HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3752 Lot 4 Rough Grade Certification
LAKESHORE
Engineering
S75~ LDf-Lj
RECEIVED
MAR 0 8 2002
Consulting Civil Engineers
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING D~~ENI-,
Client:
January 10, 2002
Project No: 01-127.LG
Greg and SheIla Griffin (760) 940-8539
4812 Gardenia Street
Oceanside, CA 92057
Subject:
Rough Grade Pad Certification Letter
Proposed Single Family Home Construction
Lot 4 of Tract No. 3752
City of Temecula, CA.
LD# 00-198GR
'I
I
Gentlemen:
This letter is to certify that the rough grading on the subject
parcels was performed in substantial compliance with the approved
grading plan prepared by W.C.Hobbs, with the exception of minor
deviations noted below:
I
II
I
I
,I
'I
-I
1.1
-I
I
I
'I
A second mid-terrace bench and concrete V-ditch was installed on
the cut slope, resulting in a terrace slope bench at 20 feet apart
intervals. In addition, the lower pad (to be developed in the
future) was extended/enlarged an additional 30 feet to the west.
The minor changes are shown on the AS-BUILT plan, dated 1/10/02
prepared by Fen Yong/Lakeshore Engineering.
This certification is for general grades, elevations and location
of manufactured fill and cut slopes. Reference elevation
(benchmark) was taken at flowline at the beginning of driveway
approach along edge of street curb.
The manufactured building pad is now considered suitable for its
intended ~.~j~j,~A".h I,."::;:,,,. "'''''C',:' "1:">- ".' ce,i '\
If you ha~t~, e tio~ pleasp contact this office.
.~ 'o'~m~~ J
RespectfuJ1.~..y .. m -t'.€,e'd\ .,~' < (:'). ::
LAKESHO 'l!:NG ING'" \..\ ,;
~ ~ ~-\
. i!i "'"
10.3744- Gi
'xp. J.
* 42 ~<I
"4.>. 'IV'!:::-::'r\(,:~1
, ~ OF c~
cc: 2 copiEfis 1;.0 c. .-1 "
.' \~L.:,~~~'t'd":"
31520-B Railroad Canyon Road . Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244-2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROUGH GRADE COMPACTION REPORT
,PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY HOME CONSTRUCTION
PARCEL 4 OF TRACT 3752
DE PORTOLA ROAD
CITY OF TEMECULA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA
EQE.
GREG AND SHELLA GRIFFIN
PROJECT NO. 01-127.C
DATED: JANUARY 1. 2002
Lakeshore Engineering
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LAKESHORE
Engineering
Consulting Civil Engineers
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Client: Mr. and Mrs. Griffin
4812 Gardenia Street
Oceanside, CA. 92057
(760) 940-8539
Subject: Rough Grade Compaction Report
Proposed Single Family Home Construction
Lot 4,of Tract 3752
De Portola Road, Temecula, CA.
City LD# 00-198GR
Reference: Preliminary Soil Engineering Evaluation
Prepared by W.C.Hobbs, Consulting Engineer
Dated October 4, 2000 (P.N. 00079-1)
Gentlemen:
INTRODUCTION
This is to report the results of our field density test results and
observations made during the placement of compacted fill on the
subject property.
Periodic field density tests and site grading observations were
provided by a representative of Lakeshore Engineering to check the
grading contractors on compliance with the approved grading plans and
pertinent earthwork job specifications. The presence of our field
representative at the site was to provide to the owner a source of
professional advice, opinions and recommendations based upon the
field representative's observations of the contractor's earthwork and
did not include any supervision, superintending or direction of the
actual work of the contractors or the contractor's workmen. The
opinions and recommendations presented hereafter are based on our
field and laboratory test results and observations of the grading
procedures used, and represent our engineering judgment as to the
contractor's compliance with the job (earthwork) specifications.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The site was previously rough graded supporting a small benched
transitional pad between cut and fill slopes centered on the lot. No
grading permits were filed with city and time period of grading
operation unknown (no documentation available for our review) .
Minor surficial erosion and/or reveling existed on the cut and fill
slope surfaces. Goundcover consisted of annual grass throughout.
The lot is free from trash, observed during pregrade meeting (first
week of november, 2001)
31520-B Railroad Canyon Road . Canyon Lake, CA 92587 . (909) 244-2913 . FAX: (909) 244-2987
2--
I
I. VICINITY MAP
I
I N
I - @-
.;
U'
I ~
~
..c.
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
.
I
I COMPACTION REPORT
LAKESHORE MR, & MRS. GRIFFIN
PARCEL 4 OF TR. 3752
Engineering DE PORTOLA RD.
I COMPACTION REPORT ~
Project No: Dote FIgure No:
. CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS 01-127.C 1/01/02 1
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Two
Grading plans prepared by W.C. Hobbs, Consulting Engineer, plans
drawn at 1"=40' scale, shows the proposed scope of new improvements
will consist of enlarging the existing rectangular shaped pad by
creating new cut and fill slopes. CUt slopes in the order of 65 feet
high pitched at about 1 1/2 to 1 3/4:1(H:V) and fill slopes less than
29 feet high pitched at 2:1/H:V are planned for construction.
Both the proposed referenced grading plans and soil report were used
in the field to aid in the grading operation. Xerox reduction of
grading plans are attached in the back of this report.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Proposed development will consist of a graded level pad for support
of a single family residence, about 3,000 square feet. The building
pad size will be in the order of 14,500 square feet (0.34 acres)
centered on the lot with the access driveway to be located along the
easterly property line.
Proposed house construction is planned for an upper scale, custom
designed, one story structure, of conventional, wood framed and
stucco construction, with tile roofing. Foundation will be of
conventional spread footings with concrete slab-on-grade flooring.
Pad drainage is by sheetflow and surface swales around building,
exiting flows to the street, De Portola Road. Future addition may
include a barn/guest/garage unit on the lower manufactured pad.
ROUGH GRADING OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Rough grading operation commenced on the first week of November and
concluded on December 20, 2001 the last day of our site inspection
and testing services. Grading was performed by Monteleone Excavating,
grading contractor, (909) 677-6403. Equipment used onsite consisted
of a CAT D-6 Dozer and watertruck (hydrant fronting lot on De portola
Road) .
Grading was conducted under the jurisdiction of the City of Temecula.
The rough grading <operation was observed to be performed in the
following manner:
I. Surface groundcover/vegetation (organic debris) were
removed/cleared from the areas to be graded.
2. Unsatisfactory;soils were excavated to expose competent
materials on which to start the fill. The maximum depth of
fill placed during this grading operation was in the order of 13
vertical feet, located under the top edge of fill slope along the
southerly edge of pad.
Lakeshore Engineering
t\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Three
3. All bottom of,substandard soil removal/excavation were inspected
and deem competent prior to fill placement and compaction.
The native soils exposed at the bottom of overexcavation
were inspected and in our opinion, considered suitable for
support of new fills. Prior to placing any fills, the
exposed bottom subgrade was scarified and moisture conditioned.
4. Minimum size keyway of about 15 feet wide by 3 feet deep were
excavated along the toe of fill slope, exposed bottom inspected
and deemed competent prior to the construction of fill slope.
5. Approved soils were placed in layers on the prepared surface,
and each layer was compacted to the specified density before
the next layer was added.
6. The minimum acceptable degree of building fill dirt compaction
was 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
7. Maximum density and optimum moisture content were determined
by the A.S.T.M. D1557-78 method.
8. Field density tests were performed utilizing the drive tube
method.
9. The soils used in the compacted fill consisted predominantly
of on-site light brown, Silty SAND (SM/SP). Clay is lacking.
10. The cut portion of the house pad was overexcavated 30 inches and
replaced with compacted fill blanket. The exposed bottom of
overexcavation was scarified another 6 inches, moisture
conditioned prior to placing fill. Limits of overexcavation
extended 4-5 feet beyond building footprints.
11. Field density tests were made during the placement of fill to
determine the degree of compaction and moisture content.
All field density tests are listed in the "Summary of Field
Density Tests", and their approximate locations are shown on
Figure No.2. Also shown are the limits and depth of
compacted fills placed during this grading operation.
GRADING DEVIATIONS FROM APPROVED PLAN
At the conclusion of rough grading, no major deviations were noted in
the field when compared to approved grading plans, except as noted: A
second mid-terrace bench and concrete V-ditch was added to the cut
slope providing a drainage bench at every 20 feet slope height
interval. The second deviated consisted of extending the lower pad
westerly an additional 30 feet. The depth remained unchanged from
original plans. All drainage scheme remained and constructed as
planned on approved drawing.
Lakeshore Engineering
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Four
LABORATORY MAXIMUM DENSITY COMPACTION TEST
Soil samples obtained from the field were visually identified and
when necessary, additional laboratory testing was performed to
confirm identification. All soils were classified with the Unified
Soil Classifications System. The procedures outlined in A.S.T.M.
Method D1557-78 were used to determine the compaction characteristics
of the fill materials. The results of our laboratory compaction tests
are presented below:
'lYPe
Soil Description
Optimum Moisture Max. D~ Density
A
Silty SAND (SM)
10.0 % of dry wt. 128.0 P.C.F.
LABORATORY EXPANSION TEST
Laboratory Expansion Index Tests were performed on representative
soil samples recovered from within the proposed building areas near
the completion of rough grading. The laboratory expansion test was
performed in accordance with U.B.C. Test Method 29-C, and the
pertinent test results are presented on the following page:
Soil
LOCATION
Moisture %
Before Test
Expan.
Index
Expansion
Potential
D~pth
Pad
-6"
8.7
<20
LOW
Based upon a test.results obtained, the subgrade materials are
considered to be LOW IN EXPANSION POTENTIAL. In that regard, no
special requirement are needed in subgrade preparation or special
reinforcement in the house foundation/footing preparation.
SULPHATE CONTENT TEST
A Laboratory sulphate content Test was performed on a representative
soil sample recovered from within the proposed building area at the
subject site. The laboratory test was performed in accordance with
E.P.A. Test Method 375.3, and the pertinent test results are
presented below:
Sample
Location
Sulphate
Content
Recommended Cement
~
Depth
BLDG. PAD
F.G.
<100 ppm.
Portland Cement TYPE 11
(2,500 psi concrete)
Lakeshore Engineering
(p
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Five
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the final results of field density tests, on observations of
the grading operation procedures used in the field and on our past
experience, it is Lakeshore Engineering opinion that the compacted
fill shown on the Plot Plan, figure no. 2 attached has been placed in
accordance with the applicable portions of the grading specifications
and in accordance.with the City of Temecula Ordinance.
Any fill dirt added beyond the limits or above the grades shown on
county approved plans should be placed under engineering inspection
and in accordance with the applicable grading job specifications, if
it is to be covered by the recommendations of this soil report.
Based upon our field testing results, the compacted fill in our
opinion has been compacted to at least 90 percent relative densities.
The on-site foundation soils exposed during rough grading operation
are considered to be granular and LOW in expansion potential (E.I.
less than 20). As.such the foundation should be constructed and
reinforced as follows:
FOOTINGS
Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent
ground surface for proposed building. Minimum width of footing is 12
inches. All continuous foundations should be reinforced with at least
2 rebars (#5), one located at top and one at bottom and consistent
with the recommendations of the Structural Engineer. Allowable soil
pressure is recommended at 1500 psf. Coefficient of friction of 0.30
may be used. Passive pressure of 250 pcf equivalent fluid density.
FOOTING PLAC'RMRN'I', AND TRENCH INSPECTION
Due to periodic site inspections conducted during rough grading
operations, footing trench excavations should be inspected by a
representative of.Lakeshore Engineering prior to placing wooden forms
to verify footings sitting on competent compacted fill cushion.
Further compaction/evaluation (as deem necessary by consultant in the
field) of exposed footing trench bottom may be necessary to deem it
suitable for its intended use.
CONCRETE SLAB-aN-GRADE
The local subgrade soils are considered LOW in expansion potential
(E.I. < 20) as verified by our laboratory test results. The floor
slabs may be supported directly on properly prepared subgrade.
Lakeshore Engineering
"1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Six
If a floor covering that could be critically affected by moisture,
such as vinyl tile, slabs should be protected by a plastic vapor
barrier of six-mil thickness. The sheet should be covered by at least
two inches of clean sand cushion to prevent punctures and aid in
concrete cure.
The concrete floor slabs should be reinforced with at least 6"x
6"-#10/#10 welded,wire mesh position on chairs at midslab or
equivalent bar reinforcing (no. 3 rebars at 18 inches on center, both
ways) and installed at mid-height. Concrete floor slabs should be at
least 4 inch thick nominal. Cold joints should not exceed 14 feet
apart in either directions.
SLOPES AND EROSION CONTROL
The constructed fill and cut slopes are considered grossly stable and
suitable for its intended use. The onsite granular soils, are
considered sensitive to surficial erosion. In order to mitigate
surficial erosion, the following recommendations are presented:
1) Slopes should be planted as soon as possible with
vegetation which is drought resistant and whose root system
extends a minimum of 18 inches into the slope face.
Immediate planting of the slopes is particularly important
where relatively loose sand is exposed.
2) High water content in slope soils is a major factor in
slope erosion or slope failures. Vegetation watering should
be such that a ,uniform near optimum content is maintained
year-around. A landscape architect should be consulted in
this regard.
3) Shrub and/or tree root excavations should be minimized in
size so that water will not collect and cause saturation of
the surficial materials. Also, back cuts for tree wells are
geotechnically inadvisable because they create a localized
over-steepened condition.
4) All berms should be regularly maintained. Surface drains
should be kept free of debris at all times.
5) Excavated slope and footing soils should not be spread
loosely on the slope face. Burrowing animals should be
controlled (burrows become avenue for water penetration).
6) Seemingly insignificant factors, such as recreational abuse
(e.g., motorcycles, BMX cycles, etc.), human trespass,
small concentrations of uncontrolled surface/subsurface
water, or poor compaction of trench backfills on slope can
result in major erosion and slope distress.
Lakeshore Engineering
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January 1, 2002
Project No. 01-127.C
Page Seven
DRAINAGE
Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of all
structures to minimize water infiltrating into the underlying soils.
Finish subgrade adjacent to exterior footings should be sloped down
and away to facilitate surface drainage. All drainage should be
directed off-site to the street via non-erosive devices. The
homeowner should be made aware of the potential problems which may
develop when drainage is altered through construction of retaining
walls, patios and pools. Ponding water situation, leaking irrigation
systems, overwatering or other conditions which could lead to ground
saturation must be avoided.
ADDITIONAL GRADING
The project consultant engineer should be notified prior to any fill
placement, regrading of the site, or backfilling of trenches, after
rough grading has been completed. This report is limited to the
earthwork performed through December 20, 2001, the date our last site
inspection.
Any future appurtenant structures such as a detached garage
buildings, home office, barn, spas or pools, etc., that are not shown
on the approved grading plan should be reviewed for subgrade
suitability and permitted separately by county prior to construction.
Our findings have:been obtained in accordance with accepted
professional engineering practices in the fields of geotechnical
engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either
express 9f.ci:~~t?:~."q ""!';''''"''':~'-''t
Respectf~hyrSUbmit-ted~ . .,;
dba LAKES~ORE E~ftNE~~'~J1{G~, 'i
:~[ I ...;,~ ~'.'. ,u'/q ~\'\
';~~ ,,;.f..ll('~" 'e
:J I'i ~.
. I',' I", 0","" r,'
, Pl1'"O. '"' I .,~ :D
\..'- .
. : \ . -~r.
Fen Yong, :'RCE~3(74 2 ;t
Exp: 6/3~1?4 ~~I~~\r()~'<-
Enclosed:,:~) <~.:j.Q~r ,F~ J'
2.1 Summa:nr oCl'est'cResults, Fig. 3
3):xero~;reauction of Grading Plan
4) Xerox of reference soil report, by W.C. Hobbs
cc: 3 copies to client
Lakeshore Engineering C\
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/ /--., I
/ / ",J
EXPLANATION
~,.\
\
~\
PLOT PLAN
\ \' ,- \ 7 ' I
" \ "0, j;(;,~ ._.__~
, \ " r:p'. >;C. .); ,. --
'\ \ \ % ,..""," 5~,__ ,~_/
" '~ ;'';'':0. 50 '---.~'"
\ e':iY~<" -,,~. "
~~ .~~ '-,-:'r~.~';~:',~~~." 40. ..,....
.,:'."j*~,..;",-:.,,,.:. -
~
~ N
~ . " \,..
.,:~
2{J
19
r-
(]
Z
.~r- --
-._---~
. f% MIN
c
"'''"' 7
0", '" C
"0'0
":\'0"
~
I
I
1
I
110
I
1
,c-
I &_"-
I
I~----l
L
i ~---- ""l!"
I I
l_______ J
F
I~
rn
Ii
o
~
::;:
i
,
I(/Ii \
n..,n../<"
'. :s:
" ,o ".
,o" '1D
A~ ~O \
X-g
APPROX. LOCATION OF
DENSITY TEST TAKEN.
~
ili.
APPROX. LOCATION OF KEYWAY CONSTRUCTED.
APPROX. LIMITS OF FILL PLACED AND INSPECTED.
LAKESHORE
Engineering
MR. & MRS. GRIFFIN
PARCEL 4 OF TR. 3752
DE PORTO LA RD.
COMPACTION REPORT
\0
Project No:
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS 01-127. C
Date
1/01/02
Figure No:
2
I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENS ITV TESTS
I ~~
DATE E LEV A. REFER- MAXIMUM FJELD ~
I ~ ,,<v ",'" 0
TEST OF TION EfKE DP,Y \4ATER DRY '(~ '-.; 9,"y-<:" RENARKS u
LOCATION ~
NO. TEST (feet) CURVE DENS !TY CONTENT DEI;SITY Cl ::
'.,,'- -:s"
>i- ( pef) (%)~" (pd) ~ c << ;;:
I en
, /
I 11101 \((0." lN10 '/. +'L /;, 118D 27 II b1 AI.
I Z 1\ 101 K 10:'1 VS1'l'l. tL A 12-80 II ,(\ . II /.fCj 8l.C) ",qa 1/
3 111'1 Slo~E \ EM:.T 14 A \'2..9,.0 9 \ Ilbs '1] /
4 II /0, C6wpF-- IsDL\.tH . -t 4 . A 12S0 [,I 11'1 2- C?3. /
5 1111' ~LD1't I (r:.. 'IVY! fC:, A 11..80 23 liS')' qo /
(, Iljl~ s'LB() I': \ Lu:t:s.i iC, A 1'2.8.0 go I zl3 '1l) /
1 1\ 11'1 <;1 "or I w-e;,T. +-<0 A 1120 13 II so C/o 1/
8 1111'1 SlJ)'PE +lO A 11.'30 70 1173 12 1/
C) Iii 1'1. SloP\=: + I ( A \280 12...0 II '55 Oro 1/
~ \:1z.o"li cO\,: &r LOI'E
'** 'FeD>'\)... lAS, ~ S~E:EP , Q E-{) oIU'I.
I
I
I
I
MR. & MRS. GRIFFIN
PARCEL 4 OF TR, 3752
_LAKESHORE DE PORTO LA RD.
Engineering rOMPACTION REPORT \\
Pr'll. No: 0018: Tobl.,
Consulting Civil Engineering and Geologists OI-OILl,c... 1/01/02 3
~
~
il
II
~s~~
~Q~~
'~Cl 2.
gR\~Q
~r'
in~~
~M
~2~~
;~~
,.
,
~
~
~
~i
~~
~
~
a~
,"'
~
\!l
~
~~~
~~~
~~
i=
~
~
'-"
al
n
e"
.~
~ .
~~
U
~
~
!
!
.
i:t_
~
b), ~:
?--t-r f:
, ~.
. I ..'i
J ' ",
f-~ .
-..-t'-
.8
.~
~
~
~
~
.
i,
~i
~
i;n!
u- ~
'W' .,s".,..t
, . . 1
: '
h ___~
\
C,.,:' \ .
~ ~ ~
O../!~
If{ , !, ,
3 "-;-,L,.~ ""
l: 1. ...'.
~. ~.
Cn.:
, .
! i ffi
C,,",!", !,
..,"
':.f!- ," '.
i
~
i
!:
-.
-.
-,
'"
~.
~
2:
g
~
F
-.
.
.
o
I
~
.~
~
,! !i
~~ ~
. ~ ~
~
"
F
.1
"~
~-
.~
h
~,
!i.
~.&
,;
oj
!i
=.
j g'
';i
t.
;"-
.,
J
i
~
~
[
.
.
~
,
"
p
~:
. .
a~'
!.O
;.,~
is'
-l
~.
it
lj
H
~. a
~!
~n
. .
5'i
! 3
i:
"
-,
~!
. -
e
, ,
"
~a
"
"
.
~~.f
i.l
:t_
~, I
~fl!
-. ,
; E:-
0: -<;
13~
~iJ
2 !-i
." .
~.~~
e.ill
;;~;
!~I,
~if
Q.g3
~'!:.~
.. .
'. <
If:>i!!.
".CLiO
!~~
;, ~~
.. .
--.""'"
;~j
,- .
IS~
a ~ !!.
. !.
!'!
"
H
~S
~
~
Il"
g
;:
,
,
~
,
[
,
.
.
~
~
.
~
o
.
,
I
,
o
~
"
[~ ~ ~
5" ~ "il
,,~ ;. ~
~!!!. ~,:i
ldl .1"E
: ~ ;;
;; ~ i~
'" ..g
~ !!.1"
. '.
it.. l~.
t t:ll
a. ~~
. <0
, -.
. ,.
~ ~!
, . =
~ ~ ~
< ..
it ~'2.
:;- -a
~ ~!
~ ~i
:: i ~
~ ~e.
l" -..
;. . ~
;; .
. 0
~. j-
&. ~
'"
"
s€'
..
n.
H
I;
2.:
o.
"
~<
..
~.l
. ,
.,
."
':"j
~.
~
~
,
l
<
I
,
;
.
~
~
o
,-
"
:i
"<
o.
a.g
".
E~
t~
ft
~:
..
. .
i~
"
i~
,.
s'
.'
.,
g~
"
"
~~.
O'R
..
'}
.
o
~.
p'
~~
0"
il
11
~.
..
,.
, ,
.
"
.
1
;:
i
~
o
,
t
.
~
.
.
.
5
.
,
J
a
o
~ ht
~ !H
l.. :I!
. 33
~ a. ~
!. 5;
~ :: ~
~:. ~ ~
[ ~
~. ~
, .
. .
8 :t
[ ~
, -
. ,
~ ~
> .
= .
~ ~
i ~
~ g
, .
, .
:I ,,'
,,' ~
~ g
. "
!' ;.
o .
"
,p.
.
g 'i:X ~ S' ~ 'O;;t.
-<Of" !3
3 :'''. g,= i-'"
!: t 3!;.'!' i!
s.",:I. Cl.. '<
"'! ";: .
~ ~ lS!:: ~
-:i!.. Q. R 2 0
'~"J " '
!!. 2. "R ...
!~~ ~.~. 2
- . ;;. .
~ ~ 1: ~_ s- g.
0"' g 2. :;I "
ia~E;~ ..'
. - 2.!i. 0 <I
0=.. i"' '"
~ .. e- ~,; :
, H.. .
~ii . ~ 'i
~:g ; ~
d' , ,
~ ~: fi ~
~ "' ~ "' 2
o~;, : i
;.:: -=
'lJ' . .
c!!S 11 -:
ii,aSl 3' '0
:!": ; ~.
~ ~:5' ! 0
~'g! !t i
i;[! : ~
al!l.. -. '"
~H I .
..
.
m
:::!!.~
".
:a..
;..;~-f
n.
p.
2S-r"
~. i
;;~~
!211
i2:2:
'r
U
!;-~~-
!,lq:
.".
-,
i;l!
.:~
".
!.3~
S a.:;I
'! !1.l
.-
'.
;; a!t
! 3 ~
~~3
.. ~. i!
2 s-l
~ ~:::
i:t
!'If
,
.
,
1-1 g~~
~ i 11..'2
~ g:: 3
~ i! ~i;
It < "'-~1I
:<;; s.,~~
1: ~ ~ ii's"
"': fS;
i-~ i'~'l'
- g ...
2.:1a.!.-;-
; 00" ~
ii ii i~
il :::&.2.
nHJ
g.!,g':il
OR"'ll"
_.. co:!
,~~ 1.
i :if~'~
~. ~ i- ~
fl;:~!
~.&.1~
:. ~s t
~ ~-a.;
'" ~,~_..
.. g.! 0
~l!i
C'..~o
gi 2,i
;..,
...1
;;
<l_~
, .,
.. .
!liaS
gog
g.! a
. -
2.sa
h.
i 2:
... ~ S'
j: ~
Eia'
~:~[
~~;
3_.
~F
2. =;
"'...~
~: &
;: i
:.a.a
. -.
t:Slg
3.S
:g,a
;fi"ii
. .
.. g ~.
J~~
if
-~
'"
0000....01...
li..~.!lg, .~iS
~.:: i:::; ~ t!, a!' ~
~.g~~i:i;~i~:
"".." 'g" -"'.. f
~-&.~&~~~~~
"t..~5"'{j....li'
~..~;~t~~a[
'. . i . -'
~!,gg...Jf:;l':
ii:~o"a.~ai
::.ll" -=i- ~!!, 0.$ ~
. 5 a..... 'l! ",.. R
~": =a~ ~ ~,~
,., '5l .. 2 II ;::;.-_ 0_
a~~~5ir~li;
~i'~:o~r::i!t
'l;:3t-l~~:
~'1!liq j;'O'l;o 5.
~,.if~S;o!:: ~ ~
~;; ~g.aj--:! ll,.i!'
o !'!: _.. ~_ .. ~...
~~; 9,g ~ ~ ,'~.
o;;!:~ 2....;;0 ~
~~.~':5:i:; 2-
ii:i~!;'~'~'~
:i2~;~~[~
!;:~; is;~'
: ~ ~!~~i;.l
!5-2~'''0 =if:
li~a~~~g'~
~~~o.:::tg-2.~
N
o
ii
~e.
=,
~i
"
"g..
2~'
il'
..
n
~,
H
~j
~
!
Il"
,
l
!
~.
,
.
I
N
! is;; ~ ~
.Pf;~ [~-
" ..?l!-_ ..
! ~i, ~ t
'., ,"
gill-
....-.f
~ ~? ii .
,,~ Il"i
l'iH.
!ot ~.g:iff
!.a",;;~
i~'; ~~'
= ~J.~ 0
~.: ~; I
i~;;::;
o~~~~
~;;~g:f
....a..ir-
~ ~J.~ ~
.._o:>tT;;:.
<Z.R2"
,g -;-;)~.
;: g t3
g'i[i~
It!.a!::
~ g..3:;
ig.2.2~
[= ;g:'!'
:i i~! a
2.S-~'~'!l'
{
N
N
" l-
~~ ~!'ii
~~ :- ",lI II
H;:~l
i~' ij;!J
~: ~~.:-
'=i ~!l;
=:: l~'g
~i 7j,;
19 la
::. ~ i:.
0.:> "'2:8
~l ;"0
~i ~.&.;.
i'; ~ j.2.
;~ ~i.}
-ll -<"il
l:r tlt-~
ol 2,8m
,:0.. :::~"
2.[ .~i:
~! ;~~
~ i i; ~
;r..~ !t.. 0
i;; j 2 I
!lg. ,ag.Q
~a 2.~i
il "C:r
~ ~g ~
.
.t(
~
~
i:.
~
z
~
~
m
I
~
r
~
~
G.
~
i Vs
Q
'z
~
.~..
, 'lJ
~',
~~~~RW. 5
Ui~~~~I~ ~
;-:-!j~b~~ .".~.
,,~.!i~.~~- 0
iUi~~ii~~ i
!0!ii1 ~<~.
~~.~>~~,~
~~.!iJilii~S C)
~i~lm:~ g
g!~~~i~d
~ ii~~ .~.
~.~.o ~.~
"",ii\~""':Eltll-<
ii~gl"~u
,~" ~~.~m
~". ~ ~~!i
o ~~ >.
!i
~!~ ~~~il~
2 o~..~
~ ~ il~~~~
~mm ~~~~~
~~~ ~~<~
~~~ ~~~~
~~~m~
I; i!;~
h ii~~
~II~~;
~. rd~
~
i@21
~ ~ I
o ~
I ...!:'
N_...
N10
. ...~
~ :!:o~ ~
Q (,.)O"'Tl
il5 Co) ~
m
~
;u
~
C
-l
:r:
1ii
z
~
1'i
m
1
~
~
~
o
'~
~
"
~
(!Ji~~~:l!E
~~~u~~
hi~l~i .~.
l"i'~~'.
~ i~~~~ I
,. .g'E.
~.~~>!~
;'!lii~,~,' .~,
~!i~.~\l
~
.
~
i
~
~II
!1
~
0'
~
-~
f
.~
.~
q
~
.
.
!1
~
,
.
i
f
\
~.
J
{
~.
~
,
~
5
~
g
---~ - -------- ,~~~~~~;. ;ta --Jl' -~--II~---P;'~ ~ ~"",-",-",,,,-,.,,"""-..........-..
n U~ ~ j,i:t,mlnnmi~~!:, U~mm~~lillllil~~!U!!i:i~lill':~i~~:iiil:~;.
. ~ o.!/ 0 '.lliil..~ oar'~'<'~~~l~'~~uiQ~ ~~88S~!i~"~'2rih~~ .. m g~i".~!i~!i~
"~~ · 19m~I!~~!!t!!J!i~I~!~l~I~~i~~!~~d~~~~~d~~(ioll~~!1 !:!~~~~:;:~~~n~
~l~ I) \ i::~iU~i~il~id~~iifIU!!~!i~;!Uji;!~~i IliiUU E~ mli!~nli~~
i~ ~ ~~t:Ji!~ '~,~i:~iJi~i~lm~!;I~ ~~~~~:!~~~~I~! ~11!i~~~~ !~ !~~~a~~~R ~ ~
\ .. ~.,hl o~~ .a~l~~ ""I.ll a.'~~,,~O"""~ ~~. ~.~. ~~;~il~~~ i
;'~~~i'!J&i~~n~'I~~~~~lii a~~~~!j~h:!;i! ~bliM ~! ~~;~~!ig~~ g i'
ii~~" ,2,. ' ~i i~~.~~~<'ii~!i~~.il ~~~!i~~~.~~~.,~ ;ffi~,.~.~ g," ~~~ ~i~h ~ ~.
~. ,~ ~.~"~~.. ~~~ ~..'o ilfij~~~..' ~~~., >,01"'." !i.~' ~ M
i~o"- ~ ~ ~g.~ ~ ~~ ~j~~. i~"~.~~~~~~~ . ~~~~~~~. ~g g~ :I~".
~~I~ ,o! ~~;gUn! ~~ !I~~. ~~ ~~~~~~i~~~B~~~ di~lm i: ~~ !e ~I . :
i~ .... ; o'~~~I!io~ ~~ · . ;. "~IS.j!i~r~...11 ~~~~..~o >Q g- m~ m~ ~ ~
1n Ilil'llj' ii !ll !~!!im~i!I!! HIli!!! II illlll ! !
.~" m ~.! ~!. ~ l m~i .~~~~~'I~ ~~~ ~. ~I!i I~ ~~ ~ ~ I
.~ PI 0 ~" d' .~ .". ." ~ ~
g ~ ",;:I <I) . j!: ~ '< .
~ ..... ;;:I ...
~ i -<
'"
o
$
o
m
o
,.
'-I
o
"
o
G>
Xl
)>
"
:J:
-<
" ~
~ ~
~ i\
~ ~
""c~
i~ .
~~R
<<.
~~o
nl~g
!il
~~o
~
'"
m
z
o
!E
)>
~
I f~ p-~
" 0 .
~ ~ i ~ ~ ~
"" ~ i ....
~ ~
:Jl ~ ~ ~ ;n i
fi::i!nl
<"~
,~~~
:~;
"!~
b~t
~;~
i!~5
~p~
~~a
>".
nl~""
i!~ili
~~
~
~
)>
..
'"
m
'"
'"
o
~
~
Xl
o
l!1
z
~
~
~
"
"
~
I'
"
"
w
!!;!
~
'"
o
~
o
<c:
)>
z
::!
iil
'"
OO~"p.i' ~--~-~-
- .~... <.
....... 't> r;!:l"l~ !:: ....
Zg ~_. ~ ~ .
~ $;m;gq~ ~ ~ ~
,~<~ . ^
~ ; ~~ ~ .
~! /
~
Is
g
~
,
~
~
N .
g 8
.
.
~
~
~
~
~'Ii ~~.~~ ~.~!
~~" '~~l!" ~<8~
!i8~ 1:' ~."~ t
m~~ ....i'l!~~ 2",~....
~~~ U~~i~ n~1
2~. ~~~< '1"0
"~. 'IU~ !i<~<
;.! ~ ~"' i~!~
"!' ~ffi~ .~~
~. '"il. "~~
g~ il..~ ~~~
~~ m~ ~~ffi
~~ ~~~ii ~"~
m~ ~g~o < <
~ .
I1lil
1~~ Iii- U~!
-go G> . ~~~
-<~!il > '? ~~c;)
~;a.il r- !!: o;o,:l!:
Cl",;a. '" ;a.lOe
;;jr~ 0 ~lI>~
~.. m ~~"
~~~ <i s:::!~
n-< :0 ... 2
~i ::;:; ::::."
g;;j ~ ~ ~
~i'i (5
~ Z
;:2
)>
~
"
ill
"
)>
ill
o
'"
-<
:g~~~ ~ ~
2!S%I~ :0....
~ ~~s If 6
!:.:...>> ~CIl
~li:~~ o~
<o<O....~ ...
>;\;p ::0
00 "
~trl~~ tT1
)(.....;:.. ..
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ l.JI
,
~18
i~
q~
.0
_-L
-<
r
o 0
-i ."
..
. -I
-i m
S;S;CI> ~
zo::tl m
~-i)> 0
owO C
-.0- ....
oR!Z )>
)0' CI>
c: 0 ~
cgrn'"'O ~
:0 ""U r- =:
z 0)> ~
:;:oZ ~
-i 0
o .
r- ~
)0 .
:n 1\
o ~
)0 ~
o "
!
.
-
%
-
,/
~