HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD 2021-0024; PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION; FINAL SOILS REPORT; 2023-08-083990 Old Town Avenue, Suite C-300
San Diego, CA 92110
PH 619.297.1530
www.geosyntec.com
8 September 2023
Attention:
Tom Bruen
Law Offices of Thomas M. Bruen
1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 608
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Catherine (Riegle) Finley
Senior Legal Counsel
Waste Management
9081 Tujunga Ave.
Sun Valley, CA 91352
Subject: As-Graded Geotechnical Report
Implementation of Stormwater Infrastructure Improvements
Palomar Transfer Station
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley:
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. (Geosyntec) is pleased to submit to both Coast Waste Management,
Inc. (CWM) and Palomar Transfer Station, Inc. (PTS) this As-Graded Geotechnical Report of
earthwork observation and testing services performed for the installation of stormwater
infrastructure improvements (the Project) at the Palmar Transfer Station located at 5960 El Camino
Real, Carlsbad, California (Site). This report was prepared by Ms. Sneha Upadhyaya, E.I.T., and
reviewed by Messrs. Cory Russell, P.E. and Miguel Parames, P.E. of Geosyntec, in general
accordance with the peer review policies of the firm.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Site is located on the northeast side of Orion Road between El Camino Real and Faraday
Avenue in the City of Carlsbad (Figure 1). The project includes construction of an onsite
stormwater infrastructure which consists of storm drain pipe installation and associated
demolition, trenching and shoring, junction structures, trench drains with minor grading, retrofit
catch basin, improvements to existing north basin, pump wells and associated pumps and
appurtenances, force main pipes, 4,050-gallon detention tank, reinforced concrete pad, and paving.
Geosyntec C>
consultants
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 2
PROJECT DOCUMENTS
Geosyntec previously prepared the following geotechnical investigation report for this project:
“Geotechnical Investigation, Stormwater Treatment System and Improvements, Carlsbad,
California”, dated 12 October 2021.
Geosyntec also prepared the following construction drawings and as-built redline drawings,
referred to herein as the grading plans:
“Palomar Transfer Station, Stormwater Treatment Design, Sheets 1 through 10, Project
No. CD 2021-0024, Drawing No. 442-3C”, dated 7 October 2022, revised 6 February 2023.
“DCN-04 Exhibit, Palomar Transfer Station, Stormwater Treatment Design”, dated
February 2023.
Geosyntec provided the earthwork observation and testing services as it relates to the project
construction in general accordance with the above documents.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Geosyntec was onsite to provide construction quality assurance (CQA) monitoring for the
earthwork activities in support of the stormwater infrastructure construction. Earthwork CQA
activities performed by Geosyntec for the Project included:
Observation and documentation of earthwork operations including the subgrade and
bottom of foundation excavations;
Collection of concrete samples for compressive strength testing;
Periodic observation of grading and in-situ field density testing (FDT) of aggregate base,
fill materials, and asphalt pavement using a nuclear soil moisture-density gauge during fill
placement; and
Preparation of this report providing the results of our testing, findings, and conclusions.
FIELD OBSERVATION AND TESTING
This report documents earthwork observation and testing performed at the Site between 2
December 2022 and 14 June 2023. During this time, Geosyntec representatives
periodically observed the earthwork activities and conducted field testing and inspections during
construction and daily field reports summarizing and documenting the field activities were
prepared.
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 3
In addition, Geosyntec provided engineering/geologic support, as needed. Geosyntec office
personnel reviewed the daily field reports, summarized, compiled, and evaluated field and
laboratory test data.
Fill Placement and Compaction
Material Sources
The engineered fill soils for trench backfill were obtained from onsite soils derived from
excavation activities. The fill soils were generally classified as clayey sands and silty sands.
Laboratory modified proctor compaction tests (ASTM D1557) were performed on select
samples of fill soils, the results of which are summarized in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Summary of Modified Proctor Compaction Tests for Fill Soils
Sample Location Description Maximum Dry
Density (pcf)
Optimum Moisture
Content (%)
PTS-EF1 Clayey Sand 125.8 9.5
PTS-EF2 Silty Sand 114.1 14.9
PTS-EF3 Clayey Sand 127.4 9.6
Placement
Geosyntec observed Pride place, moisture condition, and compact the fill soils in maximum loose
lifts of 8-inches to a dry density of at least 90% of the maximum dry density, relative to Modified
Proctor (ASTM D1557). Geosyntec’s field representative performed ten (10) in-situ field density
and moisture testing of the compacted fill soils using a nuclear density and moisture gauge (ASTM
D6938). The in-situ field density test results indicated the engineered fill was compacted to the
minimum dry density in accordance with the project grading plans and specifications. Materials or
areas that did not meet the requirements of the Project Documents were either removed and
replaced or reworked in-place. The approximate locations and tabulated results of field density
and moisture tests are presented in Attachment D.
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 4
Aggregate Base Placement and Compaction
Material Sources
Aggregate base was imported from West Coast Sand & Gravel of San Diego, California.
Laboratory Modified Proctor Compaction tests (ASTM D1557) were performed on samples of
the aggregate base material, the results of which are summarized in Table 2 below:
Table 2. Summary of Laboratory Modified Proctor Compaction Tests for Aggregate Base
Sample ID Maximum Dry
Density (pcf)
Optimum Moisture
Content (%)
PTS-AB1 142.0 7.9
PTS-AB-02 140.1 6.7
Placement
Geosyntec observed Pride place, moisture condition, and compact aggregate base in maximum
loose lifts of 8-inches to a dry density of at least 95% of the maximum dry density under roadways,
curb and gutter, catch basins, and maintenance holes and to a dry density of at least 90% of the
maximum dry density under non-traffic areas, relative to Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557).
Geosyntec’s field representative performed nine (9) in-situ field density testing of compacted and
moisture conditioned aggregate base using a nuclear moisture-density gauge (ASTM D6938). The
in-situ field density test results indicated the aggregate base was compacted to the minimum dry
density in accordance with the project grading plans and specifications. Materials or areas that did
not meet the requirements of the Project Documents were either removed and replaced or reworked
in-place. The approximate locations and tabulated results of field density and moisture tests are
presented in Attachment D.
Asphaltic Concrete
Material Sources
The asphaltic concrete was imported from Vulcan Materials Company, Western Division, Carroll
Canyon (Vulcan).
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 5
The maximum density for the asphaltic concrete was provided by Vulcan as 155.9 pcf
(AASHTO T-209).
Placement
After preparation of the subgrade and aggregate base, Pride placed and compacted the asphaltic
concrete at the north stormdrain trench and pavement sections around trench drains. Geosyntec
observed the contractor place the asphaltic concrete in two, 3-inch lifts. Geosyntec performed
twenty-one (21) in-place density testing of the compacted asphaltic concrete using a nuclear
density and moisture gauge set on the backscatter method (ASTM D 2950). The in-place density
results indicated the asphaltic concrete was placed to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction
in accordance with the project specifications. Asphalt areas that did not meet the requirements of
the Project Documents were recompacted in-place and re-tested with passing results. The
approximate locations and tabulated results of field density tests are presented in Attachment D.
Concrete Testing
Placement of concrete was monitored by Geosyntec personnel for compliance with the Project
Documents. Geosyntec monitored:
the subgrade was prepared prior to placement of concrete;
placement of the reinforcing welded wire mesh and bars;
reviewed concrete delivery tickets; and
placement of the concrete.
Based on Geosyntec’s observations, the concrete was placed in general accordance with the Project
Documents.
CQA Testing
Geosyntec performed field tests on the concrete during placement and casted cylinders for
laboratory compression testing. Samples of the concrete were obtained and tested using the
following standards:
Slump (ASTM C143); and
Compression Strength (ASTM C39)
After measuring the slump, Geosyntec casted a total of 9 sets of three cylinders per ASTM C 31
and transported the cylinders to our concrete testing subcontractor, NV5, for curing and
compression strength testing. These results indicate that the concrete meets or exceeds the
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 6
requirements of the Project Documents. The concrete test results are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Summary of Concrete Strength Test at 5 and 28 days
Field Sample ID Date Sampled
Compressive Strength
(psi)
5-day 28-day
PTS-20221208 12/8/2022 2,620 4,510
PTS-20221214 12/14/2022 3,480 5,250
PTS-20230124 1/24/2023 3,930 5,680
PTS-20230127 1/27/2023 3,650 5,700
PTS-20230209 2/9/2023 3,590 5,540
PTS-20230210 2/10/2023 3,440 4,490
PTS-20230216 2/16/2023 3,740 7,010
PTS-20230222 2/22/2023 4,100 7,020
PTS-20230327 3/27/2023 5,010 6,640
Note:
1. Sample size: 4" × 8" cylinder
2.Required compressive strength at 28 days is 4,000 psi
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and opinions drawn from the test results and Site observations apply only to our
work regarding the earthwork described in this report. We accept no responsibility for any
subsequent changes made by others, by uncontrolled action of water, or by failure of others to
repair damages by uncontrolled action of water.
Professional judgments represented in this report are based partly on our evaluation of the technical
information gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our
general experience in the civil engineering field. Our monitoring does not imply a guarantee or
warranty of the contractor’s work. Geosyntec warrants that its services were performed with the
usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession in the regional area. No other
warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended in this report.
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
Mr. Bruen and Ms. Finley
8 September 2023
Page 7
Draft_As-graded Report - Palomar TS
CERTIFICATION
Based on the observations made on site during construction by Geosyntec personnel and based on
the logs and test results presented in the appendices to this report, the earthwork component of the
stormwater infrastructure improvement project construction, located at 5960 El Camino Real,
Carlsbad, California was constructed in accordance with the Project Documents.
GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Sincerely,
Cory Russell, P.E. Miguel Parames, P.E.
Senior Engineer Senior Engineer
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment D – Field Density Testing Summary and
Locations
Geosyntec C>
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
^_
Site LocationPalomar Transfer Station5960 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Figure
CWR0667 September 2023
1
^_
0 3,000 6,0001,500
Feet
Site
Area Detailed Above
£
Geosyntec t>
consultants
ATTACHMENT D
Field Density Testing Summary and Locations
Summary of Field Density Testing Palomar Transfer Station
Palomar, California
Moisture
Content
Wet
Density
(pcf)
Dry
Density
(pcf)
Sample ID
Optimum
Moisure
Content
Maximum
Dry Density
(pcf)
1 BF 12/09/22 Southwest Stormdrain Trench 12 15.3% 121.6 105.5 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 92.5% 90% PASS
2 BF 12/09/22 Southwest Stormdrain Trench 12 12.1% 119.3 106.3 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 93.2% 90% PASS
3 BF 12/09/22 Southwest Stormdrain Trench 12 2 14.5% 127.0 110.9 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 97.2% 90% PASS
4 BF 12/16/22 Employee Parking Lot Stormdrain Trench 8 6.7% 124.5 120.4 PTS-EF1 9.5% 125.8 95.7% 90% PASS
5 BF 12/19/22 Employee Parking Lot South Junction Box 12 5 10.6% 128.6 116.3 PTS-EF1 9.5% 125.8 92.4% 90% PASS
6 BF 12/19/22 Employee Parking Lot North Junction Box 12 9.5% 113.7 103.9 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 91.1% 90% PASS
7 BF 12/19/22 Southwest Stormdrain Trench 12 14.9% 127.1 110.7 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 97.0% 90% PASS
8 BF 12/19/22 Southwest Stormdrain Trench 12 14.2% 125.7 110.1 PTS-EF2 14.9% 114.1 96.5% 90% PASS
9 AB 02/17/23 Concrete Pad Area 4 4.3% 137.4 131.8 AB1 7.9% 142.0 92.8% 90% PASS
10 AB 02/17/23 Concrete Pad Area 4 5.0% 137.7 131.2 AB1 7.9% 142.0 92.4% 90% PASS
11 BF 05/18/23 North Stormdrain Trench 8 10.1% 128.4 116.6 PTS-EF3 9.6% 127.4 91.5% 90% PASS
12 BF 05/18/23 North Stormdrain Trench 8 11.7% 127.2 113.8 PTS-EF1 9.5% 125.8 90.5% 90% PASS
13 AB 05/18/23 North Stormdrain Trench 12 4.2% 131.3 126.0 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 89.9% 95% FAIL 15
14 AB 05/18/23 North Stormdrain Trench 12 4.7% 132.7 127.5 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 91.0% 95% FAIL 16
15 AB 06/07/23 North Stormdrain Trench 8 5.2% 141.1 134.1 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 95.7% 95% PASS
16 AB 06/14/23 North Stormdrain Trench 8 4.3% 142.5 136.6 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 97.5% 95% PASS
17 AB 06/07/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 4.8% 142.2 135.7 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 96.9% 95% PASS
18 AB 06/07/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 5.7% 141.5 133.9 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 95.6% 95% PASS
19 AB 06/07/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 5.1% 141.0 134.2 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 95.8% 95% PASS
20 AB 06/07/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 4.9% 141.8 135.2 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 96.5% 95% PASS
21 AB 06/07/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 8.4% 135.9 125.4 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 89.5% 95% FAIL 22
22 AB 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 4 4.7% 142.5 136.1 PTS-AB2 6.7% 140.1 97.1% 95% PASS
23 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.2 151.2 PTS-AB2 -- 155.9 97.0% 95% PASS
24 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 152.0 152.0 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 97.5% 95% PASS
25 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 149.7 149.7 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.0% 95% PASS
26 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 148.2 148.2 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 95.1% 95% PASS
27 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 149.9 149.9 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.2% 95% PASS
28 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.1 151.1 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.9% 95% PASS
29 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.2 151.2 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 97.0% 95% PASS
30 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 153.4 153.4 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 98.4% 95% PASS
31 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 155.1 155.1 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 99.5% 95% PASS
32 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 152.8 152.8 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 98.0% 95% PASS
33 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 153.7 153.7 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 98.6% 95% PASS
34 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.0 151.0 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.9% 95% PASS
35 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 155.2 155.2 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 99.6% 95% PASS
36 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.7 151.7 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 97.3% 95% PASS
37 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 152.2 152.2 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 97.6% 95% PASS
38 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 152.4 152.4 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 97.8% 95% PASS
39 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 150.9 150.9 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.8% 95% PASS
40 HMA 06/14/23 Pavement Section around Trench Drain 0 -- 151.1 151.1 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 96.9% 95% PASS
41 HMA 06/14/23 North Stormdrain Trench 0 -- 149.5 149.5 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 95.9% 95% PASS
42 HMA 06/14/23 North Stormdrain Trench 0 -- 148.9 148.9 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 95.5% 95% PASS
43 HMA 06/14/23 North Stormdrain Trench 0 -- 149.1 149.1 PTS-AC1 -- 155.9 95.6% 95% PASS
Notes:1. This is a progress report of field density testing. All failing tests may not be reconciled to date based on contractor work activities.AB - Aggregate Base
2. Maximum Density for Hot-mix Asphalt taken from Hveem Density laboratory test results provided by Vulcan Carroll Canyon.BF - Trench Backfill
HMA - Hot mix asphalt
Probe
Depth
(in.)
Test ID Material
Type Test Date Test Location Pass/Fail Re-Test
ID
Depth
below final
grade (ft
bgs)
Field Test Results Laboratory Test Results
Relative
Compaction
Required
Relative
Compaction
Geosyntec t>
commltantss
x
x
//
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
// // // //x
MATCHLINE SEE LEFT
20 40
N
MATCHLINE SEE RIGHT
\\
s
d
c
e
n
t
r
a
l
-
0
1
\
d
a
t
a
\
C
A
D
D
\
W
\
w
a
s
t
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
\
p
a
l
o
m
a
r
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
d
e
s
i
g
n
\
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
C
W
R
0
6
6
7
C
0
3
E
X
D
E
M
O
.
d
w
g
L
a
s
t
E
d
i
t
e
d
b
y
:
F
a
r
s
h
a
d
.
S
i
s
a
n
o
n
1
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
3
1
2
:
4
3
P
M
ENGINEER OF WORK
DATE
3990 OLD TOWN AVENUE, SUITE C300
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92110
619.810.4060
RICHARD GONZALEZ, PERCE No. C 85579 EXP. 09/30/2024
3 1 2 7 8
5
10 9
4
6
12
14
11
13
I
EASEMENT NOTES
1. EASEMENT FOR THE !NSTALLA TION, CONSTRUCT/ON, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT,
AND RECONSTRUCTION OF WATER LINES, RECORDED AUGUST 22, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO.
79-0352199 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
2. EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES AND FOR DRAINAGE FACILITIES, RECORDED JUNE 30,
1982 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 82-201566 OF OFFICIAL RECORD.
3. EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS, RECORDED AUGUST 21, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 79-350469 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
4. EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY, RECORDED AUGUST 22, 2007 AS INSTRUMENT NO.
2007-0558614 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
5. EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS, RECORDED JUNE 12, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT
NO. 79-241682 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
6. EASEMENT TO INSTALL ANY POLES, WIRES, PIPES OR SIMILAR UTILITY STRUCTURES OVER AND ALONG
ANY OR ALL OF SUCH RIGHTS OF WAY, AS GRANTED BY DEED DA TED MARCH 26, 1936 AND
RECORDED JULY 29, 1936 IN BOOK 541, PAGE 244 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOTTED HEREON).
7. EASEMENT FOR COMBINED UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM PLUS GAS EASEMENT, RECORDED MAY 5,
2015 AS 2012-0475462 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOTTED HEREON).
I Cf)
0
-<
294.4.i
I ::,
-< I . \: I • •. i
29J9 TC ' \·. '.
\
I .
I
I
I
I
96.6Jrc -<
295.19FS
INV.:289.S'Fl.
\ J2' HOPE SD
\ '@)sTART
I .
I
I
KEY NOTES
0 SAWCUT AND REMOVE EXISTING @PROTECT EXISTING INLET GUTTER TO
ASPHALT PAVEMENT REMAIN
0 SAWCUT AND REMOVE EXISTING @PROTECT EXISTING TRENCH DRAIN TO
CONCRETE PAVEMENT TO NEAREST REMAIN
@PROTECT EXISTING DRAINAGE OUTLET JOINT
ffi REMOVE DRAINAGE INLET PIPE TO REMAIN
REPLACE EXISTING CURB (AND GUTTER} @PROTECT EXISTING LIGHT POLE AND
IN KIND ASSOC/A TED APPURTENANCES.
0 REPLACE EXISTING FENCE (AND GA TE) CONTRACTOR TO EXERCISE CARE WITH
EXISTING LIGHTING CONDUIT IN THE TO NEAREST POST IN KIND
® AREA PROTECT EXISTING FRONTAGE SIGNS TO
@PROTECT EXISTING REMAIN
0 ABANDON AND INSTALL 6" PVC END MASONRY/CONCRETE WALL
CAPS ® PROTECT EXISTING DRAINAGE LINE TO
8 PROTECT EXISTING TREE REMAIN
9 PROTECT EXISTING FENCE AND GA TE @ASPHALT PAVEMENT TO BE RESTORED
G CURB IN KIND AT MINIMUM
@ RESTORE EXISTING CONCRETE SWALE IN
z AND PROTECT EXISTING DRAINAGE ® PROTECT EXISTING UTILITY. IF UTILITY OUTLET PIPE TO REMAIN m CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED WORK,
RELOCATE/REPLACE AS-NEEDED.
.---, ................... .., ................. ., ................. .., ....... .. __ ........... .., .. ,. ............................ ..,.., ..... ,. ................. .. _,.,,--.., .. .. .. " .., ... .., .. .., " .., " .., .. ., ., .., .. .., .. .., .. " " .. .. .., ... " .., .. .. __.-: .. ., .... .., .................................... .., ... ..,.., .................. ..
289.06TC
288.BlTC '-
289.//6rc E ---E -----E ·-·--•-•-•-· •-• E
___.-:K_X_
SURVEY CONTROL DA TA SURVEY CONTROL DA TA
CONTROL
POINT (CP} NORTHING
1 1994385.43
2 1994384.93
3 1994376.51
4 1994365.95
5 1994366.49
6 1994368.44
7 1994370.11
8 1994284.66
9 1994282.98
10 1994012.46
11 1994013.90
12 1993956.85
13 1993959.70
14 1994032.35
15 1994029.28
16 1994024.39
17 1994035.09
18 1994038.42
19 1994043.44
047.87
EASTING CONTROL NORTHING EASTING POINT (CP}
6250071.52 21 1994037.18 6250229.46
6250073.80 22 1994104.61 6250340.57
6250078.78 23 1994097.67 6250337.33
6250076.49 24 1994093.49 6250335.35
6250075.29 25 1994120.24 6250376.73
6250070.96 26 1994134.65 6250387.04
6250067.27 27 1994168.46 6250365.67
6250087.27 28 1994170.59 6250375.12
6250083.48 29 1994167.18 6250379.28
6250099.42 30 1994156.39 6250386.17
6250095.69 31 1994164.03 6250398.50
6250148.49 32 1994109.67 6250433.20
6250145.66 33 1994116.20 6250443.43
6250233.51 34 1994107. 77 6250448.81
6250236.07 35 1994093.03 6250425.72
6250240.16 36 1994084.97 6250425.45
6250252.94 37 1994079.17 6250412.91
6250250.16 38 1994117.05 6250390.21
6250245.95 39 1994112.12 6250381.98
311.95TB
'.JQPITB ~
3116.99TB JOZ 12TB J//6.12TB
I \fl Z20TB
6.5'
• CP•2~.·.··•····.· .••.•. • .. ··.·.·.•··•· ..... • .. ·.•.· •
.··•···g < < • ··cp 38·.·.· .. ·.·.•·.·.•·.·.•·.·.· l'!-''1-i-i!' •.... ·••.••.••.••.••.•
CP 39
·.·_.· ._:_ • ... =~?~:-~~----'i;.':1~:
·.cp·35·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·
I 2 .4J ,-,--,-,_,...:::.::oc,-1---,-,_x=:::-o-i 27. 4 •
I
// /,!£,~
& \L----cffi'r'-
I
0
F OF SI.OPE
l i
CP 33
V--G/JI
CP ~
Ir-!==:-•
0
. ----
GAS flEFl1£L
ts,~
l=-:~?:i-'t-.:.2_:: '-,-·~-. ·±, ==·~· .j~~~B
·~
i
i
i i
t i
0
.
l I I
I
i •
£-CAB
EPB
~~~& ~I
HAN/)//A~
0
I i
i
i i • o I
E ------16
I
I
\
En ---------
No. 85579
Exp. 09/30/202
~
Geosyntec t>
consultants
10
'
2022
-'
0 'AS BUILT' ----SCALE IN FEET
RC[ __ _ EXP,----DATE
REVlE'JED BY•
INSPECTOR DATE
l"siiffil CITY OF CARLSBAD 1---+----il--------------+----t--t--+---; l....:LJ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1---4----+--------------+---t--t--+----1
fsREE'isl
LJQ_J
RO IIELD1E Glfll'AIL • SDCO, • IIELDJE PIIIII' EL
RO DIINC PAA ll'l'ER BAaf 511111. • E1t 1111/rY I..OIIAIE"
N'IIAL DA1E INlllM.
ENGINEER f1F '111011( REVISION DESCRIPTION 01IER H'PIIDVAL
DA1E N1IAL
CITY A. I .tO~M.
PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION
STORMWATER TREATMENT DF.slGN
RVWD BY:---
CHKD BY:
RCE 13112
JASON s. GEI.DERT I
DP. l/3J/'IA; DA1E
PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO.
442-3C CD 2021-0024