Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP 2020-0006; AMAZON VEHICLE STORAGE; PRECISE GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT; 2021-05-06 ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC.     GREYSTAR         May 6, 2021  444 South Cedros Avenue       Project No. 1‐0346  Solana Beach, California 92075     Attention: Mr. Beau Brand      Subject: PRECISE GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND   UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT  Palomar Forum Project, Parcel A, 5980 Eagle Drive  City of Carlsbad, California        References: See Appendix A      Dear Mr. Brand:  Presented herein is Alta California Geotechnical, Inc.’s (Alta) precise grading plan review and  updated geotechnical report for the Palomar Forum Project, Parcel A, located at 5980 Eagle  Drive, in the City of Carlsbad, California.  This review is based on the Precise Grading Plans  prepared by Excel Engineering and the referenced report.  Alta had previously prepared the referenced geotechnical investigation report for the subject  site.  Our review of the previous data, with respect to the precise grading plans, indicates that  the proposed project is feasible, from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the  recommendations presented in this report and in the referenced report are incorporated into  the grading and improvement plans and implemented during site development.     ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INC, 170 North Maple Street, Suite 108 Corona, CA 92880 www.altageotechnical.com     Project Number 1‐0346  Page 2  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Included in this report are the geotechnical recommendations specific to the current precise  grading plans.  The recommendations presented in the previous geotechnical investigation  pertaining to site grading, improvement design, and construction monitoring remain applicable,  unless specifically superseded herein.  Presented in this report are:   A review of the precise grading plans.   An updated geotechnical map and cross sections utilizing the current precise grading  plans as a base.   A location map.   An updated discussion of the proposed development.   An updated discussion on infiltration.   Updated pavement design recommendations  If you have any questions or should you require any additional information, please contact the  undersigned at (951) 509‐7090.  Alta appreciates the opportunity to provide geotechnical  consulting services for your project.  Sincerely,  Alta California Geotechnical, Inc.    Reviewed By:      _______________________________  FERNANDO RUIZ  Civil Engineering Associate      _______________________________  SCOTT A. GRAY/RGE 2857  Reg. Exp.: 12‐31‐22  Registered Geotechnical Engineer  President         Distribution:   (1)  Addressee    FR: SAG: 1‐0346, May 6, 2021 (Precise Grading Plan Review & Updated Geo Report, Palomar Forum, Parcel A, 5980 Eagle Drive)         Project Number 1‐0346  Page 3  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1.0 REVIEW OF PRECISE GRADING PLANS  Alta has reviewed the precise grading plans (dated March 25, 2021) for the subject site,  provided by Excel Engineering, with respect to the geotechnical recommendations  presented in the referenced report.  The precise grading plans were found to be in  general conformance with the geotechnical recommendations for the project.  2.0 UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL MAP AND CROSS SECTIONS  Alta has prepared an updated geotechnical map and cross sections (Plates 1 through 3),  utilizing the current precise grading plans provided by Excel Engineering as a base  (Sheets 2, 6 and 7 of 10).  Included on the updated geotechnical map and cross sections  are geologic units and the approximate location of the test pits from the referenced  report.  The geotechnical data presented on the attached plans is based on the  conclusions and recommendations presented in the referenced report.   3.0 UPDATED PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT  The general site location of the project is presented on Figure 1.  Based on our review of  the precise grading plans, the site will be developed into a parking lot with four (4) bio‐ retention basins and associated improvements, including curb and gutter and hardscape  areas.  Alta anticipates that conventional cut‐and‐fill grading techniques will be used to  develop the site for the support of wood‐frame and stucco construction with shallow  foundations and reinforced concrete slabs‐on‐grade, and associated improvements.   Significant height slopes are not proposed for the project.  4.0 PREVIOUS GRADING  The initial geotechnical investigation of the site was conducted by Vinje & Middleton  Engineering, Inc. in 1998 (Vinje, 1998) as part of the overall Palomar Forum  Development.  An updated report and grading plan review were prepared in 2002  (Vinje, 2002).  A grading report was prepared upon completion of grading operations in  2005 (Vinje, 2005).  The subject site was designated as Lots 6 and 7 in the grading  report.    Figure 1Site Location     Project Number 1‐0346  Page 4  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5.0 UPDATED STRATIGRAPHY  Based on Alta’s review of geologic literature and our subsurface investigation, the  project site is underlain by engineered artificial fill overlying the Santiago Formation  (Kennedy, 2007).  Based on review of the referenced grading report (Vinje, 2005), all  alluvium/colluvium that was previous onsite was removed to expose Santiago  Formation and recompacted.  The geologic unit encountered during our investigation is  briefly described below.  5.1 Artificial Fill‐Engineered (map symbol afe)  The engineered fill onsite primarily consists of orange tan to orange brown,  grayish brown, and dark brown, sandy clay and clayey sand in a dry to slightly  moist, dense/stiff to very dense/stiff condition. The unit was logged to a  maximum depth of 13 feet below the ground surface.  6.0 INFILTRATION FEASIBILITY  Infiltration testing was conducted at the site as part of our previous investigation, and  the methodology is discussed in Section 3.2 of Reference 1.  The resulting infiltration  rate for PT‐1 through PT‐3 was calculated to be 0.36 inches per hour (factor of safety  not applied) at approximately 6‐feet below the existing ground surface.  A factor of  safety of 2.0 should be utilized on the results.  Forms I‐8 and I‐9 from the Carlsbad BMP  Design Manual are presented in Appendix B.  Based on a review of the referenced reports the site is underlain by the Santiago  Formation which is overlain by engineered artificial fill across the entire site.  A review  of the NRCS Survey maps indicates that the site is underlain by C and D soils.  6.1 Discussion on BMP Design  Given the characteristics of the underlying soil, full infiltration systems are not  feasible in our opinion.  In order to achieve enough capacity, any full infiltration  system would need to incorporate a deep system, which will be problematic in  the underlying soils due to low infiltration rates and presence of bedrock.       Project Number 1‐0346  Page 5  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Additionally, given overlying layers of artificial fill onsite, partial/shallow  infiltration BMP’s will also be ineffective in our opinion.  6.2 Conclusions Regarding Infiltration  Based on testing, the geologic units onsite do not have infiltration rates high  enough to support infiltration‐type BMP’s and there is artificial fill and bedrock  onsite which are not suitable for infiltration.  As such, based on the presence of  artificial fill and bedrock, and the tested infiltration rate below 0.5 in/hr, it is  Alta’s opinion that relying on full/partial infiltration‐type methodologies for the  BMP design is not suitable for this project.  Alternate systems should be  considered for BMP design onsite.    7.0 UPDATED PAVEMENT DESIGN  Pavement sections for the proposed parking lot shall be designed based on laboratory  testing conducted on samples taken from the soil subgrade.  Preliminarily, based on a  tested R‐Value of 24 from the referenced report, the pavement may be designed  utilizing the sections presented in Table 4‐1.  These sections should be verified upon the  completion of grading, based on R‐Value testing.    Table 7‐1  Preliminary Pavement Sections  Traffic  Index  Pavement Section Options  OR  4.5 3‐inch AC on 5‐inch AB  4‐inch AC on 4‐inch AB   5.0 3‐inch AC on 6.5‐inch AB  4‐inch AC on 4.5‐inch AB   AC‐Asphalt Concrete  AB‐Caltrans Class II Base  Prior to the placement of base material, the subgrade should be suitably moisture  conditioned, processed and compacted to a minimum 95 percent of the laboratory  maximum density (ASTM: D 1557) to at least twelve (12) inches below subgrade.  After  subgrade compaction, the exposed grade should then be "proof"‐rolled with heavy  equipment to ensure the grade does not "pump" and is verified as non‐yielding.   I I     Project Number 1‐0346  Page 6  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Aggregate base material should be placed on the compacted subgrade and compacted  in‐place to a minimum 95 percent of the laboratory standard obtained per ASTM: D  1557.  8.0 LIMITATIONS  The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on the information  generated during the previous investigation, review of the referenced report, and our  review of the updated preliminary grading plans.  The materials immediately adjacent to  or beneath those observed may have different characteristics than those observed, and  no representations are made as to the quality or extent of material not observed.  ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC.                     APPENDIX A    REFERENCES             Project Number 1‐0346  Page A‐1  May 6, 2021      ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. APPENDIX A  Selected References  1. Alta California Geotechnical, Inc., 2020, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation,  5980 Eagle Drive, City of Carlsbad, California, dated September 29, 2020 (Project  No. 1‐0346).  2. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., 2005, As‐Graded Compaction Report for  Lots #4, #5, #6 and #7, Proposed Commercial Industrial Development, Palomar  Forum, City of Carlsbad, California, dated February 16, 2005 (Job #04‐315).  3. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., 2002, Geotechnical Update and Grading  Plan Review, Palomar Forum Project, Byron Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad,  California, dated February 6, 2002 (Job #02‐114‐P).  4. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., 1998, Preliminary Geotechnical  Investigation, Byron White Property, Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, California,  dated June 24, 1998 (Job #98‐215‐P).  ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC.                     APPENDIX B    Infiltration Froms I‐8 and I‐9      Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-3 February 2016 Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Form I-8 Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No 1 Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. X Provide basis: The results from our infiltration testing (Alta, 2020) indicates an infiltration rate of 0.36 inches per hour for all three of our tests (PT-1 through PT-3). The results do no include a factor of safety. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 2 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: Infiltration rates onsite are not greater than 0.5 inches. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. N/A Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-4 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 2 of 4 Criteri a Screening Question Yes No 3 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Infiltration rates onsite are not greater than 0.5 inches. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 4 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Infiltration rates onsite are not greater than 0.5 inches. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Part 1 Result * If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are “Yes” a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration If any answer from row 1-4 is “No”, infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a “full infiltration” design. Proceed to Part 2 *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. X N/A N/A Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-5 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 3 of 4 Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No 5 Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Results from our infiltration testing indicates an infiltration rate less than 0.5 inches per hour with no factor of safety applied. Additionally, the site is underlain by the Santiago Formation which is overlain by engineered artificial fill. These geologic units are not suitable for infiltration. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 6 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: Infiltration of appreciable quantities are not feasible based on test results. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. X N/A Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-6 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 4 of 4 Criteria Screening Question Yes No 7 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Infiltration of appreciable quantities are not feasible based on test results. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 8 Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Infiltration of appreciable quantities are not feasible based on test results. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Part 2 Result* If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration. If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration. *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. X N/A N/A Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-7 February 2016 Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Form I-9 Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p B Design Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.5 Redundancy/resiliency 0.25 Compaction during construction 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = p Combined Safety Factor, Stotal= SA x SB Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, Kobserved (corrected for test-specific bias) Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, Kdesign = Kobserved / Stotal Supporting Data Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms: The tests were conducted at the bottom of the test pits in an approximately 1-foot deep hand dug boring. During the test, the hand-dug borings were filled with water and the level was measured every 30 minutes until the readings stabilized. The data was then adjusted to provide an infiltration rate utilizing the Porchet Method. Reference: Alta California Geotechnical Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, 5980 Eagle Drive, City of Carlsbad, California, dated September 29, 2020 (Project No. 1-0346). 1 2 1 1 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.25 1.25 afe afe afeafe afe afe T-7 T-2 Tsa Tsa 170 N. MAPLE STREET, STE 108, CORONA, CA 92880 TELEPHONE: (951) 509-7090 ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PLATE 1ARTIFICIAL FILL-ENGINEERED SANTIAGO FORMATION APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF INFILTRATION TEST APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF PREVIOUS ROCK DISPOSAL AREA APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT LEGEND afe T-1 PT-1 Tsa TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL NOTES: (PLANllNC ANO IRRIG4llON} ALI PERMANENT ANO !EAIPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLANT!NC ANO IRRICAT!ON SHALi BE INSTALIEO ANO AIAIN!AINEO AS RE()/J!REO IN SECT!ON 212 or 1HE STANOARO SPEC/RCA T!ONS ANO 1HE FOi.LO/if NC· A. HYOROSEEOINC SHALi BE APPLIED TO: I. ALI SLOPES 1HAT ARE CRAOEO 6:/ (HOR!ZON!AL TO VERTICAL) OR STEEPER WHEN 1HEY AR£- o. THREE FEET OR AIORE IN HOCHT ANO ADJACENT TO A P/JBL/C WALi OR STREET. b. ALL SLOPES 4 FEET OR AIORE IN HDCHT. 2. AREAS CRAOEO FLATTER 1HAN 6: I WHEN ANY or 1HE FOLLO/lfNC CONOIT!ONS D(IST: o. NOT SCHEOIILEO FOR /AIPROVEAIENTS (CONS!R/JCT!ON OR GENERAL LANOSCAPINC) llf1H/N 60 DAYS or ROI/CH CRAO/NC b. IOENT!REO BY 1HE PARKS ANO RECREATION DIRECTOR AS HICHLY WSIBLE TO 1HE P/JBL/C c. HAVE ANY SPECIAL CONOIT!ON /OENT!REO BY 1HE CITY ENC/NEER 1HAT WARRANTS /AIAIEOIA 1E !REA &ENT. 8. HWROSEEOEO AREAS SHALL BE /RRICA!EO IN ACCORDANCE llf1H 1HE FOLIO/lfNC CRITERIA: I. ALI SLOPES 1HAT ARE CRAOEO 6.·/ OR STEEPER ANO 1HAT AR£· o. 1HREE TO DCHT FEET IN HDCHT SHALL BE IRRICA!EO BY HANO WA !ER/NC FROAI ()/I/CK CO/JPLERS/HOSE BIBS OR A CONVENT!ONAL Srs!EAI or LOW PRECIP/TA T!ON SPRINKLER HEAOS PROWOINC 100% COV£RAC£ b. CREA!ER 1HAN 8 FEET IN HDCHT SHALL BE WA!EREO BY A CONVENTIONAL srs!EAI or LOW PRECIPITATION SPRINKLER HEADS PROWO/NC 100% COVERAGE 2. AREAS SLOPED LESS 1HAN 6.· I SHALL BE /RR/CA TEO AS APPROVED BY 1HE CITY ENCWEER, PRIOR TO HYOROSEEO/NC. 1HE OEVEI.OPER SHALi S/JBAI/T A PROPOSED SCHEAIE TO PROWOE /RR/CA T!ON TO 1HE CITY ENC/NEER, 1HE PROPOSAL SHALi BE SPEC/RC RECARO/NC 1HE N/JAIBERS, Tr?ES ANO COSTS or 1HE ELEMENTS or 1HE PROPOSED srs!EAI. J. IRRICAT!ON SHALL AIA/NTAIN 1HE AIO/S1//RE LEVEi. or 1HE SOIL AT 1HE OPT/Al/JAi LEVEi. FOR THE CROW1H or 1HE HWROSEEOEO CRO/f1H. C HYOROSEEO/NC 1,(/)( SHALi CONSIST or ALI or 1HE FO!.LO/lfNC.· I. SEEO Al/)( SHALL CONSIST or NO LESS 1HAN: o. 20 lbs. PER ACRE or ROSE CLOVER b. 20 lbs. PER ACRE or ZORRO FESC/JE C. 3 lbs. PER ACRE or E SCHOOL CIA CAL/TORN/CA d. 4 lbs. PER ACRE or ACHILIEA AIILIEFOL!A e. 3 lbs. PER ACRE or AL rsS/JAI (CARPET or SNOW) f 1/2 lb. PER ACRE OF 0/AIORPHOLECA !/. l!EAIS c,d,e, ANO for 1HIS S/JBSECT!ON AIAY BE OAI/T!EO ON LOCAT!ONS WHERE 1HE AREA BDNC HYOROSEEOEO IS NOT WSIBLE FROAI D1HER A P/JBL/C STREET OR RESIOENT!AL S1R/JC1//RES. h. /!EAi O or 1HIS S/JBSECT!ON All/ST BE INOC/JLA ff[) llf1H A Nl!ROCEN R)(!NC BACTERIA ANO APPL/£[) ORY D1HER BY OR/LL/NC OR BROADCAST/NC BEFORE HYOROSEEO/NC l ALL SEED AIA!ERIALS SHALL BE 1RANSPOR1EO TO 1HE JOBS/ff IN 1/NOPENEO CONTAINERS lf/1H 1HE CALIFORNIA OEPAR&ENT or rooo ANO ACR/C/JL1//RE CERT!RCAT!ON TAC ATTACHED ro, OR PRIN!EO ON SA/0 CON!A/NERS. / NON-PHYTO-TO)(!C WETT!NC ACENTS AIA Y BE AOOEO TO 1HE HYOROSEEO SL/JRRY AT 1HE DISCRETION OF 1HE CONTRACTOR, 2. Tr?£ I AI/JLCH APPL/£[) AT 1HE RA 1E OF NO LESS 1HAN 2000 lbs PER ACR£ Tr?£ 6 AI/JLCH (STRAW) AIA Y BE S/JBST/11/lEO, ALL OR PART, FOR HWRA/JL/CALI Y APPL/£0 RBER AIA !ER/AL WHEN STRAW IS //SEO IT All/ST BE ANCHORED TO 1HE SLOPE BY MECHANICALLY Pl/NCH/NC NO LESS 1HAN 50% OF 1HE STRAW INTO 1HE SOIL J. FERTILIZER CONSIST/NC or AAIAION/1/AI PHOSPHATE S/JLFAff, 16-20-0, llf1H 15% S/JLPH/JR APPLIED AT 1HE RA 1E or 500 lbs. PER ACRE 0. AREAS TO BE HYOROSEEOEO SI/ALI BE PREPARED PRIOR TO HYOROSEEO/NC BY: I. ROI/CHEN/NC 1HE S/JRFACE TO BE PLANTED BY ANY OR A COAIB/NAT!ON OF· o. !RACK WALK/NC SLOPES STEEPER 1HAN 6.· / b. HARRO/f/NC AREAS 6.· I OR FLATTER 1HAT ARE S/JfflCIENTl Y FRIABLE c. RIPP/NC AREAS THAT If/LL NOT BREAK /JP /JS/NC l!EAIS o OR b ABOVE 2. CONO/T!ON/NC 1HE SOILS SO 1HAT IT IS S/JITABLE FOR PLANT/NC BY: o. AOJ/JST!NC 1HE S/JRFACE SOIL AIO/S1//RE TO PROWOE A OAAIP B/JT NOT SA 11/RA TEO SEEO BEO. b. 1HE ADDITION or SOIL AAIENOAIENTS, PH AOJ/JSTl,/ENT, LEACH/NC COVER/NC SALINE SOILS TO PROWOEO WABLE CONO/TIONS FOR CROW1/I. £ HYOROSEEOEO AREAS SHALL BE AIAINTA!NEO TO PROWOE A WCORO/IS CROW1H UNTIL 1HE 1HE PROJECT IS PERAIANENTl Y LANOSCAPEO OR, FOR AREAS WHERE HWROSEEOINC IS 1HE PERMANENT LANOSCAP!NC, UNTIL 1HE PROJECT IS COAIPLE!EO ANO ALL BONDS RELEASED. F ALI SLOPES SHALL HAVE !RR/CATION !NSTALLEO ANO BE STABILIZED, PLAN!EO ANO/OR HYOROSEEOEO lf/1H/N !EN (10) OA rs OF 1HE T!AIE WHEN EACH SLOPE IS BRO/ICHT TO CRAOE AS S/fO/lfv ON 1HE APPROVED CRAO!NC PLANS. AN APPROVED EROSION CONTROi. PROO/JCT (RECP) SHALL BE !NSTALLEO PER EC-7 IF 1H!S REWIREAIENT CANNOT BE AIET. J//ff, EXCELSIOR OR STRAW BLANKET IS /INACCEPTABL£ C S/10//LO CERAI/NA T!ON or HYOROSEEO FAIL TO PRO WOE EFRCIENT COVERACE (NO LESS 1HAN 70%) PRIOR TO OCTOBER !, 1HE SI.OPES SHALL BE STAB/LIZEO BY AN APPROVED RECP JI/ff, EXCELSIOR ANO STRAW BLANKET IS /INACCEPTABL£ H LANOSCAP/NC SHALL BE ACCOAIPL/S/1£0 ON ALL SLOPES ANO PAOS AS REWIREO BY 1HE CITY LANDSCAPE AIAN/IAL, 1HE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR 1HIS PROJECT OR AS 0/REC!EO BY 1HE CITY ENC/NEER OR CITY PLANNER, WATER NOTES I. WA !ER & RECYCLED WA !ER AIAIN ANO APP/IR!ENANCES SHALL BE CONS!R/IC!EO IN ACCORDANCE llf1H 1HE ·arr or CARLSBAD ENC/NEER/NC STANOARos· (LA !EST £0/T!ON) VOL/IAIES 2 & J. 2. 1HE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AN EXCAVA T!ON PERAI/T FROAI 1HE 0/WSION or INO/IS!R/AL SAFETY BEFORE ANY EXCAVAT!ON ANO SHALL PROWOE PROOF or OSHA NOT!RCAT!ON ANO SHALL AOHERE TO ALL PROWS/ONS or 1HE STA IE CONS!R/ICT!ON SAFETY ORDERS. J. BEFORE ANY CONNECTION OR SHUT 00/IN or VALVES ON £)(!ST/NC CAI. IY.O. LINES, A PERAIIT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROAI 1HE CAI. IY.O. OFRCE ANO All/ST BE S/CNEO ANO APPROVED BY 1HE CITY OF CARLSBAO's OEP/ITY CITY ENC/NEER ANO 1HE 1/T!L/TY OPERATIONS' PUBLIC /YORKS AIANACER, 4. A PRECONS!R/ICT!ON CONFERENCE AIEET!NC SI/ALL BE HELO A Al/NIAii/Ai or 7 OA rs BEFORE CONS!R/ICT!ON BECINS. 1HE CONTRACTOR SHALi NOTIFY 1HE CITY OF CARLSBAD ENC/NEER/NC INSPECT!ON 48 HO/IRS PRIOR TO BEC/NNINC or CONS!R/ICTION, lELEPHONE N0(760) 438-3891 FOR SCHEO/JL/NC 5. 1HE CONTRACTOR SI/ALI NOTIFY 1HE CITY OF CARLSBAD ENC/NEER/NC INSPECTION OEPARTl,/ENT 48 HO/IRS PRIOR TO START!NC WORK SO 1HAT INSPECTION AIAY BE PROWOEO -lELEPHONE NO (760)438-3891. 6. NO !REES OR S1R/IC1//RES SHALL BE ALLOM'O IN 1HE /YA !ER LINE EASEMENT, ALL £)(!ST/NC !REES ANO S1R/IC1//RES SI/ALL BE REAIOVEO PRIOR TO COAIAIENCEAIENT or /YORK -ANY EXCEPTIONS SHALL REWIRE H/?IT!EN PERAIISSION FROAI 1HE 0/S!RICT ENC/NEER. 7. ALL B/JRIEO COPPER PIP/NC ANO APP/IR!ENANCES SHALL BE PRO!EC!EO BY AIEANS or CA1HOOIC PRO!FCTION IF OEVEI.OPER/0/lfvER CONO/JCTS A SOILS !FST REPORT ANO 0£AIONS!RA1FS THAT PRO!FCTION CAN BE PERFORAIEO IN AN01HER AIANNER, 1HE 0/S!R!CT ENC/NEER llfll CONSIDER AN AL !FRNA T!VE FORAI or PRO!FCT!ON. 8. 1HE EXACT HORIZONTAL ANO VERTICAL AL/CNAIENT ANO nPE or AIA!FRIALS or 1HE f/RE LINE LOCA TEO BEl/lEEN 1HE DETECTOR CHECK VAL V£ ANO B/llf_O/NC SHALL BE OE!ERAIINEO BY 1HE CITY or CARLSBAD RRE AIARSHAL. 9. ALI POTABLE WATER ANO RECYCLED WA!ER SERWCES SHALi BE 1• ANO ALL AIE!ERS SI/ALI BE I" (//NIESS 01HER/f/SE NO!EO ON PLANS) /[! ALI IYA!ER AIE!ER BOXES SHALL BE 17" X 30" )( 12" POLYl,/ER CONCRE!E AS AIANIIFAC1//REO BY ARAIORCAST OR £01/AL. II. Al/NIAii/Ai SPACING BET/f!TN POTABLE WA!ER LA!ERALS ANO SEM'R SERWCES SHALi BE 10 FEET. 12. 1HE TOP OF WA !ER AIE!ER BOXES SHALi BE FLUSH lf/1H 1HE RNISHEO S/JRFACE CRAO£ /J. CONS!RIICT!ON or WA !ER AIA/NS ANO RECYCLED WA !ER AIA!NS SI/ALI AOHERE TO 1HE "CR/!ER!A FOR 1HE SEPARA T!ON or WA !ER AIAINS ANO SANITARY SEM'RS" P/JBL!S/fEO BY 1HE STAIE or CAL/TORN/A's OEPARTl,/ENT OF HEAL1H SERWCES. /4. A)(!AL DEFLECTION AT 1HE PIPE JOINTS ARE NOT ALLOM'O. 1HE USE OF A HICH-OEFLECT!ON CO/IPL/NC AT A PIPE JOINT AIAY BE PERAI/T!EO BY 1HE INSPECTOR ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS NOT TO EXCEED 4 DECREES TOTAL OEFLECT!ON PER CO/IPL/NC (2 DECREES/EACH CASK£!) USE CERTAIN!EEO "WN!Z-/RON" H.O. FOR C90[! SEWER NOTES I. SEM'R AIA/N ANO APP/JR!ENANCES SHALL BE CONS!RUC!EO IN ACCORDANCE lf/1H 1HE "CITY or CARLSBAD ENC/NEER/NC STANOAROS (LA!EST £0/T!ON), V0!.1/AIE /-CENERAL OES!CN STANOAROS, CHAP!ER 6-0ES/CN CR/!ERIA FOR CRAWTY SEM'R LINES ANO APP/IR!ENANCES, ANO VOLi/Ai£ 3 -STANOARO ORA/f/NCS ANO NO!ES ANO 1HE STANOARO SPECIRCAT!ONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONS!R/JCT!ON, LA!EST £0/T!ON (CREEN BOOK) 2. 1HE CON!RACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AN EXCAVATION PERAI/T FROAI 1HE 0/WS/ON OF INO/IS!R/AL SAFETY BEFORE ANY £)(CA U4110N ANO SHALL ADHERE TO ALL PROWS/ONS or 1HE STA IE CONS!R/ICT!ON SAFETY ORDERS. J. BEFORE ANY CONNECTION TO 1HE CITYS £)(!ST/NC Srs!E/,1, A PERAIIT SI/ALL BE OBTAINED FROAI 1HE CITY IT All/ST BE SICNEO ANO APPROVED BY 1HE CITY ENC/NEER ANO S/IPERIN!ENOENT. 4. BEFORE CONS!R/ICT!ON BEC/NS IN ANY PUBLIC R/CHT OF WAY, A CITY R/CHT or WAY PERAI/T SI/ALI BE RE()/1/REO. 5. 1HE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY 1HE CITY or CARLSBAD ENC/NEER/NC INSPECTION 48 HO/IRS PRIOR TO 1HE BEC/NNINC or CONS!R/ICT!ON. (lELEPHONE NO /760} 438-389!) EROSION CONTROL NOTES I. IN CASE EAIERCENCY WORK IS REO/JIREO, CONTACT BEAU BRANO AT (858-914-2/23) 2. £1)///PAIENT ANO /YORKERS FOR EAIERCENCY /YORK SI/ALL BE AIAOE AVAILABLE AT ALL T!AIES OUR/NC 1HE RAINY SEASON. ALL NECESSARY AIA !ERIALS SI/ALI BE STOCKP/1£0 ON Sl!E AT CONVENIENT LOCATIONS TO FAC/1/TA!E RAP/0 CONS!R/ICT!ON or !EAIPORARY OEWCES WHEN RAIN IS EAIINENT. J. FOR PROJECTS COVERED BY STA IE Sil'PPP /lf!J!O, IN ACCORDANCE llf1H 1HE CONS!R/ICT!ON OROER /SS/1£0 BY 1HE CALIFORNIA RECIONAL WA!ER ()/JAL/TY CON!ROL BOARD, 1HE 01/AL/REO Sil'PPP PRACT!TIONER (OSP) SI/ALL 1/POA!E ANO AIAINTAIN 1HE WA !ER P0!.11/T!ON CONTROL (il'PC) PLAN TO ADDRESS 1/POA !EO S/!E CONOIT!ONS or 1HE PROJECT. 1HE 1/POA !EO il'PC PLAN ANO 1/POA !FO Sil'PPP SHALL BE KEPT AT 1HE PROJECT Sl!E ANO AIAOE AVAILABLE TO 1HE CITY INSPECTOR. AOO!T!ONAL CONS!R/ICT!ON BAIP's BEYONO 1HE OR!C/NAL APPROV£0 Sil'PPP SHALL BE PROWOEO TO AOORESS Sl!E CONO!T!ONS NOT ANT!CIPA!EO. 1HE l)SP SHALi REPORT BAIP OERCIENCIES TO 1HE CITY INSPECTOR. 1HE l)SP SI/ALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROAI 1HE 1)/IALIREO Sil'PPP OEVEI.OPER ANO 1HE CITY INSPECTOR RECAROINC ANY SICNIRCANT CHANCES TO BAIP OEPLOYl,/£NT. 4. 1HE CONTRACTOR SI/ALI RESTORE ALI EROSION CONTROL OEWCES TO WORK/NC OROER TO 1HE SA T!SFACT!ON or 1HE CITY ENC/NEER AF!ER EACH RUN-OFF PROO/IC/NC RAINFALL. 5. 1HE CONTRACTOR SI/ALI INSTALL AOOIT!ONAL EROSION CONTROL AIEAS/IRES AS AIAY BE REO/IIREO BY 1HE CITY ENC/NEER 011£ TO 1/NCOAIPLE!EO CRAOINC OPERA T!ONS OR UNFORESEEN CIRC/IAISTANCES WHICH AIA Y ARIS£ 6. 1HE CONTRACTOR SI/ALI BE RESPONSIBLE ANO SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT PUBLIC !RESPASS ONTO AREAS WHERE /AIPO//NOEO WA !ERS CREA IE A HAZARDOUS CONOIT!ON. 7. ALL EROSION CONTROL AIEAS/IRES PROWOEO PER 1HE APPROVED Sil'PPP ANO/OR EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHALL BE INCORPORA TEO HEREON. 8. CRAOEO AREAS AROUND 1HE PROJECT PERIAIE!ER All/ST DRAIN AWAY FROAI 1HE FACE or SLOPE AT 1HE CONCLUSION or EACH WORK/NC OAY 9. ALL REAIOVABLE PRO!ECT!VE OEWCES SHO/lfv SHALi BE IN PLACE AT 1HE ENO or EACH WORK/NC OAY WHEN 1HE RV£ (5) OAY RAIN PROBABILITY FORECAST EXCEEDS f/FTY PERCENT (50%). SILT ANO 01HER DEBRIS SI/ALI BE REAIOVEO AFTER EACH RAINFALL. /0. ALL CRA ltZ BACS SHALL BE BURLAP nPE lf/1H 3/4 INCH Al/NIAii/Ai ACCRECRA TE II. SHO/JLO CERN/NATION or HYOROSEEOEO SLOPES FAIL TO PROV/OE EfFECT!V£ COVERAGE OF CRAOEO SLOPES (90% COVERACE} PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 15, 1HE SLOPES SlfALL BE STABILIZED BY PUNCH S!RAW !NSTALLEO IN ACCORDANCE #fl/I SECTION 35.023 OF 111£ EROSION ANO SEO!AIENT CON!ROL HANDBOOK OF 111£ OEPARTl,/ENT or CONSERU4T!ON, S!ATE or CALIFORNIA. j j -rz@ ---- 440 430 420 410 400 390 450 440 430 420 410 440 430 420 410 400 450 440 R/J/1 C/2-R/W ,__ __________ 7.1, -----------~ ,__ ____ 36' ------i------36' ____ __, c----10' --. 'I· 4.5' 6" Tr?£ •c• CURB ___ - & C/JTTER (nP.) 7 r-[!5' (TrP.) 4" PCC Sl!)EWALK (Tr?.) 3" A. C PVAIT OVER 6" A.8. (AIIN.) OR AS RECOAIAIENOEO BY SOILS ENC/NEER EAGLE OR/VE GREY HAWK COURT PER OIYC. 399-4A nP!CAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE PROPERTY'-.! _,,,,-lTE)(fST!NC UTILITY LINE 1'.ioo' r EASEMENT EAfJIE DR/IE' I . I PARK/NC OR/VE A/SI.£ JaOO' -- -J7 I --25.50' I 27.00' I £)(!ST/NC CURB I • ~ CUTTER & 510£/YALK 6" C/IRB,r""""=Jr=="'i'i="="';=""",,""'=.7j'='' ~ 4" AC/ 4.5" CONCRE!E J 4 AC, 9 £)(!ST/NC PVT1 I 15' CLASS II BASE RIBBON Cl/TIER CLASS II BASE SECTION A-A SCALE-1•~20' SECTION C-C SCALE· !"~20' ORA/NACE ~ EASEMENT I I PARK/NC OR/VE A!SII PROPERTY I 21' 27.00' 3000' LINE ~Jk-;::::~~-~==~~~~~~~~-:;~~~~~ Bt,Ao& 6" CURB 4• AC/ ~5• CONCRE!E 4 • AC/ 9.,LJ / , Cl/ASS CLASS II BASE RIBBON CU TIER CLASS II L . J / SWALE - - - - -SFr:;l"!r7NT-r - - / SCALE· !"~20' '-6• CURB 440 4.30 420 410 400 390 450 440 4.30 420 410 440 4.30 420 410 400 440 430 420 410 400 390 450 440 430 420 410 CURB ANO Cl/TIER (TrP.) I ~BU/LO/NC ~ SETBACK J.-7 TIP/CAL WA !ER J: 1 ,1;4-i'....._,-",;i"''/IA,,.L,_,!1:,_Y~BAecSil,,,,W~ MAX I I 2' 2' I . . I . . • I I I I I TYPICAL SLOPE GRADING SECTION NOT TO SCALE OR/VE AISLE '//,J;:i11111~ -400;--WAIE/ QIIALITY'::i d ===3a=.il='O,,.'==dl1 __ -:::::::-= PROPERTY 9.00' ~ ~ ~ 4• AC/ 9•1 . __, 16.'.CCURB - LINE / / ~ -6L C/IRB· --CLASS'// BASE ,_#fJIE DRIIE' 1 L / PROPOSED/ & Cl/TIER I • £)(!ST/NC CURB~ I I 6" PVC SO CU TIER & SIDEWALK OR/VE AISLE 3[! 00' . I . 4" AC/ 9" CLASS II BASE PARK/NC 27.00' 6" Cl/RB SECTION 8-8 OR/VE AISLE 3aoo' • I & Cl/TIER _ _ -- ;,,,"..,, ,, = ----. --·~ 6" CONC/ 6" 6 CURB 4• AC/ 4.5• 6 CURB CLASS II BASE !,,PROPERTY 15. 45' I LINE / -........ . . ExkTINC C/JRBr Cl/TIER CLASS II BASE --------------------- SECTION 0-0 SCA/£· !"~20' I • 0 "' . -~-·---- --c~--,+----- " ----+- 450 440 □ ~ " -4 '' -, _ _," '~~.,P , ,~ ~ " ,.,....,.,....t --' ><t " / ____ .,,,..,. • ~ t ,........- 0 ,-F 440 430 420 410 400 390 450 440 430 420 410 ---□ ,-"9' /, PROPERTY"1v£)(!ST!NC~ EAfJIE DR/IE' LINE LANDSCAPE --1 EASEMENT I 430 4/0 430 [)RIV£ A/SI.£ ~ \.4" AC/9" 4,20 _ CLASS II BASE 410 / / ' ', ·, , ... ,,,, -•~ ·-, ~· ' ',,,, ~--. . \,\~ 420 £)(IS-;;;;; C/IRB_p----1 ---: ~ ·"'-. Cl/TIER & S/0£//IALK '-.. PARK/NC -,"""'~6-~7'~vR.~'B3/9·,;;;'Jf-~•.,it'.":c0,;;;wc,;;;!)~~1E~IF"=~~~~= 4• AC/ 4.5• RIBB0,1/ CUT,tR SECTION F-F CLASS II BASE L . ....J SCALE· 1•~20' KEY MAP NOT TO SCALE ~GffSS!O;,JP "AS BUIL T11 ~¢ D. Dr;~ 0{/y +,,, ,, k?o -::z;';Z';: ~ a:-No. 45629 0 ~ ~ Exp.12-31-22 * RCE EXP. DATE {L' l. .._ ~I( CJV\\. ~ OF ()\.\I REVIEVED BY, PROJECT NUMBER: 1-0346 DATE:May 7, 2021 INSPECTOR DATE ~ CITY OF CAR LSBAD ~ 2 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 0 GRADING PLANS FOR: PALOMAR FORUM PARCEL 'A' TYPICAL SECTION S & NOTES PREPARED UNDER AIY S/IPERWS/ON, GR2021-XXXX CUP2020-0011 BY DATE· APPROVED: JASON S. GELDERT ROBERT D. DENTINO R.C.£ NO.: 45629 EXPIRATION.· 12-3/-22 RRAI.· EXCEL ENC/NEER/NC CITY ENGINEER RCE 63912 EXPIRES 09/30/22 DATE ADDRESS.-440 STA IE PLACE CITY, ST.: ESCON0/00, CALIFORNIA DWN BY: PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO. DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL CHKD BY: 1ELEPHON£· (760) 745-B/!8 ENGINEER OF WORK REVISION DESCRIPTION OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL RVWD BY: SDP 2020-0006 xxx-xx PT-2 T-11 PT-1 T-8 T-7afe afe T-2 T-10 T-1 T-9 170 N. MAPLE STREET, STE 108, CORONA, CA 92880 TELEPHONE: (951) 509-7090 ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PLATE 2See Plate 1 for Legend \ AP, . "--. •. -.. --,·/ .• , ' L 0 20 S/-06 40 60 80 SECURE BIKE PARK/NC BIKE REPAIR SlA 77, !RANS!T SHEL TE, (SEE LANOS, PE PLANS} \C •' ,1i• . J.0% -~'.-::-,/--~~~-S-;OJ -~ PROJECT NUMBER: 1-0346 DATE:M□y 7, 2021 APN.· 221--08-00 'CEL '.4' coc . ooc 2006-0557341 / / / • ~..? &r?.?,-:: /f !'(5!,.;;j ~~ ~~ / / / / / / / a a_ SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS (SEE SHEET Of FOR SPECIRCAllONS} SI-OJI 4" AC OVER 4.5" CLASS 2 BAS£ s1-02I 7" PCC OVER 7" CLASS 2 BASE SI-OJI 6" CURB S/-04I 6" CURB & CUTTER S/-05I 4" PCC SIDEWALK Sl-06I RIBBON CUTTER Sl-07I !RENCH DRAIN Sl-08I CURB CUT S/-09I PEOES!R/AN RAMP s1-10I RE!AININC WALL SI-Ill PARK/NC LICHT s1-12I 8/0FIL !RATION BASIN S!-!JI /YATER OUAL!TY S/CN Sl-14I 0/SABLEO PARMNC STALL EXIST/NC EASEMENTS COVENANTS; CONDITIONS, RES!R/CTIONS ANO EASEMENTS IN THE DOCUMENT RECOROEO JANUARY 10, 2003 AS INS!RUMENT NO. 200J-OOJ5/44 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SA/0 DOCUMENT PR0/1/0ES FOR A LANDSCAPE EASEMENT. ABUTTERS R/CHTS OF INGRESS ANO EGRESS TO OR FROM EACLE OR/VE ANO CREY HAif!( COURT, E%CEPT AT ACCESS OPENINGS HA VE BEEN OEOICA TEO OR RELINOUIS/fEO ON THE MAP OF CARLSBAD !RACT NO. 99-06, MAP NO. 14831 OF !RACT MAPS RECOROEO JUNE 29, 2004. EASEMENTS SHOIIN OR OEOICA TEO ON MAP NO. 14831 RECOROEO JUNE 29, 2004 AS CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 99-06, PALOMAR FORUU G) PRIVATE ORA/NACE ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES @ S/CHT DISTANCE CORRIDOR ANO !NCIOEN!AL PURPOSES AN EASEMENT IN FA vVR OF SAN 0/ECO CASANO ELEC!R!C COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTIL/1/ES ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECOROEO SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004-091/006 OF OmC/AL RECORDS. THE TERMS, PR0/1/S/ONS ANO EASEMENT(S} CON!A/NEO IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITlEO "RECIPROCAL EASEMENT ANO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECOROEO OCTOBER 06, 2005 AS INS!RUMENT NO. 2005-0865774 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT IN FA vVR OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL /YATER 0/S!R!CT FOR /YA TERI/NE PURPOSES ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECOROEO JANUARY JO, 2006 AS !NS!RUMENT NO. 2006-0065489 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF COUNTY OF SAN 0/ECO FOR A /I/CATION ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECOROEO MARCH 2J. 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0/99920 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS [NOT PI.OTTABLE] *EXIST/NC WATER SERVICE NOT£· CON!RACTOR MUST POTHOLE THE CROSS OR TEE AT THE PROPERTY LINE TO DETERMINE THE COVER DEPTH FROM THE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION TO THE TOP OF PIPE. IF THE SER/I/CE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE 111TH CITY OF CARLSBAD vVI. 2, CH. J.J.8.A. I -42 INCHES COVER FROM TOP OF PIPE TO FINISHED CRAOE ELEVATION, THE SER/I/CE SHALL BE ABANOONEO PER CMMJ STANOARO SPECIF/CATIONS 15000-J. II ANO A NEIY SER/I/CE SHALL BE INSTALLED FROM THE MAIN TO PROPERTY LINE PER STANOARO ORA/lfNCS /Y-22 ANO FIIRN!S/IEO 111TH NEW TEE ANO VALVES. OfESSiOAJ,;, ¢-D. Dlf ff '1 ~ No. 45629 o E><p.12-31 -22 Ci \\_ 11 AS RCE __ _ EXP. ___ _ REVIE\./ED BY, DATE DATE ~ LlQ_J PREPARED UNDER MY SUPER/1/S/ON, BY_==~~==~~~~~=~OATE:·==~~~~1---j-------j--------------------t------t----t-----t-------J ROBERT O DENTINO R.CE. NO.: 45629 E%P!RATION: l2-Jl-22 f---+------,f-------------------t-----t----+----+----i GR2021-XXXX CUP2020-0011 APPROVED: JASON S. GELDERT FIRU· E%CEL ENC/NEER/NC CITY ENGINEER RCE 63912 EXPIRES 09 30 22 DATE AOORESS 440 STA TE PLACE CITY, ST.: ESCON0/00, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE.· (760) 745-81!8 DATE INITIAL ENGINEER OF WORK REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL OWN BY: CHKD BY: __ _ RVWD BY: PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO. SDP 2020-0006 XXX-XX afe afe T-3 T-5 T-12 T-4 T-6 PT-3 170 N. MAPLE STREET, STE 108, CORONA, CA 92880 TELEPHONE: (951) 509-7090 ALTA CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PLATE 3See Plate 1 for Legend ~ SI-OJ • • ~i \\s iili"~i \ SI-OJ S/-04 / SCALE.· 1"=20' -------0 20 40 60 80 PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERl1S/ON, -,---~--~ ________ & "'-AA r=== ( APN· 221-015-07 I I I / / / / / \ SURFACE /AIPROVEAIEN!S (SEE SHEET 01 flJH SP£C/flCA710NS) SI-OIi 4" AC Oif"R 4.5" CLASS 2 BASE s1-02I 7" PCC Oif"R 7" CLASS 2 BASE SI-OJI 6" CURB S/-04I 6" CURB & CUTTER S!-05I 4,, PCC SIOEIYALI( S/-06I RIBBON CUTTER Sl-07I TRENCH DRAIN SI-OBI CURB CUT S/-09I PEDESTRIAN RAMP s1-10I RET,4/NINC IYALL s1-11I PARK/NC LICHT s1-12I BIOF/L !RA /lON BASIN S!-!JI /YATER QUALITY S/QV Sl-14I 0/SABLEO PARl(fNC STALL EXIS17NC EASEAIEN!S COif"NANTS, CONO!llONS, RESTRIC/lONS ANO EASEMENTS IN 1/fE DOCUMENT RECORDED JANUARY 10, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-0035!44 OF OfflCIAL RECORDS. SA/0 DOCUMENT PROl10ES FOR A LANDSCAPE EASEMENT. ABUTTERS RICHTS OF INCRESS ANO £CRESS TO OR FROM EACLE OR/<£ ANO CREY HAM< COURT, E%CEPT AT ACCESS OPENINGS HA if" BEEN OEOICA TEO OR REUNQUISHEO ON 1/fE MAP OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 99-06, MAP NO. 14831 OF TRACT MAPS RECOROEO JUNE 29, 2004. EASEMENTS SHOIW OR 0£0/CA TEO ON MAP NO. 14831 RECOROEO JUNE 29, 200-1 AS CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 99-06, PALOMAR FORUM. (v PR/VA TE ORA/NACE ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES @ SICHT 0/SlANCE CORRIDOR ANO INCIOEN!AL PURPOSES AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SAN 0/ECO CASANO EZECTRIC COMPANY FOR PUBLIC U/lL/1/ES ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004-0911006 OF omCIAL RECORDS. THE TERI.IS, PROl1S/ONS ANO EASE!.IENT(S) CONTAINED IN 1/fE DOCUMENT EN/lTlEO "RECIPROCAL EASEMENT ANO MAINTENANCE ACREE!.IENr RECORDED OCTOBER 06, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0865774 OF OfflCIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL /YATER DISTRICT FOR WATERLINE PURPOSES ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED JANUARY JO, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0065489 OF Off/CIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF COUNTY OF SAN 0/ECO FOR A t1CA 1/0N ANO INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED MARCH 2J, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2006-0/99920 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS [NOT PI.OTTA81.Ej *EXIST/NC WATER SERVICE NOT£· CONTRACTOR MUST P01/fOLE 1/fE CROSS OR TEE AT 1/fE PROPERTY LINE TO OETER!.I/NE 1/fE COif"R OEP1/f FROM 1/fE FINISHED SURFACE EZEVA1/0N TO 1/fE TOP OF PIPE. IF 1/fE SERl1CE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE M1/f CITY OF CARLSBAD VOL. 2, Cl/. LJ.8.A. I -42 INCHES COif"R FROM TOP OF PIPE TO FINISHED CRAOE EZEVA 1/0N, 1/fE SERl1CE SHALL BE ABANDONED PER C!.IHV STANDARD SPEC/f/CA1/0NS 15000-J.// ANO A NEIY SERl1CE SHALL BE INSTALLED FROM 1/fE MAIN TO PROPERTY LINE PER STANDARD ORAMNCS /Y-22 ANO FURNISHED M1/f NEIY TEE ANO VAL ff"S. BY OATE:==~~~~t------t---t------------------t----t----t---t-----J -R=o.=l'l='ER=T~o=_-O~'E,=N=11M~'O~R.=.~c.~E.~M~o.= __ -_ -45,=6.~'2~'9~£)(P/RA1/0N· 12-31-22 >---+---+----------------+---+---+---+---I FIRM.· £%CEZ ENC/NEER/NC ADDRESS.· 440 STA TE PLACE Cl TY, ST.: ESCON0/00, CALIFORNIA mEPHONE.-(760) 745-8118 DATE INITIAL ENGINEER OF WORK REVISION DESCRIPTION DA TE INITIAL DATE INI TIAL OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL PROJECT NUMBER: 1-0346 DATE:May 7, 2021 11 AS BUIL T 11 RCE __ _ EXP, ___ _ DATE REVIE\./ED BY, GRADING PLANS FOR: PALOMAR FORUM PARCEL 'A' PRECISE GRADING -EAST GR2021-XXXX CUP2020-001 I APPROVED: JASON S. GELDERT CITY ENGINEER RCE 63912 EXPIRES 09/30/22 DATE DWN BY: IV PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO. CHKD BY: __ _ RVWD BY: SDP 2020-0006 XXX-XX