HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3883 Lot 329 Rough Grading
:~EN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CO!poration
. Soil Engineering and Consulling Services . EngineeringGeology. Compaction Tesling
-Inspeclions. Construction MalerialsTesting -laboratolyTesting-PercolationTesting
e Geology e Water Resource Studies . Phase I &11 Environmental SiteAssessmenls
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NElWORK
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Calle Torcida, Lot 329 otTract 3883
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1606-C
June 25, 1999
RECEIVED
JUN 28 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERiNG DEPARTMENT
Prepared for:
CWO Development
Post Office Box 1414
24380 Fuerte Road
Temecula, California 92593
~ ,
, '
'~ ,
, ,
, '
" ,
/ " "
F ,_ __ "
, ,
, '
'/ " ,~
I ~ , /
.'-' '-F::'
\ / ~ '
, -
,
,
, ,
, '
, '
, ' ,
, '
, '
"
, ' ,
,.; -.';>--'~-
, '~::...-- ,;,"-2._-:_/__._:..:: " -
, -- __ J
- " ~ I I
.!__;l-":"._~_"; .,_L ~_:~.
'" """~i ~;J;Ii'Of.ICS4.160
- ", -c()lt~.'iq:~'COVi:t,y:o
--- I
~ __ I
J _.-;;;-........,,_
'---~"
"'.". -J:..>-...""O
E i~,:i>,f..:tirci~'N rt ,su~ii.,r~;;,~ctja, CA 92590\,ph6ne: 19091.676,3095' faxH909lR1.6:ii94
I ~',2615cbrang~ A e ue, S~i\!~:An~;'CA~2ZW., phone: (1l41[546-4051 ' fax: (1141:54:6'4'0'52: '
EB S'iTE: www.NENCOi\~.COM . E:MAiL:ENGENCORP@~E.NET . .' '~,""'"
- ,:~,.;::;,
. -" .~',
. Y'....
..- -:/-::,~'-:}~Yi~~~'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE
PAGE
1.0 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION.....................................................~.......2
1,1 PROJECT LOCATION......,..,.,.,..,.,.".,...,. ..... ..., .....".". ......,.,..,.,..,.,.,.,..,.., ......."""", '" 2
1 ,2 PROJECT DESCRiPTION....,.........,...... ..... ,....... ,."....... ...,....,....,......... ................,.,.,.,,2
1.3 SITE DESCRiPTION.......................,.......,.. ..'.....,.............. ,..,.,.,......,..,..,..,..........,......3
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK .....,.........:.,.......,.............................,............................................3
2,1 TIME OF GRADING .,.................'.........................'.................,......,.,.,..,..,.......,.,...,....3
2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUiPMENT.,......... ..,.. ...,. ,...,.,.............,... ..... ,..,..........,. ,........,.....3
2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS,.,..,.,............... ......... .,...,..... ...,.....,..,........,.,..,..,.....,.,.....,...,.3
3.0 TESTING ............,.,...... ...............................................................,.,.....,..,.,............... 4
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES..,.............. ,........' .,..,....................,....,.........................4
3.1.1 LABORATORY TESTING..............,..,....".,.. ,.,....,..,. ......".."..,..... ...,...,...... ..., A
3,1.2 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST...........,.,.....,...,..,.........,.......,......A
3,2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST.......,.,..,........... ...,................ ...,..,........,.....,....,.......,......,...,.4
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS ..................................................................,..,.,............ .............. 4
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................4
5,1 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ....,.......,...................................................4
5.2 FOUNDATION SiZE.,....,................ ,...,.. ,......,.....,................,....,...............,....,....,.,.,.,. 5
5.3 DEPTH OF EMBEDMENT..., ..'...,..,.,.............. ............... ..,........'.......,.,......... ............ ,.,.5
5.4 BEARING CAPACiTY.,...................,..... ..... .... ..,..........,.............'........,.................,. ,....5
5.5 SETTLEMENT,................,......,.......,..... ..... .... ............ ,............................... ,.......,.,.,...5
5,6 LATERAL CAPACiTY....,..,.........,...... ..,. ...,.. ....., ,.... ,... ,.............,..................,...,..,.,.,...6
5.7 SLAB-ON-GRADE RECOMMENDATIONS.. ........... ,..... .....,...,........... ......................,.......6
5.8 I NTERIOR SLABS..... ...,.....,......,...,..'...,.................,......"..,..,....,.".,.,..,'..,...........,.,.... 7
5,9 EXTERIOR SLABS....,..,.........,..,......,.........,...,.......,...,.........,..................,..,.,....,..,...,. 7
5.10 GENERAL 7
6.0 CLOSURE ..........................................................,.................................................8
ApPENDIX
TEST RESULTS
DRAWINGS
EnGEN Corporation
7-
I~
I .. ....m~"=".".,.:"... .....GEN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
//
~'~,';;":"'J"
-
i~
Coq~oration
-SoiIEngineeringandConsullingServices. EngineeringGenlogy.CompaclionTesting
-Inspections. ConslructionMaterialsTesting -laboratoryTesting. Percolation Testing
. Geology. Water Resource Studies . Phase I & II Environmental Sile AsseSSffill!1ts
ENVIRONMENTAL & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NElWORK
June 25, 1999
CWO Development
Post Office Box 1414
24380 Fuerte Road
Temecula, California
(909) 676-7099
92593
Attention:
Mr. Carl Daggy
Regarding:
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
ROUGH GRADING OPERATIONS
Calle Torcida, Lot 329 of Tract 3883
City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California
Project Number: T1606-C
References:
1.
EnGEN Corporation, Limited Geotechnical Study, Proposed Single Family
Residence, Lot 329 of Tract 3883, Calle Torcida, City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, California, Project Number: T1606-LGS, report dated April 12,
1999, .
2,
Paul Dieges, RCE, Grading Plan, Lot 329, Tract 3883, City of Temecula,
County of Riverside, California, sheet 1 of 1, plan dated March 23, 1999.
Dear Mr. Daggy:
According to your request and signed authorization, EnGEN Corporation has performed field
observations, sampling, and in-place density testing at the above referenced site. Submitted, herein,
are the test results and the supporting field and laboratory data,
1.0
SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
1.1
PROJECT LOCATION
The subject site is located southeast of the intersection of Via Norte and Calle Torcida, in
the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California,
1.2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Prior to grading operations, topography and surface conditions of the site were moderately
sloping with surface draina()e to the south at a maximum gradient of approximately 11
. ""
percent.
/ ... -'
, '
,
\ ~ ' ,
, ..
~ /... I '- _ '/...
~ ,- - - \ F ... , I ~ ,-
, ~ I _'- _
- - \ ~ ... "
, '
'~ ,
, " \-
. ..
, ,
/ , '~/ , -.... ~'-~ \
, .. '
'.. ,
',- -- \
.. ,
,. --~(~.:./_--,.:.-: " ::
, ,
\' \ "
\?,' -.-
\ ,\' -
~ -.:0:-.)
'- ' ,) -';'.--"
-" - - .
/ "-- I
, '
__ __ I
, ..
, f \' ~ I , -I : \ I '"I. '.--1 - .:::.._.........-..-..~J -'- -',; "-
_.....c:~~'."..__.__-'. I ~.J....-- ,-"
,'..~ . ~:G'Q:~ ..' itE~Ei~4:;:QQ. E Jerpri~e,Circhl'l'.j rt ,Suite i;,Temecula, Cft. 92590-'-phone: (909)676-3095 . fa~:~(909) 676,3294
. . :.QRAN~;t~@,tJN1Y;6 I E26,1'01)railge,A e ue, ~a(l1fu.,ll(na, el\.'~2101.', phone: (7141,546-4051' fax: (],f4[!;'46'4052:
EB SITE: WWW, N ENCORP:COM. E-MAIL: ENGENtORP@PE.NET
.~,
-
9....
,-,';,~--~~:;L~}
.",-,-.",._-
"-~ ,"",'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 3
1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION
It is understood that the subject site is to be developed with a single family residence with
slab-an-grade concrete floors,
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 TIME OF GRADING
This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction
operations from May 27,1999 through June 3,1999,
2.2 CONTRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT
The grading operations were performed by Del Rio Enterprises through the use of one (1)
rubber tire dozer, one (1) track mounted dozer, and one (1) water truck.
2.3 GRADING OPERATIONS
Grading within the subject site consisted of a cut/fill operation. Grasses and weeds were
removed prior to fill placement Fill material was generated from the northern portions of
the site, and used to bring the southern portions of the site to finish grade elevation.
Removal of alluvium, slopewash, etc" was performed to a depth of 3.0-feet below original
elevation. Over-excavated earth material was stockpiled and later used as fill. Bottoms
were observed, probed and found to be into competent soil by a representative of this firm.
Keying and benching into competent soil was observed during the grading operations.
Over-excavation was performed in the cut portion of the garage pad to a depth of 4.0-feet
below finish grade elevation and to a distance of 5,0-feet outside the proposed structure.
The exposed bottoms were scarified and moisture conditioned to a depth of 12-inches then
compacted to 90 percent The living area which is separated from the garage, is almost
entirely in cut, and no overexcavation was done in that area. A small 1'+/- deep fill is
located in the southeast corner, where footings need to be deepened to be fouded entirely
in natural ground. Fill was placed in lens thicknesses of 6 to 8-inches, thoroughly moisture
conditioned to near optimum moisture content, then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent
relative compaction. Moisture conditioning of the on-site soils was performed during the
compaction process, through the use of a water truck, The pad area was generally graded
to the elevations noted on the Grading Plan, However, the actual pad location,
EnGEN Corporation t\,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 4
dimensions, elevations, slope locations and inclinations, etc. were surveyed and staked by
others and should be verified by the Project Civil Engineer.
3.0 TESTING
3.1 FIELD TESTING PROCEDURES
Field in-place density and moisture content testing were performed in general accordance
with ASTM-D-2922-81 (90) and ASTM-D-3017-88 procedures for determining in-place
density and moisture content, respectively, using nuclear gauge equipment. Relative
compaction test results were within the 90 percent required for all material placed and
compacted. Test results are presented in the Appendix of this report, Fill depths and test
locations were determined from review of the referenced grading plans,
3.1.1 LASORA TORY TESTING
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of our services during the grading of
the subject site. The test results are presented in the Appendix of this report.
3.1.2 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST
Maximum dry density - optimum moisture content relationship tests were conducted on
samples of the materials used as fill. The tests were performed in general accordance with
ASTM D1557-91 procedures, The test results are presented in the Appendix (Summary of
Optimum Moisture Content! Maximum Dry Density Relationship Test Results).
3.2 EXPANSION INDEX TEST
A soil sample was obtained for expansion potential testing from the building pad area upon
completion of rough grading of the subject site. The expansion test procedure utilized was
the Uniform Building Code Test Designation 18-2. The material tested consisted of clay,
sandy silt, which has an Expansion Index of 52, This soil is classified as having a medium
expansion potential. The results are presented in the Summary of Expansion Index
Results in the Appendix of this report.
4.0 EARTH MATERIALS
The natural earth materials encountered on-site, generally consisted of brown silty sand
with varying amounts of clay,
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Foundations for the proposed structure may consist of conventional column footings and
5
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 5
continuous wall footings founded upon properly compacted fill. The recommendations
presented in the subsequent paragraphs for foundation design and construction are based
on geotechnical characteristics and a medium expansion potential for the supporting soils
and should not preclude more restrictive structural requirements. The Structural Engineer
for the project should determine the actual footing width and depth to resist design vertical.
horizontal, and uplift forces,
FOUNDATION SIZE
Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 18-inches, Continuous footings
should be continuously reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No.4 steel reinforcing bars
located near the top and two (2) No.4 steel reinforcing bars located near the bottom of the
footings to minimize the effects of slight differential movements which may occur due to
minor variations in the engineering characteristics or seasonal moisture change in the
supporting soils, Column footings should have a minimum width of 18-inches by 18-inches
and be suitably reinforced, based on structural requirements. A grade beam, founded at
the same depths and reinforced the same as the adjacent footings, should be provided
across garage door openings and other doorway entrances.
DEPTH OF EMBEDMENT
Exterior and interior footings founded in properly compacted fill should extend to a
minimum depth of 18-inches below lowest adjacent finish grade for the structure,
BEARING CAPACITY
Provided the recommendations for site earth work, minimum footing width, and minimum
depth of embedment for footings are incorporated into the project design and construction,
the allowable bearing value for design of continuous and column footings for the total dead
plus frequently-applied live loads is 1,500 psf for continuous footings and 1,500 psf for
column footings in competent natural ground or in properly compacted fill material. The
allowable bearing value has a factor of safety of at least 3,0 and may be increased by 33.3
percent for short durations of live and/or dynamic loading such as wind or seismic forces,
SETTLEMENT
Footings designed according to the recommended bearing values for continuous and
column footings, respectively, and the maximum assumed wall and column loads are not
expected to exceed a maximum settlement of 0.5-inches or a differential settlement of
0,25-inches in properly compacted fill.
(p
EnGEN Corporation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.6
5.7
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 6
LATERAL CAPACITY
Additional foundation design parameters based on compacted fill for resistance to static
lateral forces, are as follows:
Allowable Lateral Pressure
(Equivalent Fluid Pressure), Passive Case:
. Compacted Fill - 150 pet
Allowable Coefficient of Friction:
Compacted Fill - .35
Lateral load resistance may be developed by a combination of friction acting on the base of
foundations and slabs and passive earth pressure developed on the sides of the footings
and stem walls below grade when in contact with undisturbed, properly, compacted fill
material. The above values are allowable design values and have safety factors of at least
2.0 incorporated into them and may be used in combination without reduction in evaluating
the resistance to lateral loads. The allowable values may be increased by 33.3 percent for
short durations of live and/or dynamic loading, such as wind or seismic forces, For the
calculation of passive earth resistance, the upper 1.0-foot of material should be neglected
unless confined by a concrete slab or pavement. The maximum recommended allowable
passive pressure is 5.0 times the recommended design value.
SLAB-ON-GRADE RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for concrete slabs, both interior and exterior, excluding PCC
pavement, are based upon the anticipated building usage and upon a medium expansion
potential for the supporting material as determined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Buildin9
Code. Concrete slabs should be designed to minimize cracking as a result of shrinkage,
Joints (isolation, contraction, and construction) should be placed in accordance with the
American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines, Special precautions should be taken during
placement and curing of all concrete slabs. Excessive slump (high water/cement ratio) of
the concrete and/or improper curing procedures used during either hot or cold weather
conditions could result in excessive shrinkage, cracking, or curling in the slabs. It is
recommended that all concrete proportioning, placement, and curing be performed in
accordance with ACI recommendations and procedures.
EnGEN Corporation
'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 7
5.8 INTERIOR SLABS
Interior concrete slabs-on-grade should be a minimum of 4-inches in actual thickness and
be underlain by a minimum of 2-inches of clean coarse sand or other approved granular
material placed on properly prepared subgrade. Minimum slab reinforcement should
consist of #3 reinforcing bars placed 18-inches on the center in both directions or a suitable
equivalent. The reinforcing should be placed at mid-depth in the slab. The concrete
section and/or reinforcing steel should be increased appropriately for anticipated excessive
or concentrated floor loads. In areas where moisture sensitive floor coverings are
anticipated over the slab, we recommend the use of a polyethylene vapor barrier with a
minimum of 6.0 mil in thickness be placed beneath the slab, The moisture barrier should
be overlapped or sealed at splices and covered by a 1.0-inch minimum layer of clean,
moist (not saturated) sand to aid in concrete curing and to minimize potential punctures,
Prior to pouring the concrete floor slab, the subgrade should be brought to a moisture
content of at least 5% above optimum moisture to a depth of 18 inches, Flooding of the
building area may be necessary in order to accomplish the moisture requirement.
5.9 EXTERIOR SLABS
All exterior concrete slabs cast on finish subgrade (patios, sidewalks, etc" with the
exception of PCC pavement) should be a minimum of 4-inches nominal in thickness.
Reinforcing in the slabs and the use of a compacted sand or gravel base beneath the slabs
should be according to the current local standards, Subgrade soils should be moisture
conditioned to at least 5% above optimum moisture content to a depth of 6 immediately
before placing aggregate base material or placing the concrete.
5.10 GENERAL
Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site in the
areas noted has been completed in accordance with the Referenced No. 1 report or
modified as necessary in the field based on conditions encountered, and in accordance
with the project plans and the Grading Code of the City of Temecula. The graded site in
the areas noted as graded' is determined to be adequate for the support of a typical
residential development. Any subsequent grading for development of the subject property
should be performed under engineering observation and testing performed by EnGEN
EnGEN Corporation
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
June 1999
Page 8
Corporation, Subsequent grading includes, but is not limited to, any additional fill
placement and excavation of temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes. In addition,
EnGEN Corporation should observe all foundation excavations. Observations should be
made prior to installation of concrete forms and/or reinforcing steel so as to verify and/or
modify, if necessary, the conclusions and recommendations in this report, Observations of
overexcavation cuts, fill placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill, pavement
subgrade and base course, retaining wall backfill, slab presaturation, or other earth work
completed for the development of subject site should be performed by EnGEN
Corporation, If any of the observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions
are not performed by EnGEN Corporation, liability for the safety and performance of the
development is limited to the actual portions of the project observed and/or tested by
EnGEN Corporation.
6.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for use by the parties or proJect named or described above.
It mayor may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes. The findings
and recommendations expressed in this report are based on field and laboratory testing
performed during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering
practices and principles. No.further warranties are implied or expressed beyond the direct
representations of this report,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services. If you should have any questions
regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office at your convenience.
Respectfully submitted,
EnGEN Corporation
~
Jason D, Gardner
Field Operations Manager
JDG/OB:aa
Distribution: (4) Addressee
FILE: EnGEN/Reporting/Crr1606C cwo Oevelopment. Rough Grading
EnGEN Corpor:ation
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
Appendix Page 1
APPENDIX
TEST RESULTS
EnGEN Corporation
\0
I
CWD Development
1 Project Number: T1606-C
Appendix Page 2
I FIELD TEST RESULTS
(SUMMARY OF FIELD IN-PLACE DENSITY TEST RESULTS)
(NUCLEAR GAUGE TEST METHOD)
1
Test Test Depth Soil Max Moisture Dry Relative Required
roo Date Test Locations Elev. Type Density Content Density Compaction Compaction
(1999) (FT) (PCF) (%) (PCF) (%) (%)
1 6-1 See site plan 18,0 A2 126.6 10.4 107.0 84.4 90
12 6-1 See site plan 18,0 A2 126.6 9,8 110,6 87.4 90
3 6-1 See site plan 18.0 A2 126,6 12.3 110.5 87,3 90
I: 6-1 See site plan 18.0 A2 126.6 11.0 114.5 90.4 90
6-1 See site plan S.G. A2 126,6 13,8 109.6 86,6 90
6 6-1 See site plan 16,0 A2 126,6 11,1 113,8 90.0 90
I~ 6-1 See site plan 16,0 A2 126.6 11.6 113.8 90.0 90
6-2 Retest #1 18.0 A2 126.6 8.5 113.8 90.0 90
9 6-2 Retest #3 18.0 A2 126,6 11,2 113.8 90.0 90
110 6-3 See site plan 18.5 A2 126.6 10.9 114.2 90.2 90
11 6-3 See site plan 18.5 A2 126.6 10.2 114.7 90.6 90
112 6-3 See site plan 19.5 A2 126.6 8.9 116.3 91.8 90
13 6-3 See site plan 19.5 A2 126.6 9.2 115.6 91,3 90
14 6-3 See site plan S.G, A2 126.6 11.5 114.4 90.4 90
115 6-7 Retest #5 S.G. A2 126.6 9,1 116,8 92.3 90
16 6-7 See site plan S.G. A2 126.6 12,8 107.6 95.0 90
117 6-7 See site plan S,G. A2 126,6 8.1 115.4 91.2 90
S.G.) Indicates Sub-Grade,
I
1
I
I
1
1
1 EnGEN Corporation \\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
Appendix Page 3
SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT I
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS
ASTM D1557-91
Optimum
Soil Maximum Moisture
Soil Description Dry Density Content
Type (USCS Symbol) (PCF) (%)
A1 Tan Silty San9 (SM) 127.7 9.9
A2 Brown Silty Sand (SM) 126.6 10,1
SUMMARY OF EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
Soil
Type
Depth
(FT)
Dry Density
(PC F)
117,3
Moisture
Condition Before
Test (%)
Expansion
Index
Moisture
Condition After
Test (%)
8.1
18.0
52
2
1.5
EnGEN Corporation
\~
I
I CWD Development
Project Number: T1606-C
Appendix Page 4
I
I
I DRAWINGS
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I EnGEN Corporation 0
-"'J-- .----~--'~
CA LE~TDRCIDA
7ioott- T T--= ~ lo.BoY. -
ru ~ I~
U1 '" ;;0
t-'" l"-" IfTll'\)
(l\ 00 ~-l>-I'"
, fTl
~ =
Vl -It:l
r I\) I ;;0.
~X n./
- C-
,<?~
,/
N
.....
C1
In
-I e
o ;;0 N 3'24'36'''''
-., t:tl .
--:E: -., -
J> J>
-< R
r
~.....
I\)z.
1
~
.. ,/
(~~ '/'/V
r' .
""< ".
<9 ~
'1(
...---
~
"0
t:tl - ,
-,,( ---
;},o ~
~~'f- \\
;;0;;0
-IfTl, \
, -I
\ ~~ \ 1\ \
: fTl2 I \ \
': ~- i\.'- --. i
~ ~ ~ \ \
~ r \ \ \
IW -l>
_ \ ~oo I\)
\ \ 1\
~ '1 -\--1-,>-__
, \ 1\ \ T
J ;r,j;: l , ~J: I \
\ rtJ L k 'i.. I-;-\-n~\:--~ ~_\-J \~
'\ h~ R"? i ~1~UJr ~~\ f\l~ \~ \l1< '\ ~ ~ \ '\ .,- ._~~ ..
t.4. \ I \ \ ~ -I ~ I \ . \ \. ~..' \" ~ \ \ I \,. fT1iIJ
l"'\- 2 _ ;;ooe ~' \~I~ \ \ \ ~~
~ \ I\:\ ~~~ - fU~~rlD~.!PEU~~ It~~ _ \ "\ _ \~~~
tn- \ \~ \ r" \ \ \~ \ \ . \ ~\ ~-i~_
Z- - '\ --= +- -\- \ -.}, \. _ \ \ \ \: \ '
{j 1 ~ - -\ - --\ - -\ _ _ \- _ _ \ - \ - " \_ _ _ '-
~ 0 I\) \ \ \ \ \ . \ ,,- ~ - -\- -\-
~ ~ \5 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I -
~ 0 Ul1 \ \ \" Ql II\) I
~ ~._ -!I__. ru ~.-_ E\ _ _ . ~ro- . ~ N .__ "I\) .. _ -J~ _ ~~__
Ul '" I ~iIJ
loot - --ro-:.. CIll:J
2 ""'( '" I 1- - - - - Iz fT1;g
~ . I'i I .... - - - - - - - _ PATROL ~AD IlR ~C;
. , ~." - - _ , 2-1
~ . . ~~ ~ 11 - -!t - -i~_
.... fT1 I\) -l> '
w '" ,
o !l' 2 ' fT1 I
~ll M - - - - _N.Q'SO'9'E ;
~ ~ "*' 125,34 (
~ ~ Nt:? ,~
~!I' l I
"'C-l- - - .
~ . ---
---
: ----
'n
,
hlt~Qh~
./
'-,
-
,
l)
j
~
.....
(~
-I
.....
Z
C1
J:
[J
C
Vl
fT1
!
I
.....
~
~
:;::
.....
;Z
\
~
N
-l>
DIEGO PIPELINE It 1
--~ ---
ell SAN
~
-l>
~
'"
)>
"tJ
"tJ
;:0
o
X
3:
)>
-i
m
r-
o
(')
)>
-i
o
Z
o
"TI
-
Z
I
"tJ
>
(')
m
c
m
z
(JJ
~
-i
m -_
(JJ -->--
-i
r/
m
@ ~~]
t5(
I I:
I /
I
'L
'\18
\, ~~':
~
" \
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
)> )>
"tJ "tJ
"tJ "tJ
;:0 ;:0
o 0
~ ~
3: 3:
)> )>
-i -i
m m
r- r-
o -
(') l!!;
)> -i
-i (JJ
- 0
~ "TI
o 0
"TI <
(') m
c ;:0
-i ~
- (')
"TI )>
- <
1= )>
-i ::!
~ 0
Z Z
(JJ
=i
,,;: 0
i;;i: ,Z
.;~
.
~....!..~.r::;,_",:,'
,
o c "
r- > ;U
- -I 0
m m c...
Z .. m
-i c... 0
Z c -I
)> ill z
3: .... c
m ID 3:
.. (0 OJ
ID m
;:lJ
r-
m
(j')
>
r-
en c
o m
> en
r- 0
m ;u
:: =0
~ ::!
II 0
N ~
~. ",
r:\
'0
-
..
N
...
a
..
~
l!l
~
~
-I
-
en
o
en
(,
I
o
\
o
/
o
~
!=I
o
-11-
3
(lJ
::J
....
,
!
I
. .1
------------~---
I
. .
it
"TI'
i5
c
;:0
m.'.
;;;~-~,
:~'11, '
...
...
1."
;\
[1:,
!ill
.fi,
~I
~.:I'
t: