·.·
. ' ,'" .-
'"f·.
. ··~ ' . . -' .. .-.~-.
NOTE:
1. THE REVEGETA noN AREAS BETWEEN. THE TO£ OF SLOP£ ANO .
TH£ EXISnNG RIPARIAN VEGETATION MLL 8£ GRAD£0 TO Al££T ;'
THE ELEVATION OF TH£ EXISTING RIPARl(<N AREA. '· ·· .. ·· .. ,, ' . ' ' . . \ . . '+
2. PROPOSED MlnGA noN Alf£'A ·t;f(AOING Wit/. OA YL/GHT EXISTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR G~£ WITljlN :/:0,2' FEfT. MITIGATION AREA
FINISH GRADING WILL BE' UNIFO(?U ANO fffLL lvOT DEVIATE FROAI
PROPOSAL CONTOURS IM £XC£SS1 o/ 0.25' IN AN'( LOCA TION.
·.:. ·,
,: r< l..11 .~ .... -~.,,.,-~ ... -__
· 3. NO GRADING. IN THE >-£'a.ANDS AREA'-1/Nl.(Sp SHOWN ON .THIS· '·~
PLAN OR OTHERWISE ~PROVED BY CITY. · ' .,,_. .. ,. · . . 1 . . ,· • I
... ~, .
----~--·~~--·:.-,.;[,"'"·:· _-·-,.,,_
---1.j
.·· "
·,..,. '
. . .
' , ' 1-, ( ~-.-' ._,.
' .. ';,0~-i
\
r 1
r
. '~ '• . .\' '
!
I. ...... ~
I
. ..
I
' I .
.i
{ .
..,
•. .
' \ ,•
a • ...
..
> .
. . •.
. 'i.':,".!•,,fij ;,,:· :
·>, ·,.
• " I )
.I,.,
'' .....
,..,-.
. '
·,' ' 0
.'i'"-
•
J
., -. ~ .
-'-,
--,:-
·-, .
,, '
. -. ·. ~. " ·. c:J:/tf, , ..
. ·--·---~:·'. .. -.. -.,,,. . . .
.. ·t .
-, ·. "'" •.}, -. '
., ~-. .. ·•x,,. ..._ .,. ____ _
' )· \_;. ... -,
; ·,:~,_,, a
, 4 _ ...
~.,'
. . ,l·~· ,,
. . . ,' .• )/:. ' .
·,''I
' .. ; • ·r ••
1·. '
'
>
I .
-..
\
•,.
' '
---·--
' . -·~ ·, • I
/f.
SEE.·. SH££'l' . . . i 13,-· :+·<· .. i , ..... ;;s~;~;zl5jj~'.;J:1)t1ltss
-~ .·-' .---· -_,,,, ....... ~~~--::...... . -
-.____ I ----·---• f ' ' ~ ' •
. ·. . .,' ~-.. ,., ' -. . . , '~-.. ', ' __ ., . . . .-, .,:-:·· ,. ' . . . . •. ·· .:t;. · ~th'.--':t:·:"~c,·· · · .··. -~ ·
... -c:_,...,. -•.443 ., --·
.. ----:-:-'.;::··~-;:. -~L\S :__.<.·~:;.;
.' :',• ! ., ·.
,/'
,' 1,
-~ ·---..
' ,·
,I
'
·, .
: °"; '. -.~
.-..,,,1-.. :.-_, ....
-'[' -·, .....
:
,' -,,, .. ,: .. ,·.~-.,~
·~,\·
,, . , ,:-·
. \ . -:--,-. -
. ·-·
-' -J ' .
I
~~·
) .
/ • •i' ,•-,:
'
'
' ;~ .. '··-.
' . ; -;-'
. , -.
.·,,-,('
'.-.''
··-...· .. ,. .
( -, -. -
.. :,.. \' ,.
'
. '
' "i
I
,'.: ·-•,: ..
,
... . . .-.
. ·-., ,.-..
·)
40' O' . 40' 80' 120' -------· GRAPHIC SC~: 1"•40' ..
:,: l
. ,.
' ' \' .
, ~P' •· • 12.0 -..... --. I -~ . , . . ', .. :-;,. ....
I
., ..
.. -" ~
11
(.
\ .
' '
I . '•
.J ....
. .... -~----~'
. .. ·· ..---:-. . ~ .. ----· .. <F .. ··r __ .-·.·' .. r
---. ,,. . -.-. \: .:~ :.<·. _. \:
,
•
/
,<"' ''),i,_,
-~· ... ··
' . """ ' . ' -_ ~
' ··-~
,} .;
' ', ,., -
·, ,.. '
···,. ,_ ,,·.,, .
. :\
•,\, ·,
.< _:
?t,):
'
' _., ... _;
:_.·,,;.',
... ~:.: i
i.. ·.\:
11 As su1L r 0
BY: ' .
; . ,' .
'
EXP. ___ .·_o~ ·.,.,-,·· .. : .
-< ~ IT¥\OF ·. CARLSBkD ,SHEETS t-------t--+-------------_-____ --_ ----~·__,_......_-+----+-'-~"'---+-----1 jtWLJ====· ,', t:=:==::::EN=Gl=N=EE=:Rl=N::G=D:::E=P=AR=TM::::::EN=T=·=· ===-=· ~-~Bli ;=···7·
GRADING P.LANS FOR: ''. · ., . ,
CARLSBAD • TRACT 92-08 : .
C . 92--'08 GREEN VALLEY
i----i--,......-----------------,.-----1----+---+-----+-+---. ~ijOVE0: .LLOYD B. HUBBS
t-----1-----+--........ -------------------1-----+----1~---.----/~~ EN~NEER, RCE 23889 EXP. 12-l-01 , . DATE.':·
DAlE · INITIAL DAlE , 11'.!ITIAL DAlE INITIAL , PROJECT NO.' .. · DRA'MNG NO.
. . , '.' ' EHGINEElf OF , W0RI(
• ' • ·-•• • • • < •
Rf;VISIO , OlHER,· VIJ. · . OlY N>PROVA{ · CT 92-08 349~.JA , . -~ -_.,.,,-$
....-.;· '
I
-,· .-.;. .;l
I
' I \• ' /; I \./
'
' ' . ;· . ,:
~ k-·
6-=---· ' ...--
i /
. ' '
' ---~-·--..
I ' .
.. --:,. ·--
' \
(
!
' '
,,
' . ·,,
'· ..
I
!
.,
i
/
I
'
I
I
,-
-,-, ').
·----· -------~·
-' -.-.-.
', '
(
,.,)
'
I
'
·-·· . _., ... · <"
_· .. ,.,',.,.-,-·-·,•:~.·:,,.,.,_ \ . -· • ~-.. "I.A. ~.
I ' '. / J
\
----.. --
' '
.. --.
\
i \
,.
'
' '
', ' '
'. <..,,,. · .
' -
ENGINEER OF WORK
',
DANIEL A. L££
EXPIRES ON .J/31/01
,£.. . JJl_'{Q6 "r--DAT£
·r
·,
I ',j ' .i \_ .......... _,,
. -. -~-. -
--
-----
' -
}
' '
, ; I '
~.·~~.< ,, -
P&D / CTE ENGINEERS,· INC.
'
401 llf:ST ':4" STREET, SUIT£ 25od . ' · . ·. ·
. SAN Dl£GO, CALIFORNIA 92101 \
TEL: (619) 232-4466 FAX: 234-3022 \
·,,
,,ov.r.:. ~;~ ;)~!l~Rg~i',Ds~AL,~Rfh :~31 \ACAD\O~AD\1310RAD.DWG<LfC: 0,0 . ·,.
I
\
'
,,
, ',
-~;'
. _-~,
',130
--i
"'•\ ' .
. '-,. .
-;,,-
I
\
\
\
. :_ ~:' \
,
'
t-. . ...• , -.,,
.. '·'. ;/ ' ,.,./. ..
•, ." . .. , .. ~-.
··:-: -, ~·
'. ~·
' l
I ..
' --' .·· : ' ,, ..._______
I
-
,1
' \
'
. ' \ ' '.' \
'•, '\ \
' . \ ~ _, . . \ \ ·. . ' J· , . ~ .,
' '
'· I
,· '-..._ '
.. , __ ' .
.
\ '\
!
.
'·
\,
'·
',
,,
', ··~-
' ,,
' '
. ---
__ .,,_
"..,-\ \
\
' ,, .-' . .,
'>'
< • ;. -
· -,: __ .• ~:./ :. · x1 , -;J?'.!~:}~~}½;,t;,~5,~1i,;i,s~1f~:~i~t ,i
l ' , j
I'
E 0. «
t Cf ·,
. : ~-. -.
'· -; •· ... l :
• <;_ ., .·'
C -••• • · .. · .:.:·-: ., . ' .
. . ~ .
: ' ...
,, '
:.-...
l -. \· ·: . ,i ::\ -.... '· .. ,.. -: .. , t~, .
·.-,._,' \ .;_. . ,. .
"(,
,.. . . ··.\· . -., : -~-. -. ' 1 -• .
., ' '·>;-' . ; . ~
.. BENCHMAgK. ' }~~7{~~;~:f ".., C; 1 ....
DESCR;P~ON;\ct: s~~ET ~RVEY ~~u~ENr'';;; :·:' ' :, . ,·" : .· .·
. , "'COUNTY OF· SAN -DIEGO :"R1800149+91" ;' . . ·~·_, . ,, ... ,, ;-~-
LOCATION:' ; ' 'CENJERUNE: INTERSECTION OF El CAMINO REAL & ,; LA COSTA AVE.·. ,::: . ·.·' . . .
·.-. ·. ·. •.· ,_. .::'_">11.': :~ • ' . ._-. < ,I, ' •'_,,:;_;:,•,', •
RECORDS FROM: COUNTY Of '.SAN DIEGO; NAO 83 CoNTROL BOOK
. . · .. . . ··\COORDINA'!E:. N 1 76215.427 E 6249704.495 · . .'
~~TIQ~: f,\:}J~-~~!\'; ' : ~ ... ~lOM:, M/$, ::i:., ~;},:\
_..,--.. -' -., _. _.,_-f'..-{,._ ·~~ ,-... . ~~-
... /
'
--'f -
' , .
. f -, . ~
' ',,
. '
. DATE ·. INITIAL
ENGINEER Of' 'MlRK
,;-•
\'" ,·
L::-·
,\
\ '
\
\
\
'' \
v.
. •,'.
r )
!
' I
I
i
4Q','
I ' '
'
' ' '
' \ ' \. \ \
'' ' . ' ",
', ·,
' '•.;:
'\ . ·\: ··,\N . ,
\
@J\, ,f'
\' I
' ... ,· \ . ' ',·' • ·•-3 .... ' ~ '' tJ"' • tc)., \··I:! 11· ' \ Iii c:i !ti • . l Iii' I ..
l ! ~ ' ~ • :· I\ . ·\··.,.: 8 , .... i-'\
. \' ...... ' ' \a, I ($1 I
,: \ :. ·_. ·_
-,. -
·,___,.'
., .·-··o·, •' . ' 40'
b4,
•
80' ---
'
\
\
\
' \
',
\
' '
. ' • • ~I, •...
• • • :.
\ ;
•
~
120' .
•
' ''
, I
. I
i . ' ·(
'
•
'
"AS
RC£ __ _
-:r .
' ' \
\
i
I r
' ' I
I
' ' ' ' I \ I
'
"·
. I
. \ '
I . '' 'i .
·. ' .. . ;, ,"
\ i ' ' '-} ' . . 1\·.·--r ---_-.i '\ .. ; ., . ,, ..
' '' '\ ,, . . ...
•, ·-
. ':~ .
·-;
-~-· ' J, . ·· ..
·~-·
·"' I .
/•: '. i.. ''.
I, . '
. I
I
l {
'
., ·_. ~ -' . \'
.-_, ·_,."T . ' , ./ ·i1 :,, ") '
,D V-<) ;*
' 'a:! /'ttl\ .t' I -I
'I / .. ,.
} / ., .
' '
, . l
-:~ • ,, ,c",
''; \· _}~/~::;
.,
~ ''.
---REVIE\\£0 BY:·
. -~-GRAPl:{IC SCALE: 1 • ,.40• .
INSPECTOR
APPROVED: LLOYD B; HUBBS. ' . , '; ; ; /.•:,:~!};~:
CITY ENGINEER RCE 23889 EXP. 12-31-0t/ . DATE· ,:'•
DA TE · INlllAL DATE INITIAL
OTHER N'PROVN.. CITY APPROVAL
.. ~-·, \ •·-'·1·· ·'" ,, '
),, I
I--_, ,
I (
', . , ..... ....,..
. ' '
i
,,.
-~-
0
'·
t'i ' , ·-' '
, --
-
'
-
-........ --
·'s
•,
' .... ·-
·, ,:
'
-~-~ --·-. --------·.-__,,...
---''·, -~...--./
'
'
j . I
' ·,.
'·
. 'l · .. ',
'·
'
·..,:-: ,_.
' .... ,.___: .. ·-
.,
• 53 . '"-,,
' .. "-..'
.,,
'-·,,
. ',
' . ',
---~---,· --' --
. '
'-..:. ;_ . . . .. ' "'. {
.... "-, .. \,
·,
'·
·,
' -"~,
.• ~i::,
,':'.~
' _. .... ----~~----;· --_.,
'" ''
'-~ -
:
".C. NO'L •'.. ,~: ..
. ,
~
'
;i I j;
DATE: 1-21-99 ' ._. i ...,.. ______ _._ __ ..,... _ __._ ______ -f PROJECT: 4960134-002 SCALE: 1 .. =40'
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAmNG Bv: JLB/KAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
\ '
-
P&D / CTE ¥NBINEERS1 INC.
,, . . 401 WEST ':.! •• STREET, S/JITF 2500
SAN DIECO, CALIFORNIA 92101 ~ TFi: (619} 232-4466 FAX: 234-3022
J \ OWG: 751~1\1J1GRD1J.DWG XREF: 751J1\ACAD\GRAD\131GRAD.DWO LOC:0,0
~t--,/~8 PLT SCALE: 1/1 REV .r, ·-} _· . . .
.,.-,..,. ~ l ,_
: /·
'
--~
e1es
--
I
·-. . .
,,
,,
_,:. ' '
• -:< .~
'}·•:~' .. ~·
·-_,,_ .. ',
. '
., ,...... . . . -.' . ] ., ,-. , '. ..
_:-}.
ALL TEMPORARY ·oEstL TING· SAS1iis ·PER
.. :/
,. . ;
. CARLpBAD. sro.· NO. os-·3· (~ODlflED ~s SHOWN)
. -·~ ,.,, ,.' '-; ,·.,: '.~,'-~' ·.1:,-··. '· ,-;,\~. ,, ....
\
C
'I·
( ' ,;
. . j . ' . ;· ·. ENGINEER· QF WORK<:'. . . -·-~-
DANl£L A. L££'
EXPIRES ON 3/31/01
\ I '
38396
''
_J
( . -
., .
'• .
. '
DATE . '
\
. '
e2.b
SEE
,,
"
•
., · i· .· .. .--·-~ '
' ,' --
: . ,, ,";
t·
I
. :,, .:'r.\' .-
c ;,¢(;·(: ;: :=: <:!/: -x~\ ·\:: \ ~· ~,. .
:NOTE:.-·(;j.:;,::~1;,·. ~" .. ·=,.·--..·, ... ~--'. ·,<:: ' ..
. . '·. ~;.'·:·,,~,." '"':· .''~--'," .. :-·,,,. ·-;: ·, . ' :''-'~ : ,. 'THE'r~oct;,. 'flON MCAS BETWEEN: 11-IE TOE OF' SLOPE AND' ' >.
. . .'. 1'H£''EXIS1WC:RIP,4/l/AN<;'i/EGE'TA'flON MU 8£ GRADED TO MEET',
• : . THE'~ 110N 0£:, THE D(JS11NC RIPARIAN AREA. . • ; ' ·',, •"'. -'':~~~J:,,·,::.":_.p.·~, <~c'•, ., • • -.-,; '. . .•• . .-,
, 2 •. fflOPOSEl,).;J,/11!i;;.iioff•Mci. CHAD/NG' inL-'t:. DAYI.ICHT E'XIS11NG ··
,,.flPARIAM :(X)RRIJ}()R CHAD£ MTHIN J0.2' FUT.· U/11GA 710N AREA
-,. F7Nl$H /JRAl)/NfJ; MU:iJt,l/NIFORU,#ID· ML[ NOTl)zylA'IF FROM·
7 ,
. '
,,. ':
·'. ·' / ·
, F:
•, ' :/.
' ,, "
•' .
40' :· O'
. , -
'.,
/ . ~ ;_·
·40•-·
' . ,
' .. l
_,.
60' ---
•
\ '
'.t ,.
·,.
• '
7 --~.,J
' . ,'! •
.•
.. :·,.
' . ' .. \:: ,:L·:~' ;·
'·
,·.If
120' ..
. , .
., ,
'\. ·., ( .
/
·' -
.... :~
' ..
,.;,,_ . -"
·,
\ ''
,_. ,,
.. -~ .:;.~,; : •,
' . .
• 1-:' .. -~ .
' v-'·, ·-e.1-· . . , I .; ••
.',f
-;
JIAS BUil T"· ' ' ~ . );'
( ., J
' '< · .. . ... .I , •
.. 'l-· ·;:,_
. ,, . -' ,,.,;,. • -< '
,. ,,,,.' ;_, , ~ . '
EXI'. ____ .;...,, !
_.·· , _ , , > P~;,C()l_t'TOJIRf,lli/'.EXCESf Of"0,25_' IN ANYLOCA110N. : . :, ----RE'v1E'A£D BY:.
,! :_":, :_!. ,_,_;_',:._. . : ;, ,t~;: : '~'' j; NO'.-'GNAoiNC ilt: ''fiiii't£11.ANDS ARE.).;_tiNL£SS SHOWN ON THIS
• ·,,, .. ,'~ ·:': ', .:·-·', ::.--.; · PLANi(:lf{·OTl-(EfiMSE 'APPROVED BY'·CIT't;: . ·. . . ' . '' -,.-_ 1~. ....... ,
' --~ .· . ) \, .
c' . I , ,~ , •" ·,-:·-;' ...
,, . ':-·-;: . :,<-••. : . J •• , ",
::t" ·:·.,, __ ::~·:;/·J :-,.;:'-\.:· ,c,:'
l/ ''. t'-"y··~: • ,, ·4
.'"tK~-'?_\ ' -' BENCHMARK ,· . . ~ . ~:", ,, . . :·, _,«.·:·.~: ·.,\,.,::_··> ,.,
DESCRIPTION: . STREET SUR\'£'(. MOMUMENT . • · .c .,,r ';,:' : , .. ' f, .'· :,"": .. · · -• •'. ' • .,;· ,,1,"# 1... "' ., ; COUNTY OF .SAtt OIEGO· ~R180O 149+91" ;,,,.,;,. ·, ;: <. ,.·., . . .•
. . • l.~·_,.._' /· ·:·,· •. -~ •. , ~; .. -,-;;~( ~-·:t<.-;·_·,,:·.
. . CENTERLlfllE IN·IE¥*,CTIQN OF EL CAMl('JO ,REA(..' -f·> i ':: r., ,· . ,. LA COSTA A""~ .,..-,_,,, · ',··· < '. '·· ,•,:· ... ::.'·.--.. ·. · ,.,_ · i,'.!-. ·. LOCATION: . .. '. ,,i. -,0• J"~ ,·_'c\"'·,7,~."".,<··. ~ :..'.;t,~ ,,-jJ.·~·-.·,.s::.,'-,~__.-;···;··X,,·
RECORDS rao,,,:( COUNTY'<# sANSo,EGO: NAO 8.3 CONmctSi~ooir·tf';\·\:;,:. ..,. '
:: -m~°.IN~:1Ei , ~f j~7621~~~7c. ;., 62~970jLf~\ . }~t\; (} :,~ . · · > .. ~VATION: · · , •. ,:.,s.997'.'. ;-,i.e._, t,'.f'OATtJM:' MY~.u~;f,;:;-,,Jit,i_,;,.:;/'ji ,.:. ;:'i ·:. ·.: ·\·: ~-" .-.,,~.\ ',:,21.,_..,_.,,~..._o"-.C''~•f'-~-"~"'"--,,,,.,_
I ,, .. · .... ~-/ .. /'· _·.:~ ~ •'~--: ·,::-,.-· . ;. :~ · ... \
,,' I' -.· ' ..
'
•
. .r.
' '
' INfll_AL
-~EVl_?ION DESCRIPTION
. .
•• 1
~ ~ .. : . -s-· '
GRAPHIC· SCALE: 1•.40• .
·• ,,_., ·-
' . ' . '
~-.. 1
DA 'IE INlllAL
OlHER M'PROVAL
INSPECTOij . :' ,''" •·• :, ·-'DATE,:-.
CITY OF ·CARLSBAD:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
APPRO'-£D: LLOYD B. HUBB ,,
CITY ENGINEER RCE 869-EXP. 12-31-'01 DlT£\.·.
D'M-1 BY:
CHKO BY:-~-
RVWD BY:
, PROJECT NO. cr,92~oe . DRA\\!NG NO.
'i• 349f-3A:.
. ·.J
'' ' ·1 ) 1-.,
'" '
1
. '
"l . ·, -~!. .,
' . -;
··-~-:.{.~;: .
'
. •
......
.•
-·· . .... --·
'
,.
.,
_,,..·· .•
./ ,
,·
,•1'
t'
', ,·
, ____ ____,'
. . ,, ., ,:·-__ 7;,;. -;
'
.•
~ ;...----
•
'· .,
/
F>_l,ATE 1:3
' PROJECT: 4960134.002 SCALE: 1"=40' DATE: .
DRAFTING BY:
,,
r>' ·Jf'
,'•
.;· .
. . ·,'-',
''
1-21-99
JLB/KAM
,,·
: ,'.--(·-.. ~~:..-·
.\
--~
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC .. ,.~"-,0
ENGINEER OF· WORK
OANJ£l A. L££
·£XPIR£$ ON 3/31/01
'
38396 DATE
'
;_~ -· · P&D / _CTE ENSINEERS, "/IIC,,. ['1 401 WEST ''A''STR££T, SUIT£ 2500 . ·.. :,
f. . SAN DIEGO. CALIFVRNIA 9{101 . · . . . t;, TEL:· (619) 2.12-4466 FAX: .,234-.1022
-~-...... ;
'
• '
, .
~·-.
. ·,
' ' ''
\
' "
·~,,.· .. •
/
., '
I .,.
//
;
J ' /·.
''
,
..... ·•·· ::[ .. , S; - •
' . .. ~ '', ' '
J
., . ,, '
--/'lQTE.· ·, ' .. ,4lL·
\
. . . -.. . ·. .. . '. . . . . .
'
· .. ·. · • (;,4RLS8,4{) GFB.
·;
'
\ . ,.
.,-, ,.
O'Q. i ~:
''
. ,.
'
3'
\'
' '
. '
8'1StA1S PFR
{A4001£![Q 4S . . . . .
/
'
.,,._ .
. .
•
',_ .·j-. i"> , ';; -·, . ~~-. ·-,,: t~-
' .
', .,,
· .. .,;-'.· ~-:.
/'/
/ ./ / '
'\
,-··
).
..
•
I
' '
I •
. . . ,
/ •'
--· .. "' ,, :.,~·" .~
40'
'
..
,.
.I
O'
// J
;
i
),., -:
_; .....
'/ ,,
/
•
.40'
• , .
.;,.: , •, 1 -
,
l
,,
' , '
,r •.,, • .
.
! ,'
i i
• I
; ,, '
.\: '/. .-'
' _:.,.,. r·
_,.,
v'. t '•
,/:/ \ fl· "·
.
',.A','
j: ·., '.
' /
,·
,\
·.,• . .
j,i
. : l . ... \
. ',"·
\ ''·
·. 80'
.. '
.· •
/
I
' ; ', .
~'
>-
---
I
;
,.
..
:,
,
. '
~ .. '. ,'
I
t20'
• ' ,. ,'
·,/ .
! ', ' .,
'
t} ,. \, '· , '-,•
\ ..
, , .
i
·''
,
'
' '
/r
.,
•,
. '' ,., .,. . , ' ,._; __ , ..
' l
\
,
I
I
' , ,
I /
·,.,.-·
,,. ...
\
I ' I I ,.., ~ •,. ,\
I
• \ ! I
..
• '
/ . I
J .• / ••
7)
: ..... ' ' ··2.
'
I
' ' '
' ., ·, ,
/ i
-•.
.·
I i
l
l I • ' ''
./ :,
I •.
,,AS BUILT"
.,
'.J . I
j
1
:f
. ,
i
i ; • j _r
' ' ·;lj . f·
-! ·. .·, ' 'ij -f,. · .. ,: •:\ . ., .. .:.... .
0-fl · / . ff.,~
·I. I,.
r, '/-,, ' t
.. · •. ~--'----,---
RCE---EXP, ___ _ ,.DATE
----REVlEWE0 BY:
.• GRAPHIC SCALE: t"•40' .'·,
. ' ·.·• ... ·... \ ' .
\
• ..
----'--'----,------" . --=--....:......:..-_;'"· DATE··= INSPECTOR
CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY·
APPROVED: LLOYD B. HUBBS
. CITY ENGINEER RCE 23889 'EXP. 12-31-01 . ·,
OWN B'I': ......,_ ....
.CHKO BY: --...:...-1
BY:
PROJECT NO/,; . · :' • ·· ci::·:~zs:oa'i.i~l:-
.,
,,J . ' .,,
I •
. _,,,_
' ·,.'
~-: .-. ' . :, .. ". ,, ,' '. l.
" ' '.l
'i I
J r .\
.1 r
·J
1 .I
:1
•j
' f
c·
;._ .. •., ',
-'' ;, ' .
i .. :,.
f •"
' ~-.
~( ,-
~ -;.' ... l• ', !f,·
'.:. f.··
c: -~ .
1-·
. ·,.
'•/ .,
,·
---.,..--------------------------.-,-------.-.-cc-.--------.-.. -----------------.-.-.-.... ----,------,.-------.-.-----.-7--.---.,-.. -.--;--·-c-.-._-~A:-.-.,-;J_':f_; ______ --_-7 _____ -.---..;-----,.--T-f--:,--_--_-t ___ \ __ J ___ y.; ___ -_----,.------------._-----.. -.-.,-,.-.-,.-.. -----.-v---:-._~-.-.-.-.. -.. -.-... --,--.-.,-.-,-,-,--------\-----------,.,-.-.-----.-.-.-.. -:~--;-·-.-.-.-.,-.-.,;.-=-.. ~.-'ll-.,.,-,•.-,
' . . ·~ '-. ,---,. ' ,-/ , . f . t' . . .. . . )i
,
~,/
' / i ' . . : ·.,/ I
•" •'' /" .
' ;,,//· ..... •. -'. -j ~
, .
' · .. '
~-
/
w/-_·
.....
,,•
,,
,
.-....
, ... ~
"'-.,i
' I
.,·
----{ .
/
./
•" (
.,,_, I
I
/ ;
/
,'
,
,/ .J., .....
I
. _,..~· ,. ,~ --,(
.. ,
• ,
..
/
......
>,
--
p JE 14
·, /;.,, {.(. .
~-' ,.
--~-1··1
PROJECT: 4960134--002
l
SCALE:. 1"=40'
,,,_l; ) . ,·
/ • ) ~')
\ _;
' ; ·< ' ·, . .,
)
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGF/KAB DRAFITNG BY: JLB/KAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEER OF WORK
DANIEL A. LEE
EXPIRES ON 3/31/01.
R.C.£ . 38396 "DATE
•
,.
·' ,'
,'. ,
/
'
.,,. ... a:
' t,/ .
(:, .
. . .-:: .,,
P" •::
. .:. _:
/
I
i ,.
i
, .., · ~ _; -r ,_.,,,-~, ~-'·"" ,:..__.,,_ll';,;~""':"~··•:.;,::-<"':~<;,1.~.~t~_,·*,
··1·! . " ... . , ·1' :, ·::·. .. ,'."
. ,-. .:...;,.·
' ·. , a/•
' I . I ..
.. /·
/-
I
) . ;
.'
I
I / .
. ,,.-. ~ ' ' ,. ' '>,,,, .
(
·i .: . . i..
\
' I
•
;'
• ,
t
' ·'
.
. ' ,..;
., r
·' ,,
~ I
\.,
}' , ,
' .
,ct<;'
D:!
. ·1 ..
" I .
' ., "
. -,·) '
' . I
. ' ' ~ .. -,
: ._,.' .
. ·::?
' " ' .. , .. r· ,.
. ~. ..
I
" ' ,,
1 ·,
. ,./c:>•
/'
I
\
' ~ ,(° •
f ' /:':;
,
I . I
I
i
' . r
·,/
F
' ., ~ .. •,.
· .. _ . /
I ' ;,, .
;,. !
C f , .. i
\ j (i
' I '
/':
I /
' .
' \ .f
/ f~
r .
.·,,:
·r
' .. .'
y~:: . .-
,·
-. '/ ...
/-
,,.._,
Y· 1: ·:·
( ~ l
; \ 7¥-·.•-·.· . . J.~:~1 ··\\-i('. .
j ~ \·/. ·.· . ;,;, ' ' ~;-.v.__;'-
'
I
·,
. I ,. I .
/'.
\ ', .
\ ' 1
\ -,,,,' :;J;..,~ ~:. 1--(~,. ,· ]-I'-~ . ,, --y ) . . """' ,... )( -,,r. . ' /"' -,,:· . :---., . • . . \ .. I -/_. ,· ,.·:·,~' ,,.,J • '
' ' •'" . . . : ,,-.':. .-·-·.--~-~ __ .,~
.. " ./);·· /'';; ! ~ :~ :: :.:) "' '· .
/. ,-
{
" '\
\
i
\
' · .. , . ' . I· _f: _;_-' :.: · / ..
I /i.;,r -,.,· ~· (":C .
\ _,. -· • /· C.' • \ '' •• \ 1 ,,,4 . · ' · '--...:.,. ' \ ~ ~ ' .;,..... ,·.-·":--.: . ·,," .. . ~..,._-,,._I-' ....... , ..-<-:h <' .,
~ '\"' ~ I / --. -\~
w -,,.,./ j.,. I ,..J( _ , · · _
:o ! . / > . '-.., . -7:-"" r-~ ,• '.
u . ,: J / tr· . ·y.· '-'-·
1· ,:: J -.,w --~ '<\
· _,.,-? · I · _;, f . · _.,
,-.NOT£· t3 I• .,/~ · 1 . (
,. THE RMCETATION AREAS 8£7WEEN THE TOE o}, SLOPE ANO ,,, ( .. J),.,r . r·· ,·
THE EXISTING RIPARIAN VF:GETATfON WILL 8£ GlrAOED TO MEET ' / j....)-!' · )'~"-,,, '.
TH£ ELEVATION OF TH£ EXISTING RIPARIAN ARfA ~ / .
2. PROPOSED 1.1/TIGATION AREA GRADING WILL ll4~' EXISTINGi,~, __ _.,.,.-/
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR GRAD£ WITHIN ±0.2' FEET. mGATION AR. · ./ .-·
FINISH GRADING Will 8£ UNIFORM AND WILL NO DEVIATE FRO v;,· · ,·· "v··-~
PROPOSAL· CONTOURS IN EXCESS OF 0.25' IN ANf LOCATION. ' ·,_ . ·.\ ·
. · 3. NO GRADING IN TH£ WETLANDS AREA UNLESS SHOWN ON THIS i-.,L . · { ' ) ,,-,
PLAN OR OTH£RWIS£ APPROVED BY CITY. \· ,, ____ _..,.t 'I I
. :,.:.
:-· / _•; '.,. /·-.
", /
'~_)~} :-" ~ . . .
0~-:_
,z··
_ ... -.•
. -.:c '..
, __ ' .
.. :f
\ ··_\ J. '· •...
\ ,.
\
_4~ / ) . ,, . / ., ..
-~A..Vv-: " • y \· ' . t·
. .
. :./ ,'
.. ~ .
. " -~. -.,.
_' ",, \' .
. ·,.-;_:_
'
/. \ .
·-~. A.\: i.
. . . -
' ; . ' ~,
di .. ·
.,/:.· .
. _ ..
I
I '~ • '
-:~J:· .. ,_,
. f.: ; ' • < •• •• . . .•. ~
.. ~-· =-., .. ' ' C: ->:",
.. ' .. > " l ·'
.. (r·
: ." J . i;. -~.--.7···.·
' , \\. '
\ T .\
I•
i
·'
" '
t .
. ,,
)
" ,.' 1 . .
.... '
...
r . i
'
..
/
. r· :-r .... -f,
. . .. ._'\"-!
j .
/
' I
. "·. ) 't-·· . • ·' I
·'-----:. _I., I
/ . / r."J I '), .,
LOT
, , , , "::; 1 / .~_3/16 OJA O.~ (: · J.: ! "~ ..I ,;-jl'i:. . . •. ~ y -, ·'"· ,, ·t ,. '-' •i,_ J. ' . . ~EXISTING '. "-•.• / i i\i ':<,
;-, ; . . >r ~WALE ~ ·'. ~-.\ " .. '\ -... \ ' .4· . ·. I-. r . J ·, -. \ .. i 'f" i .
. / . , • I J' • /·. , • .,. t' r . .,,, i·' . ,/ . • \ ),' ~ ~ • ·; ,if • I "
j •· -<
) •: ' ,,· .. ,,/ • l
.,~. • --; ·i
I,· •{
' -' ! l l · . . r · I . . \ .' .~ \~ '· .·. \ ·. 141'
I
\
\ \
-·-
A.·,::,_ ..... ?-!,.· I ,. \ /' .,• "i, ..
\' '.~ ' ,. . ~ ' '-~
~ .. •• . '.
r .. --:, -!~ ~ .... ' ' ,.• ; .. .,
. 't~
;,
.; -~
... ~ 'J
. '.r, l . ' ··:,. ...
' ' ' . •'
" . · . .,
/
' ' \. j
/
\i ,le-,, __ ., .. , ...
!\ ! .
·l·" ·.,. '
1 ·:,;;r,
',, ':"
I • •
~ .. --~ .. ·: .. ;: ' .
I 'I f
-'\ ' '
\
I
'· '
'.
\ ,., ! ,•/ \
,. .
I
. I
' I'
. ·-. L -, ..
' .
i. . : \ .. ; ~
I : '. '
\: ~ )
,'·... l
" ' .', --· '
' ' ;' ,.
I '
. (") i
\
I
.._., . \
'
\ I ,
1-·
. ( -··· ,,,,.: ~-~-·
'
1.' . "·\
7' •; .
-~·
, .
. --·r:'il,;.:) ·'" .. ,<....-_ F' .. ,,.-s-:----
,----1-I-
~"' •"· ~". ,,
PLATE 16 Ill .' -.-' ·-.... . -· ----= a --
:iJ .. , ___ 1 ~
DEU £XI VALVE:
AND F.H. TV DISTRfCT OFF7C£.
INSTALL SUND Fl.ANG£ AT
EXIST t6• WA T£R. REUOVE:
EXIST 6. LA 7£RAL.
• A
.J
Pnomcr:•"9611134--002 ScAll!: 1"!=40' DA'll:l 14Wl'.-x :-;<'· ·
ENolN£ml/GEOLOGISI: JGFIKAB . ORAFi1NG BY! .. JLBIKAM -~t}i
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIAT~S, llf c:;J}'ir: . .
-
P&D / CTE SIQJNESIS, INC.
401 lfEST ':A" STREET. SUITE 2500
SAN DIEGO. CAUFOl?NIA 92101
TEJ..E: . (619) 232-4466 FAX: 234-.1022_
.
S:HT'iOW/7 • flfl/,Jn/97 • ,/()£11 7!'i012 • 1*=40' REV 4-1-98
R OF S 8289
EXIST. HEADWALL 4' DOUBLE
6it5' BOX CUL VERT. ROIOVE:
HEADWALL ~ EXTEND BOX SEC'T/DJV 85 T12S R4W SBM
CUL ltfRT PER DWG NO 349-J
.I I
·1 1
'-i-
F:XJSTAC BEIN
TO BE !WIOVE:D 101+27.45 _.,, ,tNN --sr UON P£R 0,,1:·1('_:---DWG 349-J .. 102 _ ..... °IT ·.:. . --. ...... ,-
--t,-~ · ·-~ _:_ .. _. '\ \ \ ' ~~x6·· ~~g
I \ I , BOX CtJLIICR-T "-,_
\ \ \ _\ ... -==-\
1 I ....__.,,
I I ·.::>
..... _-:: '· :::_:;:--.= ... -~ .~ _,._ ___ . l -·-
... , .. : -·~,
,0
NO.
. ' I
NO.
I
2
.J
4
-· ---~ .
' NO.
1
2
RIGHT-OF-WAY
PER CT 88-0J-OT ANAL MAP.
!.
•
.
t l !
f, l
: .J
l --
0 EX!SnNG CENTERUNE DA TA .
DEL.TA, 'NG RADIUS 1£NGTH ROIARKS
. .d -=22'07"56" 2000.00' 772.55' It
0 CURB DATA
00.TA 'NG RADIUS L£NGT1-I REMARKS
A =00"55'07• 1947.00' .Jl.22' 6" TYPE 'G' C 4' G
.d • 13"58'00" 1946.00' 474.36' 6" TYPE 'G' C & G
N 22'.J4'1S• W . 48.67' ,:• TYPE 'G' C ,t, G
. A-01"25'5r 1947.00' 48.67' 6" TYPE 'G' C 4r G
0 STORM DRAIN DA TA
DCl.Tt G RADIUS LENCTH ROIARKS
N 11·15•55• E 7.4.J' J-12" RCP {1600-D -N 71•15•55• E 7.75' 2-.JO" RCP (1600-D
• IIIA7E71' TIGHT JOINTS R£QUIR£D
"AS BUil T"
RCE __ _ EXP. ___ _ OAlE
' .
•
·--, ' . ' -·~ ' ··~ 'J
; ~ ' ·,l
.~
l
.·~
J , .. ~-.,., ·, :~·
:M ~,\I
;j ,i
~1 ;I
,;1
: A; ... •• J t!f. :& . ··,,t
p~ ,i
-}j
'';,! '-.--.d. r ur,,-, r
PE'!? Dllr.
322-1B
U£I)IAN PF1il--'
OWG 322-TB PDR FRA C TJD1VAL .. --.... ,'C;,·-r'JON .r) r·IQ.,..., ri4w -.,,Lui,'· .c. 100 r1-40' o· --40' ao· 120'
REVIEVIED BY:
·'11 '¥~ ·"1~
'AN/£1 A.. L££
EXPIRES ON J/.11/01
R. C.£. J8.J96
:::;,-,:~,,, !..·:.-,,, ~t :;:;,') \.'/') ,• d ,'i o t I I~ ... I "' a.. ,I t •"' tJ C' T '1 I IAJIT f t" T RR .... ,7--;,•_ 111 ' ,, .... , _ .. .,,.,_ .. , _,,_,,, -· ,., f , _,.., .... ,,w,,,
FIANC'~/0 LAS E1Vc1/1VJTAS
11//AP 848 EL CAMINO REAL
: i . r-· :, 1 b,::, NOTE: UEDIAN D£SIGN PER DWG 322-1B ---· ---. -4---
·-i .. :
.....
._)
(_~
~)
BENCHMARK
DESCRIPTION: STRtET SURVEY MOMUMENT
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO "R1800 149+91"
LOCATION: CENTERLINE INTERSECTION Of. EL CAMINO REAL &:
LA COSTA AVE..
RECORDS FROM; COUNlY OF SAN DIEGO, NAO 83 CONTROL BOOK
COOROINATE: N 1976215.427 E 6249704.495
ELEVATION: 15.997 DATUM: M. S, L
---.-·
.y,I
<;
---GRAPHIC SCALE: 1•.40• ·
INSP£CTOR
fSHffil I CITY OF CARLSBAD ,~ l---t---'l--------------+----t---;1---t---t LJL_j _ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT·. . ~ 1--4---+------------t--t--t---t--t
•
DATE
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR:
'
>J
CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY-CARLSBAD TRACT 92-08 . }~
l--+-+----,-----------+--Jr-t--1--;l~rt. """-31-01¥1 i
J-=ri-=::r.--+---------------t-;;:;;;-t;;;;~ti;~""t"iNiiTw°1 OWN : . .,.,..,.,.,--PRO.ECT NO. DRAWING NQ.
DAlE INmAL l--"'DA"-'1E;;;....,._N_11...;AL-+·-04,....1E __ .,_11111_11AL-. CHKO BY: £{Cf;, CT 92-08 349-38_,. ·. REVISION DESCRIPTION. olHER N'PRO'/AL RVWO BY: ,
& CAJllNO REAL.
CMWO 94-
'
NO.
I
SCALES· HORIZ: I •.40• vc,rr.. , ·-s·
•
0 £XIST1NG CENTERLINE DA TA
' f J f\ '. . -(' ,-'.I
• i ' . ii
,,: I ,,\ __
• i
2SJSro20-04
' •
•
_ oar~ RADIUS LENGTH RDIARKS .
N 03""6'5.J' W 1062.01'
IAIPROVDIF:NTS PER
CITY OF ENCINITAS
owe NO 3957-t
(SHEET 8 OF 57)
---
£
,,c ..... -: :·· -_J_ .-
--
k
I -·+-
--i 1i7o.i"
I
i ·-·f·-· . . . !
< i t·+--1-·i
' I -1 -, ---. I
i -. -
. ;
·l '
.. ;
lj966 , -· ,;76.-
I i . l l l
'
---
-•" ---. -' ~
------.
-·----· -'lo -__ 91-·
... ----!----
/ -•' -..,,'
____ ,.
' ___ ., , ..
. --.. ,+ -· .
§Q-;~ I \,.J------~-.
·--j ·-'
-.. --· --. \.
----·...,.---,.-.... _ -· -~ .
-' I l -C
l
'
-ll.:t
L '
I •
~ -· ., -. '
1 + : -I
l i
. • ' !
l -
1
' i I
!
l '
1 ··eo'l
-.
' •
---.------------·+-------I
-70
-J -,I-•
' '
l '
i
l i .
'
I -
i
" -
. .
I
.S1Hal SVRl-fY lilON. -11 -=. -,,_ --~ ::s=:--=-~ .. ~---
-. ---·___.;.. -.....:.-· ~--
CURB DATA
NO. 00.TA RADIUS I.CNGTH
1 973.70' 6TYPE:GC&G
PLATE 15
PROJECT: 4960134-002 SCALE: 1"=40' DATJ!:'itt-99 , ..
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGFIKAB DRAFnNG Bv: . JLBIKAM
LEIGHTON AND ASSOC/A TES, INC.}}~!/
-
P&D / CTE ENGINEERS, INC.
. 401 IICST "A" SIRl:.El, SUITE 2500
SAN OIEG(). CALIFORNIA 92101
TELE: {619) 2J2-4466 FAX: 234-J022
Q.IT,I nwr. * flfi/.Tn/q7 • .JORI 75012 • 1"=40' REY 4-1-98
-----_,
. ...J.jll ~ ... ::== _:::;:::: .
---~ --·---~---___,,,,. ------
I ' • ~,, ,.
\
0 STORM DRAIN DA TA
NO. OEI.T~NG RAO/US l.£NGTH
1 N 86°14'07" E 27.50'
2 N 86'14'07" E 42.50'
ENGINEER OF WORK
'AN/EL A. LEE
EXP/HES ON J/31/01
' R.C.E. JtJ.196
RD/ARKS
JO" RCP {1:JSO-D)
18" RCP (1.JSO-D)
PROPOSEO RIGHT-OF-WAY
PER CT 88-03-01 FlNAL UAP
RANCHO LAS ENCINITAS MAP 848
p,-,.,,,,,.,,..,._P'_Pl • r--,.r .. ,'lt#" .. ., I • -""'"'"--. 1,.,1-~ ,...,,.,,, • .-,,..._,P'~, U-·rllfll I LI l('')·IU 11nt1I ,• I tl\#1 .. ,..,.,_,_., 1,,11 .... I .. ., •• ,, V '"" I f""t ,tlffl I --R"" ,.,.. '"'1 t,. l vt:J~u .. 1-u,
* CONTRACTOR TO CONSTRUCT S£1tm UAJNTENANC£
ACC£SS ROAO FOR ACCE:SS BY LCHO SEHCR a.EAMNG
EOUIPlilE:NT. ACCEPTANCE SUB.ECT TO DDIONSTRATED
SUCCESSFUL ACCESS BY OISTRICT EOUIPAIENT 0/JR/NG
CONSTR/JCnON. MATERIAL -6" O.G.
:iJ ,., ___ ,.,1 ~
II AS BUil T"
RCE __ _ EXP. ___ _ DATE
40•-O' 40' 80' 120' --------REVIEWED BY:
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 •,.40•
INSPECTOR 0ATE EL CAMINO -REAL
NOTE: MEDIAN OESIGN PER
owe 322-,e
l---+---+----------t----1---r------t---1 I SH4EET I C TY OF CARISBAD ~o ENGINEERING OEPARTMENT ~ :====-=====:::::::::==::::::::::::=======-':====:
BENCHMARK
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
RECORDS FROM:
ELEVATION:
STREET SURVEY MOMUMENT
COUNiY OF SAN DIEGO "R1800 149+91"
CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO REAL &
LA COSTA Al/£.
COUNlY OF SAN DIEGO. NAO 83 CONTROL BOOK
COOROINATE: N 1976215.427 E 6249704.495
15.997 DATUM: M. S. L
OATE 1111TIAI. Dt.TE INlllM.
REVISION DESCRIPTION
-,• ...
-~--'----... _-.. _--'-·.· -
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR:
EL CAMINO REAL
CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY-CARLSBAD TRACT 92-08
BY·
CHKO BY: Re$
RV'Ml BY: I PROJECT NO. I DRAWING NO.
_ CT 92-08 _ 349-38
CMWD 94-301
<z.
j
'i
-1
•
··;
·-. ' •,
.. --~
.. ,
' _,
·.•. ., ;,
Nf),
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
•
••
NO.
I
2
3
5
NO.
1
2
' ! ... ·t· -/ifGL.
I •
---.......... j .. -_J . + ··I-i--.. 1~ ---·· ~ I· -1---· 1 ·.~ i .. ; . 1 . I
.. . -1-, I . L .. · f t . , .( . . r ·-_ I k , , _ . . L ' . : _ .I. ~ ........ t· -~· i ... 1 •• ·--.1 -·1-··j-j-+ --·1·-i -+-; [. t-~I; ----~ t-1-.. ---i···_i.··. 1.·t-,-.. -.1111:···· .'ti , .. -i· j . .... -. -: . ! I I . -----. · 1--~ k-! · . f -· : --· . ~ ·1
, ···· 1fs r 1--~ --r·: ··.------(~"'::,1--, , , 1 I
i--~I·······~:. .. i' ~ . t-:· ·~ ·--.... ~ ;g1,·~~lt'> t~. ;~ ,. ;, .... f,·.+!-.· I
1-~r ~ ,..,_ j-It)~---+I ·[ ···1·~ ec·· ··r-· ·~ !<) 1 ~-~ I~ ... ! ~" : I 11.,. i f·-; --~ j -f · -~ ,:,:. ·, · t · ·IC)'). ·· ··-.i-1 'i-1(:: 'i-: "~ , ' L~ f ·
' I : I I ! ~ :g ~ ltj 101 • <o I C\j I ! -ll) I ,...,.,----{.i_,__ ····------···-··· --1----1 ·----1-+--le}-! ~i fl -~ ~t--l ~ .. IC) i· !·· --I -~ f
· I ,.-, , O ti,_t-··---+--r.1.0,~,t,~~ , _____ a.5X_j__,,.....,__~Q~.6,..4':,_. ___ ~--~.f1:_~~-1---.._ .. -:-Q_$.
j ) , , .. -1. o,,.. 1 • 9 X ' . r-. ,
i .. I ·ti_ . -JI .. 'i;, J,-i ' : I "--·le dum:R O 1.-t>i; I I I .,
~
. ... . ' ' i .. {, du .. 1*f?. ! .. jto·r·.··ft'.f·· ' ... : ! t· , i . :,·. ·11-, , I . t ig:_: -i·-:--; i !-1, . 1:' <::. 8 ·~ .~. ,l' ~ . ' . ; ~ .;., ' I . I 1, ~ i, . I . 1· I I ,. ~.. ; I .. • C, (:i b. <::i . 111 ' ~ -
c:, , • , -, ! <::i I I i' : <::i g , ' ' ~ .. ,~ c:. -• ~ °' : . ""I :~;::· )~...,I 1 ,c:, ' • -lC, . . ' ' ·t· . ' ~ .. ;::: ;.;:__. ·0::,0::,· -~"'\···
' . ~ t ~ It} ; I 'i-"' i . I l .~ ~ l ; I Jg o; . ~ ~ i L i -I<) ~ 0::, ~ ")
I I l~IC)i :'+--to 1 . li-f.cil ·to:g !OX ~ -Y.e. I -· l , ~ LO I i i ~ 'O I • ~ 1 • ! 0.1"" 0.9% I ' . i,:i-I ' : -AJ$ . ' I • I ' -• :o M ' -'I ,, 1% i 4 . C, -;. ,. -1 : j 1-,-(7,1° '.:-_f.f,t_1 I f?.2% l 1~41 ' 1 .. : i~: fsi ~C, .. :g~t
. ...;;a!f-~+---r--·-c:i -·-----· . •--------8 --____ \I)_-· --________ .,.__
,. 'IC)"I-<:> i<::i ·.g ' ... ~ C, -1-o; '°'"1' qj · 410-1 i i-I j C:, ·· i ' -·'· (.') • ' · · I I I "-· , ;, '<l :?::l 'O · i ~
""11·.,.,-._, •1 ~~ .• :.1 1 c:;o,, ,$}o,•I• ~·,, "'~ -
I •
l 1'· 0~
i
I j '
t t i . I
I l · :
I
DIX _;O. I?;
. I
c,i
C,
().5.t' -r.2x 4'.JX
•
. j
I
, . I •
. '
. '
.---1-----4"-+---=1:
rOP OF ltf"s 1cRd y cu#a
;~
·~
... 0, __ '"'jj
~ o; , ") .
. .
i " ..
i ,·
I
I I
'. I
-0.9
I -~ -
. . ...
' . . . ·•
' . ' . ;
'
I· -, ' : . j
I
J
I
i C,
' " ' ~-~ ~ ·l
I j-'' I i "· i . I :-'f • , ; ~~ !
'
I , -I Of , -.at ( '
I I : I I I ! : ' I
,li -·OF 14:f'S IFRL Y ivE,?!A,V CfJRIV
: I , ' .
: Qi --. ! ;~ ' ! t j ---; . ' c, ' c, ; . I I
] ~ i :I~ : . Li!~. 1 •
. ")
I !-
. -r.J.t
I
' . '
I -I.OX ' i ----1 ----~-i ' ~I.I~ t···· l -13k ·
-I . , :
I I ' 4 -. -: t . · . f L
I i I I i C, I
.. L . I~ j
1 i "°l (o ! ·1
' l. -1 .
I ' ' ! ---r
I
I
-i.J,t : ..
, . , -c:0,4" I , - ! ',:\~I ' ' "'i ((j .
j -~ ~-J I i
I ' ' ,.
'
' .. )-1 I . .. I ") :
.'h---~--
'-0..'7.' ... ,' ,_ . . '-0.:8%
_...,·-·--·------. ·c:;-8 I I ·~ ·';.'~: ·. ~~.1···.i, ~ ·:·j~'O. , I i C) I j C, ··•·
-----4---
""1~-~i ;~ 1 ,;'.~'. ! 1-1·i:-1. ;,1;:::1··! 1 i; I -. ' 0.9%1 ·-j ·· · ! ·~ 'O , l · 1--<a . , . ", 'n I 1 , .J .. t. Of i
-7~ ; -I ~ • ' -' .j_ 7. /_,. f ' . I ' ·~f:2%; I ·· . ' . : !.-.1. j
TOP OF n1sht Y MaJIAN CURB , -1.2%. -b.9..i-
I -. "'l Lt) . , ' .. ~ i j -'
; :gg_[
... <o ;
~I, .. : 1 l :-~7~ .j. ;o_ -'1 .. Jo.2x, -1 O.f-K[ I ! ., . I
1 :
: -· ····~ ·· i t I +-
.. -,-·
I •
,_
' ' ' I
' i . . ! I : C) ' 'I ·c, 2 ·-c:i··:
! ,.~ j I <::, r-C\, c,;"'l' + _., ' ' ~. .c:;...>. !:st-.i· ·c:i~l
(:iO::, -, c,~ :·~ ·~·
. C'l '° . ... . ;.::: . i-r-...: . "Q ~ . ~ ~ ·t· -
._ i:t :g I • : -i ll); ---~----3 ~-----·---·--· ~ •--~ ~ !
'~ i ~
-~t';j ! ,::;~;
' -.1.. 1A I, C) • I
' r-" : ' 1-
-~ 1.1 1 1 .,.
.I ' . f .. J h •
'
-{+0.8~) (+dl 7.t') (+ I. O.t) {-1 J.t} !
t
{-0. 6-*') (-~.2. ;I ;
i+
·H). I +dl.-7.t) I
{+t.0%) ' 1 . :<+I.OX)
,-
l
i I ..
I I ' .. l . ' ..
' '
I.
I
I • . ---t
----t -
I
I ' 0: I . .
+ ' I ... t-•
'
'
. I
I -'
I I
' !
. '
.(o. rx). .(-0.2%) (-0.9%)
. J
-
/-l.1.t) , (-1.4,V
: EXIST f Elf VA n~ i
. ' • i
I
. ' . ,
'
I
i
,-1;2111
{-t.1%)
-~.IX
. ' ' I ,
I
jr-t.1-17
--j--
1 I j -·-
I I
I . ).. [
I
' i -
" '
I ' I + :-1,/X,
[r-t.2,V
j - --
I
. t ..
,~llli
. -.
' . '
• I
DELT.-1 £..IRING RADIUS L£NGrH RE/,1,1/?KS
••
N 08'51 '40" W
,:J = 15:35'45• 2932.00'
LJ =14"58'12" 2976.00'
•
•
•
N 08'5 I '40" W
N 08"51'40" W
N 08'51 •40• W
L1 =14'"26'45" 2994.00'
L1 =01'C9'00" 2994.00'
CONSTRUCT PER CITY OF CARLSBAD
STD NO. GS-11
SLOTTUJ CIJP UNDER CURB
288.48' 6 TYPE 'G. C &-G
798.08' 6• TYPE 'G' C &-G
• 777.56' 8• /JOO 8-1 CURB
8 1./0D 8-1 CURB
a• /JOO 8-1 CURB
8 /JOO 8-I CURB
20,.oa· 8 /JOO 8-J CURB " ..
209.08' 8 /JOO 8-1 CURB
79.40' a• /JOO 8-J CURB ••
754.87' 8' /JOO 8-J CURB ••
60.01,' 8" /JOO 8-J CURB ••
"' -. ' . INS TALL ST M(JI/,,.
PE;R STD M-10
ENorNaR/GE01.001S'r: JGFIKAB DR,j,-tJNG 13v: .Ji.BIKAM .;;.,;_: . . .. . .. -~
LElqflTONAND ASSO-CfA~TE$./INC/ift}, . ' ' ·,. ,. ' .. . ·-,,_ . " ,, . . . .., : . "-~
0 STORM DRAIN DA TA
0£LT, lJE,IRfNG
N 81"08'20" £
N 81'08'20" E
N 80"22'38" E
N 66' 1 B'JJ" E
N 2Y41'27" W
RADIUS LENGTH
17. 75'
58.25'
108.00'
27.00'
14.05'
W,1 TFRnGHT JOINTS PARTIAL REACH
4" RCP 1350-0 ••
4e" RCP 1350-0
JO" RCP 1350-0
18" RCP 1350-0
0 EXISTING CENTERLINE DA TA
DEL T..1/8£..IRING R,l[)IUS LENGTH R£/J,IRKS
N 08'51 •40• W 288.48' 't
,1 = 15'.]5'45" 2985.00' 812.51' i
. 125
'
--··-j-l.TOR~Y~;i,,~
. DRAIN ~
f:ASEJ,IENT
7
1
--..,_, --·--:-,,.
·.' !Z}11H -·
I '
C,,iJRLSB,,LJD TRACT !VD,
ENGINEER Of WORK
' ,,iJ ,P,JV,
r, ,--, r• . ,· / ~)j\· I . ; ,-0 .C:. !_J /; !.__. \j ~~,-~~I 11? fj F! 4 Jf S'Blvl
EXIST AC BERM
TO BE REMOVED
' ---
---
A
J
SAWCUT UN[~ --
1Jt
-1
' --
.'
--
·· ---· --_r_oF_ -W.A y--.... · -• RIGH -
[XISnNGS 9,~oo-1
p[R R. ·
~ ' -. ,.
,J,..--£XIST. 12· WAITR (LP) 11 Y!!~5 I' , ~
··-. · · 60 .. __
.,..,,;---·
k ... --· I ,, .. ,, ...
_, EXIST. 60" Cl.IP i<~A /,J IN fu,c.t
STORM DRAIN TO
' '-\ /----·:.... :~---
: \\ . -.,. . . ··, . -'"·~ "'
'\\ J,-· ~ ·.·\ ,.
·1;;,,N iffe.RCP TO EXIST C.O.)
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
EXIST C.O. HORIZONTAL &-
VER nCAL LOCA noN IN," ... /
THE FIELD /
,/
,J'.} . _.,..,,,,.
;l,1,,1Jp !VD,
No. 3S39tl
Exp .. 3/31 /01
,, ' _,,.,
11035
-
EL
--, .. ~.
' .
SEE SH T II FOR
MEDIAN LANDSCAPE
CUTCUT DETAI[
CAMINO, REAL
BENCHMARK
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
DESCRIPTION: STREET SURVEY MOMUMENT
•
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO "R1800 149+91"
'~-...---... :
·•
P 11 s· r; r.::; r f J .._ ____ _,
LOCATION: CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO R! . .AL &
LA COSTA AVf..
',
-' '
rJ
218'~ J:72~ 18
'
lj_ 5' SIDEWAL
PA/).. PER DETAIL
ON 'JliT II
'
---• (U[L
u~ £X,ST IO
----·,,-
'
1[}?!33
40'
•
... <--.... __..? -
o·
' .. '·
40'
,
• I
80' ------GflAPHIC SCALE: 1 "-40'
-
I •
ii ':o~~I~ ~~r. Etf!f!f!ERS, INC.
· SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101
TEI.£: (619) 2.32-4466 FAX: 2:U-.J022
EXPIRES ON 3/31/01 .
R.C.E. 38.J96
RECORDS FROM:
ELEVATION:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, NAD 83 CONTROL BOOK
COORDINATE: N 1976215.427 E 6249704.495
15.997 DATUM: M. S. L
DAT£ INlllAL • DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL
ENGINEER Of' YIORK REV1S1ON DESCRIPTION 01HER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL
SHTB.OWG • 07/01/97 • Joa, 75012• !"=40' NfV 4-1-98
~,.
I
j --t·
. -{!~
120'
l.:<'x
j
i t • C, ' ' c::, -l :g :
I 'I-c, i-
I
I
50 i
' I
I r ·-
'. ,. .
' ,
I ;
' . .l . -
. . . l ' . .
• • • j ' -f '
--•• ...J. __ ..,_ _____ __.: __ ~_ -~--_._ J.--~-
EXIST AC SPILLWAY
TO BE REMOVED
"AS BUil T"
RC[ __ _ EXP. ___ _ DATE
REVIE'M::D BY:
INSPECTOR DATE
~ ~
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR:
EL CAMINO REAL
CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY-CARLSBAD TRACT 92-08
OWN BY:
CHKD BY· Rd5
RW/0 BY: I DRA'MNG NO.
349-38 .._ _______ __,
PROJECT NO.
CT 92-08
. ('.~Awn q4_,;n1
f --, '·,,,, ' !. ., ,-'l"\t ,~-·'1". ,-
,
~-------~-·---···-----------·-·--==-=--·============================================================================.::..::..::..::..::..::..::.-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-~-====-:-_:=_:=_:=_:=_:=_:=_:=_:=_=:--=--.=--:-= __ -:_=--~--=·=--=--=--=·=-=-------
.,
NO.
I
2
NO.
I
2
J
+ 4
5
6
;. " . --· 1
0 EXISTlNG CENTERLINE DA TA
IXL-RADtlJS LENGTH REMARKS
A-19'46'48" 2015.00' 695.6.J'
A =0.J'30'20" 2015.00' l2J.28'
DEZ.TA
+
• ..
0 CURB DATA
-•
RADIUS
2068.00'
21J68.00'
2012.00·
2006.QO'
PAINT NOSE mi.ow
656.10'
6.J.51'
68.82'
2.J.81'
6 TYPEGCltG
CONSTRUCT P£R CITY OF CilllL5IMO STD NO. GS-11
Sl.071El) CNP UNDER CI.IRB ., cvrrER
·£NG/NE'ER QF -WORK
Iii · 1:a~es1'Ae~,. E:f'2l!oEERS, INC.
SAN Ol£GO, CAJJFORNIA ! 92101 ·
1EL£: · (619) 2.12-4466 FAX:. 2J4-.J022 .
SHT7.0WG,. ()7/0J/97 • JOB, 15012 • 1•,.40• REV 4-1-98 l>J·nr, at,., .Dr&r',-.. ::•_:_.-_·:.·;.-:., .. ;, .. ~.1"-.. ~J.L :,._.-_--. ·c., .. · · · ,, .-
'
-~---
/
\
-·
•
A
.J
\
""\-
\
\
\
--
,; -o· r--r') ..r1 r CJ
,!;i
8269
NOTE: CONTRACTOR IS TO RELOCATE ANY
WATER M£1ERS FOUND ALONG THIS STRETCH
OF ROAD TO NEW RIGHT Of' WAY
I ' t-r
' .
A
' .
-. ,, I ~ .,:} · ··t· . 7
' .•. ·> . -l --C l r ~ -~-.. -i . • .
·:
< • 7
r
. . '
l
..... : t·· ' ~
'
..
" '
'} ! ,
.:,j. .. -t ! .
;
\
.-., ;
'. ·,
'
SECTJ[J/V 2 -T12S F/4
.!:,
, . .,, , ..
"'->IIEDl'AN P£R
OM; J22-18
----'
I:,
/.
Sl/8Dl';fS/0N BOUNDARY
'-
NOT A PART
'A,P,J\j,.-~-011-05
_ _,,.--{i~ RD,tOl,t--8(JST.
,/ GA/JRO RAIL'. -:": ' -z::;
SL
.. --·.
., , .• , -~· _. T •
..
' ----+-,' ·" ···g . -122-~ .
. ~ -· ' ---.-, ~, ,. .... ----~·--::::r:-"~ ...,-t: --l f , •• _. ,--' l /
·..,,,
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
PER CT 88-0.J-01 FTNAL A/AP
_.._ -.,--·,\ -I \\ /S./). PER
---141-1 ---
----
---
\\ · OHC J22-18
\ ..
\\
---
--·
\
. I
[}. --. .:.e, ---· -·, . ' ,
£XISTTNC TRAFFIC SIGN
POl.£S TO Be UOOIFlfIJ
.... , ..... ,,, ..... ,._,.. ·r~,',"','',", ,' ,1 ,",•,••._-~, .1 ,•,•,•,,•,•, ,~ .... --"' ,.,_ .. ,, t"tft/t"'tl.""Jt::.1 ,'Cr. ,c ... .' ...... ,-. _ ........ ~,,""' .. ,,.,, c .. : oa .. :1 .. 1-~.,11
PDR FRACT/OJVAL T12S R4W SBJYI
•
40' o· - -
5€£ SH££T NO tJ FOR
TRAFFIC SIGNAL AIOOIFl6'Al10NS
ANO SHEET NO 12 FOR
STRIPING MOOIFTCA 170NS
40' 80' 120' --------GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 "•40'
» AS BUil T"
RCE __ _ EXP. ___ _ DATE
REVIEVt£0 BY:
·i .
-
··' . .,
• : 1
EL CAMINO REAL ,-.--,---------------,r---,--,--T-,-:::==:"!=lN:;:;SP:;E;;C;:;;l:;;OR::::;;::;;;;=;;;::;~;;::;;;:;;;;::;:;;;;:::;--;D::;A;:TE:;;;_;~1 · \ I 1-------------------+----t---t----r--LLJ cr\r~&!NG ~~]AD ~ c~ NOTE: UEOIAN 0£SICN FHOM 116+00 TO 122+2.J.26
PER OltC .J22~ 18 .
BENCHMARK
DESCRIPTION: STREIT SURVEY MOMUMENT
COUNTY Of SAN DIEGO "R1800 149+91"
LOCATION: CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF' a CAMINO REAL &
.. I.A COSTA AVF.. .
RECORDS FR0!.4: · COUNTY OF. SAN DIEGO, NAO 83 CONTROL BOOK ·_
COORDINATE: N 1976215.427 E 6249704.495
ELEVATION: · 15.997 OATU!.4: "4. S. L
DA 1t'. INITIAL
ENGINED! OF ll0RK REVISION DESCRIPTION ..
. . '
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR: \\ i,
EL CAMINO REAL '
CT 92-08 GREEN VALLEY-CARLSBAD TRACT 92-08
APP.RG\'fQ• LLO. ~ rl[f,;·
Cl 23889 EXP. 12-31-01 ATE
OMII BY: .....,..,.__
OAlt'. INITIAL OAlt'. INITIAL CHKD BY· (<Ci;
OlllER APPROVAL Cll'I' APPROVAL RVWO BY:
PRO.£CT NO.
CT 92-08
I DRAWING NO,
349-38
l'UIA/1""\ QA -"ltn 1
·., .. 'cl
., . i~j
+··
. l
'
!
·J·--J i )
.,.jl·:
-· .. l , .. 1
I i . ' ·-·-! -.i. ~--!., ..
.. . .
'
t
I
•. • . ·1 I
--i:· 1 -i , I
j t
'
'. ~ t i
L
1
: . : ...J...-+-·1'~--
--t----•--· t f' : • ! I '
-· ~ • ...;..1 --• l . '. l 1
l . t ' '
--i
' - I --t
! t . -+
. + . '
. I
i .,
i
._ ........... A ••• -~-~ -• •
'
, •·
f -I
··+----~-
. '
0 EXISTlNG CENTERLINE DA TA
NO. 00.~ RADIUS LENGTH RDIARKS
' A= 10"22'# -2000.00· 362.29'
2 N J6'16'3J" W 292.49'
J A •04V7'45" 2015.00' 145.22'
0 CURB DATA
NO. oo.r, RADIUS I.DICTH RENARKS
I A= 10"22'45· 1947.00' .J52.70' 6-m>E' G' C .t G
2 N J6'l6'3J" W 292.49' 6" m>E' 'C' C .t G
J A •04V7'44" 2068.00' 149.0J' ,c• 1'>1¥' •,:,• r .. r.,
0 STORM DRAIN DA TA
NO. DEi.TA ·-·NG RADIUS /ING'TH REMARKS
1 N 5J"4J'27" c 47.75' 18" RCP (l.!150-D)
ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST: JGFIKAB DRAFI1NG BY: JLBIKAM .:
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,.,JN.C:.??~~i'. . :, ' . . ': . , '. . ' . . ' .· ' . . ,,. '~-
ENGINEER OF WORK
'£l. A. I.ff
EXPIRES ON .J/.JI /()1 R. C.E. .J8.J96
f-tz-11
DATE
•
•
A
.J
----
..
s0-··---···
... . . . ' .
j ' . t . l
l . l ·-l .
j
I ' ' .;. . , ..
i •
.j ...
' ' • . ,! ' .;. · ·1 · t
' ' i i . 1
' ' !· 1· .. . •
PDF! LDT B
SECT/DIV 2
A,P,JV,
T12S R4W SBJ'vl
255-011~13
_1..,_ __ ---
OOST. ------~-w-
···-----·· ,-.,. ·------··· --------·
---~-·~·--' -
stJPEREl.EVA 710N
TRANSl710N ENO AT APPROX!MA TE:
112+00:i:
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
P£R er 88-0.J-01 FTNAL MAP
r :
f ·
' .. ·t ' ~ ___ j .
' '
116+00
.. _,..... .. -.
' 75T STREET lt/ONIJll£NT
SUP£Ra£VA T1QN
•.
·-1· , -,-Tr ~~ ,.,-.
I
SCALES: HORIZ· 1"•40'
VERT.· 1"=-8'
I -:
"AS BUil T"
t
l •
I .
1
'
. .
..
-:~
. ' .
. ~ .i~
.' . i;
-·. ; .
· . . s . • . , .~
. . • _r,.
. ··~·
'• ' '· ..
' ,-,~
' ((
ME:/)IAN AND SLOTTED DRAIN PER owe J22-,e · EXIST1NG 90' RIGHT-OF-WAY-=;:::::.---
oc-n RS 1800 T r, '' ,.. .. '" ..... , .. r-r, .,.,,..,. .... , ..... • • ........ ,,. .. --••••• -f
TRANSl710N BEGIN
Ar APPROX/MA TE
11,J+,50:i-40'
RC£_____ EXP. __ __,,..,_ 0A1E , ;~ ._ ..... __________ ....., _________ ... r. . ~.,
REVIEWED BY: __ :11 ---o· 40' 80' 120' .
rc.rr • • -,-,n,'t'L,':.;.t:l.,l ,". tr tr t/ , t.' J .. ,~ ( ... {...' ,.,"; J ,~ ' '"" ' . ,.,, II I ---GAAPHIC SCALE: t"•40' '-·' 2 rt26' F!4W SBiv/ ti
,---,---,,-----------------r---,r-"T"".""'--r~-r::==~::IN:SP:;;E:Cl~OR;:'.:·:;;;·:;;;;:::'.;:;::;;;~;;;;;:;:;;;;::;;O;A~TE;,;;;;:;i (~ I -~.:!ll CITY OF CARLSBAD IISHEETS·. I ·-~~ l---+--+-----------------+--:'.'t----1t-....... -t---t 6 . { .. _ · ENGINEERING OEPARlMENT . . · 30 , ',1 1--~--+-------'--'-------P--t-----t--.+-,--t ~~
PDF! FF/A CT/DJVAL
EL CAMINO REAL
NO'TE: ltlEDIAN DESIGN PER owe .J22-1B * CONTRACTOH ro CONSTRUCT SEl+FR MAIN7ENANC£
ACCESS ROAD FOR ACCESS BY LClfO SEl'ER a.EANINC
EQiJIPltlENT. ACCEPTANCE SUB.ECT TO OENONSTRArED
SUCCESSFUL ACCESS BY DIS'mfCT EQUIPftlENT DURING
CCX'JST'RUCTION. UA TERIAL -6" O.G.
BENCHMARK IMPROVEMENT rLANS FOR: . \j
;;-··•; EL. CAJIINO REAL ,~
STREET SUR\IEY UOMUMENT . . · J ,' "R . • CT :92-08 GREEN· VALLEY-CARLSBAD TRACT 92-08 · · :;~ COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1800 149+91 ;~
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
LA COSTA AVE. .,. . . CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO R£Al & 1---1---+-----. -.--.;.._----'---t,-:.---r--:-'"t""-7-------11,~~~~~~~~:::'.-;::-=----:-;:--:::-:· 7~/;--9/' ,:j EXP. 12-31-01 DATE :.:J
-
n•o / CTE Je'Al~IAl~Ja~ ,.,,. ' RECORDS FROM: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, NAO 83 CONTROL BOOK • •. ra. 5ffVIIW._._ne;,,, ,,..,. 0 I PRoxcr No. I DRAWING NO ·:,,~ ~ ~/,.-~d.:t~~ su;:o:500 1COOR5_99;1NATE: N 1::~~-:.7 s~ :.2497 4.495 EN~~:.:: REvlSlON DESCRll'TION o:!,m:: :: ,.pp::~ ."'!'::~~, . CT 92-08 349-<3B .. x~ l!!!Li~]""'~]~E~~:.~:;;:~~---------------------------------------~---------~El:EV:A~n:ON:.:~---:=~--...:::.:.:,.::_ _______ l:-:~-:.:=::1.. __ _:;.:;:::_:::.;::.;;+.--~~=--=;;J~:.==;~;;;:~;=~-----~:;~~tTc~~·, "'i'l Tel.£: (619} 232-4466 FAX: 2J4-.J022 . ',••,. CMWD 94-30l<:eci)