The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 72-28; PACESETTER HOMES; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 1981-11-131 :,Q:~';:T ", "'e--" ',,,,c'·;.' , .. , ... ,'-'. ~"C7'=c;? '(~,,,", ,,_'=n;;i-;i~~r . 1 1 , ~I -jJ I j jl ]1 11 JI JI ]1 11 JI 11 I ' I KENNETH G. OSBORNE &, ASSOCIATES ~ 1 I -~ t 1 1 )1 1 I· 1 -'1 j 1 1 1 1 ~, . , 1 -4 oJ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Tract No. T2-28 West of Skyline'Ro~~ and North of Park Drive Carlsbad, ~California Client: Pacesetter Homes, Inc. 4540 Campus Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Attention: Mr. Art McCau~ Job No. 3380-1 November 13, 1981 GEOTECHNICAL ENGNEERING • 17141 MURPHY AVENUE • lAYNE, CALIFORNIA 92714 • (714) 540,2001 1 I I t I I 1·1 .1 -I I -I I I I I -I -I I .1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION---------------------------------------1 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION---------------------------1 OTHER INVESTIGATIONS-------------------------------2 LABORATORY TESTING---------------------------------2 SITE DESCRIPTIONS----------------------------------2 VICINITY MAP---------------------------------------plan GEOLOGY Geologic Setting---------~--------------------3 Seismicity------------------------------------3 STRUCTURAL FEATURES Bedding---------------------------------------4 Faults-------------------------------------~--4 Ground Water----------------------------------4 Formations Colluvium--------------------------------5 Santiago Formation-----------------------5 SOIL ENGINEERtNG-----------------------------------5 CONCLUSIONS----------------------------------------6 Geologic--------------------------------------6 ?oil Engineering------------------------------7 RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Bearing----------------------------------7 Settlement-----------------------~------------8 Lateral Soil Pressure-------------------------8 Retaining Wall Design-------------------------8 Expansive Soils-------------------------------9 Concrete Slab Construction--------------------10 . @ -KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 :1 1 :::1 r ~'I I :'1 .1 J 'I 1 ~I :_1 I .1 ~I J I I \ Shrinkage and Subsidence---------------------- Soluble Sulfates------------------------------ Stability of Excavations---------------------- Subdrains and Seepage Control----------------- Special Grading Specifications---------------- General--------------------------------------- REFERENCES APPENDIX Laboratory Testing Procedures----------------- Grading Specifications-General Provisions----- Boring Logs----------------------------------- Direct Shear Summary-------------------------- Typical,Slope Repair for Seepage-------------- Boring Locations------------------------------ @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 10 11 11 11 _ 12 13 A-B C-D E-H I-J K map 1 I I I _I I 1 ",I I I I .,,1 _I :1 _I Job No. 3380-1 Page 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Geotechnical Investigation performed on the property located along the westerly side of Skyline Road and north of Park Drive in the City of Carlsbad, California. This property, which covers an area of approximately 59 acres, has been designated as Tract 72-28. Planned for construction are wood-frame multi-family dwellings to be founded on 160 graded lo~s. It is expected that the structures will be constructed on both continuous and pad footings with slab-on-grade concrete floors. The exact structural loads for the buildings are unknown at this time. However, for the purpose of analysis, it has been assumed that continuous footings will carry 1200 pounds per lineal foot of which 90 percent is dead load and that pad footings will carry 15 kips e~ch of which 50 percent is dead load. If it is found that the actual loads are substantially different from those assumed, this office should be notified for reevaluation. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION :! The field investigation consisted of excavating four exploratory borings to depths ranging from 7 to 20 feet. The borings were drilled using a 16 inch bucket auger drilling rig. Selected specimens of the in situ soils were obtained by using a 1.4 inch I.D. drive tube sampler equipped with brass liner rings. In addition to these relatively undisturbed specimens, bulk samples of the soils were obtained for additional laboratory analysis. These soil samples served as the basis for the laboratory testing and the engineering conclusions contained in this report. The logs of the borings and a plot plan showing approximate boring locations are included with this report. KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 'I I f~1 I I :,1 I _I I 1 I ,I I I "I '.1 I _I Job No. 3380-1 Page 2 The elevations shown on the boring logs were deter- mined by measuring from topographic features shown 9n the topographic map of the property as prepared by Rick Engineering Co. of Carlsbad, California. OTHER INVESTIGATIONS In addition to the subsurface investigation described, a cursory examination of significant geologic features and exposures was made on the si te and adjacent properties as well as a rev~ew of pertinent published and unpublished geotechnical and geologic reports. LABORATORY TESTING The laboratory testing consisted of performing classi- fication, strength, settlement, soluble sulfate, and expansion tests, determining in situ dry density and moisture content, and determining the moisture-density relationship of major soils. Descriptions of test standards used in this investiga- tion, in addition to other tests not used in this investiga- tion, are included in the Appendix of this report. SITE DESCRIPTION The area of investigation is bounded on the north and northwest by existing residences. The south end is about 50 feet -north of Park Drive and 1000 feet north of Agua Hedionds Lagoon. Topographically, it is an irregular spur, or ridge, trending more or less north-south and descending southward toward the lagoon. Surface drainage is along several small valleys and gullies descending from the main ridge to the east, south, and west. The ground slopes at a very low gradient for most of the proposed development, except along the southeast, south, and southwest margins, where s lopes steepen to a ratio of approximately 2: 1, and locally as steep as 1:1. @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 1 I 1 1 ':1 1 1 I -I I .1 1 1 .:.1 :-:1 , . ·1 ·1 Job No. 3380-1 Page 3 The site is vacant except for native shrubs and grasses which cover most of the area,' and these have apparently grown since cessetion of previous agricultural activities. Several unimproved dirt roads also traverse the property. A preliminary grading plan by Rick Engineering, dated 12 May 1981 (at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet), indicates that 160 residential lots are to be constructe·d by cutting and filling operations, both with 2:1 slope ratios. The maximum proposed vertical height of finished slopes will vary from 40 to 50 feet. GEOLOGY Geologic Setting The subject area is a typical portion of western San Diego county. Bedrock is a se~ies of .flat lying sedimen- tary rocks. These are locally overlain by some marine terrace deposits and residual soil. Although crystalline metemorphic and granitic rocks are present beneath the sediments, their depth is too great to be of importance in this project. Seismicity There are no known active faults in or near the subject area. The nearest known active fault, the Elsinore Fault, lies approximately 30 miles to the east. It is believed to be capable of an M7= earthquake which would not seriously affect the Carlsbad area. A fault which may connect the Newport-Inglewood Zone with the Rose Canyon Fault lies off-shore about 10 miles. The activity of' this fault is controversial but its distance and uncertainty rule it out as a major threat to the proposed development. The San Miguel Fault in Baja, @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES -I I 1 I -I I ~ :-: .• i 1 '1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 ., 1 .J .. .,-"~'-.../" '. KENNETH G. OSBORNE " ASSOCIATES SITE LOCAT:ION 1 'I 1 t 1 -I r·1 1 I I , 1 -I _I _,-d 1 j ~. .1 ...:.: ·1 -' I -, J Job No. 3380-1 Page 4 California, is likewise of minor concern. Although it is known to be· active, it is too distant to the Carlsbad area. adversely affect· The pr9bability of liquefaction; and seismic remote. STRUCTURAL FEATURES Bedding earth shaking, ground rupture, sea waves (Tsunami) is extremely Stratification, which is a poor!y developed, sub- planar structure, is generally present in the Santiago Formation. Except in very silty, clayey zones such as shale, it does not form planes of geologic weakness or fissility. Owing to indistinct bedding planes, cross- bedding and poor exposures, the precise attitude of bedding cannot be measured. On the basis of scant data and regional conditions, it is concluded that bedding ranges from essentially flat to 5 or 10 degrees southward. Faults There are few faults in this region and none were seen within, or near, the tract. Just beyond the extreme south- west corner of the proper~y, there is an exposure of fractured sandstone which resembles a fault but no offset of· bedding is apparent and it is unlikely that the zone trends into the subject area. Ground Water None of the borings, (maximum depth 20 feet) , encountered the water table. There are no springs, seeps or excessively moist areas on or near the tract. Therefore, it is concluded that the existing, natural ground water conditions will not present problems during grading or to the completed project. KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES . i 1 'I 1 1 :'1 I ~I .1 ~I I 1 '1 ~.I I I _.1 ~I . 1 ... I Job No. 3380-1 Page 5 Formations Colluvium A few feet of residual soil, derived from weathering of the sandstone, blankets the area except where eroded in gullies along the margins of the tract. This material is predominantly sandy although it is clayey or silty in a few small areas; Such material is moderately expansive. Santiago Formation, Map Symbol Ts This formation, which is equivalent to the Del Mar Formation, is mainly a sandstone although interbeds of sil tstone and shale are common. The sandstone .varies from firm to coarse grained and is moderately well cemented. In some places, it is very well cemented and could not be penetrated in drilling beyond· the upper weathered zone. Individual strata are 1 to 3 feet thick and show considerable lateral variation in grain size, cross bedding and channelling. SOIL ENGINEERING Development of the tract will consist of constructing a series of graded terraces for streets and houses which will involve excavating the sandstone and siltstone bedrock and placing these earth materials. as compacted fill. The earthwork construction, as proposed, is expected to result in slopes which will be fill over cut and building sites with both cut and fill. In addition, major fill slopes will be required as planned in the eroded canyons at the tract boundary. The slopes for the project are planned at ratios of' 2 horizontal to 1 vertical, as previously mentioned in the Site Description portion of this report • @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 I I :1: :: I I ~I I J -, 1 ~, -::1 ..... ~ I I I • -I -J I '"' Job No. 3380-1 Page 6 CONCLUSIONS In our opinion, the site is suitable for development as proposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are included in the project design, specifications, and construction. Geologic 1. South facing cut slopes may expose unsupported south-dipping strata. The dip angle is low, the rocks are not well bedded, and the cut s are not high. However, the possibility of slope instability exists and all cuts should be inspected early in gradi~g so that modifications or stabilization can be made if necessary. 2. Although grouqd water presents existing conditions, the increase of development could create potential no problems under water accompanying seepage-problems. In-situ sandy strata are permeable whereas the clayey and silty interbedded layers are tight and impermeable. Ground water can move down through sandy layers and be forced to move laterally by the clay layers to surface at the face of cut slopes, or be impounded behind compacted fills. In either case, the resulting pore pressure could cause slope instability. Cut slopes should be inspected for potential seepage conditions and if determined to be unsuitable, slopes should be stabilized and subdrains installed. 3. Seismic hazards existing at this site are very low. No faults are present on the site and all known active faults are far distant enough as to have little effect on the site. The probability of ground rupture, earth shaking, liquefaction, Tsunamis, and -other seismic-hazards are absent or minimal. 4. Some of the clay-rich strata in the bedrock are expansive and soils which are clayey are also moderately to highly expansive. @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 I -I , 'I I -:1 I J J J 'I " :: ·1 --' I I , J I -" ·1 • j I Job No. 3380-1 Page 7 5. Slopes cut in sandy portions of bedrock and/or soil possessing little coh.esion are easily eroded. Proper drainage and planting will be necessary to control runoff on slopes on this project. 6. Strongly cemented~ sandstone is exposed in this vicinity and it is possible that grading may encounter such rock which will be difficult to rip and which may generate oversize material. Soil Engineering 1. Subject to inspection by the engineering geologist, cut slopes made at 2:1 slop~ ratios are stable. 2. Properly compacted fill slopes placed at a 2:1 slope ratio are stable. 3. The heavily eroded areas at the tract boundary may present problems with establishing fills. 4. Considerable excavation will be requ:Lred in the' eroded canyons at the tract boundary. Consideration should be given to filling the eroded canyons. 5. Soils derived from excavations range from non- expansive to moderately expansive. 6. Soils oli this project possess favorable ,strength characteristics. 7. A subdrain system may be required within the erode~ canyons at the tract boundaries. 8. Overexcavation of the cut portion of the cut-fill lots will be required to provide uniform foundation bear.ing. 9. There are no landslides on or near the tract. RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Bearing The site the proposed footings for is considered sui table for construction of facilities using both continuous and pad support providing the recommendations presented ,herein are followed • @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES .... , 1 "I 1 , "I I ~I , J , 1 " I ~ ..:..1 I • , J ·1 ---" -, I --' Job No. 3380-1 Page 8 Footings may be designed for an allowable bearing value of 2200 pounds per square foot for footings -placed to a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. This value may be increased to 2600 pounds per square foot for footings placed to a depth of 18 inches. An increase of 1/3 of the above bearing value is permissible for short dura- tion loading. The above bearing values have been based on footings placed into -approved natural ground or tested compacted fill. Settlement Settlement of fills and structures will be negligible provided loose surface soils and fills are properly compacted. Lateral Soil Pressure For purposes of designing the structures for lataral forces, an allowable lateral soil pressure of 345 pounds per square foot per foot may be used for the building design. A coefficient" of friction of 0.4 may be used for concrete placed directly on the natural soils. Retaining: Wall Design Retaining walls may be designed using the following parameters: Bearing -2200 psf Active earth pressure, level backfill -35 psf/ft Sliding coefficient -0.4 Passive earth pressure -345 psf/ft The nonexpansive natural soils are considered adequate for backfill of retaining walls. Retaining walls should be provided with adequate drain- age to prevent hydrostatic pressures. @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 I -I I I I I I -I I I '.' I I .. 1 ·1 .1 _I Job No. 3380-1 Page 9 Expansive Soils The results of tests indicate that the soils existing on the site vary from nonexpansive to moderately expansive. Soils derived from the upper areas of the project were found to possess very low expansion potential. However, the existing fill in the lower area was found to be moderately expansive. Th~ test results are as follows: Sample Maximum Optimum Expansion Location Densit~ Mo;i..sture Index B-1, 0'-1' 123.0 10.2 0 B-1, 3'-4' 118.7 11. 6 0 B-1, 5'-6' 131.0 9.7 1 B-4, 3'-4' 130.1 9.4' 0 lower fill, offsite 126.5 10.6 40 lower fill, offsite 126.5 li. 3 45 Tentative recommendations for minimizing the effects of expansive soil are as follows. A final determination will be made at the completion of grading. Subgrade Treatment 1. Just prior to placing concrete floor slabs, the moisture of the soil should be at least 3 percent above optimum. This moisture content should extend to a depth of 12 i~ches. Subgrade not meeting this requirement should.be flooded. The flooding should be done after the footings are placed. 2. The subgrade for garage floor slabs should conform to the above requirement . Footing Treatment 1. Exterior footings minimum depth of 12 inches. reinforced with one No. 4 should be constructed to a The exterior footings should be bar placed in the top of the footing and one No. 4 bar placed in the bottom. KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 I ~I :II ?:. I I I _I I -I _I .. 1 I I ~I J .1 I Job No. 3380-1 Page 10 2. Interior footings . should. be constructed to a minimum depth of 12 inches. The interior footings should be reinforced with the same reinforcing as exterior footings. 3. Footings should be carried across garage door openings as a grade beam. These sho~ld be reinforced as for exterior footings. Floor Slabs 1. Concrete floor slabs should be at least 4 inches thick nominal. 2. The floor slabs should be reinforced with 6x6-10/10 welded wire mesh or equivalent bar reinforcing. 3. Garage floor slabs should be free floating and cast independent of footing stems. A positive separation should be provided between footing stems and concrete floor slab. Garage floor slabs should be reinforced with 6x6-10/10 welded wire mesh. In lieu of reinforcing, the garage slabs may be saw cut into quarters. Concrete Slab Construction It is recommended that concrete floor slabs in areas to be covered with moisture sensi tive coverings be con- structed over a 6 mil plastic membrane. The plastic membrane should be properly lapped, sealed, and protected with sand. lt is cautioned that concrete slabs in areas to receive ceramic tile or other crack sensitive floor coverings must be designed and constructed to minimize hairline cracking. Shrinkage and Subsidence Based on the in situ densities of the natural soil and assuming an average fill density of 92 percent relative compaction, calculations indicate that shrinkage will range KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 1 -I ~I I I ·:1 1 I 1 -I I I I . 1 ~I ~I ·.1 I Job No. 3380-1 Page 11 from zero to 5 percent between the cut and fill operations. In addition, it is estimated that there will be a 0.2 of a foot of subsidence due to reworking the surface soils. These values are estimates only and should be verified during the grading if earthwork quantities are critical. Soluble Sulfates An investigation of the on-site soils was performed in order to determine the concentration of soluble sulfates. A representative sample was tested and the resu1 ts are as follows: . Sample Location B-4, 3'-4' % Soluble Sulfates 0.015 A soluble sulfate content less than 0.20 percent i~ not con- sidered detrimental to standard concrete mixel? As a re- sult, no special type concrete or construction is con- sidered necessary for soluble sulfates for this project. Stability of Excavations Even though no caving was experienced during the sub- surface exploration, it can be expected that instability of utility trenches will be experienced and, as a consequence, shoring or sloping excavations will be required to protect worke.rs. The contractor should refer to the State of California, Division of Industrial Safety for minimum safety.standards • Subdrains and Seepage Control It is .expected that subdrains may be required within the canyon fill area and possibly for stabilizing cut slopes which are determined to be unstable because of seepage potential. The need for either drain will be deter- mined at the time of construction. KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 I I .. 1 I -I I '.1 I I I :1 I . 1 Job No. 3380-1 For tentative design purposes, the following para- meters may be assumed. Drain pipe -4" and 6" schedule 40 PVC perforated pipe are approved equal. Filter material -Class II permeable material as per Caltrans Standard Specs., 1978. Quantity of filter material - 9 cubic feet per foot for main subdrain - 4 cubic feet per foot for minor lines A typical slope repair for seepage is shown in the Appendix of this report. Special Grading Specifications The following special grading specifications are recommended for grading of this project in. addit.ion to the general grading specifications shown in the Appendix of this report: 1. In fill areas, all residual soils shall be removed to bedrock or approved soils. 2. In areas of shallow cut, all expo~ed residual soils shall be removed to bedrock or approved soil. 3. Keyways shall be cut at the toe of all fill slopes. The keyway shall extend through all residJal soils into bedrock or approved soil. The depth of keyways shall be determined at the time of grading. 4. All loose soil in the eroded canyons shall be removed and recompacted. 5. As fills are placed in areas flatter than 5: 1, level benches shall be excavated into bedrock or approved soil. 6. Removal of alluvial soil from gulley bottoms shall be to such a depth adequate to remove loose or dry soil. It is estimated that this removal will average 3 feet but extend up to depths of 8 feet in places . @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 1 I I· :: 1 1- :;1 .' I _I 1 -I -I .J 1 I _I _I ,.1 I Job No. 3380-1 Page 13 7. The cut portions of cut-fill lots shall be excavated to a depth adequate to provide a minimum of 36 inches of filIon the lot. 8. All fill shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density. 9. Slopes shall be compacted to the slope surface. 10. All fill shall be compacted to a minimum of 2 percent or more above optimum. 11. All keyways, benches, and cut slopes shall be subject to inspection by the engineering geologist and/or the soil engineer. General It has been assumed, and it is expected, that the soil conditions between the borings are similar to that encountered in the borings. However, no warranty of such.is implied in this report. The recommendations contained in this report are based on the results of field investigation and laboratory testing and represent our best engineering judgment. If soil conditions encountered during the grading, or at a.ny other time, differ substantially from those described in this report, this office should be notified imrnedi:ately so that appropriate recommendations can be made • . This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative·to insure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Project Architect @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES 1 '1 1 ) ~I I '::1 ,. '1 -I I 1 ~'I --I I I ..I -I ,I ~I Job No. 3380-1 Page 14 and Engineer and are incorporated into the plans and speci- fications and that necessary steps ar.e taken to see that interested persons have this information and that the Con- tractors and Subcontractors carry out such recommendations. KGO:dhd CEH:dhd RHM:dhd Respectfully submitted, KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES Kenneth G.' Osborne R.C.E. 14340 ,//~?~ l C'~l E. Hollon C.E.G. 397 I?~( .//J lu ~~ Richard H. Merriam C.E.G. 850 Viki G. McFadden Staff Geologist @ KENNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCIATES i . I -. I I . I I I -I I I I -I I I -I , ~ I I REFERENCES 1. Jones, B.F., 1954, Geology of the San Luis Rey Quadrangle, unpublished master thesis, Unversity of Southern California. 2. Kennedy, Michael P. and Peterson, Gary L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Bull. 200. 3. Phillips, Irvin, 1939, Geology of the Oceanside Quadrangle, unpublished masters thesis, University of, California, Berkeley. 4. Weber, F.H., Jr., 1963, Geology and Mineral Resources of San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology County, Report 3, 309 p. '5. Preliminary Soil and Geology Investigation for ,the proposed Laguna Riviera -29 acres, C~rlsbad, California. Project No. 51101W-SI01. 1 I -I I I I I I -I APPENDIX I -I -I ! I I I -I ~I I I -. 1 ·1 1 :1 'I I ;1 1 . 1 I 1 I .1 I 1 -I ~I -I I LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES SHEAR STRENGTH The shear strength of the soil is determined by per- forming direct shear tests and unconfined compression tests. The direct shear tests are performed on both undisturbed specimens and on samples remolded to various densities which reflect anticipated conditions. The s.amples are ~i ther tested at in situ moisture or are satura-ted to simulate the worst . field condition and sheared at a constant rate of 0.1 inch per minute. The relationship between normal stress and shear str~ss is shown on the attached Direct Shear Summary .• The unconfined shear strength of selected undisturbed specimens is determined in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-2166. The results of these tests are shown on the Boring Logs • EXPANSION Tests for volume change with moisture are performed on compacted soil in accordance with Uniform Building Code Test Method 29-2. SETTLEMENT The settlement characteristics of the in situ soil are determined by performing standard consolidation tests on undisturbed or remolded specimens. The samples are tested in the original sample 'liner ring and the increment loads for 'consolidation are applied for periods of 24 hours by means 'of a single counterbalanced lever system. The pressure settle- ment curves are shown on the attached -plates. MOISTURE DENSITY The moisture-density relationship of the major soil is determined in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-1557. This test may be modified to use three layers in lieu of five. The test results are shown on the Boring Logs. 7/78 Page A ) I I hi I I I I I -I ·1 I I I -.1 -I I I CLASSIFICATION The following test methods are used to aid in the classification of soils in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification system: 1. A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-422 2. A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-423 3. A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-424 The results of grain size tests are shown on the Grading Analysis sheets. The results of consistency tests are shown on the Boring Logs. RESISTANCE "R" VALUE The resistance "R" Value of soils to support pavement is determined by means of California Test Mehod No. 30l-G. SAN~ EQUIVALENT The sand equivalent of granular soils and fine aggregates is determined in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-2419. SOLUBLE SULFATE CONTENT The concentration of soluble sulfates in the soils is determined by A.S.T.M. Test Method 0-516, Method A. 7/78 Page B 1 1 -) t I I ~~I . - 1 ] I 1 ~I ,I -I -I ·1 RESPONSIBILITY GRADING SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The Soil Engineer and Engineering Geologist are the Owner's or Builder's representative on the project. For the purpose of these specifications, observation and inspection by the Soil Engineer includes the inspection performed by any person or persons employed by, and responsible to, the licensed Civil ~ngineer signing the soil report. 2. All clearing, site preparation,. or earthwork per- formed on this project shall be conducted by the Contractor under the observation of a qualified Soil Engineer • 3. It is the Contractor's responsibility to conform to the Grading Specifications and the applicable grading ordinances. CLEARING 1. The site shall be cleared of all vegetable growth including but not limited to trees, stumps, logs, trash, heavy weed growth, and organic deposits. 2. All houses, barns,' or other buildings shall be re- moved from the site. 3. Unless otherwise approved, the foundation and slabs left from the demolition of structures shall be remov~d from the site. Included with the removal of foundations and slabs shall be the removal of basements, cellars, cisterns, septic tanks, paving, curbs, pipes or other deleterious materials. No cavity left from demolition shall be backfilled unless inspected by the Soil Engineer. 4. Unless otherwise specified, all cleared materials shall be removed from the site. SITE PREPARATION 1. Loose soils within areas of fill shall be processed by either excavating and stockpiling the loose soil or by scarifying, adjusting the soil moisture content to the specified amount, and compacting to the recommended relative compaction. 7/78 Page C 1 I -I :;a ::. I I ~'I "I J I 1 .,1 ~I I I 1 J I 2. The soils within areas of fill shall be processed to a depth adequate to insure the removal of major tree roots and pipe lines and the compaction of cavities left from tree removal. 3. Excavations for the removal of subsurface structures shall be cleared of loose soil and filled with compacted soil. -The backfill of such excavations shall be compacted to the recommended relative compaction. 4. Cesspools shall be pumped out and backfilled with clean sand or pea gravel. The sand backfill which shall be approved prior to use, and may be flooded and jetted for ob- taining compaction. Any unsuitable backfill of cesspools shall be removed. The preparatio~ of cesspools shall be observed by the Soil Engineer. 5. Abandonment of oil wells shall be in accordance with California' State Law. The ba,ckfill of cavities resulting from the abandonment of oil wells shall be compacted in thin lifts under continuous inspection of the Soil Engineer. 6. Unless otherwise specified, the tops of any abandoned subsurface structure shall be removed to a depth o;f 5 feet below the finished grade in building areas and.to a depth of 10 feet below finished grade in all other areas'. FILL PLACEMENT 1. Unless otherwise approved, no cobbles over 12 inches in diameter shall be acpepted in any fill. 2. All on-site and imported soils to be used for an engineered fill' shall be subject to the approval of the Soil Engineer. 3. The placement of fill shall conform to the Special Grading Provisions. 7/78 Page D -, ~I I SURFACE ELEVATION 236 "1 ,. :. :' I I '~:I I J I 1 :1 '~I I I J J I I 107 104 121 118 118 106 . >< · foo"; H~ v.: · :z ::s w u 0-"'" • >tift t:z:..c 0.-4 .'. 123 87 1.7 119 88 2.4 131 92 8.9 - 9.2 1.1 0.0 >< foo · :z ~,.; :z -0 CI)~ ~8 H :z • ra; foI ~ ::s ME-< ex: ~ o U foIU ::> -..... <.c foI t;z • · ~~ CIl >< 1ft M Z ~;9 ~o 0 &al U J: 0.. · . · .. · .. · .. · . 2:"" · .' · .' · . · . 4-· . · . · . · .. · ... · . 6-o .' • · ., . · . · . · .. · 8-· .. • •• I · .. · . · .. · . 10 -. ' . · .. '. . · . · . · . · 12 -• , I • · " · .. · . · .. 14 -. · . · . · ... ' ... · . · 16 -· . . ' . · ... I : •• 18 -· ', .. , • I • · ... · . · .. 20 -· .. · ... · . 22 - - - - - EE ~~ .... 0 E! ~~ Oz .... ~CIl SAND, fine, silty, dry, rusty brown - slightly moist - moist, mottled with gray, dense, trace of clay ~ SM trace of small clay lenses "'- very hard, dark rusty brown -little clay,'moist, light tan, fine, slightly micaceous - rusty streaks Bottom of Boring No Ground Water No Caving z KENNETH C. OSBOR~E 6-ASSOCL .... TES ~o MM Of4 CI)~ BORING LOG 0 .... ~ .. TEST HOL~ NO. B-1 MM LCIl .... CIl ~~ ~OB NO.~ DAT~ .1 3380 /21/81 SHEET 1 OF 1 u Page E .01 I 'J t I 1 ~I 'I _I 1 -I 1 ,I 1 1 .. I ~I ,.1 1 SURFACE ELEVATION 183 104 4.3 97 4.6 111 lO.O 107 6.2 97 8.1 103 1.3 '0, ,0, I' ::.:' :. '0'.' • .... ' " 2 -:':'.::, SP · . '. '. , '0 '0' '0 ...... 4 -::::::: ...... '0' ," •• '0 '0 %~. 6 -"~'"'' SC .. :1 8 -' I SM ., , .... 10 -:'.: .. : .' I" , , , . , .. ' 12 -::::: .' ' '. ,'" ,. 10 14 -.... f ••• , .. 'I' II · .' . 16 _ .... II •• · ... sw SAND, Tihe, l~ttle s~lt, dry, r-rusty brown moist, fine to coarse sand with small clay lenses SAND, very clayey, fine/medium, moist., rusty brown with black streaKs,. trC;ice of r:oots· .. SAND, fine to medium, silty., trace of clay, moist, dark brown, slightly micaceous I- fine sand, no clay P- ~ine/medium sand, hard fine/coarse, littl~ clay SAND, clayey, rus~y brown, moist, fine/coaise 20 'o~ ••••• ': SM SAND, s~lty, .t~ne; mo~st, wh~te oj l trace of m~caceous _____ ~ 22 - - - - - Bottom of Boring No Ground Water No Caving ~ ~ KENNETH G. OSBORXE & ASSOCIATES t-C ... ~~~------------------~ ~ ~ U BORING LOG 5 i ~ 5 '1'!ST HOL! NO. ... ~ ~CI.I ~ CI.I ; ~I-J!-OB-NO-.-tl-A-T~--"--------""" -..... :> 0 3380 ~/21/81 SHEET 1 OF 1 B-2 Page ·F 1 :1 -I 11 ~~. 'I 1 :::1 1 _I 1 -I "I ·1 1 1 ~I J :1 .:·1 SURFACE ELEVATION 110 11 0 • ~ 116 9 . ~ 118 -7.S -- >->-· ~ · ~.6J ~.6J Z ,. t-4~ CI)~ ~g CI) · z • ~ z =' ~::1 ~f-4 fill) C 0 f-4U ::> c,,", "-.c.c 'f-4 • • • ~~ en >-><Wl ~o ~ ~.Q ~:9 ~ C~ U 136 2- 4- 6- 8 - - o· - - - - - - - - - Z 0 t-4 EE f-4 ~ t Z II)~ Cz z ~ ~ ~ ~ SAND, claley , f~neTmed~um,dra' SC I-brown, race of gravels an salts slightly moist -· " silty, fine, · .. SAND, very moist, light yellowt4rt with black · . · . " . and brown clay streaks · " · . SM -· . · · · . · . · . · . · . dense · . · . · . · . '.0 · " - Bottom of Boring No Ground Water No Caving • ~~ . UNNETH G. OSBORNE & ASSOCL.\TES MM ~5 ~~ BORING LOG ~I QM ~ .. 'rEST HOL! NO. B-3 MM .. en ~CI) ... en §~ JOB NO)"DAT' 3380... /21 81 SHEET 1 OF 1 u Page G 'I 1 }I 1 _I -I -I .1 -I I I J :1 .. 1 __ I SURFACE ELEVATION 101 124 126 130 113 >0. ca:.o Q- 81 2.2 97 8.0 S.i 176 ... . , SAND, s~lty, f~ne, dry, brown SM r- 2 -.... slightly moist, trace of roots . . 4-~ CL CLAY, sandy, moist, rusty- brown, dense, fine/medium :. SAND, fine/coarse, silty,light 6-SM yellowish tan, moist, hard 1-·.L·]...·y •• I----4_b=..r=-o:;;..;wn and black clays t re a k s 8- - - - - - - - - - - - Bottom of Boring Refusal -too hard No Ground Water No Caving ..J ~ n:NSETH G. OSBOIL~E &: ASSOCL\TES ........ ~~~------------------------~ ~ ~ u BORING LOG B-4 ~ i ~;;: TEST HOL! NO. ~~ ;;:~ I en t-4 CIlI-----.----..------------t ~ ~ ~f!8~O ·~rtf'81 SHEET 1 OF 1 Page H D I a ! C T S H B 'A a SUM M A a J 2000 - 1600 L.J .. ~ 1/ './. V 1200 /' ~ ~~ - 800 -/ ". / / :/ ./ ~ .... ./ V .J V 400 V V ~ o o 400 800 1200 1600 2000 NORMAL LOAD, P.S.!'. JOB NUMBER .J'380-/ BORING NUMBER / DEPTH ,,' MOISTURE ..s;,b"~/ UNDISTURBED -e- REMOLDED --0-, 90\ MAXIMUM DENSITY Page I 1 ·1 1 I I I • .. • III ··1 • • .. I § ~ J ~ -< ~ = CIl I 1 'I ···1 I I .. 1 J I I DIRECT SHIAIt SUMMARY 4-000 ./ ./ ~ ~ V - V 3%.00 .. 2.4-00 IGOO 800 o 0 800 JOB NUMBER 3380-1 BORING NUMBER ~/ __ DEPTH S MOISTURE ·.r"IV'A/~J UNDISTURBED -e- ..II './ V ......... "" V I~OO NORMAL LOAD, P.S.F. REMOLDED ------o---@ 90\ MAXIMUM DENSITY 03200 4000 Page J . " ~ ~.lr-~" . ~ -~ .'h·~ .. ~~).; C.T-72-22 .", 3 .... L~G!C~HP co~pnRATlO~ ... -.... ---.. ~~~-... -.-........ -... . . . . . C"MPUTE~ ~EqV!CES VER. 2.0 CEO!' ,. TOm. ,,-,. c&.LSB'D/~T L;~P: ;~~~iQ 'G4i'i? J!' ""f .. X'I11i 0/ MiDI '{'IH~E~ "F JIJI.JCTTO"JS~ •• ·.:.: ••••• ~.: 2b N'fMI'IEP. r'JF L!"'ES: ••• :.; .... :.~ •••••• 3~ ~ REICHENBER~ER I\~o . ",.JI;o; " INPUT FLnw FACTOR.~ •• · ••• ;.. 1.00000' GP~' OUTPUT FLOw F.CTOR.......... 1.00000 GPM . ..J N'f'1tlEQ 'IF L'lOI'5: ••• :.: ..... ~ ••••••• 10 ITE~'TI1N L!MTT •• : ••• ;.:.:.: ••• ; 100 CYCLES NUMaER OF B.LANCED LOOPS........ 10 ACTUAL NUMBER OF ITERATIONS..... 8 CYCLES' L1J PS T~ ~E e6L~~CEO ~ITHYN.... 5.000 GPM L~aps ACTUALLY BALANCED WITHN.,. 3.115 GPM S'IRFHE ELEV. OF JU'JCTIo:IN ZERO 330.00 FEET PR~SSURE AT JUNCTION ZERO ••••••• .00 PSI PIP E LIN E S U M·M A R Y e ***.**************.******** •••• ** P!H BunSTER UN!! LEl.JGTH ·OU.I~ETER H-io/ HE.O '10.-HET INCHES COEFF FEET __ a. ---.-. ..-._ ... _.---. ------. 1 '101'). 1 S :00 140. .00 2 q5~. \b~00 lao. .00 '! aoo. 1 ,,; 0 (') 1£10. .00 a 11'15'1. 12.-00 lao. .00 '5 q50~ . 8.00' lao. .00 " it 51). 16.-00 lao. .00 ., 901'1. t2~00 . '1. £10. .00 P-11\5('). 8.00 lao. ,00 9 noo. .8.00 . 1 a O. .00 10 700 •. 10.00 140. ,00 11 1250. 8.-00 laO. .·00 tt' II 0 0·. 8:0n 1 ao •. .00 n It\5~. 10~00 140. .00 .a 551'1. 8.00 140. .00 ~ . '5 95/'). 6:00 lao. .00 H 151). 8."00 ll1.~·. .00 11 11'10'0. 8.00 '14.0, ' ..• 00 1" ~50. 8.00' ·laO. .00 19 90'(') • 8 ;.0.0. 140. .00 21\ ~OO. 8.01) lao. .O~ 21 170'0. 8.-00 14.9. '.00 22 601). 8.00 lao. .0.0 23 : 650. .8.00 1:40. " .00 211 200. 8.00 140 .. .00 25 1S~. 8.00 lao. .00 "\. HEAD FLOW LOSS HEAD 1.0SS GPM FEEl' .FT/l00FT _._--__ a. .._------a705.000 4.29 .53580 4705,000 9.03 .• 950,86 ~1~6.b16· 1.78 .a.4519 1060'.639 2.58 .24526 -278,38'1 -1.'11 ".11.1816 -2308.38'1 '·2.93 ·.25468 112~.977 2.47. .27395 561.017 !:i. 71 .54388 ""39.l1l6 -5.54 -.34601 . 5511.96'0' 1.26 • t 7982 534.960 6.23 .• '49807 -63.033 -,04 -.009'53 ,"528. ~56' "1.73 -.164.H .572.993 3.11 .S655~ 562.993 21.11. 2.22219 . -1134.931 -.51 ·.33961 -1102 •. 007 -18.96 -1.89645 -350,523 "1.94' .. -.2278a· '·1.115.523· '!I2.81 ".31210 -836.'Ie'l -3,42 .-1.13880 -30c,807 -3.03 ~.17807 972.9211 . 9.04 1.50607· ~527.076 .3.15 •• a8a!l8 -552.076 "1.06 -.52795 -345.871 -.33 -.22228 UNl"T VELOCITY COST ·FT/SEC SIFT ...... --.. -... -,..., 5 •. 93 18.00 7.51 16.00 4.58' 14.00 3.01 12,00 1.18 8.00 3.&8 16.00 3019 12.00 .. 3.58 8.00 2.80 8.00 2.'27 .10;00 .3. a 1 ·8.00 .40 8.00 2.16 10,00 3.b6 . 8.00 b. 39' . 6,00 2.78 8,00 7.03 8.00 2~24 8.00 ;;.65 8.00 5.3'1. 8.00 . 1'.96 8.0'0 6,21. 8,00 3.36 . 8.00 3.52 8.00 2.21. 8.00 EST. CaST'·. OOLI.ARS R E " ARK S -------~. ~.--.. -~--.-. 1'1400. 1520'0. 5600. 12600 •. 7600. 1840Q. 108QO. 8400. 12800. 7000 •. 10000. :S200 •. 10500, 4'100. S700 .• 1200, 80\OQ. 6800, 7200. 240oltE' .' . ~. lj600. . ". 4800 . CEIVEn. 5200. 1600. • . •• ., t f •. ' !-\. . 1200,· Ard~2 7 1973 \. r--_" .. cr?2-J-B '-'CITY OF CARLSBAD Engineering Department. J '. .. " L~GYCOMP tO~POR.TtO~ ~ . •.••...•...... -_ .......... ---...... . ~~MPUTE~ SE~vtCES .VER. C!.O . CEO! T~AeT 72-~a CARLS~AO ALT LOOP FF AT 1 81N REICHENBERGER e-2a~'73 PIP E I. I N E SUM 11 A R Y *************************.**.**** PTP~ eOOSTER HEAD UNIT LlN~ LENGTH OUMETER H-W HEAD FLOw LOSS HEAD LOSS VELOCITY COST EST. COST ~O: HET INCHES eOEFF FEET GPM FEET FT 1100FT FT/SEC $/FT OOLI,.ARS R'f H ARK S .. --. -._-. .. --..... _._.-.... ----.-.-. _.-. .----.. _. ---.--.--.--... -_ ... c ____ . .... -.. -...... 2" 70/). . 6.00. 140. .00 -20.8.553 "2,lla -.35392 2.37 b.OO 4200. e 27 45~. 8:00. 14 0. .00 -333,538 -,94 -.20783 2013 8.00 lbOC~ 2" ?2/). 8.0!! 140.. .00 ..642.070 -1.54 -.69813 4.10 8.00 1760.. 2Q ~GI'\. 6.00. 140. .00 "162.324 . "1.34 -.22262 1.84 b.GO 3600.. 30 1200. 6:00 140.. .00. -Q9,985 -1.09 ... 0.90.83 1.·13 b.OO 7200.. 3' 1201). 8.' 00 140. .0.0. -2160199 "1.12 -.0.9319 1.38 8.0.0 9600.. 32 ~OO. 8~OG 140~ .00. -231.199 -.95 -.10551 ;; 1.48 8,0.0 7200, 3'3 11 on. 6.00. 140. .00. 62.339 .42 .03790 • 71 6.0.0 6600 • 34 951). 8.01) 140. .00. -298,536. ·1.61 ·.169.so. 1.91 8.0.0 760.0., 3'5 3 /J 06. 10,'00. 1'50, .00 ·579.678 "!7 .60. . -.22355 2.37 10. .. GO 3110.00', 3b ll!on. 12.00 140. .00. -579.678 -~96 -,0.8021 1.64 12.0.0 14400. Ie J. " ,. .. « . L"GT~OMJ:I CO~.PORATtDN· .-.-.. --.. --------.---.••...•.... --~ . C~~PUTE~ ~ER~TCES V'-R.· 2.0 CEOS . TqACT 72.~8 C1RLS8A~ ALT LOOP FF AT 1 elN REICHENSe:-RGER . ·e .. 2Z-.73 . J U NeT ION SUM MAR Y ********************.** •• **.*** J'I~CTtO~ !URF1C~ CONNECTING BACK JUNCUON OUTFLOW HEAD PRE5S~ H.G.L. t.Ju u 8FR ELEV. LINE NUMFlI::R NUMBER GPI'I FT. ..,51 ELEV .• .. "' ..... ... ----........ -... .----._._--.. . ........ .-.-... -_.--. -----.. 0 3;0.011 .00 .0 330.00 1 3110.00 t a .000 ,?5,69 1-1 • .1 325.b9 2' 215.00 2 1 200.000 101.60 44.0 31b.bO -3 2t2.00 3 2 10.000 102.82 44.6 ,H~.82 " 175.00 4 3 320.000 137.22 59.5 312.22 5 1'10,00 ~ 4 2030.000 133.63 57,9 313.63 6 2~0~OO 7. 3 10,000 92.36 40.0 312,36 7 111\5~OCl 8 6 165,000 121 .• 63 ·!:l2.7 30b.63 e ?55.'OO 10 6 20.000 56.13 24.3 311.13 9 2f!0~OO 11 8 25.000 84.88 3b.8 .304.88 10 200~OO 12 9 50,000 104.91 .45.5 304',91 t 1 2?5:00 14--9 10.000 76.18 33.3 .s01.18 12 l QO:OO 15 11 25.000 90.66 39.3 280 .b6 . 13 177.00 16 lZ 25.000 104.16 45.1 281.16 ,4· 125.00 17 13 85.0'00 175.07 '75.9 300.07 :, 15 1 '55 .•. 0 0 1e 14 65.000 167,,01 72.4 302,01 ,6 11 ° ~OO 2() 14 50.000 193.417 83. e ' 303.47' 17 200.00 '22 1-2 1500.000 :71.64 31.0 271.64 ,e 150.00 . 23 17 25.000 12".75 54.1 .' 274.75 19 157.00 24 18 10.000 118.81 5'1.5 275.81 i'0 un.on 25 19 25.000 106.15 46.0 27&.15 . 21 2no.oo 26 20 ' 25.000 78.65 3401 278.65 22 170.00 21 21 10.000 109.56 If7.5 279.!:l& <'3 160"00 ' 2«» 20 .000 117-.(18 50.9 277 .'Ie ?4 1'tl~00 3t, 19 15.000 163.e9 11.0' 27b.89 _ ~5 11J2~00 32 ?4 5.000 135.8b 58.9 277 .8'6 . 2'6 1'50.00 35 16 .000 161.10, . b9.8, ',511.10 " . ,,·.· ..... •·• .. 1·.·· '. .. -........ T~TAL OUT'LOW •••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••• ~ •. 4105.000 GPM ----------.. --~~--------~----.------ " , .' .... ~~GrC"M~ eO~p~RATto~ ..... __ .••..•.•. _ ..................• C~~PU1E~ ~EQVICES VER. 2.0 CEO! T~AeT 72-28 CARLS~AO ALT LOOP, FF AT 1 SIN R.EICHENBERGER 8-22-73 ,', PIP E L! ~ EC a 5 T 5 U M MAR·V **********.*.***************.*.* •• ***& •• Ol""'ETER TOTAL LE~GTH E5T. COST 1FT TOTAL COST Hd"';I"S FEET DOLLAR'S DOLLARS .. ---.. -.. ---_._ .... .. -.-.-.-----.. --.. ---" . &\Ofl iJ'5sn. 6.00 27300.00 e8~on 161\20. 8.00 121l160.00 o.on 5150. 10.00 51500.00 '2.011 3150, 12,00 37800.00 tll.OO aoo. 111.00 5000.00 \0 ~ 00 2100. 16.00 33000.00 t8.00 eoo. 18.00 1a,,00.00 •••..••..... ----., ... _ . T"'T"L 1C170., 298360.00 AVG: e08T·PE~ FOOT OF T~E TOTAl. SVSTEM S 9.27 e ( , ", ... . -...----__ -'-. . '. ·C-7-.:· ALTERNATE ~?2-2g L~GrC~MP eoqp'R~T!Oij ..... --.-..... -.~ .. -....... -....... . C,~p~TEq ~EqVTC~S V~R. 2.0' CEoe .TOArT 7?·?B CARLS~AO ~o ALT LOOR FF AT 2 UN· ~'I"I:aEO ~F JIJN~TTOI.jS .. ·.:.~.:.: ... ~·: •• 25' N 1"l~EC1 1F L·YN~S:.:.:.:.:.:.: •• ·.: ••. 34 NJ"I~~O 1F L'OPS:.~.:.;.:.;.: ••••• ~ 9 IT E C1 AT I 1"1 LT H!T : • : • ~ • : • : ••• ~ • • •• . toO' C YCL'E S LiDOS T~ qE BAL4NCEO wITHIN~ ••• 5.0'00 . GPM S'IRFU'E ELEV. OF .JU"ICTIrlN ZERO 330.0'0 FEET PIP E REICHENBERGER 08-22-73 INPUT FL.OW FACTOR.......... 1.0'0000' 'GPM OUTPUT FL.Ow FACTOR......... 1.00000 GPM NUMBER OF BALANCED ~OOps........ 9 ACTUA~ NUMB~R OF IT~RATIONS..... 17 CYCL.ES LOOPS ACTUA~LY BA~ANCED WITHN... 4.510 GPM PRESSURE AT JUNCTION ZERO •••••• i ,00 PSI LIN E SUM MAR Y e •••••••••••••• * •• **.****** •••• *** P!Pf: UNIT L!NF. LE'JGTH '10: . HET DUJo1ETER H-W tNCHES COEFF ROOSTER HEAl' FEET FLOW GPM HEAD L.OSS FEET. HEAD LOSS FT/.l00FT VELOCITY . FTlSEe COST' EST. COST .-.-.--_ .. " ~ ~ 1I 5 6 ., e 9 II') 11 U! 13 All1. • 1-; 1~ 1'1 1~ 19 2n 21 2~ 2~ 211 25 ·Oll. .051'1. UOI). 1"50. Q.50. 1'S/). Qoo .• 11'15 11 • IhOO. 70". 1~51'). 1I00. 11\51'). ssn. qSI). tS!). lllon. ·RSD. CIon. 10 o. "-- 170n. bOO. "sn. '-011. 150. .--.. _.. .--... '.8.' 0 n 16.-00 1U:OD .. 12:00 8:00' lb.On. 1'2:00 8.'00 8.00 10;00 8~OD 8~00 to :00 8~OO 6.on ·8 ;00 '8.00. . 8 ;00 8.0,0 8. on. 8.-on . 8.00 8:00 .8.00 8 ~·Q.o .' lUO. 111 0. 140. 11l0. lUO. 1110. 140 •. lUO. 140. 11£0. l UO. 11£0. 140. 140. 140. 140. 140 •. 11i0 ~. 14'0. 1 'tI0 •. 1#0. 140·. 140. 140. 140. . .. _--. .00 .00' ,DO .00 .00 . .00 .00 .00 .on .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 . .' 00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 '.,60 ,00 . ,00 . ,00 -_.-. lI70S.000 4705~OOO 228C!.45b 801.417 -P~2·. 544 -2222'.544 . 14.71.039' 7U7',3A9 -b73.961 1U.6l19 695.649 47.71"1 -629,838 b20.872 .' 610.(l,72 26~0'50 -1051.1.128 ~5b2,o15 -027.615 ·S7b.~U -626i !)13 559.822 559.822 531.1.822 479.352 .. .... . 4.29 9.03 1.91 1.55 -.71 -2.73 4.0ll 9.7t -\2.22 2~ 00 . 10.07 .02 -2.39 3.bl· 24.~S. .00 -17.47 -4,65 . 000,02 ';'1.72 '--.. "11.34 .3.25 3.S;! . 1.'00 ibl .. .. -.-... .53580 .95086 .41791 .t'lb04 -,07521 -,2.H44 .'1'1920 .• 924b2 -.76361 .28635 .80559 .00571 -.22726 .6~607 2,5811j9 .00186 -1.74664 -'.54675 -.66932 -.51200 -,66714 .54t74 .S'I174 .49764. .40655 . .. _----. 5.93 7,51 4.76 2.27 1.23 3,55 4.17 ·4.71 4.30 2.92 4.1£3 .30 2,57 3.96 b.q~ .. .17. .b, 73. 3.59 , 4".0'1 3.b& . 4.00 3,57 3.57 3.41 3.06 SIFT DOLLARS .-.-...... --...... 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 8.00 16.0'0 12.00 8.00' 8.(10 10,00 8.00 8.00 10.00 '8.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8,00 '.8.00 8.00 '. 8.00 1~~00. 15200. 5600. 12600. 7000. 18400 • 10800. 81100. lc800. 7000. lOOOC. 3200. 10500. 4400 • 5700'. 1200.· 8000 • b800. 7200. 2400. 13600. 4800. 5200. 1600. 1200. ;$1' f ~ I(-.. ' I" .1 '.' . vS'E" ".' ." ~ . '\" R E H A R K·8 . ... --.. _-...... . '. RECEIVED . . . AU$2 7 1~7J CffY OF. CARLSBAD' Engineering Oepartiner4 ·. L~GtCO~P CO~P~RAT!O~ ... ----..... -.. -~ .. -.. ~ .....•...•..• C"MPUTE~ ~E~V!CES· : VER. 2.0 CEOS T~AeT n·?8 CHlLSI3AO '-10 AL T LoaR FF U··2 81N ~EICHENBERG~R· 08-2Z-71 PIP ELI N E S U H H ~ R V •••••• *******~****.********.***** PtP~ ROOSTER HHO UNIT L.TNF LE~GTH DIAMETER H-W HEAD FLOW L.nss HEAO LOSS VEL.OCITY COST EST. COST '-10. FEET INCHF.S COEFF HET GPM FEET FT/l00FT FT/SEC SIFT DOLLARS R E 11 A R'K S .. ----. . --.-.. -..... ... -----_ .... -.-.' . .. ---_ .... ------... . ----._-----. ..--_ ........ 2~ 70n. b;OO 140. .00 -157.642 -1.48 ".21088 1.79 b,OO 4200. e 27 USO. 8;00 140. ,00 -&17 .670 -2.92 ",64983 3.94 8.00 3600, 211 "2'1. 8:M 140. .00 ·t055 .• 178 -3~ts5 -1.7500& &.74 8.00 1700. 2~ 1,00. b,OO 1110. .00 611.9Q4 15.56 2.59318 6 ~9·4 b,OO .s~oo. 311 1~01). b.OO 1 ao ,. ,00 • 435.028 -16,S5 -1.3H14 4.94 b.OO 7200 • 3\ POll. 8.00 140. .00 45.1.170 .0& .00521 .29 8.00 9bOO. n ~OO. 8;01) 1 "0.' .00 30.1.170 .02 .00248 .19 8.00 7200. :n it O/). 6.00 1"0. .00. . ,,·52.978 . 16.35 1.'18625 5.14 6.00 b600. 3u Q50. 8~OO 1"0. .00 -1.127.508 -3.13 ".32896 2.73 8.00 7600 •. /) e .Z/4· / } .' " ' . " • L'GtcnM~ CORP~R.TtO~ , •...•...................••.•..•••••• ' C'~P~~Eq SEqVtCES ' V!:R, 2,'0 ,CEO! t~ACT 7~~?'8 CARLSBAO ~o ALT LOOR Ff AT ~ 8IN REICIo4E~BERGER 08 .. 22-73 ". : 'J U N C T ION 5 U 11 H A R Y .* •• *.*.***.*.***************** J'JNe TY ~N SUQFACE CON"IECTING BACK JUNCTION OUTFLOW HEAD PRESSURE H,G,L, 'hJ~a"R EL!::v. LI~E NUMRER NUM!'ER GPM FT, PSI ELEV, ---_.-.. _ ... -.. -_._._._ .... -.--'!I ........... ..-.. -.--.... . .. _.-... eI) ____ .. 0 3,0.00 ,00 "0 330,00 1 31)0,01'! t 0 ,000 25,69 11,,1 325,09 2 215,00 ii' 1 200,000 101.60 4~.0 310,00 3 2\2,00 3 2 10,(100 102,69 44,S .H 1.1 ,09 e " 175,01'! 4 3 320,000 136.13 59,9 313.13 5 11\0.'00 5 4 2030,00(1 133,85 5~.0 jU.6S 6 2~0.on '1 3 10,000 90.66 31'1,3 .510.66 7 1~5,00 ~ 0 165,000 11 5.93 5'0,2-300,93 8 2'5S,Orl 10 b 20.000 ,53,68 23,3 308,68 9 2~0,'OO 11 8 25,000 78,59 3'1.1 2'H! ,59 to ,2/10,01) 1 ~' 9 50.000 98.50 42,7 298,56 11 ,2?~,oO 14 9 10. 000, 69,99 :SO,3 291.1',99 t2 lQO.-OO 15 11 25 .. 000 80.1.13 31.1,9 270.43 13' 177,'00 16 12 25,000 93,42 40,5 270,42' ! 4 ps.-on 17 13 85,000 162,83 70,6 287.l\3 45 135"00 1~ 14 65.000 157,1.19 68,2 ,292.1.19 1& 110,00' 20 11.1 50,000 H9,S4 17,8 289,~4 11 2/10.01'! 22 12 ,000 07.19 29,1 267~19 18 150,.00, ,23 ! 7 25,000 113,63 1.19,2 26~.o3 19 1C;7.'Otl ' 24 18 1'0.000 105.65 45,8" 262,65 " 20 110,00 25 t9 25.000 92,.05 39.9, 26~,OS 21 21)0:00 26 20 25,.0.00 b3.5" 27.5 263,~" ~2 170:0.0 27 21 10 • .o0t! 96.44 41,8 266.1.14 ~3 100 • .0.0 29 20 1500.000' ,86.49 37 .5, 21l6,49 ,Tlr 113:.01) 31 19 ·15.000' 149.55 bU.8 ~b2.~5 'i:: OIJT'L~: ;~,:, ~ ~ • ; .... ~. ;~: •• '.: ~ : • ; • ,. ,"~ :: ; 5,0.0.0 120.55 52.2 ,,2&2.55 -----8!--47.05,00.0 GP'" \ %'.,/ .. . .,. L~GYCn~p eO~p~R'TtQ~ •.•....•• -... -----... -.-.. ---...... . C1HPUTEQ ~E~vtCE~ VER~ 2~0' CE08 TQA~T 72.~8· CARLS~AO ~O lLT.LOOR FF ~T 2 SIN PIP E L J.~ E COS T SUM M A'R Y *.*.***.****~****************** •• ******* otA~ETEQ TOTAL LEf.lC;TH EST. COSTIFT TOTAL. COST !"'C~;::S FEET DOLLARS DOLLARS .... _.-... .. -._._._---_._._-----... .. ""-_ ..... b;on 1055 11 • b.on 27300.00 8.011 tbn2n. 8.00 128160.00 _0:00 175t}. to.oo 17500.00 . 2.011 1~5n. 12.00 231.100.00 tl.l:OO lJOO. 1LI.00 5600.00 1 b. 0.11 2101). 1b.00 33600.00 18.00 M('I~ 18.0'0. llJ400.()"0 ....... -_ ..... ..... ---.- T'TAL 27S711. 24QQbO.OO AVG: COS, peR FnOT OF THE TOTAL SYSTEM S 9.01 .. e " , ..... REICHE~BERGER 08.2Z·7~ (' 1 ~ 4;4./ I I' \ ", . ),.,-, '~ L~G!cn~o'eOq~~RATtO~ .--....... --.~-~~----.... --.. --.~--~ , " " ALTEf2..IVATE.· 7[-72~?8 C'~PUTEq $E~VICES V~R~ 2.0 ' CF.oe 'TQ4CT 7~·'e CARLSBAD ~O ALT LoaR FF AT N'IMCE~ ~F J;iNCTIU'ls:.:.:.: ........ .. N j"lClEq "F LTNF:S:.:.:.:.: .......... : 25 ,34 Q 8lN REICHENBERGER ,oe.zc-73 INPUT, FLOW FACTOR.;.,.,.'~.. 1.00000 OUTPUT FLOW FACTOR ••••• ~... 1,00000 NUM8ER OF 8~LA~CED LOOPS........ 9 GPM GPM N1J'1C1:E~ 'F L10PS: ..... :.:.:.:.: •••••• ITEPATI~~ LtMtT.~;.:.:.: ••• :.;.: 100 5.000 CYCLES GPM ~CTUAL NUMBER OF ITERATIONS..... 7 CYCI.ES L'DPS T~ qE a~LAN~ED WITHIN •••• S'JRF"AC:E ELEV. UF JUNCTION ZERO e' PTPE 1.1NE '10: • <It •• 1 2 3 4 r; 6 , ~ q 10 U 12 n A14 LENGTH, ctA~ETE~ FFET !NCH!:S . ....• "Oil. Q511. 1l0/). 1 f'ISI1 '. Q5". 115". QOIl. 11'15" .. 1~01J. '70('). 12~1). 1l0/). 111511 • t;SIJ. QSO'., tSI). . .... --.. 1 e.' 00 Ib:OO t~:oo 12.0n 8:00 16.00 12.00 8:00 8:00 10.0(') '8.00 8:00 H-W COEFF ---.. 140. 140, 140. 140. 11l0. 1110, l t10 " 111 0.' LOOPS ACTUALLY ~ALANCEO wITHN ••• 3,710 GPM 330.00 FEET PRESSURE AT JUNCTIUN ZERO ••••••• PIP E LIN E 5 U M MAR Y ********************************* BOOSTER, HEAD ,FEET ..-._ ... FI.OW GPM _ .... - 4705.000 t170,.OClO 2282.503 801.3bl -192.497 '-2222.497 1471.1t1~ 147.2b2 .. b73.ijS8 713.879 :b93.879 44.911 -630.922 ,be'3.9b8 b13.9,68 "313'1.'175 ' -1051.03'2 HEAD LOSS FEET .-... 4.i9 9.0'3 1.91 1. !:i3 -.71 -2.73 4.04 9.71 -12.21 2.01 to.07 .02 -2.39, 3 t ba 24.78 -.41 Ht:AO LOSS FT/l00FT .. .......... .. .53580 .9508b .47793 '.14602 -.07518, ".237'13 .4'1920 .92'a32 -.70'340 .28052 .80589 .00509 -.22798 .6b214 2.b08b8 -.27425 -1.737";5 VEL.OCITY FTiSEe _._._-.- 5.93 7.51 ~.7b 2.c7 1.23 3.515 4.17 4.77 4.30 2.92 4.43 .00 PSI UNIT COST $/FT, ---.. le.oo 16.00 ,111,00 12.00 8,.00 1&.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 10.00' 8.00 e.oo EST. COST DOl.I.~HS 1""00. 15200.. 5600.. 12600. ' 7600. .t8400. 10800. saoo,' 12800. , 1'000. 100.00-. .s200. 10500.. "400 • 570Q. 1200., 8(')00. \:' , :.' -.-... , \ \ \\ ~ " \ '~ R E H ARK 8 .---.......... . • 115 16 11 1~ 1 ~, 20 21 22 23 211 215 11'1011. ~Sf.l. QOO. 301'). 170(') • , &0 ()~. 10.00 8.00 b;OO, 8;00 8;00 ,8.00 8:00 6.00 8.0'0 , '8.00 8:00 8:0-0 8.00 1110. 140. 140~ 140. 1110. 14 0. 140~ 140. 140' • 140. 140. 140'. 140. 140. 140~ 140'. 140. .00 .00 .00 .00 .on ,.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 iOO .0(1 .00 .00 .00, .00, .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .on .00 .00, .00 -SbO~83J .. 625.833 "575.199 -025.199 976.'143 -523.5'57 ";!:i48.551 -344.498 ·17~37 -4.E?2 '-:;.99 -1.71 -11'.30 9.10 -3.11 ... 54 '3'~5 -.boSSl -.5b9!:i9 -,6645& 1'.51b16 .... 478bl -.5217S ".22065 .2~' 2.58 3.98 6.97 2.47 b.71 3.58 3.99 3.67 3.99 6.23 3,311 3.!)O 2.20 10.00 8.00 b. 00,' 8.(10 8.00 8.00 e.oo ,8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8,00 e.oo ·mtRE CEIVED 13f.100'. '4800., " ," 1,5" ., itOI) .' t50. -1.04 -.33 52,00.:. ,AUG 2 7 1.9.73 , ~lboO. ", __ '. 1200. " , , , CITY OF CARLSBAD-' Engineering Department \/4 ;.. ~ . L~G!C~~P CO~PORAT10N ••••• _-.... --......... 'tI!-............... . C~MP~TEq SEqvtC~s VER. 2.0 . ,CEO!! T~ACT 72-28 CARLS~AD ~O ALT LOOR FF AT I erN RElc~E~aERGER Oe-2z-tl PIP E LIN. E 5 U M MAR Y •••••• ***** ••••••••• ***** •• ** •• ** pyp, (, BOOSTER HEAD UNn L.YN~ L.E"IGTH OU"'1ETER H-W HHD I"L.Ow LOSS MEAO L.OSS VELOCITY. CUST EST. COST '-10. HET INCHES COEfF FEET GPH FEET FT/l00FT FTlSEe $/FT DUL.L.ARS R E H ARK S _.-... ......... . .... .-.-.. -... _.---.. .----_.-. . ...... -.------..... ---. .... _-........ 26 '70Cl. 6~00 140. .00 ·208.406 .2.41 -.353'16 2,36 6,00 4200, e 21 1150. 8:00 1110, ,00 "332.382 -.91 -.206';)0 2.12 8.00 3600. 21' ~20. 8.00 1110, ,00 .638.557 ·1.52 -.b9106 ,,',08 ' 8,00 1700. 2q t.OCl. 6.00 140. .00 -161.0Q2 -1.12 -.21q~0 1.83 b.OO 3600. 3n 120n. b.OO 140. .00, .. 98.976 -1.01 -.08914 1.12 6.00 7200. 31 1200. 8.0t'! 140. .00 -214.059 ·1.10. -.09149 1.37 8,00 9600 •. 32 qOO. 8~00 140. .00 ·229.059 -.93 '-.10371 1.46 8.00 7200. 33 tt 01'). b,t 00 140. .00 b2.116 .41 .03765 .70 6.00 6bOO. l'I 950. 8.00 .. 140. .00 ·296.175 -1.51l -.1bbtS3 1.89 8.00 ?bOO. ." 2/4 ~ ,1J • )- L~GTCn~~ eO~PORATtO~ . •............. -..................••• C'HPUTE~ ~ERVtCES VER." 2.0. CE08· TQArT 72-28 CARLS9An NO ALt LOOR FF AT 1 . 8IN REICHE~BERGER 0&-22-73 JUNC'fl0N SUM MAR Y .*.* •• *,*.* •• **.* •• ***********. JIINCTIQ"I C3URFACE CrlN"lECTING BACK JUNCTION OUTFLOW HEAD PRESSURE H.G.L. "Iu'~BER . ELt:V. 'LINE NUMBER NUMBER GP14 FT, PSI ELEV, ......... . ...... . .... ---... . ................ .. .. ~-.. . ... -.. -._.-. .-._ .. 0 . :nO~OO ,00 ,0 330.00 1 3"10.0"1 1 0 .000 25.&9 11.1 325.09 e 2 215"00 ~ 1 200.000 tOl,flO 44.0 310.00 3 212."0/) '3 2 10.000 102,&9 44.5 314.09 'I 175.00 II 3 320,000 13e.13 59,9 313.13 5 1~0.00 15 4 2030.000 t 33. 8~ 58,0 313 t 85 & 220.01) 7 :3 10.000 90,&0 39,3 310,00 7 lQS.OO . " b 105.000 115.CJ:3 50.2 300.93 8 255.00 10 0 20.000 53,68 ;n.3 308,&8 q 2?0.0l) 11 8 25,000 78.59 3"ii7i 298,59 !~ 21l 0,' 0 t) 12 9 50,000 98.55 42,7 . 298,55 n 2~~.00 111 9 10.000 &9.CJS 30,3 294~9S \2 190,00 15 11 25.000 80,1"b 34.7 270,1& !l 177.00 1& 12 2S.000 93.5& 40,S 270.~0 • 'I 125,00 . 17 13 85.000 1&2.88 .70.6. 287.88 \5 1 ~S"OO. 18 14 65.000 151.5·1 b8.3 292.51' \0 1! 0.00 .20 .14 50.000 179.58 77.8 289.58' II 200~OO' 22 12 1500.000 &1,08 ~ 261.08 18 1';0.0!'I 2' '1'( 25.000 HlI.tS 'I • S 2b4.15 19 1'57.00 21l 18 10.000 108.2'0 46,9 265,20 tlO 17Q.O/) . 25 19 25.000 95.54 41.4 265.~1l 21 2"10.00 2b 20 25.000 &8.01 2~.5 268,03 ~2 1701.00 21 U. 10,000 9f1.94 42.9 2&8.94 --~3 lbO.OO 29 20 .000 106.85 46.3 266.85 ::>4 113.00 31 19 15.000 153.26 66,4 26b.2& tiS' t 02, O·!) 3'2' . 24 S.OOO 125.21 '54,3 267.21 .... ----. .... , ..... " ......... , . T"T 61... OUT·"'LO~ ••••••••••• " •••••. " •••• t .•••••••• 4705.000 GPH "' ''3/4 · . ~'" .: . . .'". c L~G!CnMP eo~p~R4T10ij, •.......•.... --................•...• ,C'M~UTER ~ERvtCES V~R. 2.(1 CEoe T~ACT 7~-!8 CARLSQAD ~o ALT 'LOQR FF AT 1 8r~ PIP E L t '" E COS T ~ IJ "1 M A,R V ****.*********************************** OU"ETE=I TOTAL LE'lGTH EST. COST 1FT TOTAL. COST' t "<CoiFS fEET DOI.LARS DOLLARS .. -----. .. --.. ---_.-. .... -.-._-------_ .. -.... b~Or. ,,1550. 6.00 27300.00 _ 8.00 tb~2('). 8.00 128160,00 t 0 ~ 00 1750, 10.00 17500.00 \2,00 lQ50. ,t2.00 2'3'100,00 , ,,~o(') aon. 1'1.00 5600.00 16~OO 2 to (').' t 6.0'0 33600.QO, t8.00 ROO. 18.00 14400.00 •.••..•....• .------..... Tr:tTAL. 27'nn. ?"99bO.OO AVG; COST PER FOOT OF THE TOTAL. SYSlEM S" 9.07 e rr' REICHENBERGER 08-2z-n 4/4 ! f I I· I • J>, • • SUPPLEt·iENTAL Et--TVIRONHEN'l'AL DATA TO ENVIRONHENTAL I1'-1PACT ASSESSMENT REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 27, 1972 Resolution #3015 Tract. #72-28 Carlsbad, California P:r.:-epared For; PACESETTER HmJIES October 10, 1973 Prepared By: ENVICOM CORPORP~TION GT 72-29 .. J _ . '.~ . . , • • t- ENVICOtv~ "Rough Dra,ft" october 10, 1973 project No. 13-034-101 PACESETTER TR. 72-28 Groun4water The site of the proposed development is underlain by marine terrace sands of Pleistocene age which, in turn, are underlain by marine sandstones and shales of Tertiary age (1), None of t~ese-sediments are. "water bearingll as -,normally defined by the California Department of Water Resources (2, ~ap on page 91). The terrace sands· are flat- lying, are generally porous and permeable, and are capable of retaining a moderate amount of water. Ho~ever, these deposits are eroded and incised in the adjacent wa~hes, transient flow during the rainy season and ,some retaihed capillary moisture during the dry·season. The-underlying Tertiary sandstones are discontinuous, less permeable, and are also breached in the nearby washes. As a result, their ability to contain groundwater is limited to isolated pockets and lenses that are not practical-to exploit as an economic source of water. Exist~ng ground moisture conditions are controlleg . primarily by the· volume and time-distribution of winter rainfall. Water that falls on the existing surface in- filtrates the terrace sands to an extent limited by the clay content of the soils developed on the upper few feet of the sands. These soils are less permeable than the 1 , f . . . . . . " , . , .. " .' • • sands themselves, and they act as'the primary limitation on infiltr,ation into the upper sand layers. If the rain is gentle and prolonged, infiltration is high; if it is intense and of short duration, most of the rain runs off. The normal vlinter regimen is thus one of a series of "waves" or, "pulses" of water entering, and moving through the terrace deposits toward the easiest exit. In this in- stance, the "easiest exist" is the steeper topography on the flanks of the site where erosion has breached the layers of the deposit. This condition continues into late spring or early summer until the sands are drained of all but capillary moisture and probably some po~kets of groundwater trapped along the unconformity between"the tE:rr~ce SaT'H:lC dna U11Uu:t: J.y lIlY, Tertiary or in the len Licular " Tertiary sandstones. Thus, local perched w.ater conditions are probably present into early summer, but there is no significant groundwater acc~mulation under the site or between the site and Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The proposed project will reduce the area of potential infiltration by the amount of the site to be covered by roads, lanes, paved walks, driver, etc. On the other hand, the creation of relatively flat pads for home sites and the disruption of the less permeable surface soils will increase the, efficiency of infiltration on the remaining area. The use of imported w~ter for yard- watering will not only add to infiltration, but will also 2 ~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------,~ -. .. ( .,. . I~.·" . . • ' . tend to more evenly distribute it across the dry summer months. Th~re are no precise figures available on the net result of these several variables, but it is.normally assumed by prudent engineering geologists that the net infiltration will increase. This is based on studies of the reactivation of ancient (Ice Age) landslides by the changes that accompany urbanization. In summary, the effect of the project on ground- water will be nil because the're is no true groundwater basin (U"vater bearing" sedimen'ts as normally used) at the site or in the downslqpe area between the site and the Lagoon. Ground moisture conditions will probably be enhanced. It will certainly be more evenly distributed in time, and the total infiltration may increase. the latter cannot be proved with,available data, but experience indicates that yard-watering is a very sig- nificant factor in underground moisture conditions. 3 . -~ , .. .., ,. . , . • • • \. REFERENCES o '. 1. State Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet: California Division of Mines and Geology, T.H. Rogers, 1965. 2. Hydrologic Data: 1971, Volume V: Southern California: California Department of Water Resourc·es Bulletin 130-71, December 1972. 4 . , . i. I • • EJ,WICOM Draftll october 10, 1973 "Rough Project No. 13-034-101 PACESETTER TR. 72-28 • Ag~a Hedionda Lagoon Agua Hedionda Lagoon is located immediately ad- iacent to the south boundary of the city of Carlsbad. Agua Hedionda Lagoon comprises about 340 acres, 90 of which is marshland. All of the submerged portion of the I. lagoon ;is owned by San Diego Gas and Electric Company. } I I The status of Agua Hedionda Lagoon was evaluated in a report complied by John W. Speth, Associate Wildlife Manager -Biologist, California Department of Fish and Game, February 2, 1969. In this report watersk~ing was considered the primary use of. the middle and upper parts of. the' lagoon and recreational use of the outer 'ba~in ~s restricted to fishing from the shore~ The status :report ,/ observes "The area does not possess significant·wl.ldlife values primarily because it is a deep-water lagoon with a relatively small amount of marsh". Through personal communication with Mr. Peter Phillips, associated with the California Departmen·t of Fish and Game, it was learned Agua Hedionda Lagoon is one 6f only a limited number of coastal lagoons with a permanent opening to the ocean. This characteristic allows for an effective flushing action of the lagoon on a regul~r ba§is through normal tidal activity. Mr. Phillips sees Agua Hedionda Lagoon as an attractive site for the development of mariculture - I primarily the cultivation and harvesting of shellfish native j' I I • .' to the Gulf of California The characteris,tics of storm drain runoff and their potential environmental effects were examined utilizing the proposed development and available data. storm drain runoff contains an array of constituents whose pre- sence in sufficient quantities could be termed pollutants . . The major constituent of runoff is inorganic mineral matter similar to, common sand. Othe,r measurable 1 constituents include "oxygen demanding pollutants , algal I nutrients, bacteria, heavy metals and pesticides. For a medium density, newly developed multi-unit . residential area, the constituent concentration in storm drain runoff are: Constituent Total Solids Oxygen Demand Biochemical Oxygen Demand Chemical Oxygen Demand Volatile Solids Concentration (lbs/curb mile) 500 6 42 50 t oxygen-demanding 'pollutants are~those constituent types whose natural process of degration requires oxygen. This oxygen which is taken up by these constifuents is then unavailable to other biological types. The result, if suffibient o~ygen isn't available is the lessening of support capability of a given waterway toward desireable species. 2 , , I', ' . • Algal Nutrients Phosphates Ni'trates Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2.2 Bacteriologic?,l Total Coliforms organisms/curb mile 50 x 109 Fecal coliforms organisms/curb mile '.2'.8 x 109 Heavy Metals Zinc Copper Lead Nickel Mercury Chromium Pesticides P,P DDD P,P DDT Dieldrin Polychlorinated Biphenyl Compounds (PCB's) .65 . • 20 ::::- .57 .05 .0,7 .11 67 x ,10-6 61 x 10-6 24 x 10-6 1100 x 10-6 The constituent levels in s.torm drain runoff vary with the age of the development and the den?ity of the land- use pattern .. - The sources of contaminan'ts in runoff include the pavement itself, motor vehic·les, irrigation, atmospheric fallout., 3 . ; • and vegetation and litter. The pavement itself, through • weathering accounts for much of the silt material and '. sediment load in storm drain runoff. This is exemplified by asphalt streets carrying 80% heavier loads than concrete streets of comparable type. Motor vehicles are a prime source of street surface contaminants. Fuel leakage, lubricant leakage and spills, and coolant leakages cont~ibute a great deal· to contaminants of the oxygen-demanding type. Fine particles from tires, clutches and brak~s are contributors to the total solids fraction of the runoff. Other vehicle-related contributions are dirt, rust and decomposing co~tings which drop off fender linings and undercarriages. Irrigation of yards and garden areas car.ries wi+h it soluble nitrat~s, phosphates and pesticides. These materials find there way into storm drainages and eventually to an outfall into a nearby watercourse. The problem of persistent pesticides is important in dealing with closed systems. The natural flushing action of the Lagoon lessens the impact such persistence would present. The reference study upon which much of this ~ discussion is bCised states: liThe chlorinated hydrocarbons were found rather consistently as were PCB's. Although these have repeatedly been associated with adverse environmental effects in recent controversies, the actual significance of these findings cannot yet be stated since the environmental consequences of such materials have not yet be~n established Lith any degree of certainty." I 4 . i . ~ 1 " .• • o Vegetation adds to 'the eontaminants'in storm drains through leaf loss and their subsequent decomposition~ Decomposing leaves offer an adequate environment for bacterial growth. Nutrients are released by decomposition and made available to plankton populations. In summary, the proposed project will have little impact upon the present ecology and use aspect of Agua Hedionda Lagoon • . The environmental consequences on the lagoorr will be minimized -by two basic factors: first the deep wate+ aspect of the lagoon excludes the danger of toxic imbalanc'es occuring ·in the more sensitive and complex marshland ecosystems. The second significant factor is the' efficient flushing action within the lagoon caused by normal tidal activity. This flushing action will disperse pollutants and transport them out of the confines --of the lagoon •. It is believed the nature and charaqteristics of Agua Hedionda Lagoon will minimiie the potential effects 'of materials which might .be introduced.as a result of developmen~ at the proposed site . 5 . . . e • . ~ References 1. Speth, John W., Status of Southern California / Marshlands, California Department of Fish and Game, February 2, 1969 . 2. Sartor, J.E., et aI, Water Pollution Aspects / of Street Surface Contaminants., Environmental Protection Agency Report #69, EPA-R2-72-81 3. "Polychlorinated Biphenyls -Environmental Impact", / Environmental Research 5 (3): 249-362 .. } ... • .< $(/;5.o/I//S/O.</ .&E /NG ..o~P':l.OPE/) /A/P//A$'~S I Figure 9 Temperatures and isotherms for sections A an~ B taken during morning radiometry i temperature survey, 8/23/72, i 930 to J 100 (High tide). I Numerical values are in °C. I I " • 20 • t: \ i 1 t 1 f I f r I ! I f , r t 1 f i i' f } ! .~"'-.. ~ .. '!-'.\ >.' ',f. "f' .. ;~.' "'';':': :." ..... \,p'\ ... l ...... '.... \' """'-=Z'\. '\ \ '~\ \',,('-':.'11 I) '.) f~,J!' ~,~ ~!\, \:. ....... \ \ ~:) ~ . ~~~'. ') . '-.t' ,. I·: \.. .\.·~.<!.'(I; .. ·d:l: .... :-;::. """:'.);'",?!~ \~ ~ j '\.":~'\ \ .... ,~ '\ ': rT'" .: . .5(-\.\, :~'::::'~:r.':::~\~'~:'.;;,; .. ~, :.:: .. ' \~l·) :0(; :,\Ll,. t·:t" "'::::"-::~-"\ J(..l\.!\" ....-r·' .. , .. ·· , \ -:, ...... ... ~\ \ ~,.\ ..... ,\ ..• ; ...... ....... . ' · .... .. ... \." . -, . · .. ,,': ~~ .... ~ ',. · ...' ...... ' ,. '. . , .... \: ~' ~\ . ~ .(\ . \ 'i \ .. . . \ \ . ""'-.. } _. ~ ' .. \\ \ \ " \ . .' '. ".' \ -'; '" 'f~:-1''' J . ~""'" ~ ,. \" \~ ,i 1,-'"". \ ' •• , ' •. _': • \ '\" ': .••• ' • ,"'; :.: .1,,', \' ,j,,' .I( .' ,": :(','; (1'\' • . I I f I' '. I "'. .: :\' . ..f .. 1 " \: !;I ~1 /·f· .:\r\.·~V~'.,",.~I.1 r ~:\\.l.!·.\~,~ /f ;:tj ,( .. ' J ' .. '~" . \':.;'j" ,\:"'i. . \' \I·I.:/J . ~:I"'" ., 'I ' • , ..... { ;. ~ '\. .,',,,,,,,**\ :i\' ~;\. . \': : ... \~t~ ... ~ '.'~ .. \.'I~;·:· I; 'I ~. '~"\:-·,,···.· .• ,'.'· .. ,1.,· '! " \ .... ..:,: ........ ,.S~·:: 1~' ;'\'(::t \ , ..• ,x;....,_ ... _./' .t. ' .. 11'.,. .', _., ./ \" ... / : .'. ,." .. i\"::' ,,~~:.!, .. ... 23.30 • 23.3 • 23.7 ~ , '. ~ .:. ......~. . -"':" .. " \S'" \. . {' " ~~gure xu Temperatures and isotherms for section C taken during morning radiometry temperature survey, 8/23/72, 930-1100 (high tide) Num~rica1 values are in °C. ! ". }oo , I .,L l'!l/J ,.,/./ 4 .... ;.~ .;tI! ~".r'·",t ~~" .'". I '-~ ~\\ '-\. Y' ._, • _ ":'·;rv.;~ 'n7~"" ~"1 ,.-:.-= .......... : .. :: .. ~~~'~·~~-::I1\~-r;\.'~''\'~~ .•. ~ • ;,,,,. ., •• , .• -.. ,.: .j(. _ ..... _. : .. t· ,'-:...... \ .' •. n... '~-'~<:'" : ,...,J.' ,., • '1'-. .., •. 1-., ,\' /...~ ,. .. '/'.~. ~ '.,'. :...,. tf ~ ••• ! .. '. '..... .. .\ J; J, .1....... .. '\, \ ... \}d.~. J), \ '. </' ••• 9 '.-. ~t. ... ;. ,. ~h • \~ ./~c../.:... '" \\\ " ·.\~v,?~, ... , ••. ' .~ .. , ~ ~ •• :'\'\\ v~ ."_ .••. )/.j •• ~ .... _.')\ \ ••• ." .. : to· . '~"-I. ,.' "'j.', • .' •. \~' '-/~\, ) \:..:-", j . . ~"~~. . '. .... ~ .' . ~ .,~ ---t-:-~ .. '" 1I .I .~-;;:;v" I. 9. .... .~ ..... " t ,-e'. "'''-.~·":',.t _/.~.; " ... :W I," ... \~.r-:.-!.. • ." .... '"'::~\':---'.-'~_ ..... _ ~, , .•• ~, .•• L~.·---,,_· ~ .... ", ..... --=-~-./" . -......i~.J~ •. ~. . ... ,; :. • .. (:., :.. ",-' •• ,,~ ~ __ . ~ _~.~.. . rl..'~ ~:. -I"';"" ~ __ ... ':--~ .• J ." t .............. " ........... ~ ........ '....... 1 11 ': .l • . • .'., \ ,-... :'" I~ 9 1 ' •• :1 • • .~ 1. .. ; •• - , : I ! " "',.,. . . .~ .. 11" • 'a .... • .'1 .. ·• ~ ,~ ~, .. .,," ~ -. '. • !~ I ill .'''' . I . ........... __ .•. __ ._--_. __ .. ----. .. .' 'f-- •• I t , .. . , a •• ~~.~ • _ _ !.. , • ~!," . . . ....... --..:...~ .. . "",-. ~;.:~<~~ ': . ,. ; .. '\_ ..... I/i}- .. .' It '!(~.~ ..... . ~ ........... ~---.......... 'i':-:--;.=:-. \ 1.\.......,...:."' .... ·_·,. 1-r ... •• ~l Ii r \ \ i i f 1 I i 1 I i j I FIgure 11 'l'e1l1peratures and isotherms • for sections A and II taken during noon,tradiomctry temperature i Survey, 8/23/72, (1.0\>1 tide) I 1130 to 1300 --------------------~------------~---------------------------------~----------------~-. . -22 -• , " , , t ! i I , i r I I ! II N~merlcal values arc in QC. I ~_~ __ ~~_~ _~~ __ ~~~_~_~ ___ ~_~~ \ , , \, \ ..... '. \\ ..... , ,~<l! ................. ~ -w~ ....... , "" ': ,. ': :," :':'~4""":'(~"','''''''' *". ~: .... ~'. ~. ~··""''''--·''·''''·-~'':;-~'~¥~~'":7'";.-::-:--.~':'-:'7-:~r:-~~''~ x"J<.. . -c.__ '\ '\, ~" '\' "i' .'.) '1' /',1", ... ' :. "'. ,.~_-:',\. '\. a:' >., h):· ':-..... ,\:.: ... -;. ...... '-'.; . secti.on C taken during noon, rat.;tio-.t"'" -" '.. >-t t." ... ;J. ...., .. ,., •• :.. , .. ...... \'" _'-. .... _.'. \,. " ,to ..... ~." • ~'-'. '"l. 'K:'\ Y. !':\.Y~:.,-./.:/." .. ~:I.-;' "'0..-::'·~·"'?!~\~~'I'·;·':'-;:;'·""::':;·~\'~:·-:·~· .... " metry temperature survey,· 8723/72, -:-----' '\.''':. \ I.,,) I: rp" .. 't ..•.• , .• , .• , .. , ....... -':'::--"'\'':::'''fj"", .• \.t.I' .r: "~::.~~' ..:.-:::., ',.z-",: .... . "-~ < . \,:J 1'.1 'J"! itt: 1"/~:t'~""::C'::::',\,-!:\. J):\:-~\ ... :-,\~:,:.::;: ... : ';.~.:':\:.':-..~~.: . '.' \ ' 1200 to 1300 (Low tide) .. ::-.,\ .; .. 'v.-';.;\ f°';'" 'f:': \~C:;" I"'~''''''\\'-.. !:-):.:~ .~~~":"'''~::''''''-~.~\"''''.:':''' .. 0 \.: ~ ... 'I' . I·~j· :.: •. \. J'./ I ( .' :\'\ "'\:"",'; ('J" \.'\'. ·~~ ....... c_.' ' , \'. ,.:: ":" Numerical values are ~n c. ! r If., I I d. \ ~ , \./,--' ... ,' •• 1 1 .~. . -~.. ., \ . " ,'\ '/:1/1/1 .' ·f· ·1!':\~·\:'~\i ... ,.~.f i I'I':~' \I.!'}'.~ i(;l! l. '_., .. :::.:::::,. ':-\\'i': ... _ ': .:'{.' '·.X·.· ,.:::\ .. \ ........ " "'\f/" . ~'I:\~~',': "." J.:: ~ ••. ~-• ':, \'~;" . .:' '.\ ... \".~ .. \.)o,)., _.".,., ..... :;, .... , •.. 1.(/ .. -""", •. , ...... . • : •• " .... ~~'~ • , •• \' ~~. ~:t.;· .•• ,\.·: ••• ~i\," .. (.!·,! f/5.Q ....... :~" : ,\ ". ••..• ,.. .' •. 'l,.. ')10" , •• ' '.\\.(.::_ ' ~ ".:' , .• '.: .. t..\ ..... \ ... :' .. "'x..;; J:\, .. ' ;': .. :,~_ ... ':::;;: ~. ":1 \., : .. ~J //il '..J' '~!. ~.\ ,: .'. \'., ... ,~". I" .' .' ./. \ :. "}" .,lJJ " \. .' . ~\" '-> .,'"S.:, .•. t-" :' .' ..... : \\,":"'j /.~. ~. .... ',. '\"-'f~",., .":' .... ' ..... : .... " ... ~#~ .. ~ .. ~.~.:\".: 'l ... < .... '\ .. ;-._.: :0. "':\'?tf: :' t::.\ ~ \....::~ ),.:'~::.\:.'~.:.Ul~(~~(:t'''''i:~''' "I '.' ~ '\, .. "-;:. ,.~,.\" --.-'''--', .. q:\ \ 'j "'-~. ~ ~~' \: . "j"'" "':;., . 1\\r-:...:;:.,.~,-:~ .,. ")"\ ~i.\ "'ll' ~,_', ~...:.. ,~'. .. ~. 'f ~ '\" 'L:: ~:;-:;·"t.~ ~\, ~... ,,','" 1 1" .··i ........ \\\··.,~~·{ \.~" :.~ ·v.',-,/t /0:,\\~"")\ , .... ~.~\~ ": V/;.:.,..l., \' ~ ' ... -.. : .. ':::.:-l'i-' . '\'. 22:.~. '~. :,'! .~~~ ) r:J}.."'\ ~~~;'''.l_'~ )e' ' .. '" T~'< ~~~<>~ . ~ ;.:J.\':\\.:A. ~.!,~~-:: _~~.:..: "~I"o.'UL" ,,''\ 'k-"<:\'\\~ '-. .' \", -~-. """.j.-.,'< ...... '. ",~ \. I .::7a.~~:.:,!~··~~~~ ... 0 ~ ., ~ , .""."\': . . ~.;f'~ ~;,...;::~~,..::~-=:;;,;:~x: .' t \ t' .' :,~.;.-.-~ ... :":,,.; .. ~~;t~>~~ .. i.·-"1 . \ ~3\. J } "-. --"v: {;.-)I' !~~ .~ -\'. ~,/!' I • -' ~,~~J \\1, I, 24 0 . 24.3 I '~Sf:';~il( .'S /~ /' , • \. . \.-:...;) '", 'r'?: /... t . , . "-''i" t' / '. • ,~~. I ;/ /# .. ."..~ : .. - • 23.6 ~N .,~ 1 • ? 4 5 I.t;;"<{ I ~ •• J .i, _. . .--~ .. ~ !,..! {~'''':;fIl:r.~ .n.7t¥:<. ~".7''''''-='.''':.;-'~ .. :: ..• ~:;~~'~~~~1\~~\\:'~'~~'~' r-' f-", l.';-... .. L;, I ·;!r·/·-.'·p·;oI! ~'." .. !"',,~ ! ..... ~\::\~\~>~ ". ~-..... . '. J'lli . 11 .. ,.~~ .. : .::11. _ ...... -. : •• t· ,'--' \~ ./ /--.. ....... ,' .. _.... 0 •. ::--='! .. ;., . _I \ ,;-. '.., .. p ~ ·~.i .... ;... . . , \ ,,' J ( s .. _.......... ... .\ 1," .... ~ 23.6 . 23.9 .. ' \'..~ ',/.),',:. :oj: '.~ :.~ •• /:t~·;.~'" \~'!\\::./-~~ \\\\.-. o;?y , "'~.~,"<" .. ,... .~.. '.. • :.' ,.1 \.\.:/~~ . "')))/ .·0 jl .~\ ... JY:)'·· .,' .... ! •.•.. ; ....... ~; "j~: ~.:. \~.,~~,: \ ,~;"., .,' . -.~-" • .. . J,.' . _'=". ____ / ~, . ~ ,.--'I. .... ." " .' • .' . .: ,." '.. .. 0-.. .. '. ", \ ~ , In :r- Ql ~ .~. • .,,' lit I I"· · , .. ' t~.__ .~. .. .... ~~:~ '::--'" .,., 1.' • _0, .......... '-~ .'. •• ~I' •.. J.--.... _~~ •. -....... , ....... ~~ : ~ ' .. ;.::.JJOo;C.';" ';;: ....... .;:.,:_ ..... .,. .' ~ __ • -......:... _ _:. • •••• ... ~ '\'~ ~:. ~.;. -... ~.-.., .. ~~. ~ l , .... ;. • .......... 1.. -r -... t.\", .'. i·. .... .;. . ". Ii .. " m. ,. !j .ft .';~ I~ • f· •• •• • ~ .~ 1. .. ~.~ • , t .). • ., • 'I .: • .. :,') ). .t. ~ Ift,'~"". ... .. .. .. . ! ~ ,~ ~ .. .. ... " .. : '.. «!!t • .. .. '.. .~-.. --..... '": .••• , .. ~Y": ~. ' .• " ... :. ·f. ,', • l ' . ...... _.,,~ • • . , .~!' :.. . • 1 __ •.•. • -" ---~'.""'" --.-----I ................ . " .'ittf';1 •. A 24.S- ~~ A If:;;' ~ifC' ~, " t \ I ii (;;":.;;~~ ;:7i~:~.~~~ 1.1: ." . V~-... ~\,(), ...... \ .... :~ -" .... . ,:-,-...... ~ .' ... ~--..... ,;.:-' ~ .... :' Z~0"\~ ..... :, ... " .... : " .. ,:,:, .. r0'-·,-:z;.rK~'·: .~ •. \' .<'V.:! • ..-'/'!:' ;/~. .~·r',,:,·:~ r7' . .#-'~':/I ff;~: .,......-.. . :// . ...,;;..-.... -". ... .. • """'_.~_~~,,_~~~ ___ joo",_'~'"l*-,,j, .. :.. ... "l. ... ,..,-~.,-- 'j' , , 1 1 , 1 \ .' " • ':)0 ll1: Boll? SBnllUl, t1?;)l~ (Clp-p 2UpUO;JUI) ~tLt O~ 'ZL/r.Z/8 'ABA.:tns G.:m:}1?l:, Aol:}BUlO1=P'E'::t 'UOOlUCl:J,Jl? ~h. mnp:?:l a pUt? V SU01=:}Ot'H SUlolBlPOS1= put? SB.ln';l1?li; ~ ... ~ ... ~ -• _. -' --..l ~ ,~ ~~~'-~'~"~ •• ., -.; r~~~:.t: ...... "y.~:---~. to ~ •• t,~<\ .:~~ "~~~J~~~ • -: .. , ~'-~:~~r~A~'·"I:l~i-~.::. :;.~ ~ .. -_:~: ~.~~~::~."::,-::::::"-------:\?~;;-T; .. . --. '--=.0.. '\' '\ '~. ,.",",,\ A \ \ '~'II';(!' -~~ ":'\' \.>~ ::. \\ \':. k' \.\~( "":":,':1,:. '\;" .:' .... :. " d i h . ~'-'. \. '.\ I ')' \ ;.I.,,{, ~.~: ~.t.f':"'<-':"~~''-1\' ':',"\ ':'( i'·;·'~R·'\.~::\: ,~:-.. :.:. .... \ Te..rnperatures an sot erms . •• ' _. ' . ..r .~.,.')-\ ... ';J.~'\ t'~)';I: ·r··i·t::.Y{\;\:?:~~~~t::.~:::.;.;.:{:~\~~::~.~:~~·"1~~~~;.~ .. \': for section C taken during . > .. ~ ;;;.\ '. \.~ .":, :J" r\'\·:~ ',\ ~j.:\ .. ,~-.:~.~~\\:.\ ;.::.:::..':.:::~ "~~~;';~5:::" .:~ \". ';~':'\'.. afternoon radiometry temperature ," -• '\ • '-'\",-;-,\. ... 0"1. \ ,. ; , •• : ••• '. r' '. ..-........ ... , \., ." ,. ," "' ••..•• "'j ". • \ .j.. I ( .' .. \,.,' ,. \ .~ .•.. !.'~. ... \\ .~-' . / I 2 1630 t 1715 . "" -',OJ! I f.i' I \:.:-,.~,\ ;."( :~·i .. ' . \ iI ~\I~·\{~.I, 1(':1111;;1' "'-"'::::;:~'.,. ..:\~. ~: .. _ survey, 8 23 7 )' 0 ." :!/I/.. .' '( ..... ~ •. ,?.\.:." ',1,:.'. 11·;.:"1-.• ';·; ..... ,( I .1.;-":.~ .• '":, \~;,,_V (. tide) " :'. '"">\ ~:\. ';\"'\" ,,"'~-l:'~' L~ ..... ,1, '~;':: I. f J-. "'-'" •.•. . • . Incom~ng . ;'\'><.\~>(. < .. \~~: '(\S':' .:.~~0.:)~.:~~.{~: ... ~~/:'~ I ~:}i'·i:!.' •.. ~:.~ ":: .. :' Numerical values are in °C. t 24. 6~ ~~, ... ..\":.''"~ ,J'\.. -f\ \. <.., .'. -":'~j'\ ~< ;! '!"'f-;II~.,i.I"~ .... ~ ..... :. . ;" .. \." •.• <~ .•• J.\;\ : .• ~ ... : \\{;. 'j'-{, '0/ . ',,-', ": I. -..'. .·.' .... :l-, ........ " ',,'." ~ .,' I ... ~\~t'( /..' 5\ . '", ~·'~~ttt; .'; 'b{'~ ~ )·.:i~· 0~:,.:. 'r.ott~~·. ~. ..... ~ . '\ ' . .. ~~ . .\'\.. .."-' \ .\..:. 1\ ,,~,~ ", \ .. -24.8\ ·~:1··~-\~:\:i·.: :~~~:~j~ .. \'~~.~'~*" ", '. '~'''i~~ ~,-~::.~ .. : .. ,. .. i; (~ ... ·;.·.i~'\\\\·. ~~':' ,:.~~''...~\ . "" ~;~~.r.,~.:\\ '~. ". ~ " ,.), ,'\ ~ r. ~~ o~ ~ II.': .. \",\\,...".......:. ... :-~ ·r-.-I'·!..· . \', ?4" ~:<... '~'>' :,'! . .. \\ ~\. -:.v.~ /--;-;;-f..}\ I .. ..,,\-, ~,-~ .. \ -, ·~}rJ\j\\\\..;~-.....:::::::.;I.,~"·l:·'..:,-;:·tG'·:. -•. "(" '''~4 \~ .:~A\·~\ ....... ~·. '.-r .•• >0: .... -. -.. ~~ \ \ ' .:.;:~~\.~~~.JI,~~.)~\~ .\ I .' ~~~~·!1:~~:;;,.~; \.\ '~. '. l'---~ ~-.. -'~-.~~~~i;~'~·:~~~/ll'/ I. J ! -25.2 1Jl I "~I~)& i I 24 i 8 . . ~. '. . '~;i~ ':'/)~" '/'I'~~:: > ! el. to.) VI 23 3 nt I .... l.':$. ;~ ,: , ~/,1.::::f'"'/;.; ::'1. -~· ...• -:i .. t"~' ,,\,J(l:/.-:. '0 ~'\......,«"'\.: · w;~~ ~ . .. ~y ~~)~~. ~'1/!;!;~';~:Il;';r~ ·.ITff7 .... , . ..2;,;.~'1.~=;~;~ .. : •. ~~.; ... 1.~. :~1~:\~V\:.~~· \ ~. :.~-. , > _ •••••• ~-• ....: •• -\~. i4.8)'~ !-;.: \, i' ).1) J-: : ..... , ~ /. (~!:.~.~~ '\'\ ~i(\;./..~ \.\\\ ...... : · !) .... ~<%.~ • '.\~~~\\ •• ,~. to. ··:-·~(··t··:~·· .. ·:.,1\\\.\J~.s.\\2..;;,.)))/., -----~3.'5 ; -24.8 25.4 . ··~ ....... ')\S.·'./.~.~ .... ~·; ...... ~. ':'l~: ~/-"~\~;;,:~S/,. ... ;~ . 1.0 • -":~.. • .. . I, .,~:---. l /.,. -.l"Q =i 25 l' .. ~ /. .... . ." 1 J • • . _ .. __ ,' ......... -.......... _._ -z; .: CIt 0 .' __ :, ~.:-... , ~i: •• ' .~:~.:.::::::;::::> ... ~:: ........ 9 ' ..... ~:~~. '. '-.' '\' . \ ~ . .. '. \ '\ .~ ." ~ 'i~.,JJO<.';" '.;; I •• , _:;::.,: ...... "> .... _ •• ::-_ " .. • . _______ h, ... '· ~ .. :' • ..r-w ... "-:;..'!">'. ~ 1 ....: .: ."'1. -!'" : • I). i ." .. ' .. "',";' -" .,. . J.» .,.. I. " \ " .,~ ~ \)r.:~ ".;:<.~.\ .... ~. .~.~ 24 8 .. . .............. .., I. •• 1·" I _ .". : • . "j~ .,.,'. •• ':..--• •. ~.I.~".· .. J.1 ...... ? , .1 • a 'It 9 : ~ • , ~,!.. . J "" •• • "-. :.H".~. .. "1# .... :" . •• t !,...., ... ~ ~ .. ~.'" ,. ~.~;' .... ~:' •. .':J' .. , ,"': '; ~ . t .. .. .--:-.. .... _ - . . Ii'!' "'. '" • •• ' •• ~ .. t' .. '. \ \ .. ::o.\:, • ' .. -.'. .':!~ft".: ~~:\t.::... . \',~:---\ .,~.~ ..... ~~. .. "~ . \:. .\' : ~':~~~.~ ~ ~ \ ~ . , ~ ... ~ -. . '-. .' """, .~~~~. • 24 2 • ,",. .', ". 'I.l1 ~ ·~~n""'" . . •• "'. . ... •• "~ " II! ~ I. ", '. ," -:. ~ ~'. \ (.. 1 Li' .. "!.. .., .... 1. :' .' "-.... __ • \.. '.. \-, . :! f ( J,/",_-"':' .. , ~~~.~~~ .'. ,'. '-. \ '/ . f·p-c. '::-...;:£;::::--• 'i'i'& ' . (\.. :. \',"; ··v~"----';',..J."" iJ' . . . . \ ~ 't \ . .: . ,\; ( .: ,; ~ -= "" ':'. .< . .. • , \.. I.' ~, • . ..•• ;., . . \".. . ~ . -. :,.. .' r· . '. 1''':', "" . 24 6 • \,) .... " \ V - -• r--'.. ." -. \. _", <t.. ,Cl • : .. • .." -I j /' • .' . J ,'.. "_, " ,: . ' .•.. ~~\,.-.rr.,,(P":\2;,J\ .... ~ ~ ~ ~ \\\ /1 <.: \ ,~~~ . ~ ••. ~~:!~=-.. ~ ,; ~'\ I. • "'~ " , .• ":",~'",:,,. ~ ~_., .. _ ........ ,.., • 'I ., '" _ ':'" .,,' I ., ...... .• v. ......... __ .•. !.. ••. ____ '_" L=:' I '";" 'i , ~ \ , ... _'. .' \ ... ~\ '. >\ . \ ','\ \:~ ., "'--~..o.:.";';' '.' ~ " \ \ ~', . t":'F' \\~'jp"".:~ '--=: . .' "''':'' '.'. ~" ...... , . • ' •• 4. \, \, ....... "·'.\'I ... ~;~'//,..~"-.@ .... :. 'A:"';~':l"~'~~'.:':'\\"""''''-;'::~''' "~" ••. ~ .• • • . \,'. '. "r / " ....... \.::i' :1-:."..... -;:::-:::;-; .• ",;,'. . ", " , .. '\ "/,. • I'." /. '.~ "~ . \\ ;' ~, r \\\ .-: .. ~ ..... :'.\ "1' , P :,.': ... \.*. ~:,jjJB ~;~: ~~·t5~t:'i~-~:'~ •• ". ,I • . .,. • '\..._, </ ... ~'\D,.,.,dt ...... :r~'!'\, .. I • I. J I I ", \ \.-..:.::.:.,. __ ..... :, •• . • I /-", " . •• ".. • .... ! .. ~ ., ...... j< ~' , ... '-~"l. ... t. ~~ ~IJ"'''' ~ .~r, ... , ..... 7 ......... ," • ~ .. : ... , ..... _ ,,"\ ............ , .... _ .'<"\',,,. l I, " ~ II "_,.,. • ."....,:" ..... ~"""'" i"'~"''''' .,.... . --~ •• ,. .. • , ..... ""lI' ~ ..... .- , . C:J li.f.'o'rn.i.{: , -. • l~ I () r~·r· .. -. _-;V h 1)1 '7 • Mr. Mic~u01 C. Znn1cr 17'1 ......... .,.\ . "'). .... ]". --:. ' .... .t:'1 -,'-. +-t ... t:~ on';' . . : i .~.-..:.. "" .. ~ .• c_"": .'., J"_-'J~ .. " LJ l~l';~#Y (.;;:' ~:~::·l.;·,)~!~l 1:.-: :_'~) J;J:~il i\·l:~:"l ~~~a C 1 · ~ i.:: l' :1~jF' ... C., 9"· .... ···<"' '-;'=I..'VV " o.J~)cl'tu.ni ty to :x·~v~t.('U th0 !<:~1v::"rr:n~;.t~tlt~\l :r.~l\ !J::.e t ;~r;) .:' ::.,.;; f :)i' C £:':'"'.!. 81.:.::1(1 rJ;F;~'J:';. ~e ~ • /\1 thouSr:· ';If.: V:'8X'0 i.~n~ 0]. (; to i:;U~::l.t t ::,t,:.?:' .:; O~::"l::::';'~;:; G by :1 ;)~::'''' ~. :~;}ic str-.:d 0 a t<::: of' f:.::;:::·:U, 6:. 1::((3; ~!CU in [; t. (~l f;; :);: 1) !'~:; C~: :1"":.r ~~ ~'.? f~ l.l"t~:!. C l! '},; ()1A 1 (1 :.J;') flC f~t ,)~ll r.~(l, t;i O~l (i!), ~'!i t~~· ;:,t"{)llJ~ (lC~·tJ~li··~:- 1';1-i:l8 !.::l;.l),jGc't tlrl.t;:1..], '. C '-~:C. r~;': .:'c :'; ::..,r:,~·::' ;:::~ t 81' -'_.::~l 1 ~~:!'.! ::.';.:" V ') 2,J"J;~ 'f: ~.:: :~t ~-':'.~" 1:.; ::~.,.;:6·· ;:': (.' ~·.'::z:ir:,;::-}· O;:;G';.tt '~:le ,!':'~;:;G '-i.~:· ' ... :111:::.. !Li~'):j ~:!C:"::;rJ of n:?·'(~a t~lf.>\.; :i.D P:i:'!.}i.~,~~:;t;·:'J· ,', .,:', ... t::;ed r')~ :lC2:.1':Lo;:,; :..y n,E::le;:,o:~:.l :)ird.z:. [~830c5.;;).tc.d; 1~it;·~ 'tij,:-~ l.::~:t;n~ i '~ ~l:i st.:-) J.c s;~ & 1·,l:,w J e'!;c. .> ;;: r. \'::t G:~, :3 i." r~ ~1. ~'l - ;.7: <.; l':'-~ii\. ;: ~l 'i; (~ ."r"1:~ i'. ~·!-r'. :y,"':1 "0 l). t; :1. t t~) ~':{). ·-I'iJ-.(J .. :~.3 ::iJ~ (,1]:';:~ ~~'~lll-;:::~}\)' i\n.:·{:-·;·! :\..:3 --):"':·)'~'~':~.:d 'it.: ·:;S:1.\j0:/ t,:~G .:1J~::~ ~J n~) l :~. :11 .. ~ 1 ~ [~t~ ':.: ;.~!':·")::::·2 ~l--:e "I: 8.l":!..~ 1"l i U ,)::r '\'),;:' ~.: (.' ,:' :.1 ",;~. J], c ;': ... ~ .. (_():. ~! cl J. ::;. ~ ;;'i,?t 8;)]. j, :"j ;:-" Cit~ 'L( .. ~::>::-t.il":: s !: :l.d t'C :'!(~.[' C::~<.:.': i:t (! c: .. :t:: j,'~:'C,;;·. ~~~:.! LL 1 ;.> :1 nd 0.G c.:-'I.. dt;"~ tit :.~ ':>t: t.h ~ P2I' ~Cl r~;'; :1 ot Ll].'(:::'. 7:":\.;,,; 'in ~l.C;{~ '(.i:8 t.~:)-:::' '.I.r -.l:_~tC::· t;'lS-;; :~ t; (le!:'ix·r~bJ.'::-1:0:''' ~:i..t.i-'.;;t, ti:e 1~ , .... .; ... ~ ,. ,f.1. ' .. :L ~;\. ':0 ~:1 j. tl~·.0 a I;') (" ,.-' .7 / __ <; c-J .. ~'/l 1·!:~!:~)f.~·.,· t.: :). " ~ .::;':,: "1'#. ';~·::'·:I'l }"'.~.! :.:~. -.::': ~1 \ ~.~~~\ ~j;..i .:';0.,1 r{r~ E': ~] \' ,-, .. ,J e(.~! C~:.:::l;·' ~if.' (J~:'(,~lf;.~tt'.";l'!~ \"l: ::; :: .. ~ .;:~ ( . i :~~ • 1 .... • ./ .. (6) Crop , Celery Corn, Sweet Cucumbers Lettuce, Hea,d :J r I Melons, Watermelon : Peppe,rs, Ch iii, Green ,- '( • rotntces Romaine . Squa~h Tomatoes, Fresh Market Year 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 !970 1971 1970 1971 1970 Spring 1911 1910 Swnmer 1971 (a) FaZZ 1971 Tota,l, Fresh Market Tomatoes Mi~c. Vegetables Asparagus, Bluck- ~ eye beans, Celery & 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970 Gx h 4 1/,-g, ~EG~;BLE CROPS, CONT II:lU'ED PRO 0 U C T ION Harvested Per Acreage Acre 575 25.3 615 32.0 195 6.7 290 5.9 270 14.5 290 16.9 65 95 30 65 5.3 1'2.0 4.6 5.5 405 9.6 425 4.6 70 4.1 95 5.7 1,070 18.0 ! ; 000 21 .0 105 11.5' 135 15.0 610 8.7 385 8. I (865) (20.5) (1.,530) (24'.1) (450) (13.0) (2.,810) (16.0) (2., 880) (16.6) 4,125 4,410 '665 560 xx xx xx xx Total 14,550 19,700 1,305 1,710 3,900 4,900 344 1,240 135 360 3,890 1,960 . 290 540 19,260 2 i ,OpO 1,210 2,020 5,31'0 3,120 (17., 730) (36., 8?O) (5.,850) (45.,000) (4.7., 800) xx xx xx xx • Per. Unit Unit Ton $ 76 Ton 104 Ton 107 Ton 164 Ton 318 Ton;' 21 I Ton Ton, Ton -Ton 70 70 85 80 ion 201 Ton ,227 -Ton 405 Ton 440 . Ton 85 Ton 95 Ton 212 Ton 80 Ton 294 Ton 174 Ton Ton Ton Ton Ton xx xx xx xx (257 ) (230) (193) (385) (222) xx xx xx xx ~ Caul iflower for processing, Cherry Tomatoes, EggpJ.ant, Garl ie, Gourds, ~ Mushrooms, Orn(Jmental Corn & Squash, Peas, Pumpkins,' Sweet Potatoes, j (FreS~1 & r."nning) i TOTAL 1971 9,861 xx xx xx xx i 1970 9,630 xx xx xx xx· i . (a) 1 nif~ udod 1 n Spr 1 n9 Tomatoes 1 n 1970 t.~'""'i ~"'~-"'r -.v~ ........ ___ ....... !~. _ V A, l V E Total ,$ I, 106.,000 2,049,000 140,000 280,000 1,240,000 1,034,000 24,080 86,800 11,500 28,800 782,000 445,000 118,000 23~,000 r ,637,000 1,,995,000 257,000 162,000 1,561,000 543,000 (4., 5S?~ 000) (8.,480.,000) (1., 129~ 000) (17., 325.,000) (1 0., 612~ 000) 23,011,000, . 19,092,000' 1,077 , 000 634,000 :!'''"!9' ')"., r::.t)(\ .{l.J:J, .... Vf..,.-uv 28,324,600 • TABLE 1.' Sm1MARY OF COMiJAL AGRICULTURE, 1969 Compiled from data -collected by the Ca1iforni~ Crop and Livestock Reporting Service Artichokes J:../ Asparagus Beans, Green lima B.eans, Sn2¥ B:r.occ.o.1-i -2/ nrussels2?prouts - Cabbage - Carrots Caulifl~yer Celery - Cucumbers Lettuce Onion, green I Peas, green Pepper, bell Potatoes Spina c h.::..---,-..".-:-","""-_ :{:r~tc:es (allL .-=:> ! 7\pples -' (at» =..' , Avocados - Grapefruit 2/ Lemons (all) - Oranges (all)2/ Strawberries - Pasture, Irrig. Pasture, other Coastal Acres as % of State Total 100.00 5.01 53.41 . 27.00 98.14 100.00 67.67 30.43 79.16 99.05 17.35 49.99 35.23 22.51 22.77 12.85 65.98 ~ --9-0:03 97.62 9.15 79.94 27.43 87.82 5.27 16.87 . Coastal Value as % of State Total 100.00 7.11 65.26 3/ 44.53 - 98./17 100.00 '73.70 38.89 83.01· 99.63 3/ 31.05 - 49.27 50.78 31.32 21.99 15.53 77.81:J[:) <36.2l" -. --86-:-97 99.07 3/ 18.41 - 88.99 19.55 91. 72 5.97 15.15 1./ "Coastal" data are for the entire coastal county, but many of these crops are grown only in the marine-influence climate zone of the coast. See Appendix 5 for complet~ data. ~I 2/~_o~!p2_r~ _.9t_t.lW._8 ta te' s acreage of .. theB~ crops is ~in the coastal counties. , 11 Coastal location gives value advantage to these cro~~~~- -15- .. ... , (2-) -£x,.~ "1/j / 0, -e- lht'j I Ap r i I, 1971, it appea red that the ye.ar' s Qoney crop wou I d -be cornparabl e the 1970, total of $3,500~ Rain in that month resulted in a respectable crop. Compi lation of these annual statistical. reports is an important cooperatlv~ . servi ce performed by:'the state and County Depa rtments of Agr i co I turefo,r the general public, not only for farmers and those who \-/ork with·them. Every effort is'made to see that they are as complete and acc~rate as possible. S! nce it is somet i mes necessary to 'use i ncomp I ete 'or est i mated figures iii computing the reports as soon as possible after the first of the year, adjustments have been made in the 1970 figures where signif~cant changes I'/ere noted. Many organizations and i~divjduals ha~e contributed to this report~ wish to express my appreciation to them; as well as to the member of ·.tre Departme'nt of Agricultu-re who assisted in gathering the needed data, The report was com- piled by Roy M, Kepner, Jr., Speciafist for Natura'i Resources and STatistics, imd Bar-bara E. Bieviener, Senior Stenographer. 1 ' ~ -, . i Respectfully submitted, t7r'rv<A?7i-".~·~ JamE?s M. Moon. AGR I CULTURAL COMfvll SS lONER MOST I ~JjPORTANT COMMOD I TIES, 1971 Eggs Tomatoes Avocados lv1i I k Cattle Valencia Oranges lemons Carnations Field Crops Fru'it & Nuts: Bearing Non·bear i ng Vegetables . Flowers & Nursery Stock' Total (a) Est i mated $24, !2'3,000 23,011,000 18,136,000 17,275~000 7,280,000 6,753,000 6,597,00C! 5, 104,000 Gladiolus Potatoes Squash Tangerines Cucumbers- Ce lery Cabbdge COMPARATIVE ACREAGES 1950 73,000 27,000 " 6,500 12,800 1,065 120,.365 & Tangelos 1960 33,500 25,900 6,700(a) 14,800 550 (b) 81,450 (b) Nursery stock only; flower acreage not jeported $3,795,000 2,148,000 1,637,000 1.,5'61,000 ! ;350,800 1,240,·QOO 1,106,000. 1,087,000 1970 23,400 21,200 7,900 9,600 475(b) 62,575 to , ~' 11 ,J J 1 ...J ] J .' ." . ~ , c-x h: L; 77",/-. ' .~ Please Use 1" --1st of--maps within th maps, 011 page····' " text are' e report. Page 1[11 111_ lo(~ating l~aCcl1rate. re eren~cs in .-- ANALYSIS OF THE EX;J;STING TRENDS REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE June 1973 MEMBER AGENC!ES -" CARLSBAD TMPERIAl BEACH CHULA VISTA LA MESA CORONADO NATIONAL CITY DEL MAR OCEANSlDS'- El CAJON SAN 01 EGO CITY ESCONDIDO SAN MARCOS • . ,- VISTA¥ The preparation of this report was financed in part- through a comprehensive planning ,grant from the Deparhne~t of Housing and Urban Development. Suite 524 SeCUfltV PJcilic Piazil -1200 Third Avenue -&.In Dlflgu, California 92101 -'(714) 233,5211 .. , • AGRICU LTU1\.A1., LAND: NEAl."tLY 16.,000 ACn.ES OF' ACiIUCU LTU RA L . , LAND IS LIl\J!::LY TO BE CONSUMED FOn. URBAN DEVELOPMENT. The 16, 000 acres· .. ~f agriculturallancl which would be converted to urban uses under Existing Trends accounts for approxi.rnatcly 15% of the total land in agricultural use based on a 1971 land usc survey. However, because of the low density with whicn Existing Trends spreacls population, this is likely to be more agricultural land than will be consumed by the other Altern:1tiv(!s. (Figure 17 shows the agricultural land in UHe in the San Diego Re~i.on. ) The table below shows the probably 'loss of agricultura.l land under Existing Trends by jurisdiction. Of a total acreage of 103,000 pl'ssently in agricullural use the n1.ajor.portion--over 70, 000 acr~s or 69% of the to~al--is in the Countyl s unincorporated area. The next largest acreage is in the c'ity of San. Diego, \vhlch : contains 9% of the total agricultural land. . \ to § ~-=! ,-{ III J.t ~ .jJ ,-{ ~ () .~ J.t bO 10,000 8,000 6,000 :~ . "H o tfl ~ H () ~ I I 2,000 . C. 1, 000 I I DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURAL LAND : S3:X> ---- ~lOO ... -.... -...... , T:lXl '! i -.. -.. -.--" 4100 tfl I:: III Cl) U o ~300 f--- 25% 1700 (() o U ).. !\l ?; I=l III U) 7O,ro ---,. ~Acres in Agricultural Use 1000 cd .jJ ({) ,~I :> 70 ~riOO &AcreS of Agricultural Land 11% Y.oJo of Agricultural Land Developed 1 i - • REGION AL PARKS IMPLEMENT A TION STUDY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO -aEVISED _FINAL REPOR.T ItS Acc?J;!ted by the ~ounty orSan Diego _ !loard ofSupervisor-s- in Minute Item 4f19 [12-(1; 2, 3) April 1972 .. -.. --- . -. -: .' ~ . ~ .,,: .... .' ?t:ep~~d by: -- CORNELL, BRIDGERS & TROLLER 5336 Fountain Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90029 Landscape Architects . - DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH ASSOCIATES 7-31 South Flov.:er Street, Los Angeles, California 90017 Economic Research COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CONTRACT NUMBER 5461-1200 E . -' ~ -: I 1 J • OFF-ROAD VEHlCLES No more perplexing problem faces the regional park planner and managers than how to handle off-road vehicles. The Sari Diego County ORV Report of January 197] stated: o The use of trail bikes, mini-bikes, dune buggies and four-wheel drive vellicles i!1 the County of San Diego has grown rapidly in recent years. o These ORV's have posed serious problems 6n private and public lands, in- cluding noise, dust, odors, fire risks, litter, hazards to users, unauthorized and destructive uses of public and private 1and and irreparable damage to the terrain. ~ o It should be the objective of any management program to provide, within the concept of multiple use, for the reasonable needs of various types of off-road vehicles on public lands, in .such a manner as to maintain a stable land resource and minimize conflict with other legitimate users. Off-road vehicle activities are recognized as legitimate recreation activities and of a magnitude that may be expected to increase with time. The popularity of these vehicles for all age levels is significant. Their use is becoming more and more a 'family activity, perhaps of important social significance. Investment in equipment and costs of operation are indiC-'ltive of a rising affluence of county residents. Analysis of related available facts and trends has led the consultants to the position that it is timely and proper to provide public facilities for this growing demand in a positive manner. As appropriate and feasible, the regional park system should provide a portion of the facilities needed to satisfy this demanu. (See lyIap 15.J J .. _ .. -z...... .......... Map 15 OFF·ROAD VEHICLE SITES " -, .~ f1lLS~T\7~:::-:=::--.. ~-•. --"-, .. _ .. _. "--'--'-"-"T ~' : ~'<;: , ' 0 PALOMAR HO .... TAI>I STATE PARK \ ~ \ ' fli CU),"'OM~ " 0 LAKE HtHSHAlI ., AVENA VISTA LA~;c-..e;J C]CALAV. A LJ.~~\ \: \ 0 LAKE WOHLFORD AC;UA HEDION01Q OOIXON R:ESE~VOIR \~ . OATIQUITOS LAGO';;''o OSAN ELI 0 0 SAN PASQUAL i ~ r QUA I ~.\o HODGES '~ O~EISE SAN ELIJO LAGOCNG : SAN OlEGutT 0 0 DOS Plcns \ \ VALLEC ITO 0 lOS PE""~5~UITOSO OSAH VICENTe REs~~vorR AGUA CALIENTE 0 '~\ ') I :; ForHt.'N.\~rAIN s~~~~E~I~~;~~::::;L~"EHrE W ~CAH;:~H~S\ MISSIO~ {It\;O ~! ~--: ... ':J~,I MU~~AY (.__ .J.--" ___ , J plOL.L>S RESERVOIR s~ O"~I\~:':.:~,~~r:j~ __ "::' . I ~ I~_'. '\ ~ '. :-SwEET"·\TE~ c: LAKE MORENA i ''t "~\" "1\ \\\'\ ItOTAY R:fSCR:'/OIR D ~'.; • POTRt;:RO __ ~ __ ---------~ ----- '\ \. ---.---- H,TER"'AT IONAI. PARI.-..: ~ __ -... ---~.----t· -- i:! OFF ROAI) VEHICLE; -PRI~'R( SITES tJ OFF ROAD VEHIClES -PO:;SI~LE SITES IJ OFF R~AU VOIICLf.5 IIOT PE~MITT£D IV-27 " . -. j.- ~ " • There is a basic conflict in case of rccreatiollE))dJ2,Ctween those participating in off-road vchicle acti~rities and other park use;; which must be resolved. All park sites are evaluated f0r ad-aptability and compatibility. for ORV activities. Several sites are acceptable places to provide facilities -. Guajome, Lake HoClges, Sycamore Canyon, and Otay Reservoir -that are reasonably convenient to population centers of the county. In addition, two other sites are recommended for further study as possible ORV activity areas -a portion of the Los Penasquitos site away fro111 priniary natural areas of the park, possibly in the former NASA engine test center to the east, and near Buena Vista Lagoon east of EI Camino Real and south of Buena Vista Creek (isolated from the lagoon and the. main .regional park area). These two sites offer potentials for ORV areas for younger ages near home. Additional sites should be investigated that may-provide close-in play areas. . " " Sycamore Canyon is recommended for development primarily as an off-road v.ehicle park dueto the terrain and -isolation-from present poppIated areas. Activity management will -be necessary to forestall degradation of the site and surroundings. Rotation of use areas is suggested as a manage- ment policy as activities reach the point of undue wear ana lear. ORV activities at other parks must be segregated from other activity areas so that the largest number of people may enjoy the park. Adequate buffering of ORV activity-areas from other parts of the park is essential and off-liniit restrictions for ORV's should be adopted and enf0rced as needed and feasible. The implementation program should approach ,the problem p0sitively to provide and test mixed use of the regional parks with use of the police poWer to maintain an eq'uitable'6hlahceo USt:l. Though not identified and included in these recom:rp.endations -due .. to present "lack of known ~terest) cross-country trails for off~road vebicles may sbow a-greater demand as the-number of vehicles increase in the county. Due to incompatibility of these vehicles with-hiking, bicycling and horseback riding, additional trails would be required to satisfy tIns demand. Until separate trails are constructed;, some conflicts may occur due' to enforcement. problems related to segregation of trail J • us~ BEACHES AND LAGOONS The coastal beaches and lagoons of San Diego County are.....p_rlceless naturai tesour~s-,_.:vhi?h serve local, regional arid national needs. The value of these county assetshas been recognized in two recent studies. The California Coastline Preservation and Recreation Plan projected intensive recre- atipll demand for the beaches, whether in state, local or private ownership. In addition to providing for recreation needs which are obvious; the plan ca1ls for the lesser known but equally vital objectives ofyreserving natural features and preserving history. In San Diego County, Torrey Pines State Reserve bas preserved two pine forests, a rocky intertidal zone and a coastal salt marsh. The University of California has a marsh preserve at Mission Bay. In Buena Vista Lagoon land bas been acquired by the Nature Conservancy and State Department of Fish and Game. Other public zones are a1 La 1011a City Beach, La 101la Point (city) and Point Loma (federal). But more needs to be done. The Tijuana River/Border Field area, according to the Cpasiline Plan, has 'high quality occurrences of coast sagebrush, coastal strand, coastal saltmarsh, IV-28 '. ~ .. ~ t .. • S:JIH.1y intertidal zone and ncarshore zone. The Coastline Plan recommends 38 natural reserves be eSlahlished along the California coast. The two within San Diego County are designated regional parks -Torrey Pines and International Park. For Torrey Pines, 518 acres would be added to the existing state reserve to create a total park of 1,495 land acres and 8,110 offshore acres. Inter- national Park (called Tijuana River State Park) is recommended to add 1,702 acres in private ownership to the 793 available at Border Fielcl and other public holdings. Both proposed state park additions arc in the "high" category for endangerment. . Five of the lagoons of San Diego County -Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, Batiquitos, San Elijo and Tia Juana Slough -are designated regional park sites. In addition, a small portion of Los Penasquitos Lagoon is part of Torrey Pines State Reserve. Only San Dieguito is outside regional park consideration. (The eighth lagoon in the county -Santa Margarita -is located on federal land in Camp Pendleton and not studied by RPIS nor the Coastal Lagoon Study.) Buana Vista Lagoon, San Elijo Estuary, and Tijuana River Estuary are designated as "Very Good Scenic Fishery, Wildlife and Recreational Watenvays" by the California Protected Waterways Pl::J.n (1971). This indicates regional rather than state-wide interest. The Coastline Plan recognizes significant biotic communities of coastal saltmarsh at Batiquitos, San Elijo and Santa Mm'garita Lagoons and maritime pine forest at Agua Hedionda. To preserve these natural resources and meet the objectives of the Coastal Lagoon Study, this RPIS designates Buena Vista, Batiquitos, and San Elijo Lagoon and International Park (Tia Juana Slough) as ecological preserves, with recreation demands subordinated to the preservation of irreplacable na~ural resources. 'J The Coastal Lagoon Study found that six of the seven under study, all except'Tia Juana Slough (site 'olli1lemifioil-aJ. -Park), are -in-VaTIous,statesor--ecologlcal'deterioration:' This-is-due primarily to the --{ntiuences -ot" urbarl1zaIlon: s'L~;Ling with the construction of th~ S3.nt~ Fe trestles ;:)cross the mouths of the lagoons in the 1880'? As urbanization spreads over the coastal plain, pressures are becoming ever ,s,tronger for the develop~eDt_QJ alUand still open, including the coastal lagoons. For most of "'these. ~'ome -form--C;{-ci"evclop'ment proposal is pending, ranging from outright filling to extensive . . J!~ding.,.Th~"fe-is'-aq-u~~tion as 'to-which demands can be met arou'nd coastal lagoons, with the"'- Coastal Lagoon Study stating, "The various and unique qualities of the lagoo~~.2}.!.gges.t a m_uLti:_ -12.!Ld~y of Rotential use~ncluding many forms of recreation, wildlife conservation and biotic . production. A broad range of beneficial uses could be carried on simultaneously in each lagoon . under a program of multi-use management. Effective management would minimize conflicts between uses and maintain the equilibrium of the estuarine processes." The attitude survey of the . Coastal Lagoon Study found a high preference by the federal public for ope!! space, wildlife conservation and recreation in the lagoons. The pretimin3ry proposals of the Regional Park Imj}lementation Study for recreation and ecological prc:O;l'rv:ltion of the lagoons were submitted to' the Coastal Lagoon Study consultants to determine thdr compatibility with the natural processes of each lagoon. The results of their initbl reviews <1W used in the concepts developed for each regional park in the implementation program described in Chapter V. The recommendations of the RPIS for lagoons should be submitted to the Coastal Laf!oon .;;tafT of the Environmental Development Agency 'for a formal testing in their computer basL'd L'valuation system. IV-29 , ; : • .. I..... • ... I /. I \ 6 ' • • BEACH CAMPING The Sotlthern Caiifornia Regional Recreation·Area Study 0f 1960 stated the first priority goal of "Additional sites for ocean shoreline campgrounds be acquired as soon as possible bdore increasing land values price all potential camping areas out of reach.:: Eleven years later, the CaliiQ!2]..1fl ''':''' Coastline Pres~rvation aJ~ Recreation Plan projects l~~t state beach campsites Qlan}1ed fpr 19j~ over two an<Lane:halUi.nlesl"hC;LJ2Ieientsui}"pTY -' WIII meet less than ten percent of the pfojec;ted .,..,. --.~ -~-'--------. beach camping demand in that year. The number.of camp units required in San Diego t6 meet that demand could be as hi.£h as 10,020, cqmpared to the existing 397 urills and the 962 proposed by 1980. ;. The Coastline Plan identified northern San Diego County as one of the areas having the greatest deficiency in supporting upland. Day use sta,te beaches at Carlsbad, Leucadia, Moonlight and Cardiff are too limited in size to provide cam.ping. The existing camp areas atSouth Carlsbad and San Elijo are fully. developed with no room for expansion. Torrey Pines is a state reserve with ~amping a dubious use. Additional campsites are projected at San Onofre Bluffs. (25 0 units) anu Silver'Strand (315 units). Some camping may be allowed at International Park if enough land can be acquired. . . The regional park system analyzed in this section and described park-by-park in Chapter V is designed to meet resident recreation needs and a reasonable level of out-of-county demand. It is not capable of meeting any significant portion of the excess demand for beach camping, unless major changes are made in planning guideJlnes and policies .. ~ev.eral alternative solutions are possible to -... ~ . --meet tllis staggcril1g.be5.ch campsit.e.T!eed: . • ~ ~ • ' ••• --.... --.~--.. '----. __ A ._:-:.-::.:-: J o Increase the number of state be'aches or u.nits within each state beach (above currently planned expansions), .' o Provide additional campsites along the beach by city, county'or port district .,public agend'e.s.. o Encourage additional priv~te development ,of overnight campgrounds, on eithe~ .privat~.;Qt'public 1aF~' o Provide for the use of day use facility patki.ng'lots of turfed areas for parking self-contained units on a one-night-only basis. o . Provide additional camping facilities at regio:t;lal parks adjacent to the beach. Four regional parks -Buena Vista Lagoon, Agua He~djOnda Lagoo~~ Batiquitos ~agoon, and SaI~ Elijo Lagoon -are in the north coast are4Lhaving the greatest deficiency in supporting upland. It _ ._~v_~l!}~Jll~ref~T5:~~0~al to_~~~~l1..e~ meet be~5.hc~rn.plEfden}ana~'11ese-regfoniilparksare,-·- however, also lagoons which have limits on the amount and intensity of development which can be accommodated. These two coni1icting yet independently desirable n~eds must be considered in~ planning lagoon parks . . / I IV-30 , .. I f. i- ; I. " i • .' . Another alternative possibility is to utilize existing transit facilities which are now adjacent to the entire beach frontage. Amtrak is operating passenger trains several times daily along the Santa Fe j tracks between Los Angeles and San Diego. Stops are now provided at, Oceanside and Del Mar. Additional stops might be provided at San Onofre State Beach and at one or two l~goon regional parks -for example Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos Lagoons. The concept sketch below illustrates one way of tying Amtrak rail service to a recreation center consisting of lagoon·regional park, a public beach and plivate resort hotel facilities. A secondary tram system would provide access from camping areas around the lagoon fo the beach. Map 16 AMTRAK SERVICE TO LAG,OONS STATE BEACH RESORT HOTEL- IY·31 ' .. fF ~ r 1. [ [ r"" J L r .. ", .. .... [ I. 6 r L [ [~' ..... l ~ " '·\.50S--• • . \:. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ': " AND GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT FOR PROPOSED 165-HOME SUBDIVISION CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-28 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED PURSUANT· TO RESOLUTIONS NO.'S 3015 AND 3016' CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OCTOBER 30, 1972 OWNER: PANNONIA INVESTMENT CORP. 3433 WEST 109TH STREET INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA . DEVELOPER: J.,W. KLUG DEVELOPING CO" INC. 4540 CAMPUS DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA . PREPARED BY: NESTE, BRUDIN & STONE INCORrORATED CIVIL E;NGINEERS SAN BERNARDINO -HEMET -ESCONDIDO CALIFORNIA F.", t,. r L [ [ [ C r L [ .. , . I \ I I r, ,f , I • .. GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING IMPACT ON ENVIRONME~T RESOLUTION NO. 3016 - ~_. ..... .'0,----. .•. _" .-"." .. ~.. Y'.' • I I r' ~ll.i r' Ih,; f~ L r L • l.a. The proposed project wili significantly change present uses of a mostly bare, vacant and irregularly sloped land area wi,thin the city limits into a high-class subdivision of single-family homes in acco:rdance with the General Plan and zoning ordinances of the City of Carlsbad. Adjacent lands to the northwest, north, and northeast have been or are now in the process of being sub- divided and developed as single-family residences. Another sub- division is planned to the southeast which will connect this site with an already partially developed area. The area west of Park Drive adjacent to the cove off Agua Hedionda Lagoon is being developed with condominium-type dwellings. The remainder of the surrounding area is used for agriculture or is vacant. The pro- posed houses "V,ill be compatible with the surrounding homes. When the homes are completed and landscaped the proposed project will reduce siltation of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon through the exten- sion of an enclosed storm drainage system through this site and the prevention of on-site soil erosion through the grass and other landscaping around the homes. Under existing conditions soils that are eroded from the proposed site by surface storm water flows are washe~ into ~he lagoo~ causing an extensive siltation problem. l.b. No known areas of historical, archaeological or aesthetic value will be affected by the proposed project. The aesthetic vnJ~1Je of t.hc arGa in general ,alill be enh2 .. ncec .. by th(-? r1p.'\:relopmAnt of the proposed '~ubdivision with its architectually pleasing arrangement of well landscaped homes. Some of the homes within this subdivision will be able to enjoy a view of the ocean and others will have a view of the lagoon area. However, it is not , anticipated that the aesthetic view from any existing home will be permanently reduced,by the construction of this subdivision. l.c. The proposed project will not significantly accelerate the development of adjoining non-urban areas in the immediate future. The proposed project, being a SUbdivision, will attract 165 families to occupy its new homes. It is anticipated that some of these will be families moving within the community and some will be families new to the area. The development of this attractive subdivision may increase'the land values and encourage some per- sons to construct their homes on the few undeveloped lots in the already subdivided areas 'ivi thin the immediate vicinity. The proposed project does, however, help to complete the develop- ment of this southeast area of the City of Carlsbad by partially bridging the gap between two already' subdivided areas. Therefore, the way is prepared for the orderly planning of other future , . '~ ~ " ~ ·1 I t: '.- ~ [ ~~" E ," [ [ ~ ~. IF 1 " ~ " [ E '. r [ '''~ f E .-,;. t ~ g: 1;:' ml ~ ~:: ~ ,0 . • developments that might be app:roved, in the next growth ring around the City, in accordance with its General Plan and zoning ordinances. However, the proposed project in itself, in pro- ( viding homes for 165 families, would tend,to delay rather than accelerate other resident~al developments. l.d. The proposed project will not alter the character of the existi!lg ,community which is primarily residential. The 165 families attracted to the proposed hom,?s will generate, a cer'tain amount of traffic wi thin the area by their normal acti vi ties. ' However, 'the proposed subdivision provides for the extension of Hillside Drive as a major collector street with an 8-4-foot right-of-way as recommended by the 1970 traffic analysis for this area of the City of Carl'sbad. It should be. noted though that Hillside Drive will need to be extended another few hun- dred feet beyond the limits of this subdivision to conriectto an existing portion of Hillside Drive, thus proyiding access to El Camino Real and areas to the east. This 300+ foot-sec'tion of Hillside Drive, which lies within another, proposed subdivi- sion, will complete Hillside Drive from Highland AVenu~on the west to Kelly Drive on the east with all of the new sections designed as a major collector street. The 1970 Traffic Study for this area 'of the City of Carlsbad , estimated the 1990 average daily traffic (ADT) ,for this section ,..,4= .w.: 1 -: ~-i .-'1 c ;-,,-~ n.-, "~-'1 Ii Ii u'-"v-' ·V-el'n-i, .':L-es ' 'T'n' ~ -= "-\-s'--'o1"'e'l'l'"' 'Wl' tn" in t' he " ~_ ... ~~ ':'J.~.~.J..;:; ...... ~_ -'.1.. ..J..·V-\.,:O <:.l '-.L.V r"% .. -.l..-....... -• .J...u·"..1; ~YV ' " recommended maximum capacity of 13,000 ADT for this type of stre'et. A c'opy of Figure 5 from the 1970 Traffic Study giving the projected 1990 ADT for Tamarack Avenue, Hillside Drive and Park Drive accompanies this report. Also attached iS,a copy of Figure 3 from the above repor:t entitl~d, "Traffic Analysis Zones and Load Points." The report indicates the projected 1990 ADT generated within Area 16, which as shown on Figure 3 extends from Tamarack Avenue to Hillside Drive and from Park ,Drive to Sunny Hill' . Drive, is 2,770 vehicles. Probably at least half of these trips will utilize Tamarack Avenue and Birch'Avenue as their ,main east-west street to go to either Highland AvenUE? or El' Camino Real. Within Area 29, which is enclosed by Hillside Drive, Park Avenue and Neblina Drive, an estimated average of 4,590 trips per day will be generated in 1990. Many of these trips will utilize Park Avenue rather than Hillside Driye as their main traffic artery. This traffic analysis indicates that the completion of Hillside Drive as a major.collector street will improve the flow of traffic within this area of the City of Carlsbad since over 50 percent of its capacity in 1990 will , ' " , " ,1 [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ • be utilized by traffic originating beyond the limits of Areas 16 and 19. It should be also notcd that the proposed subdivision also provides an outlet to the south for Sunnyhill Drive, Clear- view Drive and Skyline Drive via the Clearview Drive connection to Hillside Drive. Therefore, the benefits gained from providing for the extension of these two streets in accordance with the proposed traffic flm.., analysis will more than offset any disad- vantag~s created by the traffi6 generated from within the pro- posed project area. The proposed project will increase the tax base for the City of Carlsbad and generate an increase in business tor the commercial establishments in the community. The developers.of the proposed project have agreed to contribute funds for the acquisition of school sites in an amount determined by the Carlsbad Unified School Dis trict, the City of Carlsbad and the Developer. 'rhe developer will also make a payment for parks in" lieu of fec'S re- quired by Carlsbad City Ordinance No. 9190. It is not anticipated that any nevI acti vi ties not pres(=ntly found wi thin the communi ty would be introduced as a result of this project. The proposed project in conjunc"tion wi th Tract 72-18 will pro- vide for completing the loop of a l6-inch domestic water main. This will increase the system reliability and fire flows for system to be constructed as a part of the proposed project will interc"ept flows from the existing sanitary sewer system at the south end of Sunnyhill Drive and transport the waste- waters by gravity along Hillside Drive to the edge of this pro- posed subdivision where it will be discharged to the sewers of proposed Tract No. 72-18. Th1S will allow the City "of Carlsbad to eliminate a sewage pump station that is now creating a con- siderable maintenance problem for the City forces. I.e. The proposed project will not affect the potential use, extraction or conservation of scarce natural resources as none are known to be located \vi thin the project si te. 1.f. The proposed project will not affect any natural or man- made feature in the project area that are unique or rarely found in other parts of the City, County, State or Nation as none are known to exist within the proposed project site. 2. Significant environmental effec~s of the proposed projBct are both positive and negative. The proposed project, with the exten$ion and additions to t.he present enclosed storm drain systems and tl1e lmvns and li:mdscapipg around tJ1e proposed homes, ,.,ill greatly reduce the siltation problem in Agua Hedionda. Lagoon. According to the City of Carlsbad Engineer the proposed site in its existing condition is one of the prim~ sources £or siltation of the lagoon. Siltation tends to kill fish and other aquatic life, it prevents the penetration o~ sun light for aquatic plant growth and tends to hasten the eutrophication of the lagoon and the resultant salt water marsh. The proposed subdivision will provide desirable home sites for 165 families with homes tha~ are compatible with the City of Carlsbad General Plan and zoning and with the other homes in the surrounding area. It will provide the City with a greater tax base with which to operate its various. programs. It.will upgrade an area which is now vacant and generally bare·land. Since the proposed site is in close proximity to an existing developed area both on the northeast and southeast sides and has little vegetation, it is not. anticipated that any birds or other forms of wildlife "{ill be adve"rsely affected by the pro- posed construction. Also I the development of this area '-ihich joins existing developed land on two sides and another proposed ·subdivision on the ·thtr-d !3)"qe .. p:rovi,d~-s. ,f9r.·a p'~.3:n~.~9-. srrm:Tt? .... '_'_ of the City outward from its ce.nter, without leaving scatteped patches of undeveloped areas that would encourage fil,l-in growth at a later date. As previously men"tioned, the City o,f Carlsbad storm and sanitary sewer systems, its' domestic wat~r system and its traffic patterns for local streets, all will be improved by the development o~ the proposed subdivision. The proposed development will undoubtedly bring new people to Carlsbad, which means new talents and abilities for the growth of the City. It will provide the CitY'with a greater tax bas~ on which to operate its various programs. The new ~amilies will generate increased business for the merchants of Carlsbad, and th~ children will attend its schools. To offset the cost of school requirements as previously sta'ted, the developer·has. agreed to make a contribution to the school an4 pa~k funds. During the construction of a project ,stich as this, there is always a certain amount of dust, noise and conjestion .which causes a temporary adverse impact on the environment. <;onstruc- tion activities, as such, do not enhance the scenic vie~s or esthetics of the area. However, all of these are only temporary in nature and can be kept within reasonable limits with proper I " ' f ~ I I ; L.J [ [ " I l. ~~ l • controls. No hard rock that wbuld require blasting is antici- pated to be encountered during construction. Dust can be kept to a minimum during earthmoving operations by spraying water over the loose dirt and by good housekeeping operations to pre- vent dirt fr6m being deposited on nearby City streets to dry up and blow away as dust. 3. Significant environmental effects can also result from the cumulative effect resulting from a number of similar small acti- vities in one area and these need to be evaluated in the context of the entire City. One such effect is the, traffic patterns in the area. In 1970 the City of Carlsbad had a traffic study made with reference to this possible problem. As previously noted the extension of Hillside Drive through the proposed subdivision will aid in the overall traffic pattern. The City's public utilities are also an important fac·tor. As previously stated, the City IS sanitary and storm sewer systems and domestic water distribution systems will actually be improved by the proposed project. The water and sewer systems they fee~ into were designed and con- structed to accommodate the maximum residential densities (seven dwelling units per acre) permitted in the General Plan while densities in the proposed subdivision will average less than 3 dwelling units per acre. The effects of the iI).crease in popula- tion resulting from the proposed subdivision on ~ity Schools and Parks is also" imp'ortant. However, as previously' noted the devel- oper has ag~eed to make a contribution to the school and park funds. The location of the subdivision, in a gap in the rim of the developed community, does not provide enclosed vacant areas which would encourage other development in the future, but does provide for an orderly ,growth· of the community from, the center outward and in accordance with the City's General Plan. '., --~----.---} " / -' .J I •. ~.'. ~ /:.,' . /1' -, .•• ':r 1 '-: 1 VI:: V· ee ... ; .. :. lL-,,-- . 'Ex~/1/12 .,., • _ ---r:rOAflD _ DI nr.CTOmj· . ChtllrmMl -fl,cl""d C, flVpillSld n l .1" 1"1" ro<' '--"-1 A I' ""7/'-"-10"" 1'l...'''.l·'I''I\·'~ VI ll..:l.-\I'III_, \1 '1\ Mavor Pro Tcrn-Dul Mar i I I I I , i I I ; I ! ·1 1 SAN ,DIEGO liEGIOrJ Vice-Chairman -. Jarnc5 Hobol Councilm"n -Chl/I;! Vista EXECUTIVE DIRECTOn e. St;;CRETARY Richard J, Huff Suitt! 5211 Security Pacific Plaz,l " 1200 Thin'! Av-a.--San-D.icgo....ct.~_ . .;.,·u' ..u!.J...:.." ~(7W1"-!4!...1 233-521'j I oetobc'l' 5, 1973 I C\.'-:."'·~"·\ /"'-, ....... ; ' .. J;,."" , .. CI}\STALsd I '':::::-i :~"'::. '/. , -.: ... , .. ""'/'" ~-1 • .. ........ 1 ............. , • '---------<. - T()~ Board of Dir0ctors Executive Director HE: ~ancho La Cuest2_: Federal Housing Administra.tion Referral Intro~lllction Tht; following is a report concerning a referral received from. the Federal Uousing Administration (FHA) requesting CPO comment on 'a preliminary applh-:aUon for FHA rnortgagc insnrnllce for dcve]opn1ent of 278 detached single fa.mily homes and 100 duplex buHdings at the 107 acre Rancho La Cuesta, 'I ShO. The Hancho La Cuesta subdivision is located to the ",vest of EI Ccl.lnino R~a1 bct\-"Gen Ar-2n;:j..u.llu ..c\.lga. Hoads directly -to the ·east" and southeast" of-the pro-' posed La Costa development. This subdivision is a part of a large·r parcel of approxillJateli 11 00 acres o"\vned by Rancho La Costa \vhich was recently annqxed to 'the -City of Carlsbad. Hancho La Cuesta itself .is within the low'" lying, round bottomed valley immediately to the west of EI Can1ino Real ~nd among the sloping hill and plat.eau l8.nds im:mediately \~Iest of thE! valley. RECOIVll\lE~DATION that the Board of Directors of the Comprehensive Planning Organization reC01l1·- rnend to the Federal Housing Adm.inist;ation that it not issue mortgage in8ur-- ance for the proposed Hancho La Cuesta Project until such tilne a:~ devcloprnents arc in accol'do.ncc with an adopted City public facilities phasillg plan, wit.h the understanding that the Hancho La Cuesta devclornuent be· consistent with the provisions of til,at adopted plan. . ('.\f1L:~n.\I'. [IIL'l" VI:,: /I.. l llf:t''''·\!'(', I'l! L r·.!,\I:. I L ('./1. I,):.;, I :;C0N[:fDf), IMPt 11I.\l I'LJ\CH, L.J\ MH;I\, NATION/\l. ell Y, l 1 L' t .\ r..:: d t 11 . : •• \: ,j i HI \ n I \. I I , . ~u\ (J f .. 1.\; 1 ~.; ).: \' ,', t /\.. l . I ..... , I _~ __ ,_J October 5, 1973 •• , D i ~;(' 11 !: !.; i () n .. -_ .. _ .. __ ._-- 1. 2. ( Hancho La C'lH~fita is not sl.lo\~n as being served by either water or f.:('wcr on' CPO's recently adopted \Vater, Sew'er and Flooc.l Control Phln's 1831 served area maps. Therefor.e, the implication remains ih~d: development of H(LllCi10 La Cucsta will use sewer and water capacity which will eitiler increase total capacity dem.anc1s throughout the area or precJ.udc dcvelopnlC'llt in anollwl' location. To detenninc the general effect 011 the ent~re Carlsbad area we have compiled data on all current developmenL proposals we could identify in the area and projected sonle of iheir public service necds over th~~ next ten to fifteen year' period. This analysis has been forwarded to the City of Carlsbad a.nd is also attached to this report for your infol'rnation. I As indicated in the accompanying leUer and attachments, current developrnent proposals could easiJ.y increase the Carlsbad .population six-fold in the next 10-1.5 year period, adding approxilnately 90, 000 new residents in approxi:01ately ~) 7, 000 new hO'using units. (This level of housing production y:ould seenl to represent an inflated portion of fut.ure North County grc)\7th. The total dYJ'eHing unit dem.and for the • Ii. ; 'San Diego region for the 1975-1995 period is estilnated at about 450, 000 I units. Even assum.ing a maximum. capture rate of twenty-five percent ,.- ~ of tlle3G 1.111its for l'Jorth ~COlll1tJT~ tlJ,e C11rre:lt le\Tel of peT'mj~ts i11 1hr:~ 1 Carlsbad area has already accounted for one-third of North County! s p~ojected growth over the next twenty years. ) . r",,<!1 '. (' Public: services for this level of developlnent will require a large /' \ financial outl8..Y. Sewage flOViS by 1985 could exceed by 4 to 6 MGD ) presently projected Carlsbad lVIWD and Leucadia CWD capacity rights .l in the Encina tratem.ent plant, as outlined in Encinal s Phase III ex-<" pansion proposals. Construction of additional schools could cost as 1 111Llch as $GO-70 million. C01l1bincd y8arly opc!l.'ating 8xpenses for 3. I the inlpacted school districts could increase by $30 Inillion dollars L?;~year. Taken together. the development proposals wi~hin the City of Carlsbad have signincat~t inlpacts on the entire subregional area. Many of the school districts cross political bounc.1aric~s and these added school expenses will have to be shared by neighboring cOll1n~unities. The sewage treatment service supplied to the City by the Encina plant is only a part of the Enci.na plant's subregional service obligation which also inc1udes Vista. Buena, San Marcos, Encinitas and Leucadia. If development pressures are at a similar level in those areas, the present expansion pl'ogram envisaged for tile Encina plant will not be adequate to :lceollul1odaie tbe increased sewage flows • . --) . /\ (lA.-eH"" ,~~~\\L\~. ~.il_. lUC!I!\l~I).1. IIl\J~'II\) ~ \ /\ Hac 11I11\'nt t' 4 ,-)' 'b'~' [:::-x /)" I ( ...3 CHi: of Carlsbad ) --c :J ._+ ' + V) Current population f'; c-Existing trends ':::-r;: ) ~ ~'~lRadia1 Cor.ridors --J 'J .) Ci: ; ~. C6ntrol1ed trends " 1\ ' .... \ ~ .. ..--;-, .- M .... :-r .. -- '" ~ 'i ~ -: >. r"\ 1) t >-r ...... ---.~ Under current develo,pment p-ropo'sals (. (.L-\\(U ... \'\~-~) I - \ I ,I • , I ! I 17,316 70,700 51,800 44,800 105,000· • Year 1973 by 1995 by 1995 by 1995 ~ by 1985-1990 I ----..", I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I- I- I I I -' HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER SYSTEM FOR TRACT NO. 72-18 & 72-28 in the CITY OF CARLSBAD -- 7 --23 -7':::; Prepared For Pacesetter Homes, Inc. 4540 Campus Drive Newport Beach, California Prepared By William_G. Church. Consulting Civil Engineers, Inc. 2000 Dove Street N~wport Beach, California • /, r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I' I, • GENERAL I ' 'The Hydraul ic Analysis attached was accompl ished with the /iJniva'c Computer Systems of Logicomp Corporation. This Computer is one of the largest systems available to private engineers ;,n ;the United States. ' The program was developed especially for the design and analysis of water systems of this type. , SCOPE OF STUDY In order to properly evaluate the water system· for Tract No. 72-28, it was our opinion that a major portion of the entire pr~ssure zone should be analyzed. ' Four alternate and complete studies were ma-de. Two fhe flow' . . locations were assumed and with each fire flow. location, alternate pipe sizes were assumed as discussed with 'the City Water and Engineering Departments. ' The results of these studies are attached. DESIGN CRITERIA Because of the difficulty in exactly determining the domestic flows during a fire, assumptions were made and included in the analysis. The fire flow, itself, was increased by 500 GPM over what the City has determined to be the minimum fire' flo~ required. Overall, the criteria used was very conservative and it is'felt that the pressures calculated would, in all cases, be greater than shown in the calculations, especially cons,idering the fact that a loop will exist between Junction No. 5 and 14. CONCLUSIONS We have concluded, from a careful study of the four alternate' network analysis, the following: . 1. The water system for Tract No. 72-28, as designed, is' adequa te and wi 11 meet the Ci ty standard,s. 2. The existing 8" 1 ine between Junction 9 and 11 (Line 19) , should be upsized to 10". J 3. The proposed line between Junction 9 and 10 (line'12) should be a 10" line. 4. The propos~d line through Tract No. 72-18 should remain an 811 line. (Line 14. 15 and 16) I I I' I I I I I· I I I I I I I I I I 'I e. cnr·1PUTER PRHlT OUT EXPLANATION OF COf,1PUTER PRINT OUT Printout headings ar~ generally self~explanatory~' However, there is a tendency for those unfamiliar with thjs particular program to read the outflO\<Js as coming from the. "Back Junction Number" rather thaR " the column titled "Junction Number". This is also true in reading residual pr:essures at each junction. Other than this, those familiar with ·the Hardy Cross method of balancing flows will find the printout easy to follow. ' • I I. -_.---.-.--LOGIC1,b35LOG,1,SO ---- - ---. 23 JU·1. 73 '09157105 PAGE -~}."~-e 4 LM~ICOMP CU~PORATION .... __ ._---._------...... _-_ ....•. -- C~~PUTER SERVICES 'fER. 2.0 CEOB ··FIRE ,FLOW I ~ ALT. A TRACT 72-20 CARLSBAO FIRE AT LOCATION 2 ~IJ,",~ER OF JUNe T IONS...... ••• •• • •• • 25 Nu~BER OF LINES................... 33 N~~9ER OF LDOpS................... 8 ITERATION LIMIT................. 100 CYCLES LnoPs TO BE BALANCED ~ITHIN.... 5.000 GPM SURFACE ELEV. OF JUNCTION ZERO 330.00 FEET .. PIP E I. I N E \Ii G CHURC.H 1-18",73 INPUT FLOW. FACTOR ••• :...... 1.00000 GPM OUTPUT FI.OW FACTOR......... 1.00)000 GPM Nu~eER OF BALANCED LnOPS........ 8 ACTUAl. NUMBER OF ITERATIONS..... . 0 CYCLES ~OOPS ACTUALLY 8A~ANCEO WITHN... 4.ooq GPM PRESSURE AT JUNCTION ZERO ••••••• .00 PSI S. U "1 "1 A R Y ********************************* Ptl)E L.INE 1.,10. -.. - 1 2 3 " S II 7 8 9 . 10 11 -12 t3 ·t4 -15 -16 -17 -18 1'9 20 21 22 23 2" 25 Lf:N\;TH FEET --._.- ~oo. qS;O. 1150, 400. 1050. ~SO. lb~O. .1050. 400. 700. 1250. ,400. 10-:'0. qOO. 1'50. 1000. 150. CJSO. 550. 300. qOO. 400. '550. 250. 350. DIAMETER I"CJotES -.-----. 18.00 16.00 16'.00 la.on ll.00 _.01) 8 .. 00· 8.,00 12.00 10.,01) B,OO -1O •. on -10:.00 -10.00 -10.00 -10.00 .. e.oo .. 8.00 10.0~ 8.00 a.on &.00 10.00 8,.01'1 6.011 H-W COEFF .----- 140. 140. 140. lila. 140. 140. 140. 140. 140. t40. 140, 140. lila. ltlo. 140. 140. 140. 140. 1.:j0. 14". 140~ .)1 40. 140. 1.tlO. 140. BOOSTE~ 'HEAI) FE'ET . '!It------ .00' .00 .00 .01) .on .00 ..00 .00 .0Cl .00 .00 .00 .0Cl .00 .00 .00 .00 .01'1 .on .00 .00 .on .00 .00 .00 FLOW GPM --_.-171'10,ono 1100.000 -3?1.278 '1373.722 3'()2.847 -2?1.278 -519.12Q 41J9.A7& 10b5.870 b11.000 60b.000 -3/17.720 -9~4.000 "&11.280 ... bllo.280 -001.280 -209.A09. 4\9.1)'57 91l8.720 524.b63 S19.o~3 ... b:?3.52b -361.8li> ... 38b.610 -1I1b.6So HEAD LOSS FHT .65 1.37 -.O~ .75 .25 .... 92 -7.54 3.80 .qq 1.50 7.84 -.30 -5.24 -1.94 -1.80 -2.0Q -.13 3.0! 2.07 l,U4 4.25 .-2.05 -.Ll5 -.b8 -1.01 HEAD Lnss FT/l00FT .. -.----- .08!Ll9 .14L1b2 .-,001,63 .18682 .02L113 -.09728 -.1l7t14 .3ot51 • 2L175.1 • 21484 ,62nn -.07572 -.49ClIl5 -.21503 -.21178 -.2085b -.08790 .31703 .48491'1 .48048 .47205 -.00127 -,01:1150 -.27338 -,28883 VELOCITY FT/SEC -.-.... - . 2.14 2.71 .51 2.80 .86 1 .41 3.31 2.87 3.02 2.50 3.87 1.42 3.94 2.50 2 •. 48 .c?4b 1.34 2.07 3.88 3.35 3.32 3.98 1.48 2,47' C!.12 UNIT COST SIFT ---. 1~.00 10.00 lb.OO 14.00 12.00 13.00 6.00 . 8.00 12.00 11).0'0 . 8.no 10.00 10.00 11).00 10.00 10,00 8.00 A.OO 10.00 13.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 13.00 ~.OO EI3T. COST DOLLARS --._-_.-. iLlUOO. 15200. 18uOO. 5bOO. 12&00. 7bOO. 12R "I'). 8400. IJAao • 71)00. 10{lOO. 4000. 10500. 9000. 8'500. 10000. 1200. 7600. 5'500. 2400. 7200. 32QO. 5'500. 2.000. 2100 • REM ARK 5 .. ---........ - e • • • • • e. • • e • • ;'e e· •• •• • • • ••• . e. -'.-' "a , .. • , , , I , , I , I I , I , I , ~ , - -- -_.--LOGIC1,~~5l0G,1,50 LMGICOMP CQ~PORATlaN ........ -... -----.... --.. _-.•...••.. CnMPUTE~ S~~VIC~S VER. 2.0 CE08 T~ACT 7Z·2~ CARLSRAD FIRE AT LOCATION 2 PIP E - -_ ..... -.-...... ... ' ... '''. ; r' -,.. .. ~-_-. -- 23 JUI. n eql'371~o; ..., ...... ~ ':> \Ii G Ct:lURCH 7-18-73 • L. I N E SUM '" A R Y •• *.**.********.******.**.****.** P!OE BOOSTER HEAD UNIT Lr~E LENGTH DIAMETER H-W HEAD FLOW LOSS HEAD L.OSS VELOCITY COST EST. COST ... n. FEET INCHES COEFF FEET GPM FEET FT/I00FT FT 15EC' ~/FT OtJLLA~S R E '" A R I< 5 -.--. -.--.. -.--..... .---.. ..... -.. -. _.-.. .--.--.-. _.------. ..• . _ .. -_ ... . ............. 2& 100. b.on 140. .00 -120.0u8 -,89 -.12740 '1.3& ~,OO 01200, ?7 IS'O'. o.on luO. .00 -170.85& -.39 -.2bOd8 2.01 &.00 900. ~~ 250. 8.on 14O. ,00 -,3&1.810 -.bO -.241bl) 2.3! 8.00 2000. -~q 1350. 8.0n 140. .00 -1~q.95S -.99 -.07335 1.21 ~,Ou 10ACO. 10 1MO. a.oo lao. • 00 -194.955 -1.23 ·',0769& 1.24 8,00 121100 • 31 2200. b.OO 140, • 01'1 -bl.808 -,82 -.03731 .70 b.OO 13200 • 32 200. 11).On 140. .01'1 11'38.190 1.3& .cHl? l:I.b5 10,00 200!). 33 500. 10.00 140 •. .00 10&5.87& 3.01 .601Qb u.35 ttl,I)O 5000. .; e - .. . ,,:... '.---.-_""_1"1.1III1 .... ~~ -PA.GE. - -~OG~~5L~,,50-I'; \. , I '. I , ." .. -.--21 .IV\" 73 091'5710'5 --. --- - b ,'" Lnr.ICOMP COQPORATIO~ I ••• ~ __ --•• ----.~~~-~-------.-.----.- ~~ Cf'l'lPUTEQ 5t:::QVICES. VER. 2.0 .C,Eoe' .. . TQACT 72-2d CARI..S~AP F~R~ ~r ~~C~TfR~ 2 fI/ P. 1=HI.IR(;H 1-18-73 • t J U NeT 1 9 N S IJ 1:1 f'kA R. Y ! I • I: ~ .* •• *******~~~*~.'.*~""'*"*', .. , . 6, to 6, " 6, 't, t. t, • • to ·ll1'JC TI ON StlQF ACE / CONNECTING BACK JUNCTION OUTFLOW HEAD P~ESSllRE fI.G.I.. l,jU~18EQ ELEV. LINF. ~IJ"~ER , ,.NyM~ER GPM lif \j, FT. PSI EI.EV. " , , -.. --... .._---. --...... ----.~:-\:---.. ----.. f I ~"--···I t" •• ,.,. It r. fliJlll!··---.. t I. -• .,---,. " 1330.0~ II 1'1 ,. 0 r·f I ! .00 11' I .0 , I 330.00 . , .. .. BO.On . " 1 . I I , ' 1 0 . • 000 .. 2Q.33 12.7 329.33 2 21':),00 2 q.l . I S.Oon ... 1.12.AQ , ' .' 4~.9 327.89 3 . '''212.00 4 I I' , · 2 5.00(1_ ,1.15.14.:, .' ",49.9 l?7 .14, 'u / .. 5 I I, '.:) , I l1S.CO "'.'I S•oon . , 1,51.80 . ' , 05.~ 32&.8& 5 lBO.OO 6 I II , · , ,4 lOO.OOO .1'17.18 . b4.0 lZ7.78 I' I I' 25 2tb.OO 9 · 3 • 0 0 0 I, 1,1 0 • 1 5 .,. ; ,,~1. 7 32b.15 , & I-220.00 33 I I • :::~? ,,,5.00n. 103.15. 144.7 32l.15 , , '7 1!:1~.00 1,. I" fI I ,". .1' S.OvO, .134 .33 58.2 319.33' 0 I I ' 8 '238.00 10 I '''. 0 5.000 d3.bb 36.3 321.06 ' . 9 221.'.0(1 111 8 5.000 93.81 40.1 3B.81 10 201).On 12 9 5.000 114.10 , 49.4 11~.10 11 225.00, lq q 5.000 8b.15 37.3 311.15 12 190.00 18 t1 5.000 118,11 51.2 30B.l1 13 177.00 '17 12 5.000 131. ~~ 5~.q 308.24 14 125.00 16 13 5.000 185.28 80.3 lta.~8 15 135.0 (\ 15 14 5.000 177 • Oq 76.7 312.-09 OJ 255 • .01') 20 11 $.000 54.73 2.3.7 .30'J.73 17' 20'1.00 2' 10 5.001') 101.45 44.0 305.~S 18 200.0n .32 17 1500.1)00 104.0Q 4S.1 304.0)9 19 150.00 23 18 ~-.000 b4. '50 0".9 304.50 20 1S7.00 28 19 5.00n 148.11 01.1.2 3a5.11 21 170.0n • 27 20 5.0,00 135,51 58.1 305.5l-22 200.00 26 21 5.00.0 106.42 46.1 3CH,.,,2 23 170.00 25 22 5.000 137.41 59.S 307.41 ,24 113.00 29 ~O 5,000 193.06 83.7 306.0b -.--_.-. TnTAI. 'OUTFLO~ ••••••••• ;~.~.~.~ ••••••• ~ •••••• 1700.000 GPM - -• .. • • " • • t "'. r-..... : -.. . --.--...... I ---. -... -.--_. -1IiI!F'?-' €I .-LOGIC1,b3SLOG,1,2~0 L~GICOMP CORPOR~TION , -.. ------.-------.--._-.---------.--C~MPUTER SERVICES VER. 2.0 .CEOS TQACT 72-28 CARLSBAD REDUCED PIPES fF AT 2 NIJ">lE~ OF JUNCTIONS ••••••••••••••.• 25 ~!lp·It1E~ ('IF LI',ES................... 33 t.jiJ~1~ER ::IF l.nOPS................... 8 IT~QATtON LIMIT................. 100 CYCLES Ln~PS TO 8E BALANCED WITHIN.... ~.OOO GPM SU~FACE El.EV. OF JUNCTION ZERO 330.00 FEET , PIP E 23 JUL 73 10,30:07 PAGE ~ FIfZ.E, FLOW /-ALL b. \II Ii CHURCH 7-18-73 . INPUT -FLOW FACTOR.......... 1,00000 GPM OUTPUT FLOW FACTOR......... 1.00000 GPM NU~BER OF BALANCED LOOps........ 8 ACTUAL NUMBER OF ITERATIOhS..... b cvrLES LOOPS ACTUALLY BALANCEO WITHN... 4.1.152 GPM PRESSURE AT JUNCTION ZERD •• ~ •••• .00 PSI LIN E SUM MAR Y ****************.**************** - PIPE LT"<E OJ::! • -.. - 1 2 3 4 S o 7 8 9 10 11 -12 13 -1" -t5 -1& -17 -18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2·5 LE"niTr. FEET . -.-.. - 1300. ~SO. 11 ~O·. 1.100. 1050. 950. 11,00. "1050. 1.100. 700. 1250. 400. lClSO. 900. A50. 1001). 150. 950. 550. 300. 900. 400. 550. ?50. 350. OIA~ETER INCHES .. --_.-.. 1~.0(\ iO.On lb.OO 11.1.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 12.0n 10.00 8.00 .. 8.0n 10.00 • 8. 00 • 8.00 • 8. on ·8.01) .. b.on . 10.00 8.('111 8.00 8.00 10.00 8.0(1 b.O"" . ~"I~ COEFF . --.... ·140. 11.10. lllO. 11.10. 140. 1t10. 11.10. 140. 11.10. Ill·O. 140. 11.10. tLiO. lllO. lllO. 140 • ·140. lao. 1£10. 140. 140. 11.10. lila. 11l0, 140. SOOSTER HEAD FEET .. -.---. .00 .on • 00 .on .00 • 00 ,00 .00 ,00 • 00 .00· • 00 .00 .00 .t)0 .00 .0(') • 00 • 00 • 0Cl ,00 • 00 ,00 • 00 ,00 FLml GPM 1700.0no 17()0.OClO -3(10.318 1374.MI 2 2Q7.513 .. 220.318 -512.831 .43':).907 1072.169 b31.262 b'-".2t.2 -424.727 -943.738 -511.1.0tl -509.011 -504.011 -lSQ .077 336.223 . 10aS.9A9 704.761 b99.7b7 .. 490.299 -31~.934 -339.Cn4 -1b4.094 HEAD LOSS FE!:.T ---. .il5 1.37 -.08 .75 .25 -.92 -7.37 3.58 1.00 1.bO 8.33 -1.3{1 -5.04 -4.1b -3.8l' .. 4.4& ... o~ &.13 3.19 2.49 7.37 -1.70 -.35 -.54 -,79 IolI::A[i LC1S~ FT/l00FT ---_.---. .0814CJ .141.1b2 -.00659 ,18'70& .0.a335 -.09&50 ..·.4b06'\ .34t02 .25022 .22821 .bb6hr; -.32501 -.48'020 -.4b2S9 -.4543(1 -·.1J 4"OA -.05283 .£\5&27 .58('186 ,82941.1 ,81858 -.1J2389 -.Ob305 -.211527 -,22713 VELnCITY FT/SEC _._----. 2.14 2.71 .~1 2.87 .81.1 1.41 3.27 2.78 3.04 ·2.58 1.1.00 2.71 3.8b 3.28 3.25 3.22 1.02 3.82 4.27 4.50 4.1.17 3,13 1.29 2.17 1.8& l___ ~, .• ; llNIT r.uST $/FT .--. IFl.OO 11,.00 1".()0 1lJ.OO 12.00 8.00 A.OO 8. 00· 12.00 10.00 8.00 lI.OO 10. 00 ~.OO e.oo B.OO 8.00 ".00 10.00 A.OO a.oo 8.00 10 .. 00 a.bo 6.00 E~T. CflST· DOLLA~~ . R e ~ A·R K 5 -._---_ .. ' --.--....... . 11.;:.lOO. 1<;:>0 0 • , 0 (1 0 ,1 • ':)"'00. 12600. 7600 • 12FOr-. 8£100. .. A C-.o • 7000 • 100 ()O. 3200 • 10SOO. 7200. bAOO. 8~OO. 1200. 'S 7 Oil • 5'500 • 2aoO • 7"200. 3200-• 5500. 2000 • 2100. e • 0 • • 0 e. 0 0 0 (I 0 0 eo • 0 0 0 e c 0 --".'.--.-PAGE .. - ----.--LOGIC1,635LOG,1,250 - - 23 JUl. 73 10130t07 ... 5 --~ LOGICOHP CO~PORATION c ... -------_._----------.--------.---C~~PUTE~ SERVICES VER. 2.0 CEOS 0 TQACT 72-28 CARLSBAD REOUCEO PIPES FF AT 2 \II G CHURCH "-18-73 C PIP E I. I ~ E SUM MAR Y •••••• ** •••• ** *** .******.* .**.**** 0 PTPE F.HJQSTER HEAD l'",n t.t~E LENGTH DI'METE~ H-W HEAD FLOW LOSS HEAD LOSS VELOCITY COST EST. COST 11'11. FEET INCHES COF.FF FEET GPM FEET FT/l00FT FT/SEC $/FT DOLLARS R E. M , ~ K S • -.-----_ ... -.---_ .... .-._. .-.---. ----... -.--~-.. -.----.--. ..... -----. ..•..•....•. ~ 2& 101). b.OO 1110. .00 -105.161 -.70 -.09972 1.19 ".00 4?00. •• ~1 150. &.00 140. .00 -1';4.0QI.l -.30 -.20::!19 1.75 b.OO 900. 28 250. 8.0.0 11.10. .'00 ... Si4.93ll -.47 -.18690 2.01 ~.OO 2000. 2Q 1350. 8.0{l 1£10. .00 -165.8£10 -.77 -.0570& 1.0& . 8.00 10AQO. 10 1"00. 8.0n 1£10. .O{l -170.SIl0 -.96 -.06028 1.09 8.00 12500. ·e • :5.1 2200. &.00 1'10. ,00 -'53.1133 -.6'1 -.02899 • &1 &.01) 13200 • 32 ~oo. 10.00 140. .00 llA5.066 1.46 .• 7317& 4.84 10.00 2000. • 11 sao. 10.00 1110. ,00 1072.1&9 3.04 ~60aou 4.38 1/).00 S(lon •. ,. C • e 0 0 eO 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 ~ ----"--LOG!Cl,~35LOG,1,250 ... ---L~GtCOMP CORPORATION .--~-.-------.-------... --.----.-~~-CnMPUTER SERVICES VER. ?O CEoa TQACT 72-28 CARLSBAD REDUCED PIPES fF AT 2 \01 C CHURCH JUfIICTION ",UMBER . --.. ~-. o 1 2 3 '" 5 25 it 7 e q 10 11 12 13 14 15 Its 17 18 11) 20 21 22 23 2U SURF I;CE -EI.EV. . ...... . 330.00 300.00 "215.00 212.0~ 175.00 180.00 21e.OO 2l0.00 18':;.00 238.0(1 220.00 200.00 225.01'1 190.00 177.00 125.00 135.00 255.00 204.00 200.00 lso.on 157.00 170.00 200.00 170.00 lU.O~ J U III C TID III , U M to! A R V ******************************* CONNECTING I.I~E ~UMaER --.---._--- 1 2 " 5 b C) 33 13 10 11 12 lQ 18 17 16 -15 20 21 3? 23 _ 2A- 27 2& 25 29 SI;CK JUNCTION NU~f\ER --.---.--.. -. o 1 Z 3 4 3 i?S & & 8 q 9 11 12' 13 14 11 lb 17 18 19 ~o 21 22 20 OUTFLOW GPM ..-._.-.. .000 5.000 S.OOI) 5.000 100.000 .000 5,oon 5,0-00 5.000 5.000 5.00n 5.00/'1 '5.000 5.000 '5.000 5.000 s.ocJO 5.00n 15011.000 .000 S.O~O 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 _._ ..• -. T"TAL OUTFLOW •••••••••• ~.: ••••••••••••••• ~ •• 1700.000 HEAO FT. .-.- .00 29.33 112.~9_ 115.14 lo;l.A6 147.78 110.14 103.11 134.50- 83.52 93.18 114.47 84.99 111.A~ 124.cH 181.33 17S.tQ 52.53 96.13 98.66 11.18.97 1(1Z.44 129.76- 100.48 131.25 187.18 GPM -- 7-18-73 PRESSURE P~I -... -.-. .0 12.7 1.18.9 uQ.9 bS.8 &4.0 47.7 1.11.1.7 511.3_ 30.2 1.10.4 "9.-0 3b.8 1.18.'5 54.1 ·7A.6 7S.q 22.8 1.11.7 42.8 61.1.b 61.7 5&.2 il3.S 56.9 8t.l ---23 'JUL 73 '0'30107 "'.G.I.. EI.EV • 330.00 32q .33 327.89 :P7.14 320.00 327.7-a 320.14 32 ~.11 31q.5G 321.52 313.1e 31~.:;.7 309.<;1; 301.84 301. 'H J.Ob.31 310.1Q 307.53 300.13 Z9a.bb 298.97 2C)9. 'HI 2q9.7b 300.u~ 301.25 300.18 .-P~GE -& --. • • • • • • e· • • • • • • e· • .. , f (: • e .... .f ' ___ .. __ .. _. _________ ~_____ _ ______ _ --•. '.-.. '-' --... ----LOGIC1,b35LOG,t,50 ;' --19 JUL 73 --15118107 .-PAGE _~~8_e ~ L~GICa~p CQRPORATION CMMPUTER SERVICES VER. 2.0 CE08 (, FIRE FLow 2-AL]: A .. 'e .. ----.. --------~------------------- T~ACT 72-28 ClRLS6AO FIRE AT LOCATION ~!I\.lJ:\EQ OF JU~CTION5 •••• ~ ••• ~ •••••• 25 NU~;E~ UF LINES ••••••••••••••••••• 33 NlIM;:!ER OF I.OOps................... 8 ITERATION LI~IT................. 100 C1CLEs LnnPS TO BE '8ALANCEO WIT~!N.... S.OOO GPM SU~FACE ELEV. OF JUNCTIO~ ZERO 330.00 FEET .. 'p 1 P E 'L I N E W G CHURCH 7-!8-73 INPUT FLn~ FACTOR ••••••• ~.. 1.00noo GPM OUTPUT FLOW ~ACTOR~........ 1.00000 G~M Nu~aER OF BALANCED Lnups •••• ~... 8 ACTUAL NUMSER OF ITERATIO~S..... 7 CYCLES LOOPS ACTUALLY 8ALANCED WITHN... 3.038' r.PM PRESSURE AT JUNCTION ZERO ••••••• .00 PSI S U ,., MAR V **.********.**.** •• *.************ PIPE F!fJOSTER HEAn U~IT I.I'lE I.E~JGTM or l"lnER H-\Ii HEAD FLnw LOSS ~EAD·LI.jSS VELOCITY COST E~T. CC'ST >,j0. FEET INC"t!!S COEFF FEET GPM FEET FT/l00FT FT/SEC !/FT DOLLAR!! -.. -.-.---_.--._-. .-._. ..----. ... ~-.... -----_.-.-.-. .. -. .... -._.- t ~Ot). ll1.0n '1 ao. • 00 1700.000 .&5 ./)81~Q 2.1/,1 18.00 laaoo • 2 qso. 10.00 IIJO. • 00 170'')'.000 1.37 • 141lo2 i? .1t 1&./)0 152(ln • 3 1150. 10.0(1 lao. .00 -3'1.31~ -.08 ·./)0~o3. .51 16.00 181100. ~ ano, ta.OI' lao. .00 1373.01\1} .75 .18681 2.8& 14.00 5600. 5 111'50. 12.00 IlJo. .on 3tl2.951.1 .25 .02415 • 86 12.1')0 t2600 • b 950. 8.00 140. .00 ·2?1.31~ -.q2 ".09731 1. ~ 1 8.00 71,00. 7 1&00. 8.00 tao. .00 -519.2&8 -7.5~ -.u7138 3.31 e.oo 121300. 8 t050. B.On lao. .00 ~50.la4 3.80 .361 cH 2.87 8.00 ellon. Q 1l00. 12.0(1 140. .nn 1065.732 .99 • 24745 3.02 12.00' Ileoo • 10 7(1). lo.on lllO .' .00 010.588 1.50 .211J5A. 2.1l 9 10.00 71'00 •. tl 1250. 8.00 l~O. • 00 &n5.588 7.83 .b~651 5.87 8.00 tOooo. -12 41')0. -10.00 lao. .00 -33'5.7'58 -.28 -.07097 1.37' 10.00 ~ooo. 13 in50. ·'0/0(1 lilO. .00 -qb~.412 -5.25 -.aqq8~ 3.9U .11'1.00 10'iCO. -I ~ 900, -10.0n lilO. .00 -0?3.654 -2.01 -.22315 2.55 10.00 9000. -IS 850. -10.00 14/). .00 -bI8.&;4 -1.87 -.2198'i 2.53 10.00 8500 • -16 loon, -10.00 140. • 00 -o\3.05tJ -2.17 ·.21~57 2.51 In.no 10000. -17 . 150. -11..00 lao. .00 -Q8.840 -.03 -.• 02190 .03 8.00 1200. -18 flSO. . -8.00 lUO. .0(1 433.367 3.21) .33735 2.77 13.00 7600 • 19· 550. . 10.0 () 1UO. • 00 Q3b.31lb 2,60 • U7327 3.82 10.00 5500 • 20 300 .• B.OO lilO. .00 a97.979 1.:51 .U3625 3.18 8.00 2uOO. '21 QOO. 8.00 l~O. .00 4Q2. Q79· 3.85 .a2819 3.15 8.00 7f.!OO. 22 1l00. 8.00 1~0. .00 -~n.207 -1.94 -.IlBIl80 3.37 A.CO 3200. 23 550. 10.00 1~0 .. .00 1015.1~b 3.02 .51.1901 U.15 10.00 5500. 21l 2SCI, 8.00 lUO. .00 -509.814 -1.14 ·.U~5b3 3.25 8.00 2000. 25 3S0. . b.O~ i~o. .00 -246.071 -1.b8 -.4801:13 2.79 6.00 2100. -. '. . .. • • • 0 0 e· • R E ~ A R I( S . ........•... 0 • • 0 0 e· 0 • 0 • 0 0 o· -"---.--... --- -.. ' ....... --.----, LOGIC1,~35LO~,1,50 19 JUL 73 15t1A,07 . PAGE 5 L~GICOMP CORPORATIO~ c •• _-•• ---. __ w __ • ________________ ~_._ C~MPUTE~ SERVICES VER. 2.0 CE08 c T~ACT 72-28 CARLSBAD FIRE AT LOCATION 1 III G CHURCH 1-18-73 c PIP E LIN E S'U M MAR Y .*******.*.*.*.~.***.*.** •• ****** c PTPE BUOSTE~ HEAO uNIT LTN~ LEN(;TH OIA~ETER H-W MEAl) FLOW LOSS HEllO LOSS VELOCITY COST ES.T. COST c ":0. FEET INCHES COF.FF FEET GPM FEE.T FT/100FT FT/SEC SIFT OOLLARS R' E MAR I( S -.--.-.. ---.-----. .----. ...... .. ----------.-.---_ .... ---_ ... --... --.. -.--.- ?b 100. &.~O 140. • 00 -157.903 -1.48 -.?11S3 1.79 a.OO 4200 • c 27 150. &.00 140, .01) -230.071 -.&7 -.41.151? 2.c8 "',00 qoo. 28 250. 8.00 140., .00 -4QII.~14 -1.04 -.UIC;1& 3.09 t\.00 2000. 29 1350. 8.00 11.10. .00 -2Sl.71.12 -1.&9 -.. 12532 1.&2 8.00 10800. 30 1&00. 8.00 lllO. .00 -2C;8.71.12 -2.08 -.'2<;193 1.&5 A.OO 12QOO. 'e G ·31 2200. b.OO 140. .00 -83.1&8 -1.1.12 -.Ob401 .91.1 &.00 13200. 32 200. 10.00 11.1 0 • .00 1015.18& 1.10 .549&1 4.1 C; 10.00 2000. • 31 500. 10.00 11.1 0 • .00 10&S.732 3.01 .• 60131 4.35 10.00 5000. ,. e c • c • --G •• G • •• C 0' ,. .~~. ---- - ---'--' - - - - - LOGIC1,&1SLOG,1,SO l~GICO~P CORPO~ATION --·-'--0 19 JUL 73 15.18:07 PAGE b .--.--... -----.-.--.-----~--.-------o C~~PUTER SERVICES VER. ~.o CEO~ T~'CT 72-28 CARLSaAD FIRE AT LOCATION \II G" CHURCH 1"16-71 0 J U III C T I Q N SUM '" A R Y '0 *******.*********************** -., J'J~CTIOIII SURFACE CONNEI:TING SACK JUNCTION Nu"'BER ELEV. LI"'E "'UMBER NU1~8E.R --_ ..... . ....... .-.-.------..... -....... 0 330.0/) 1 )00.00 1 0 2 215.00 2 1 3 212.00 IJ 2 U 175.0n 5 3 5 180.00 6 " 25 21b.OO q 3 6 220.00 33 t'5 7 HI!:i.OO 8 0 8 238.0n 10 0 q 220.Gn 1t 8 10 200.00 It' q 11 ·225.00 19 q 12 190.00 18 11 13 177.00 17 12 U 125.00 16 13 15 13';).00 15 14 16 255.00 20 11 17 20i.l.CO 21 10 18 200'.00 32 17 19 150.0-0 ?3 16 20 157.00 28 .19 21 170.00 27 ?O ~2 200.00 2" 21 23 170.(1) 25 ?2 . ?I.l 113.00 29 20 T~TAL 'OUTFLO~ •••••••••• ~.~ ••••••••••• ~ •••••• OUTFLOW HEAD PRESSURE H.G.L. GPM Ft. PSI EL.EV • .----.. . ... . ....... ..-.-- .00 .0 330.00 .000 29.33 P.7 329.33 5.00n 112. ~q "8.q 327 • 69 5.000 115.14 119.9 327.111 5.000 151.86 65.8 320.8& loo.oon 1117.71:1 bll.O 327.78 .000 110.1.5 117.7 3?6.15 5.00(1 103.15 /J1J.7 3?3.15 S.ooo 13/J.3l SA.? 319.33 5.000 83.66 31-.3 3?1.&b 5.000 93.83 110.7 313.~3 5.000 11 U. 09 119.11 3111.01) 5.001') 86.23 37 .IJ 311.23 5.000 118.00 51.1 308.00 ,5.000 131.112 56.8 308.0~ 5.000 185.15 .80.2 310.15 5.000 177.02 7&.7 312.02 S.ooo 511.94 ·23.8 309.94 5.000 102.1')5 1J4.2 30b.05 .000 ,10ll.1)5 115.5 301J.95 -1500.000 151.139 65.8 301.89 5.000 11J5.1)/J o~.2 302.91J S.OOo 133.61 57.1) 303.b1 S.OOO 105.\2 '15.5 305.12 5.00('1 136.77 59.3 306.77 5.000 191.59 83.0 3011.59 ... _---. 1700.000 GPM • -• Ie· • e e • 0 -. ,e- o • G • e' « , ----. ---LOGIC1,b35LOG,1,250 LnG!C~~P CORPORATION -.-----_._ .... _--.------------------C~M~UTE~ ~ERVICES VER. 2.0 CEoa TRACT 72-28 CARLSBAD REDUCED PIPES FF AT 1 NUM~Eq OF JUNCTIONS •••••••••• ~ •••• 25 Nu~~EQ OF LINES................... 33 NUM~ER OF LOOPS ••••••••••••••••• i. e !TEQATla~ LIMIT................. 100 CYCLES L~~PS TO BE 'BALANCED wITHIN.... 5.000 GP~ SlIqFACE ELEV. OF JUNCTION ZEPO 330.00 FEET . , PIP E .- L 1 !'oj E ----. ---, -_. IiiIS7;" 23 .rUL 73 10113:29 ~AGE II 'F/~E FLOW 2-All 6 101 G CHURCH 7 .. 18-73 INPUT FLOW FACTOR •• ~....... 1.00ftO~ GPM OUTPUT FLO~ FACTOR......... 1.00000 GPM NUMBER OF BALANCED LOOPS........ a ACTUAL NUMBE~ OF ITERATIONS..... & CYCLES LOOP~ ACTUALLY BALANCED WITHN... 4.525 GPM ~ PRESSURE AT JUNCTtON ZEQO ••••••• .00 PSI SUM MAR Y ********************************* e PT~E LI~JE "'0. -... - 1 2 3 q 5 & 7 8 q to 11 '"12 13 -l(l -15 -1" -17 -t 8 t9 20 2'1 ,22 ·23 2(l 25 LENGTH ~EET DIA"'ETER INCHES --.-.. ' ....... . 800. 950. 1150. IHIQ. 1050. 950. 1&00. 1~50; LlOO. 700. 1250. /00.0. 1050. 900. ~s~. 1000. 150. 050. '550. 300. 900. IfOI) • 550. 250. 350. 18.00 16.00 1&.00 14.00 12.00 8.ilO 6.0'0 8.00 12.00 10.00 8.'QI) -s.oo -10.00 -8.00 -8. Ot! ·~.OO -8.00 -b.OO 10.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 10 .. 00 6.00 6.00 joj .. \11 cnEFF lIJO. 140. 140. 1/00. 1110. 140. 1/00. 140. 140., 140. 140. " 140. IIJO. ,1L10. 140, 140. 140. 1L10. 11.10. 1/.1 0 ,; 11.10. lLiO. , 140. lLiO. 1/.10. BOOSTER HEAD FEET .-----,. .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .on .00 .00 .00 .0('1 .01) .00 .Ot) .00 .00, .00 .,00 '.00 FLOw GPH -___ fit 17t!l'.OI'l0 171'0.000 -320.351 1374.649 2C17.720 -220.351 -513.072 1.13(0).427 1071.928 &30.502 625.502 -1.118.228 .941.1.498 -~21.270 -:'16.270 -511.270 -31.307 31J3.379 1038.730 090.351 b$\'5.351 -3~9.08b 1050.037 -474.963 .229.530 HHO LOS~ FEET .bS 1.37 ·.08 .75 .25 -.92 -7.38 3.59 1.00 1.59 8.31 -1.2b .5.05 -lI.27 -3.9~ -lI.:'8 -.00 8.lIo 3.15 2.39 7.09 -1.01 3.22 -1.00 '-1. 1I8 MEA,D LaS~ FT/100FT .. ----.-. .08149 .1446? -.00660 .18705 .0t:338 '-.09b53 -.4b103 .34177 .25012 .22770 .b6C:;lS , -.31587 -./081)92 -.47475 ·."b~3b ·.4~A04 ·,.0026t .891')29 .• 5'7343 .79832 ',787b6 -.251'H .56503 -.39909 -.42257 VELOCITY FT/SEC . ..•.. -. 2.14 2.71 .51 2.87 .84 1.41 3.27 2.79 3,.04 2.58 l.qq 2.07 3.86 3.33 3.30 3.2b .20 ~.qO 4.2IJ 4.Lll Il.37 2.3& 4.29 3.0'3 2.60 UNIT CDST SIFT .--. 18.00 1b.00 lb.I)O 14.00 12.00 9.1')0 8.00 P.OO 12.00 U,Oo ~.Oo. e,oo 10.00 A.nO P.O'O P..OI') A.OO b.ilo 10.00 e.oo 8.00 ~.OO 111.00 S.Oo ·6.00 E~T. COST DOLLARS ..-~--... 14(,1i)0. 15200. lellJO. 5600. 12bOO. 7600. ti?AOO. tiIlOO. 4800. 7000. tono!). 30200. 10500. 7200. 611C(I. 6000. 12CO. SHOt SC;OO. 21l00. 7200. 3200. 5500. 2000. 2100. R E. ,., A ~ ~ S . ..•... -..... - ,.,.. _ _.-_ _. 1IiiiiiI·· ._ LOGIC1,63SLOG,1,2S0 .. ... ' _. --- --- - 23 JU\. 73 10113129 -.-. P.AGE 5 --(; L~GICaMP CO~PORATION ~ -.---------------.-----.--.... ----... CMMPUTER SERVICES VER. 2." CEoa . e TRACT 72-28 CARLSBAD REDUCED PIPES FF AT 1 WOG CHURCH 7··18-73 0 PIP E L. I N E SUM Pi A R Y *************.*.***************** I'!'<' • "'[~E BOaSTER HEAO UNIT I.T~E LE~GTH DIAMETER ", .. \II HEAD FLOW L.OSS HEAD LOSS VELOCITY COST EST. COST NO. FEET INCI-'ES COF:;FF FEET GPM FEET FT/I00FT FT/SEC ~/FT r>OLLARS R E "1 A ~ K·S • -.. -.. _-.. -_.-----. .-.--._.-.-.. _.-. .--.--._. ..-._ .... .----._._----.-_.-.. -....... 26 700. b.OC) 11.10. .00 -lIn.737 -1.31 ".18703 1.oB &.00 4200 •. • 27 150. 6.00 11.10. .O(l -219.530 -.58 ... 381H 5 2.a9 &.00 QOO. 28 251). 8.00 tao. .00 -449.963 -.90 -.361bll 2.87 8.00 2000. 29 1350. B.On 1110. .00 -235.1133 -1.47 -.10Q11 1.S0 A.OO 10ROO. 30 160O. 8.0n 111O. .00 -21.10.433 -1.81 -.11343 1.53 8.00 12800. e 0 31 2200. b.Ot) 11.10. .00 "76.793 -1.23 .... 05574 • 87 6~00 1.3?0" • 32 200. 10.00 140. .on 10'50.037 1.17 .56503 1.1.29 1(,).00 2000. n 1500. 10.00 11.10. .00 1071-.9?,8 3.01.1 .60779 1.1.38 10.00 StOOl • 0 • 0 C c e c ¢ ~ C C C C ~ C .. r .. '--:'"-·· ..... I ..... -. ---- --: --.. --.-~. -. -.. -. ---LOGIC1,&3SLOG,I,2S0 23 JUI. 73 10.13:29 PAGE b L~GICOKP CORPORATION .-.-.--.. -~---.--.---.. -.-.--.. --.-. Cn~~UTEQ S~RVICES VER. 2.{I CF08 • T~ACT 72-28 CA~I.SBAD REOUCED PIPES FF AT III G CHURCH 7-18-73 J U ,." C T ION SUM MAR Y .~ **********.*** ••••••• *.* •• * •••• JlI"JCTIOIII SURFACE Cm'lNECTI"lG 8ACI< JlJi"o/C T ION OUTFLOW "'EAD PRESSURE H.G.l. NUMBEQ EL.EV. LINE "'UMBER NUMBER , GPM FT. PSI EL.EY. -.. -... -._----. . .... -... __ .-........... "".-. --.---. --.--.-... -. ------0 330.00 .00 .0 330.00 1 ; 300.00 1 0 .000 29.33 12.7 329.33 2 -215.01) 2 1 S.OOO 112.A9 U8.q 327.69 3 212.00 1.1 2 5.000 115.11.1 I.Iq.q 327.14 e " 175.00 5 3 5.000 151.8& &5." 326.86 5 180.00 & 1.1 100.000 \1.17.78 &1.1.0 327.18 25 210.00 9 3 ,000 110".11.1 IJ7.7 326.14 6 220.00 33 ~S S.OOn 103.ti ul.I.7 323.11 7 185 •. 00 8 6 5.000 131.1,1.19 SA.3 319.49 F 8 238.00 10 & s.ooo 8~.53 36.2 321.53 9 220.00 11 8 5.001) 93.21 1.11).1.1 313.21 10 20(1.01) 12 9 5.00n lla.4S 1.19.6 311.1.45 ( 11 225.00 lq 9 5.000 85.00 3b.9 310. ·06 t·2 190.00 lA 11 5.ouo 111.58 as.4 301.38 13 177.00 17 12 5.000 1211.57 :,u.o 301.57 ( 14 125.00 16 13 5.000 181011 78.5 306.11 15. 135.00 15 14 5.000 175.08 75.9 310,D8 16 255.00 20 11 5,000 5~.&9 22.8 307.69 17 ZOl.l.oo 21 10 S.ooo 9b.r:;7 41.8 300.57 19 200.00 32 17 .000 99.39 1.11.1 299.39 19 150.00 23 18 1500.000 11.1&.11.1 63.3 29&.14 ·r 20 157.0() 28 19 5.000 11.10.05 00.7 297.iJ5 21 170.(1) 27 20 5.000 127.611 55.3 297.e" 22 200.00 26 ?1 5,000 98.97 1.12.9 298.97 {: ~3 170.00 25 22 5.000 130.43 56·.5 300.43 . -24 113.00 29 20 5,00(1 185.49 80.4 298.49 -.-----. f T~TAL OUTFLOW •••••••••••••••••••• ~ •••••••••• 1700.000 GPM f ( f ~ I .. e , ~ c. 'I'" _ ---!r-"'---'. ~ I I I I I I • e '--- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING IMPACT :ON ENVIRONMENT FOR PROPOSED I6S-HOME SUBDIVISION CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-28 ' , , CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTIONS NO. IS 3015 AND 3016 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL , I I I I .C T 1:l. _ ~PTED OCTOBER 30, 197~ . I I I I .1" I I I OWNER: PANNONIA INVESTMENT CORP. 3433 WEST 109rH ''STREET \.-, I NGLgWOOD, CALI FORN I A DEVELOPER: J. WI KLUG DEVELOPING COl1 INC. 4540 CAMPUS DRIVE NEWPORT SEACH, CALIFORNIA , I PREPARED BY: NESTE; BRUDIN & STONE INCORPORATEP eIV I L ENG I NEERS SAN BERNARDINO -HEMET -ESCONDIDO CALIFORNIA I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NESTE, BRUDIN & STONE INCORPORATED / rtie"tfld ~1t!JineeIW P. O. BOX 902 • 350 WEST FIFTH STREET. SAN BERNARDINO • CALIFORNIA 92402 • TELEPHONE (714) 888-1401 E72-020.002 November 27, 1972 Mr. James King Planning Deparb~ent City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Enclosed are five copies each of an "Environmental Impact Assess- ment" and "Guidelines for Determining Impact on Environment" for the proposed 165-10t subdivision on Carlsbad Tract No. 72-28. These reports have been prepared in'accordance with"Resolutions No. 3015 and No. 3016, respectively, ,of the'clty'cotindii of Carls- bad. Pannonia Investment Corp. of 3433 W~st 109th' st~~~t,' Ingle- wood, California is the Owner and the J. W. Klug Developing, Company, Inc. of 4540 Campus Drive, Newport Beach, California is the Developer of the proposed subdivision. Your early review, comments and/or approval of this material -will be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions or we may be of any further service, please do not hesitate to contact our office. ':;'0'~-JLP-~ ~~~~~ ~~n~~ sa enclosures J. W~ Klug Developing Company, Inc. Mr. John Williamson OFFICES IN: SAN BERNARDINO • HEMET' ESCONDIDO I . I I I I I I ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT I RESOLUTION NO. 3015 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 NAME OF APPLICANT: OVmer -Pannonia InvesLment Corp. . ~ Developer -J. W. Klu~eveloping Co., Inc. PERMIT APPLIED~R: Approval -Tract Map ~ LOCATION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY: Carlsbad Tract No. 72-28 City of Carlsbad, CA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. 1. GIVE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY. The proposed project consists of the construction of a l65-home subdivision on a 59-acre site, complete with grading, streets, curbs and sidewalks, storm and sanitary sewers, and water mains, all as approved by the City of Carlsbad Engineer. Single-family wood-frame homes are to be constructed on concrete slabs with concrete wall foot- ings. The proposed subdivision is in accordance with the City of Carlsbad land use plan and zoning of R-1-7,500 and R-1-15,000 for the proposed site. Homes to be con- structed will be compatible with the homes in adjacent areas. 2. DESCRIBE THE ACTIVITY AREA~ INCLUDING DISTINGUISHING NATURAL AND MAN-MADE CHARACTERISTICS. The proposed site is quite irregular, varying in elevation from about 280 feet above sea level down to an elevation of about 80 feet. The ground slopes to the west and south so that· storm water drainage flows to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon through two main washes. One wash is in the northern part of the property and flows to the west and south. The second is in the southeast portion of the site and flows to the south. Vegetation consists of lmv grasses, brush and some very small trees with large areas of the site just bare earth. The soils within the site, to the depths that m~y be disturbed by the proposed construction, consists of re- cent m,arine deposits ranging in texture from silty sands and weakly cemented sandstone to sandy clays 'and clayey s·ands. No durable bed rock formations nor soft compres- sible materials ar~ anticipated to be encountered. Adja- cent lands to the northwest, north and northeast have been or are in the process of being subdivided and developed for single-family residences. Another subdivision is planned to the southeast that will connect this site with an al- ready partially developed area. The area west of Park Drive adj acent to the cove off Agua Hedionda La.goon is being developed with condominium-type dwellings. The remainder of the area is used for agriculture or is vacant. ... '....,-~ I:: ; ·1. I' . 10 •• .1 I .. '. '. 1 0 .' . . " '. 011. • . '.. . .... :1· :~ ... 'I~ . .' . '. .: .... . .. ' . . . : ~".' ''' .. ' '1:' .' .. "1 ... ·1. I I' ··O~. ~I' "I I'" I I. 0 0 APPENDIX B. • Envi~omental Impact Analysis. Answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. .. ,Yes o 1. Could the project significantly change prese~t land uses in the vicinity ~f the activity? x . . . 2. Could the activity affect the use of a re- . creational area, or area of important ... aesthetic value? 3. Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighbor- hood? • 4 •. Could the activity result in the displace- ment of community residents? 5. Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not found in other p~rts of the County,· State', or nation? . . 6~ .Could the activitYsignificantly affect a historical or archaelogical site ~r its setting? 7. Could the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or con- servation of a ~carce natural resource? 8. Does the activity area serve as a habitat, food source, nesting place, source of water, etc. for rare or endangered wi1dlife or fish species? 9. Could the activity significantly affect fish, wildlife or plant life? '10. Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the activity a~ea? 11~ Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's lagoons, ~~ys, or tidelands~ • • x .'.~" _x • • No x x ". : x . x x . x .' .. . x I ' .' 1·' t. I ~ , i ' I '. i·. '. J.. , .. .. / ..... . - .. . ' ": .. l I. : .. ] \ .:'. l-I \ . . , . , . . .. • e •• • \ . 12. Could the activity change existing features of any of the City's beach~s7 13. Could the activity result in the erosion . of agricultural lands? , . '14'.: Co u 1 d the act i vi t y serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped '. areas or intensify development of already '. developed areas? . , 15. Will the activity require a variance from established envirornental standards (air, water, noise, etc)? ~ ..... Yes - x • 16. Will the activity require certification, authorization or issu~nce of a permit .by any local, State or Federal en- ~ viromental control agency? .' -. t •• _ 17. Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditional use permit by'the City? '. -...... . . ... .",. . 18.~1'ill the activity involve the application, use, or disposal or potentially h~zardous materials? 19. Will the activity involve construction of facilities in a flood plain? 20. Will the activity .involve construction of racilities on a slope of 25 per cent .or greater? .~ ' .. 21; Will the activity involve construction of facilities in the area of an active fault? .' 22.' Could the activity result in the generation of significant ·amounts of·noise? . . . 23. Could the activity result· in the gen- eration or signific~nt amounts of dust? 24~ Will the activity involve the b'urning ~"of brush, trees, or other materials? . ... 25. Could the activity result in a signifi~ant change in the quality of any portion of' the region's ait~ Of \·:ater resources? (Should note surface~ ground water, off-shore) • . .. • . ' '. ,. '"':. : ", ., x x • . "':"" No x x \ x 'X ",' . -.. x x . '. 'X x 'X x - I· I· "I I· I I" I' I· I I I I 26. Will there be a significant change to existing land form? (a) indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic yards. 400,000 ,(b) percentage of alteration to the ~ present land form. 95% {c} maximum height of cut of fill slopes. 45' • 27. Will the activity result in substantial increases in the ~se of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? x III. Statement of No Significant Enviromental Effects If you have answered yes to ,one or more of the questions in Section II, but you think the activity will have no significant enviro- mental effects, indicate your reasons bel~w: '- IV. Comments or Elaborations to Any of the Ques~ions in Section II. QUESTIONS 1, 3, 9 and 14. The environmental impact of these changes are considered beneficial in the long-term analysis through the ex- tension of a prime residential neighborhood in accordance wi th the . planned community growth and the reduc~ion of siltation of the Agua Hedionda .Lagoon. .QUESTIONS 22, 23 and 24. If these activities create an adverse affect on the environment at all, they would be of very short-term in nature, existing only during portions of the construction phase . . 1. v. Conclusions (To be Completed By the Planning Director) Place a check in the appropriate box. J .... : .. . . ~,-~~-:. ' I.··. I ' .. ',1' I I] Further information.is required. . ' . .. "tJ It has been determined that the' project will not have significant enviromental effects • ,[] It has been determined that the project could have significant enviromental effects. An enviromental impact statement will be submitted on (approx. date_ BY:~~~~~~~~ ______ _ .PLAr::lli~G DIRECTOR • . ' . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I e· GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT RESOLUTfON NO. 3016 7 I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I l.a. The proposed project will significantly change present uses' of a mostly bare, vacant and irregularly sloped land· area within the city limits into a high-class subdivision of single-family homes in accordance with the General Plan and zoning .ordinances of the City of Carlsbad. ~djacent lands to the northwest, north, and northeast have been or are now in the process of being sub- divided and developed as single-family residences. Another sub- division is planned to the southeast which will connect this site with an already partially developed area. The area west of Park Drive adjacent to the cove off Agua Hedionda Lagoon.is being developed with condominium-type dwellings. The remainder of the surrounding area is used for agriculture or is vacant. The pro- posed houses will be compatible with the surrounding homes. When the homes are completed and landscaped the proposed project will reduce siltation of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon through the exten- sion of an enclosed storm drainage system through this site and the prevention of on-site soil erosion through the grass and other landscaping around the homes. Under existing conditions soils that are eroded from the ·proposed site by surface storm water flows are washed into the lagoon cau?ing an extensive siltation problem. l.b. No known areas of historical, archaeological or aesthetic value will be affected by the proposed project. The aesthetic value of the area in general will be enhanced by the development of the proposed subdivision with its architectually pleasing arrangement of well landscaped homes. Some of the homes within this subdivision will be able to enjoy a view of the ocean and others will have a view of the lagoon area. However, it is not anticipated that the aesthetic view from any existing home will be permanently reduced by the construction of this subdivision. l.c. The proposed project will not significantly accelerate the development of adjoining non-urban areas in the immediate future. The proposed project, being a subdivision, will attract 165' families to occupy its new homes. It is anticipated that some of these will be families moving within the community and some will be families new to the area. The development of this attrac1;.i.v~ .. ;'·· subdivision may increase the land values and encourage some per- sons to construct their homes on the few undeveloped lots ,in the already subdivided areas within the immediate vicinity'. The proposed project does, however, help to complete the develop- ment of this southeast area of the City of Carlsbad by. partially bridging the gap between two already subdivided areas. Therefore, the way is prepared for the orderly planning of other future • < I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I developments that might be approved in the next growth ring around the City, in accordance with its General Plan and zoning ordinances. However, the proposed project in itself, in pro- viding homes for 165 families, woul~ tend to delay rather than accelerate other residential developments. l.d. The proposed project will not alter the character of the existing community which is primarily residential. The 165 families attracted to the proposed homes will generate a certain amount of traffic within the area by their normal activities. However, the proposed subdivision provides for the extension of Hillside Drive as a major collector street with an 84-foot right-of-way as recommended by the 1970 traffic analysis fo'r this area of the City of Carlsbad. It should be noted though that Hillside Drive will need to be extended another few hun- dred feet beyond the limits of this subdivision to connect to an existing portion of Hillside Drive, thus providing access to El Camino Real and areas to the east. This 300+ foot section of Hillside Drive, which lies within another proposed subdivi- sion, will complete Hillside Drive from Highland Avenue on the west to Kelly Drive on the east with all of the new sections designed as a major collector street. The 1970 Traffic Study for this area of the City of Carlsbad estimated the 1990 average daily traffic (ADT) for this section of Hillside Drive at 10,400 vehicles. This is well within the recommended maximum capacity of 13,000 ADT for this type of street. A copy of Figure 5 from the 1970 Traffic Study giving the projected 1990 ADT for Tamarack Avenue, Hillside Drive and Park Drive accompanies this 'report. Also attached is a copy of Figure 3 from the above report entitled, "Traffic Analysis Zones and Load Points." The report indicates the projected 1990 ADT generated within Area 16, which as shown on Figure 3 extends from Tamarack Avenue to Hillside Drive and from Park Drive to Sunny Hill Drive, is 2,770 vehicles. Probably at least half of these trips will utilize Tamarack Avenue and Birch Avenue as their main east-west street to go to either Highland Avenue or El Camino Real. Within Area 29, which is enclosed by Hillside Drive, Park Avenue and Neblina Drive, an estimated average of 4,590 trips per day will be generated in 1990. Many of these trips will utilize Park Avenue rat~er than Hillside Drive as their main traffic artery. This traffic analysis indicates that the completion of Hillside Drive as a major collector street will improve the flow of traffic within this area of the City of Carlsbad since over 50 percent of its capacity in 1990 will , ! ,! I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I I be utilized by traffic originating beyond the limits of Areas 16 and 19. It should be also noted that the proposed subdivision also provides an outlet to the south for Sunnyhill Drive, Clear- view Drive and Skyline Drive via the Clearview Drive connection to Hillside Drive. Therefore, the benefits gained from providing for the extension of these two streets in accordance with the proposed traffic flow analysis will more than offset any disad- vantages created by the traffic generated from within the pro- posed project area. The proposed project will increase the tax base for the City of Carlsbad and generate an increase in business for the commercial establishments in the community. The developers of the proposed project have agreed to contribute funds for the acquisition of- school sites in an amount determined by the Carlsbad Unified School District, the City of Carlsbad and the Developer. The developer will also make a payment for parks in lieu of fees re- quired by Carlsbad City Ordinance No. 9190. It is not anticipated that any new acti vi ties not pres(~ntly found wi thin the community would be introduced as a result of this project. The proposed project in conjunction with Tract 72-18 will pro- vide for completing the loop of a 16-inch domestic water main. This will increase the system reliability-and fire flows for this entire area of the City of Carlsbad. The sanitary sewer system to be constructed as a part of the proposed project will intercept flows from the existing sanitary sewer system at the south end of Sunnyhill Drive and transport the waste- waters by gravity along Hillside Drive to the edge of this pro- posed subdivision where it will be discharged to the sewers of proposed Tract No. 72-18. This will allow the City of Carlsbad to eliminate a sewage pump station that is now creatirig a con- siderable maintenance problem for the City forces. I.e. The proposed project will not affect the potential use, extraction or conservation of scarce natural resources as none are known to be located within the project si~e. l.f. The_ proposed project will not affect any natural or man- made feature in the project area that are unique or rarely found in other parts of the-City, County, State or Nation as none are known to exist within the proposed project site. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • 2. Significant environmental effects of the proposed project are both positive and negative. ~h'e proposed project, with the extension and additions to the present enclosed storm drain systems and the lawns and landscaping around the proposed homes, will greatly reduce the siltation problem in Agua Hedionda Lagoon. According to the City of Carlsbad Engineer the propos.ed site 'in its existing condition is one of the prime sources for" siltation of the lagoon. Siltation tends to kill fish and other aquatic life, it prevents the penetration of sun light for aquatic plant growth and tends to hasten the eutrophication of the lagoon and the resultant salt water marsh. The proposed subdivision will provide desirable home sites for 165 families with homes that are compatible with the City of Carlsbad General Plan and zoning and with the other homes in the surrounding area. It wili provide the City with a greater tax base with which to operate its various programs. It will upgrade an area which is now vacant and generally bare land. Since the proposed site is in close proximity to an existing developed area both on the northeast and southeast sides and has little vegetation, it is not antiCipated that any birds or other forms of wildlife will be adversely affected by the pro- posed construction. Also, the development of this area which joins existing developed land on two sides and another proposed subdivision on the third side provides for a planned grovlth of the City outward from its center, without leaving scattered patches of undeveloped areas that would encourage fill-in growth at a later date. As previously mentioned, the City of Carlsbad storm and sanitary sewer systems, its domestic water system and its traffic patterns for local streets, all will be improved by the development of the proposed subdivision. The proposed development will undoubtedly bring new people to Carlsbad, which means new talents and abilities for the growth of the City. It will provide the City with "a greater tax base on which to operate its various programs. The new families will generate increased business for the merchants of Carlsbad, and the children will attend its schools. To offset the cost of school requirements as previously stated, the developer"has agreed to make a contribution to the school and park funds. During the construction of a project such as this, there is always a certain amount of dust, noise and conjestion which causes a temporary adverse impact on the environment. Construc- tion activities, as such, do not enhance the scenic views or esthetics of the area. However, all of these are only temporary in nature and can be kept within reasonable limits with proper I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • controls. No hard rock that would require blasting is antici- pated to be encountered during construction. Dust can be kept to a minimum during earthmoving operations by spraying water over the loose dirt and by good housekeeping operations to pre- vent dirt from being deposited on nearby City streets to dry up and blow away as dust. 3. Significant environmental effects can also result from the cumulative effect resulting from a number of similar small acti- vities in one area and these need to be evaluated in the context of the entire City. One such effect is the. traffic patterns in the area. In 1970 the City of Carlsbad had a traffic study made with reference to this possible problem. As previously noted the extension of Hillside Drive through the proposed subdivision will aid in the overall traffic pattern. The City's public utilities are also an important factor. As previously stated, the City's sanitary and storm sewer systems and domestic water distribution systems will actually be improved by the proposed project. The water and sewer systems they feed into were designed and con- structed to accommodate the maximum residential densities (seven' dwelling units per acre) permitted in the General Plan while densities in the proposed subdivision will average less than 3 dwelling units per acre. The effects of the increase in popula- tion resulting from the proposed subdivision on City Schools and Parks is also important. However, as previously noted the devel- oper has agreed to make a contribution to the school and park funds. The location of the subdivision, in a gap in the rim of the developed community, does not provide enclosed vacant areas which would encourage other development in the future, but does provide for an orderly growth of the community from the center outward and in accordance with the City's General Plan. " , il I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TRAFFIC STUDY FI"GURES .............. ® • f IIIIiI .... _ 'i'" '. " 1670 AOT '-. - '" >' :;;J :>;: 1:1 :;;J 1250 AIJ'l' ~ .. " . . AV: ". .@ ...... .. / / '. .... (' r • ~ .. . " ~ \'" ...... •• ' • ~ • I' • ;', . ~. .~.: . .":: .. ~ .. ".: ::: ::"'. . ,.~ / ,: ':. ~' .: >,'., : : . . . . .... .. .: : . / . , LEGEND". ..:'::, . .. (.' " '0 Internal Zones. ':; .. : .. ': ':':-'\ ' '. . .. (' . 1'" 0 External Zones ... .::. .. : .... :;': ' .... ~':";" ! "\' • .\ ...... ':' ;. .... ! . .' ••••• ~ .• Load P<:>lnts .... , .' " ' \ .:. \ . \. '. : \. .. ;: ~: ." " ·r .. ··, ~ .;:::..: . ':.:' ---.-.--- -- - \ \ \ .CITY Of ~ARLSBAD SUB AREA TRAJ=F!C ANALYSIS 'TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES AND LOAD POINTS 1':::\.,., ............... . .... ~ 2340 ADT 4210 ADT " . . '~>19\ ...... \!:.J '. .z. \ t:'l " V' • .... . \-I \ .z. \ .. \ ..... ... ... . . ® .. ' .' ,.' ••.•.. 2770 ADT .~ .. /' I \ Hlll~!.E! \ . .;,' OK,I Y ~; 'b ~ • i~ 4590 AOT , I ! \ · · · · .: . , I •. 123\ / \:.y I I / - " G .' / I A / I I / , t e l!i1 " (AnT = Average Oa1.1y Traffl.c) ..... ; .. :".,:'> :,,:_, :. :,.;. ~,;.. .. .... . '0:\'\!t.:,.', "."', ,,:": .. ~ .. ':::. '.' ". . ,'\. ~ . . -.,u ~ 3870 AI)T : t G I I / " ~ .~. "-'. -*: -~";"~ ,';'" ',:'" ... A'PlOllNlAtl SCAU. .oo 1000" .. ;.', ". ~ ..... . ..... 4460 AOT .. ..... ~.~ ..... @ .............. .. .. G " ~-... -----------... -------. --" '. 7320 AOT FIGURE '3 . i·· -.. " , ,..;, '\ -.. ~.":" .... ,-: ..... .. .,,' ...... 0, .. .; ..... _ ··· .. :··_·····iIIII-.. ·-,~,_ :,_ ._., _. • . '. -c" • . .. ' '. j' • ~'T"" I..:..J '.' '. " ---.-. - - -~ • ,1 11\ , '. '0 }' " . ~ " :·'r~: 1'" ~. • .. 't· . , 1 ~ .' @ . . ," ' .. .. ~. " 'LEGEND' ~.'.;, .. ,~ .. e/f .. / ~ , : .... ~ __ ..,_ Mt~<if' loc~ti~n ',.',: ,r.'>:~~': -' oJ , n~:~f'~3~~~~.S:. ~5~%'t~~~;~: §!\:,.,{,; ': .. : ':'. . <, : ••• :'; '/' ~;r: '. ,~ , .. p~oP.o~~~·.;~ll:¥-d,ef:'~a!i=,(·<.~ 'I: .. : , ,~:':... .... " \. : .:" :'" , ~,:,": .. :'~: <:;:.;~::".:' ~ !~,~f{··~;:<~:·.,':,·~.;: .:; <·Y·:'· .,.-".'; :\ ..... J.":" .. , " 2'1'1'0 'AIiT ·j',~1>.ro,j~qt~g::~~~l)::>;PT· '" " ',; .J;.;. ..;~. .~.). ® ,,' , .' . "~:·;d;i~~~,';F(?\;:-;';C "~' . ," ,,;i ~;' '" -", , • .' .. '!:~ CITY OF .. CARLSBAD SUB AREA TRAFFiC Ai'JA lYS IS 1990 A. D. T. FOR BASE CONDITION WITH THRU TRAFFIC (ADT = Average Daily Traffic) 1."::\1 a·· .. ············ •••• \!..!) , I · · · · \ \ :, ' ... ~: ...... <ip .. . .. ",.. / V' I . . I ~ .. ; •. ~' .. ~: .. ~~@ ..... ~.~ ....... .. · · · G / I I I I - • I I / , I / e- o , '. ' Al'tlCUJ4AU seA·ta., :''--'. ··too.Q.':> .. ,,"f' .. ' :::. l,' " '.' . ,":' ""@) ,:: '''-....;... '::.',. c11 L.~:~ · .. >,;.·':~L:~:l*~:,~~::;:~j~~~f~~Fi~~~t:~l:t·:;~~:::·:;tfi~i,>_· ., ',:.'.~' ", ',: "> .. ::.;;' .::',;' '~. ,~~~:{~tfr··' FIGURE S