Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRough Grading Reports ct cica bp 2-) 'THE. Soils Co. , t 'Phone: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769 1705 Central Street, Suite A •Wildomar, CA 92595 1 1 March 2, 1999 Mr. Al Novik ' Kapa Development Corporation 40485 Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Suite 292 ' Murrieta,California 92562 SUBJECT: REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING ' Redhawk Business Park, Phase II Portion of Lots 41 Through 46,Tract 23172 State Highway 79 South Temecula Area,Riverside County, California Work Order No. 011804.23D ' Dear Mr. Novik: INTRODUCTION ' In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Rough Grading presenting the results of our observation and testing during rough grading of the subject site. All compaction test ' results are included in this report in Appendix C, Table I. The 40-scale grading plan prepared by BRF Enterprises of Lake Elsinore, California was utilized ' during grading and to locate our field density tests and was utilized as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1. ' ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES Location Map -Figure 1 Compaction Test Location Map (40-scale) —Plate 1 Appendix A-References ' Appendix B-Laboratory Test Results Appendix C-Results of Compaction Tests 1 1 T.H.E.Soils Co. W.Q.No.011804.23D Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development ' March 2, 1999 Page2 Project Description The subject site had previously been mass graded during the improvements to the Temecula Creek ' Channel. We have reviewed the report of mass grading prepared by GEE Inc_ (1995) and the preliminary geotechnical investigation performed by ProTech(1997),and utilized the recommendations ' contained in these reports during rough grading of the subject site. A maximum of approximately 3.0 feet of additional fill was required to bring the site to design grade in the southwest corner. The site is located south of State Highway 79 South, north of Wolf Store Road, and approximately 250 east of ' Mahlon Vail Road in the Temecula Area of, Riverside County, California. A site map, depicting site boundaries and geographic relationships of the site, is presented as Figure 1 of this report. ' Grading included clearing and grubbing, overexcavation, placement and compaction of fill material to prepare the site. Maximum fill depth including overexcavation was approximately 5 feet in the southwest corner. ' Site Description ' The site consists of one generally rectangular-shaped parcel of land. Parcels 41 through 46 of Tract 23172 is bounded to the north by State Highway 79 South, on the west by the recently graded self storage site, on the south by Wolf Store Road and further south by the Temecula Creek Channel, and on the east by vacant land. Topographically, the building pad site, prior to the subject grading, consisted of a relatively flat graded ' site sloping to the south toward Wolf Store Road at approximately 3%++. Overall relief at the site, prior to the subject grading, was approximately 6+feet. ' GRADING PROCEDURES ' Site Preparation The preliminary soils report required overexcavation of the building pads to a minimum of 5 feet below pad grade or 2 feet below deepest footing and 5 feet beyond the outside building line. The area was ' overexcavated to expose competent fill soils. The upper one foot of the exposed bottom was ripped and moisture conditioned to achieve uniform, near optimum moisture. The material was leveled and ' rolled in with the Blade and Scrappers then wheelrolled with loaded scrapers to achieve a minimum compaction of 90%. ' Fill Placement Fill was placed in thin loose lifts approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, brought to near optimum moisture ' content and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (ASTM D1557-91). Per the preliminary soils report, the fill was compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density. Compaction was achieved by wheel rolling with a Caterpillar rubber tired dozer, and loaded scrapers. The 1 T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O.No.011804.23D t T.H.E. Soils Co. Nni 7- too 7 Indian 8"'a1 Gnittrici 59 Lt— well v e7ne ADAPTED FROM U.S.G.S.7.5 MIN. QUADRANGLE PECHANGA 1968 (PR1988) .I- 0 T® MW 30M a SITE LOCATION MAP w.o.# 011804.23 Date: MARCH 1999 Figure. I i Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development March 2, 1999 Page3 i maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557-91, Test Method Table 1), was utilized as the standard for field compaction control. ' Fill Soils A (Appendix B, ' Soils utilized for compacted fill typically consisted of on-site silty sands. Test results are presented in Appendix B. ' Cut/FiD Transitions Rough grading at the site included overexcavation, compaction, and fill slope construction. The ' subject site was previously mass graded as a fill pad. No transitions from cut to fill exist on site. The entire site, as graded, consists of fill. ' Slope Construction A fill slope was constructed at the southern boundary of the site at a slope ratio no steeper than 2:1 ' (horizontal:vertical) to a maximum slope height of approximately 4 feet. The remainder of the perimeter slopes are constructed at less than 2 feet and a maximum slope ratio of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). There were no cut slopes on this project. ' TESTING PROCEDURES ' Field Density Testin ' Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556-82 (sand -cone method) and ASTM Test Method D2922-91 (nuclear gauge). Areas failing to meet the minimum compaction requirements were reworked and retested until the specified degree of compaction was ' achieved. The elevations and the results of the field density tests are presented in Appendix C, Results of Compaction Tests Table I. The approximate location of the tests are shown on the Compaction Test Location Maps, Plate 1. ' Maximum Density Determinations ' Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations used were obtained from the geotechnical investigation and confirmed in the laboratory on representative samples of on-site soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1557-91, Test Method A. The test ' results, which were utilized in determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendix B, Table 1. ' Expansion Index Testing Expansion index testing was performed on representative on site soil samples collected at the ' completion of grading. The results, which are fisted in Appendix C, Table K indicate that on-site soils T.H.E. Soils Co W.O. No. 011804.23D __ 6T- L 0 40 80 gImca NATE ROUTE 79 {S N.T.S. z 6 6- jl _ 1' L 66 1I i5= II t53 L52 - ; I THE SOILS COMPANY COMPACTION TEST LOCATION MAP KAPA DEVELOPMENT REDHAWK BUSINESS PARK PHASE II L50 1 TEMECULA AREA RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA ' WORK ORDER: 011804.23 DATE: MARCH 1999 PLATE:_ � .30 -APPRO)IMATE LOCATION OF COMPACTION TEST -APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF GRADING(PHASE II) I 1 1 1 Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development March 2, 1999 Page4 exhibit very low expansion potential. Additional testing for expansion should be conducted on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. Sulfate Testing Sulfate testing was performed on representative on site soil samples collected at the completion of grading. The results, which are listed in Appendix C, Table III, indicate that on-site soils contain very low soluble sulfate. Additional testing for sulfate content should be conducted on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. Slope Protection and Maintenance Slope erosion of the silty sands is a significant concern with regard to surficial stability. We recommend that any unprotected slopes, be planted with erosion resistant vegetation or otherwise protected as soon as practical. tFoundation System Design ' Based on the information in the Preliminary Geotechnical & Liquefaction Investigation (ProTech, 1997) and Response To County Geologic Review (ProTech, 1998), foundation elements should be placed on engineered fill material. Continuous spread footings should be a minimum 18 inches wide ' and 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The footings should have a minimum of two 95 rebars, one top and one bottom. Isolated square footings should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with the anticipated loads and the soil parameters given. Concrete slabs -on -grade should have a minimum thickness of 5 inches. Minimum slab reinforcement ' should be 43 rebar at 18 inches on -center both ways, at midheight of the slab. A polyethylene vapor barrier should be installed beneath floors. The vapor barrier should be a minimum of 6 mil thick and should be covered with a 2 -inch thick sand layer to prevent puncture damage during construction and ' enhance curing of the concrete. • Allowable Bearing Pressure.....................................................1,50Opsf ' Maximum Allowable Bearing.....................................2,500psf Increased Capacity for each additional foot of depth ............ 150psf • Lateral Loads T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. No. 011804 23D 1 Passive Soil Pressure: 325psf ' Active Soil Pressure: 35psf Coefficient of Friction: 0.35 T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. No. 011804 23D 1 ' Mr. Al Novik ' Kapa Development March 2, 1999 Page5 ' Utility Trench Backfdl ' Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by the ASTM 1557-91 test method. It is our opinion, that utility trench backfill consisting of on-site or approved sandy soils can best be placed by mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90% ' of the maximum dry density. All trench excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal - OSHA standards, as a minimum. ' Retaining Walls If restrained walls are to be used, the appropriate active pressures should be derived during the grading ' plan review when wall heights and restraint conditions are known. Walls subject to surcharge loads should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to ' V3 of the indicated active pressure for unrestrained walls. The wall backfill should be well drained to relieve possible hydrostatic pressures on the wall. 1 I Wall footings should be designed in accordance with current Uniform Building Code criteria. Backfill behind retaining walls should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Surface Drainage Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved permanent drainage devices. Where landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurface drains should be provided to prevent ponding or saturation of foundations by landscape water. Structural Section Considering a minimum R -Value of 48, we recommend the following structural sections over 95% compacted subgrade materials. 1 1 T.H E. Soils Co. Light Dutv(TI 51 • 0.25 feet Asphaltic Concrete over 0.50 feet of Class 2 aggregate base. (County Minimum) Heavy Duty (TI 8) • 0.39 feet Asphaltic Concrete over 0.50 feet of Class 2 aggregate base. Concrete Drives • 0.5 feet Portland Cement Concrete over 0.5 feet of Class 2 aggregate base over one foot of 95% compacted subgrade or 0.625 feet of Portland Cement Concrete over one foot of 95% compacted native subgrade. Minimum reinforcement, 93 bars 24 inches on -center for loading docks or trash truck pickup pads. W.O. No. 011804.23D I H Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development March 2, 1999 Page6 Fill Placement On-site soils are expected to be suitable for use as structural fill. Imported soils, if utilized, should be evaluated by ProTech Environmental & Testing for suitability as structural fill when specific borrow locations are identified. Approved fill material should be placed in 6 to 8 -inch lifts, brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 909/o of the maximum laboratory dry density, as detem3ined by the ASTM 1557 test method. No rocks larger than 6 -inches in diameter should be used as fill material. Rocks larger than 6 -inches should either be hauled off-site or crushed to a suitable dimension and used as fill material. Foundation Plan Review ' T.H.E. Soils Co., should review the final foundation plans to verify conformance with the intentions of these recommendations and those in the referenced reports. Some additional field or laboratory work may be necessary, at this time. Construction Monitmina ' Continuous observation and testing by T.H.E. Soils Co. is essential to verify compliance with recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with the recommendations of this report. T.H.E. Soils Co. should conduct construction monitoring at the ' following stages of construction: • During additional site grading; • During construction and backfill of retaining walls; • During placement and compaction of fill material; ' During excavation of footings for foundations; • During utility trench backfill operations; • During subgrade and Base compaction; • When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading. A final geotechnical report, summarizing conditions encountered during grading, accompanied by an "As -Graded Geotechnical Map", should be submitted upon completion of site improvements. LIMITATIONS This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. No. 011804.2313 ' Mr. Al Novik ' Kapa Development March 2, 1999 Pagel ' This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; ' therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. 1 n [1 11 [1 The findings of this report are valid as of the report date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. �Yi1r�I\;?t'1 Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services, were limited to those rough grading operations performed between February 18, 1999 and February 25, 1998. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing as noted. It is our opinion, that the work performed in the areas denoted has generally been accomplished in accordance with the job specifications, the requirements of the regulating agencies and the recommendations of the accepted preliminary soils report. No conclusions or warranties are made for the areas not tested or observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading. No warranty as to the current conditions can be made.. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. This report should be considered subject to review by the controlling authorities. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, T.H.E. Soils Co. es R. Harrison Project Manager JRH/JTR:jek T.H.E. Soils Co. I AR, RCE 23464 Civil Engineer, Expires 12-31-01 No. RCE 23464 z W.O No. 033701 23D FavlaaahvOYMI References 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T.H.E. Soils Co 1 W.O. No. 011804 23D I ' REFERENCES EnGEN Corporation, June 17, 1997, "Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study, Proposed Service Station, Lot 14 of Tract 23172, Temecula Area of Riverside County, California", Project Number: T1198 -GS; ' Geocon Inc., September 2, 1994, "Report of Testing and Observation for Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative Tract No. 23172," Geocon Inc., June 18, 1993, "Site Moisture Test Results, Tentative Tract No. 23172, Temecula California"; tGeocon Inc., December 21, 1992, "Geotechnical Investigation, Tract 23172, Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Temecula California"; Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc., April 26, 1995, "Report of Rough Grading, Temecula Creek Improvements, and Disposal Areas, Tract Nos. 23172(MDC Vail), 26861, ' 23267 (Presley Homes), Parcel Map 18993 (LandGrant), and 23063 (Park Site) Approlamately From Station 114+00 to Station 225+00, Riverside County, California", WorkOrder No. 225301.22; ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, November 17, 1997, "Preliminary Geotechnical & Liquefaction Investigation, Proposed Commercial/Retail Development, Lots 41 through 46, Tract ' 23172, Highway 79S., Vail Ranch Commercial, County of Riverside, California", Work Order No.0337701.00; ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, January 29, 1998, "Response To County Review, County Geologic Report No.941, Vail Ranch Specific Plan"; ' RanPac Soils Inc., March 15, 1991, "Liquifaction Analysis, Vail Ranch Commercial, Tentative Tract No. 23172, County of Riverside, California"; ' SPC Geotechnical, Inc., April 18, 1997, "Geotechnical Investigation, Red Hawk Town Center, Lots 37 to 40, Temecula, California", SPC 1907-01; 1 1 1 1 T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. No 011804.23D 1' 1 1 1 T.H.E. Soils Co t APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results W.O. No. 011804.23D I C' 1 Il' n 1 1 H 115� 'IND111 011804.231) Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture TEST LOCATION Description Lbs/Ft3 % Moisture General Source Area 1 Light Brown Silty Sand 126.0 10.7 PAD 2 Green Brown Fine Sandy Silt 115.2 14.0 PAD 3 Brown Silty Sand w/day 120.4 12.0 PAD 4 Light Brown Silty Sand 128.0 9.0 PAD 5 Dark Brown Silty Sand 125.0 8.7 PAD TABLE II EXPANSION INDEX TEST LOCATION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL E. Building Pad 5 Very Low S. Building Pad 2 Very Low TABLE III SULFATE CONTENT TEST LOCATION SULFATE CONTENT Building Pad 21 ppm T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. No. 011804.231) 1 1 1 T.H.E. Soils Co. APPENDIX C Results of Compaction Tests W.O. No. 011804.23D 1 TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION VEASEY Job No. 011804.23D Name: Kapa Redhawk Phase 11 Date: March 1999 Test Test Elev Moisturenit D"' Rel. soil Location No. Date Depth Content Density omp Type (PCF) 1 2/18/99 96.0 9.9 113.9 88** 14 SOUTH PAD IIA 2/25/99 96.0 10.1 117.9 92 .4 SOUTH PAD 2. 2/18/99 96.0 6.0 117.7 91 :4 SOUTHPAD 3: 1 2/18/99 92.0 5.2 116.8 91 i4 SOUTH PAD 4 2/18/99'.- /18/99 95.0 I 11.7 1! 1103 86**, 4 SOUTH PAD 14A 2/18/99 95.0 13.1 1 111.6 188**: 4 SOUTH PAD 14B 2/19/99 95.0 13.5 119.8 94 !4 SOU M FAD 5 2/18/99 92.0 i 9.4 116.6 91 4 i SOUTH PAD 6_ 2/19/99 97.0 6.4 125.3 98 14 SOUTH PAD 7- 2/19/99 96.5 10.7 113.2 i 88** i ;4 SOUTH PAD i :7A 2/19/99 96.5 4.6 117.3 92 SOUTH PAD 8 2/19/99 97.5 9.5 1122.9 T96 SOUTHPAD 9 2/19/99 97.5 8.1 121.6 i 95 4 SOUTH PAD 10 2/22/99 95.0 j 9.9 119.3 93 ;4 EAST PAD 11: i 2/22/99 F.G. 7.6 119.7 94 4 SOUTH PAD 12 2/22/99 F.G. 8.6 11 126.7 98 ;:4 SOUTH PAD 13 2/22/99 95.0 10.5 118.5 93 14 EAST PAD 14 2/22/99 96.0 11.1 119.5 93 EAST PAD 15 2/22/99 96.0 8.0 108.9 85** :4 EAST PAD :15A 2/22/99 96.0 8.6 115.3 j 90 !4 EAST PAD i 16 2/23/99 97.0 11.1 116.2 91 A EAST PAD 17. 2/23/99 97.0 8.7 - --------- 107.8 84**; 4 -------- EAST PAD 17A 2/23/99 97.0 7.3 117.7 92 4 EAST PAD 18, 2/23/99 97.0 7.5 109.0 85**, :5 EAST PAD 'I 8A 2/23/99 97.0 12.0 114.5 91 5 EAST PAD 19 2 /24/99 98.0 8.7 117.1 94 .5 EAST PAD 20 21 2/24/99 2/24/99 98.0 F.G. 7.9 11.1 119.3 116.0 93 91 .4 4 EAST PAD EAST PAD 22 2/24/99 F.G. 10.4 116.9 91 EAST PAD 23 2/25/99 97.0 10.7 117.8 924 S. PARKING 24 2/25/99 98.0 9.9 115.6 90 . ....... :4 ... S. PARKING 25 2/25/99 98.0 8.9 116.5 91 4 '4 S. PARKING PARKING 26 2/25/99 97.0 10.4 118.8 93 E. 1 1 TABLE I ' RESULTS OF COMPACTION VEASEY ' Job No. 011804.23D Name: Kapa Redhawk Phase II Test Test Elev / Moisture Unit D Rel. Soil ' No. Date Depth Content Density omp Type (PCF) 1 _ 27----- 2/25/99 _i.___97.0 ' - -11.2 ___;...116.7 91 _ w 28. 2/25/99_ 98.0 ! 10.1 117.4 92 _ ' 29_ _ 2/25/99 98.0 —_ 10.6 115.9 911 30 ! 2/25/99 i 98.0 1 8.6 ! 117,7 92 ** INDICATES FAILING TEST --- — --- — - — - - -- ' I A- INDICATES RETEST 1 1 1 1 1 1 Date: March 1999 Location PAD 4 MIDI PARKING 4 . E.! PARKING ^ , 4 MID; _ PARKING 4 MID PARKING ` IT.H.E. Soils Co. Hione: (909) 678-9669 FAX: (909) 678-9769 ' 31705 Central Street, Suite A • Wildomar, CA 92595 November 5, 1998 ' Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development ' 4000 Westerly Place, Suite 200 Newport Beach, California 92660 ' SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS Redhawk Business Park, Phase I Portion of Lots 41 Through 46, Tract 23172 ' State ffiighway 79 South Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Work Order No. 011804.23 ' Dear Mr. Novilc 1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Compaction Testing presenting ' the results of our observation and testing during site improvements of the subject site. All compaction test results are included in this report in Appendix.°B, Table I. I 1 u J The 40 -scale grading plan prepared by BRF Enterprises of Lake Elsinore, California was utilized during grading and to locate our field density tests and was utilized as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1, Density Test Location Map. ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES Location Map - Figure 1 Density Test Location Map - Plate 1 Appendix A - Laboratory Test Results Appendix B - Results of Compaction Tests T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. 0 11804.23 Mr. Al Novik Kapa Development ' November 5, 1998 Page 2 ' Project Description The subject site had previously been rough graded to establish a building pad and parking area. We have reviewed the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation performed by ProTech (1997). We utilized the recommendations contained in the "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation & Liquefaction Investigation"; dated November 17, 1997, prepared by ProTech, Work Order No. 033701.00. Improvements consisted of installation of water, sewer, utility lines, curb and gutter, and asphalt paved parking. The project site is located south of State Highway 79 South, north of ' Wolf Store Road, approximately 250 feet east of Mahlon Vail Road in the Temecula Area of, Riverside County, California. A site map, depicting site boundaries and geographic relationships of the site, is presented as Figure 1 of this report. ' Site Description ' The site consists of the northern '/4 of one generally rectangular -shaped parcel of land. Parcels 41 through 46 of Tract 23172 is bounded to the north by State Highway 79 South, on the west by the recently graded self storage site, on the south by Wolf Store Road and further south by the tTemecula Creek Channel, and on the east by vacant land. Topographically, the site is a relatively level graded site. Overall relief at the site was approximately ' 3+ feet. BACKFILL OBSERVATIONS & TESTING Water, Utility & Sewer Lines ' The materials used for backfill consisted of silty sands, and sands. Following placement of the pipe, fill placement and compaction was achieved utilizing a rubber -tired front-end loader, a backhoe with compacting wheel, and a water truck (as needed). The fill was placed in 6 to 8 inch thick lifts and moisture conditioned, as needed, to bring the material to near optimum moisture content, and was then properly compacted. A minimum degree of compaction of 90% was required. ' Curb And Gutter Subgrade Testing ' Prior to the placement of Portland Cement Concrete curb and gutter in the parking area and drives, the exposed subgrade materials were scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture, if necessary, and re -compacted to +90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM 1557. ' T H.E. Soils Co W.O.011804 23 o taco tmc moo .aao 9CJLL& FT. SITE LOCATTON MAP w.o.x 011804.23 1 Dary NOV 1998 i Fie: 1 ' Mr. AI Novik Kapa Development ' November 5, 1998 Page 3 Parking Lot & Drives, Subgrade And Base Testing Prior to the placement of Class II Base and asphaltic concrete the exposed subgrade materials were ' scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture, and re -compacted to +95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM 1557. The base materials were moisture conditioned and compacted to +95 percent of the maximum dry density prior to ' placement of asphaltic concrete. TESTING PROCEDURES Field Density Testing ' Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556-82 (sand -cone method) and ASTM Test Method D2922-91 (nuclear gauge). Areas failing to meet the minimum ' compaction requirements were reworked and retested until the specified degree of compaction was achieved. The elevations and the results of the field density tests are presented in Appendix C, Results of Compaction Tests Table I. The approximate locations of the tests are shown on the ' Density Test Location Map, Plate 1. Maximum Density Determinations ' Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations were performed in the laboratory on representative samples of on-site soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in ' accordance with ASTM D1557-91, Test Methods A and C. The test results, which were utilized in determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendix B, Table L ' LEW[TATIONS The findings of this report are valid as of the date tested. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards ' may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside t our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. ' T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O.011804.23 53 r - 51 —� _ _ _ 50 _ _ .._ w .. _. .. 45 .v46 O"�Il.Ullr]uluunnl 1�.� 22 ...i li Obi luulu IluUlulu 1 n lu 1 u nwlulUu n 43 iuu nlu�ulutu Qllll,'1�-�I�l1l LU IU 1 WWWIII _ 61 _ ! - 17 1 ... ._ _ _ S Id JJ a. 6 Q5)T 72I II ,h 32 k 83 n R". Hlr-•t 26 �! 62 I 18 l 58 20 C!/RH 23 r 74 -. 16" 'jAG / ii(rilld9 t71 _ PCL1 41 55 - ' I73 ,e - � �. � IAA�II� A4rA 1 47 NOW - ^ �' C L.1--44: sk olli I 68 33 MUM I ' � i1 J n ♦ �1 � � � 10 ' 2431 , ;I� Moo; ubl. �. Ijra w. lf.'f• a, /Iota F.%E 'ill.35'. h 1 r!.1fMD 1JdC9 iw /JO}i f 76p99 Dk 37 I• _ r I !, :3631 35 1 O /i 9g •�" 1 .y/, ! %QI 30_ �O 69 27 Illi 28 / w r • y 1f 1 ' S - fl"� i��- 2 r 3� 1 -L d 48 y w� } ' `i •� 42 it I l� 29 1 - _ _ 39 �. �� _ r ,1. C 9t• p O 41 I-� 78 4U - mlf �Iluwu.un �llp uuuuu uuululuu Il c _ GOM — ,; 75 7 70 17 15- aL 671.-: � ��(/8t♦) ��1�.'�+wl/��lllllllll}ll llll�lnnl llllllllll l 11L� ._-7{-- _- 1 I/' ..•' s I � t 1 'yt:; C� ',g � �• t 19{'��ITI %• M1GJ+r 9g.-.14 r• i;j�! � i lllllll 1 / t 1. ll�lld;j Ill^� • I — j a' *;,li. / LII I'—� l�:1' • e t1 --•--- - -- _. •por0 v 75 V f O THE SOILS COMPANY Density Teat Location Map Redhawk Business Park Vail Ranch Commercial TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WORK ORDER: 011804.23 DATE: NOV 1998 PLATE: 1 OF 1 -APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DENSITY TEST ' Mr. AI Novik Kapa Development ' November 5, 1998 Page 4 ' SUMMARY Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services, were ' limited to those site improvements performed between April 2, 1998 and September 11, 1998. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing as noted. It is our opinion, that the work performed in the areas denoted has generally been ' accomplished in accordance with the job specifications and the requirements of the regulating agencies. No conclusions or warranties are made for the areas not tested or observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading. No warranty as to the current conditions can be made. This report should be considered subject to review by the controlling authorities. ' This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, pleases�o �'Ve CIYI Very truly yours, �Z. RE/�y�9�� ' T.H.E. Soils Co. No RCE 23464 9 Expires:/ * !'�e Hari%? o T. einhart, RCE 23 9 F CAL®i0�P Project Manager ivil Engineer, ExpireS12/ 1/01 1 u 1 ' T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O. 011804 23 APPENDIX A I References C' r ' T.1 1.E. Soils Co. WO 011804.23 ' REFERENCES t EnGEN Corporation, June 17, 1997, "Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study, Proposed Service Station, Lot 14 of Tract 23172, Temecula Area of Riverside County, California", Project Number: T1198 -GS; Geocon Inc., September 2, 1994, "Report of Testing and Observation for Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative Tract No. 23172", Temecula, California; Geocon Inc., June 18, 1993, "Site Moisture Test Results, Tentative Tract No. 23172, Temecula California; ' Geocon Inc., December 21, 1992, " Geotechnical Investigation, Tract 23172, Vail Ranch Commercial Site" Temecula California; ' Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc., April 26, 1995, 'Report of Rough Grading, Temecula Creek Improvements, and Disposal Areas, Tract Nos. 23172(MDC Vail), 26861, 23267 (Presley Homes), Parcel Map 18993 (LandGrant), and 23063 (Park Site) Approximately From Station 114+00 to Station 225+00, Riverside County, California", Work Order No. 225301.22; ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, November 17, 1997, "Preliminary Geotechnical & Liquefaction Investigation, Proposed Commercial/Retail Development, Lots 41 through 46, Tract ' 23172, Highway 79S, Vail Ranch Commercial, County of Riverside, California", Work Order No.0337701.00; t ProTech Environmental & Testing, January 29, 1998, `Response To County Review, County Geologic Report No. 941, Vail Ranch Specific Plan"; RanPac Soils Inc., March 15, 1991,"Liquifaction Analysis, Vail Ranch Commercial, Tentative Tract No. 23172, County of Riverside, California; 1 SPC Geotechnical, Inc., April 18, 1997, "Geotechnical Investigation, Red Hawk Town Center, Lots 37 to 40, Temecula California", SPC1907-01; I T H L Soils Co W.O.011804 23 I n I I 1 [1 1 ' T.H.E. Soils Co. APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results W.O. 011803.23 I 1 1 1 11 TABLE 011804.23 REDHAWK Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture % General Description Lbs/Ft' Moisture Source Area I Light Brown Silty Sand 126.0 10.7 PAD 2 Green Brown Fine Sandy Silt 115.2 14.0 PAD 3 Brown Silty Sand w/clay 120.4 12.0 PAD 4 Class II Base 138.0 8.5 ' T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O.011804.23 1 I 1 APPENDIX C 1 Results of Compaction Tests 1 1 1 11 ' T.H.E. Soils Co. W.O.011804.23 I 1 I 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION Work Order No. 011804.23 Name: KAPA DEV. Date: NOV. 98 Test Test Elev / 13.3 nit Rel. Soil Location 2 No. Date Depth M(%) ensity omp Type 3 4/2/98 (ft.)(PCF) 12.2 116.4 (%) 1 SEE PLATE 1 1 4/2/98 98 13.3 114.8 91 1 SEWER 2 4/2/98 99 14.2 114.2 91 1 " 3 4/2/98 97 12.2 116.4 92 1 " 4 4/2/98 98 11.6 115.4 92 1 " 5 4/2/98 96 13.8 114.3 91 1 " 6 4/2/98 95 12.4 115.0 91 1 " 7 4/2/98 94 12.5 115.2 91 1 " 8 4/3/98 92 11.6 116.0 92 1 " 9 4/3/98 90.0 11.1 114.3 91 1 " 10 4/3/98 92.0 10.6 115.2 91 1 " 11 4/3/98 94.0 12.2 114.2 91 1 " 12 4/3/98 96.0 11.5 116.3 92 1 " 13 4/3/98 97.0 12.1 115.7 92 1 " 14 4/3/98 96.0 13.0 113.7 90 1 " 15 4/3/98 94.0 11.0 116.2 92 1 16 4/16/98 95.0 10.2 114.3 91 1 WATER 17 4/16/98 96.0 10.5 115.0 91 1 " 18 4/16/98 97.0 9.8 113.9 90 1 " 19 4/17/98 98.0 11.7 115.0 91 1 " 20 4/17/98 99.0 10.4 116.4 92 1 " 21 4/17/98 98.0 11.2 113.7 90 1 " 22 4/17/98 100.0 10.6 114.7 91 1 " 23 4/17/98 97.0 10.3 118.1 94 1 " 24 4/17/98 99.0 11.1 114.2 91 1 " 25 4/17/98 98.0 11.5 114.9 91 1 " 26 4/17/98 100.0 10.5 114.4 91 1 " 27 4/17/98 970 11.5 114.8 91 1 " 28 4/17/98 99.0 11.6 114.4 91 1 " 29 4/17/98 96.0 10.1 113.7 90 1 " 30 4/17/98 98.0 10.6 115.3 92 1 " 31 4/17/98 97.0 10.2 115.9 92 1 " 32 4/17/98 99.0 11.8 115.0 94 1 " 11/6/98 Page 1 TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION Work Order No. 011804.23 Name: KAPA DEV. Date: NOV. 9$ Test No. Test Date Elev / Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) UrutRel. Density (PCF) Comp (%) Soil Type Location SEE PLATE 1 33 4/17/98 96.0 10.8 115.7 92 1 " 34 4/17/98 98.0 11.1 114.2 90 1 " 35 4/I7/98 96.0 11.2 113.7 94 1 SEWER 36 4/17/98 98.0 10.3 118.1 94 1 It 37 4/29/98 -1.0 11.1 106.1 94 1 DRY UTILITY 37A 5/12/98 -1.0 10.9 113.8 90 1 " 38 4/29/98 -1.0 10.5 112.9 89** 1 " 38A 5/12/98 -1.0 9.3 115.3 91 1 " 39 4/29/98 -1.5 10.5 107.2 85** 1 39A 5/12/98 -1.5 11.6 114.2 91 1 " 40 5/12/98 -1.0 12.0 115.7 92 1 " 41 5/12/98 -1.5 11.7 113.6 90 1 " 42 5/12/98 -1.0 9.8 114.8 91 1 " 43 8/4/98 -1.0 7.3 107.3 85** 1 " 43A 8/6/98 -1.0 10.5 115.9 90 1 " 44 8/4/98 -1.0 6.7 107.4 85** 1 " 44A 8/6/98 -1.0 11.2 114.4 91 1 " 45 8/4/98 -1.0 7.3 112.0 89** 1 " 45A 8/6/98 -1.0 9.8 112.9 90 1 " 46 8/12/98 SG 8.0 112.3 89** 1 CURB & 46A 8/12/98 SG 6.4 117.5 93 1 GUTTER 47 8/12/98 SG 4.7 117.7 93 1 " 48 8/12/98 SG 4.7 111.0 88** 1 " 48A 8/12/98 SG 6.0 114.2 91 1 " 49 8/12/98 SG 4.8 124.4 98 1 " 50 8/12/98 SG 11.1 117.7 93 1 SIDEWALK 51 8/12/98 SG 10.0 102.2 85** 1 79S 51A 8/12/98 SG 7.5 114.1 91 1 52 8/12/98 SG 6.7 117.5 93 1 SIDEWALK 53 8/12/98 SG 7.3 114.2 91 1 ON-SITE 54 8/12/98 SG 8.7 116.7 93 1 It 55 8/13/98 SG 7.5 114.1 91 1 It 11/6/98 Page 2 ' TABLE I ' RESULTS OF COMPACTION ' work Order No. 011804.23 Name: KAPA DEV. Date: NOV. 98 Test Test Elev / Moisture Unit Dry Rel. Soil Location No. Date 11 Depth Content Density Comp Type 8/13/98 SG 6.0 (ft.) (%) (PCF) (%) SEE PLATE I ' 56 8/13/98 SG 6.0 111.5 89** 56A 8/13/98 SG 6.4 117.5 93 57 9/4/98 SG 6.5 123.0 97 58 9/4/98 SG 8.0 121.0 96 ' 59 9/4/98 SG 9.4 119.9 95 60 9/4/98 SG 6.0 124.0 98 1 61 9/9/98 SG 10.5 121.5 96 62 9/9/98 SG 10.3 122.3 97 63 9/9/98 SG 11.1 120.8 96 ' 64 9/9/98 SG 10.8 121.6 97 65 9/9/98 SG 12.0 123.3 98 66 9/9/98 SG 10.6 124.1 98 ' 67 9/10/98 SG 8.9 116.6 93 67A 9/10/98 SG 9.6 116.7 93 ' 68 9/10/98 SG 11.5 118.8 94 68A 9/10/98 SG 10.7 120.5 96 9/10/98 SG 12.1 121.8 97 '69 69A 9/10/98 SG 10.9 1201. 95 70 9/10/98 SG 11.7 120.2 95 ' 71 9/10/98 SG 10.6 122.5 97 72 9/11/98 BASE 8.8 133.3 97 ' 73 9/11/98 BASE 9.5 136.2 99 74 9/11/98 BASE 10.6 133.2 97 75 9/11/98 BASE 9.7 132.9 96 ' 76 9/11/98 BASE 11.0 132.6 96 77 9/11/98 BASE 8.9 135.0 98 ' 78 9/11/98 BASE 10.1 134.1 97 ** = Failed Test A = Retest 11/6/98 Page 3 1 " I " 1 PARKING 1 LOT 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " I " 1 " 1 " 4 " 4 4 " 4 it 4 " 4 " 4 " I I 1 1 11 1 1 ProTech ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING (909) 335-1314 • 624 East Mariposa • Redlands, CA 92373 March 24, 1998 Kappa Development Corporation Attn: Mr. Steve Kaplan 4000 Westerly Place, Suite 200 Newport Beach, California 92660 SUBJECT: REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING Redhawk Business Park, Phase I Portion of Lots 41 Through 46; Tract 23172 State Highway 79 South Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Work Order No. 03370113 10-7- LVJ M "Cri M1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request, we have prepared this Report of Rough Grading presenting the results of our observation and testing during rough grading of the subject site. All compaction test results are included in this report in Appendix C Table I. ' The 40 -scale grading plan prepared by brf enterprises of Lake Elsinore, California was utilized during grading and to locate our field density tests and was utilized as a base map for our test locations presented as Plate 1. ACCOMPANYING MAPS AND APPENDICES I I I Location Map - Figure 1 Compaction Test Location Map (40 -scale) - Plate I Appendix A - References Appendix B - Laboratory Test Results Appendix C - Results of Compaction Tests RECEIVED RIVERSIDE COUNTY PERMIT ASSISTANCE CENTER MAR 2 7 1998 RIVERSIDE �c c / �!L/o/� 6ZA EeVN-S;,R41W7.5 I ADAPTED FROM U.S.G.S.7.5 MM. QUADRANGLE PECHANGA 1968 (PR1988) I 1= 2= 3= moa SITE' LOCATION MAP WO.# 033701..23 lDa= MARCH 1998 I Figwe: 1 I ' Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 ' Page2 Project Description ' The subject site had been previously mass graded during the improvements to the Temecula Creek Channel. We have reviewed the report of mass grading prepared by GEE Inc. (1995) and the preliminary geotechnical investigation performed by ProTech (1997). We utilized the ' recommendations contained in these reports during rough grading of the subject site. A maximum of approximately 3.0 feet of additional fill was required to bring the site to design grade in the southwest comer to achieve finish grade. The project site is located south of State Highway 79 South, north of tWolf Store Road, approximately 250 feet east of Mahlon Vail Road in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. A site map, depicting site boundaries and geographic relationships of the site, is ' presented as Figure 1 of this report. Grading included clearing and grubbing, overexcavation, placement and compaction of fill material to ' prepare the site. Maximum fill depth including overexcavation was approximately 5 feet in the southwest corner. Site Description The site consists of one generally rectangular -shaped parcel of land. Parcels 41 through 46 of Tract ' 23172 is bounded to the north by State Highway 79 South, on the west by the recently graded self storage site, on the south by Wolf Store Road and fiuther south by the Temecula Creek Channel, and the east by vacant land. Topographically, the building pad site, prior to the subject grading, consisted of a relatively flat graded site sloping to the south toward Wolf Store Road at approximately 2%±. Overall relief at the site, ' prior to the subject grading, was approximately 6± feet. GRADING PROCEDURES ' Site Preparation ' The preliminary soils report required overexcavation of the building pads to a minimum of 5 feet below pad grade or 2 feet below deepest footing and 5 feet beyond the outside building line. The area was overexcavated to expose competent fill soils. The upper one foot of the exposed bottom was ripped,and moisture conditioned to achieve uniform, near optimum moisture. The soil was leveled and rolled with the 824 then wheelrolled with loaded scrapers to achieve a minimum compaction of 90%. ' Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 ' Page3 Fill Placement ' Fill was placed in thin loose lifts approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 901/o relative compaction (ASTM D1557-91). Per the preliminary soils report the fill was compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density. Compaction was achieved by wheel rolling with a Caterpillar rubber tired dozer, and loaded scrapers. The maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557-91, Test Method A (Appendix B, Table 1), was utilized as the standard for field compaction control. Fill Soils Soils utilized for compacted fill typically consisted of on-site silty sands and sandy silts. Test results are presented in Appendix B. ' Cut(Fill Transitions ' Rough grading at the site included overexcavation, compaction, and temporary fill slope construction. The subject site was previously mass graded as a fill pad. No transitions from cut to fill exist on site. The entire site as graded consists of fill. ' Slooe Construction ' Temporary fill slopes were constructed at the easterly and southerly boundary of the site at a slope ratio no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) to a maximum slope height of approximately 4 feet. This is a temporary condition and should be eliminated by the grading of Phase H and or precise grading. ' The remainder of the perimeter fill slopes are constructed at a maximum slope ratio of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). There were no cut slopes on this project. U TESTING PROCEDURES Field Density Testing Field density testing was performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556-82 (sand -cone method) and ASTM Test Method D2922-91 (nuclear gauge). Areas failing to meet the minimum ' compaction requirements were reworked and retested until the specified degree of compaction was achieved. The elevations and the results of the field density tests are presented in Appendix C, Results of Compaction Tests Table I. The approximate location of the tests are shown on the Compaction ' Test Location Maps, Plate 1. ' Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 1 1 Page4 Maximum Density Determinations Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture determinations used were obtained from the geotechnical investigation and confirmed in the laboratory on representative samples of on-site soils used in the fill operations. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1557-91, Test Method A. The test results, which were utilized in determining the degree of compaction achieved during fill placement, are presented in Appendix B, Table I. Expansion Index Testin¢ Expansion index testing was performed on representative on site soil samples collected at the completion of grading. The results, which are listed in Appendix C, Table II, indicate that on-site soils exhibit very low potential. Additional testing for expansion should be conducted on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. Sulfate TestinP Sulfate testing was performed on representative on site soil samples collected at the completion of grading. The results, which are fisted in Appendix C, Table III, indicate that on-site soils contain very low soluble sulfate. Additional testing for sulfate content should be conducted on imported soils prior to their approval as structural fill material. Slope Protection and Maintenance Slope erosion of the silty sands is a significant concern with regard to surficial stability. We recommend that any unprotected slopes, be planted with erosion resistant vegetation or otherwise protected as soon as practical. Foundation System Desien Based on -the information in the Preliminary Geotechnical & Liquefaction Investigation (ProTech, 1997) and Response To County Geologic Review (ProTech, 1998), foundation elements should be placed on engineered fill material. r Continuous_ ipread footings should be a minimum 18 inches wide and 24 -inches -below the lowest adjacent grade. Th`s footings_should have a riiririmum of two #5 rebars Q1 one top and -one bottom -Isolated square footings should be designed by the structural engineer in `I accordance with the anticipated loads and the soil parameters given. + b I � I ' Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 Pages Concrete slabs -on -grade should have a minimum thickness of, 5 inches. Minimum slab reinforcement should be 93 rebar at 18 inches on -center both ways, at midheight of the slab. A polyethylene vapor barrier should be installed beneath floors. The vapor barrier should be a minimum of 6 mil thick and should be covered with a 2 -inch thick sand layer to prevent puncture damage during construction and enhance curing of the concrete. Allowable Bearing Pressure.....................................................1,500psf Maximum Allowable Bearing. , . .................................. 2,500psf Increased Capacity for each additional foot of depth ............ 150psf Lateral Loads Passive Soil Pressure: 325psf Active Soil Pressure: 35psf Coefficient of Friction: 0.35 Utility Trench Bacldill ' Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density, as / determined by the ASTM 1557-91 test method. It is our opinion, that utility trench backfill consisting ' of on-site or approved sandy soils can best be placed by mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density. All trench excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal - OSHA standards, as a minimum. ' Retaining Walls ' If restrained walls are to be used, the appropriate active pressures should be derived during the grading plan review when wall heights and restraint conditions are known. ' Walls subject to surcharge loads should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure equal to V3 of the indicated active pressure for unrestrained walls. The wall backfill should be well drained to relieve possible hydrostatic pressures on the wall. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with current Uniform Building Code criteria. Backfill behind retaining walls should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Surface Drainage ' Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved permanent drainage devices. Where ' landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurface drains should be provided to prevent ponding or saturation of foundations by landscape water. I ' Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 Page6 Structural Section ' Based on R -Value testing of the material at grade at the completion of rough grading, considering a minimum R -Value of 48, we recommend the following structural sections over 95% compacted subgrade materials. ' Lieht Dutv(TI S1 ' 0.25 feet Asphaltic Concrete over 0.50 feet of Class 2 aggregate base. (County Minimum) ' Heavy Dutv(TI 8) • 0.39 feet Asphaltic Concrete over 0.50 feet of Class 2 aggregate base. ' Concrete Drives ' 0.33 feet Portland Cement Concrete over 0.5 feet of Class 2 aggregate base over one foot of 95% compacted subgrade or 0.625 feet of Portland Cement Concrete over one foot of 95% compacted native subgrade. Minimum ' reinforcement, #3 bars 24 inches on -center for loading docks or trash truck pickup pads. ' Fill Placement On-site soils are expected to be suitable for use as structural fill. Imported soils, if utilized, should be evaluated by ProTech Environmental & Testing for suitability as structural fill when specific borrow locations are identified. ' Approved fill material should be placed in 6 to 8 -inch lifts, brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 901/6 of the maximum laboratory dry density, as determined by the ASTM 1557 test method. No rocks larger than 6 -inches in diameter should be used as fill material. ' Rocks larger than 6 -inches should either be hauled off-site or crushed to a suitable dimension and used as fill material. ' Foundation Plan Review ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, should review the final foundation plans, to verify conformance with the intentions of these recommendations and those in the referenced reports. Some additional i field or laboratory work may be necessary, at this time. tl�A Ott j\�A �0 � 1� t Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 ' Page7 Construction Monitoring Continuous observation and testing, by ProTech is essential to verify compliance with recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with the recommendations of this report. Construction monitoring should be conducted by Protech ' Environmental & Testing, at the following stages of construction: ' During additional site grading; • During construction and backfill of retaining walls; ' During placement and compaction of fill material; ' rDuhi excavation of footings for foundations; ' During utility trench backfill operations; • During subgrade and Base compaction; ' When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading. ' A final geotechnical report, summarizing conditions encountered during grading, accompanied by an "As -Graded Geotechnical Map", should be submitted upon completion of site improvements. ' LIMITATIONS ' This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary ' steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. The findings of this report are valid as of the report date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. I Mr. Steve Kaplan Kapa Development March 24, 1998 ' Page8 Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. SUMMARY Our description of rough grading operations, as well as observations and testing services, were limited to those rough grading operations performed between March 13, 1998 and March 20, 1998. The conclusions and recommendations contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing as noted. It is our opinion, that the work performed in the areas denoted has generally been accomplished in accordance with the job specifications, the requirements of the regulating agencies and the recommendations of the accepted preliminary soils report. No conclusions or warranties are made for the areas not tested or observed. This report is based on information obtained during rough grading. No warranty as to the current conditions can be made.. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. This report should be considered subject to review by the controlling authorities. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions, please call Very truly yours, PROTECT ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING es R�Haml� son Project Manager I Jo RCE 23464 Civil Engineer, Expires 12-31-01 Z. R F-11 w4ul11► References ' rcr r GRL` 1\ %- Ea EnGEN Corporation, June 17, 1997, "Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study, Proposed ' Service Station, Lot 14 of Tract 23172, Temecula Area of Riverside County, California", Project Number: T1198 -GS; ' Geocon Inc., September 2, 1994, 'Report of Testing and Observation for Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative Tract No. 23172, ' Geocon Inc., June 18, 1993, "Site Moisture Test Results, Tentative Tract No. 23172, , Temecula California; ' Geocon Inc., December 21, 1992, " Geotechnical Investigation, Tract 23172, Vail Ranch Commercial Site Temecula California; ' Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc., April 26, 1995, 'Report of Rough Grading, Temecula Creek Improvements, and Disposal Areas, Tract Nos. 23172(MDC Vail), 26861, 23267 (Presley Homes), Parcel Map 18993 (LandGrant), and 23063 (Park Site) Approximately ' From Station 114+00 to Station 225+00, Riverside County, California", WorkOrder No. 225301.22; ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, November 17, 1997, "Preliminary Geotechnical & Liquefaction Investigation, Proposed Commercial/Retail Development, Lots 41 through 46, Tract ' 23172, Highway 79S., Vail Ranch Commercial, County of Riverside, California", Work Order No.0337701.00; ' ProTech Environmental & Testing, January 29, 1998, `Response To County Review,Couty Geologic Report No.941, Vail Ranch Specific Plan"; ' RanPac Soils Inc., March 15, 1991,"Liquifaction Analysis, Vail Ranch Commercial, Tentative Tract No. 23172, County of Riverside, California; ' SPC Geotechnical, Inc., April 18, 1997, "Geotechnical Investigation, Red Hawk Town Center, Lots 37 to 40, Temecula California", SPC1907-01; I APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results 1] TABLE 033701.23 Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture TEST LOCATION Description Lbs/W % Moisture General Source Area I Light Brown Silty Sand 126.0 10.7 PAD 2 Green Brown Fine Sandy Silt 115.2 14.0 PAD 3 1 Brown Silty Sand w/clay 120.4 12.0 PAD TABLE II EXPANSION INDEX TEST LOCATION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL Building Pad . 4 Very Low TABLE III SULFATE CONTENT TEST LOCATION SULFATE CONTENT Building Pad 18 ppm ' APPENDIX C Results of Compaction Tests 1 U 1 TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION SUBGRADE & BASE Job No. 033701.23 KAPA Date: MARCH 98 Test No. Test Date Elev / Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) nit D Density (PCF) Rel.Soil omp (%) Type Location SEE PLATE 1 1 3/13/98 1096 12.2 113.8 90 1 " 2 3/13/98 1097 11.4 115.2 91 1 " ' 3 3/13/98 1098 12.6 117.9 94 1 " 4 3/13/98 1096 10.9 116.2 92 1 " ' 5 3/13/98 1098 11.7 115.3 92 1 " 6 3/13/98 1099 8.9 116.8 93 1 " 7 3/13/98 1099 10.6 117.2 93 1 " ' 8 3/13/98 1100 12.5 114.8 91 1 if 9 3/13/98 1100.0 13.2 114.0 91 1 " ' 10 3/16/98 1D97.0 11.2 115.7 92 1 It 11 3/16/98 1099.0 11.7 115.0 91 1 " 12 3/16/98 1100.0 10.6 114.2 91 1 " ' 13 3/16/98 1098.0 11.3 116.9 93 1 " 14 3/16/98 1100.0 11.6 116.3 92 1 " ' 15 3/16/98 1101.0 12.2 117.8 94 1 " 16 3/17/98 1097.0 15.9 105.1 91 2 " ' 17 3/17/98 1099.0 10.9 116.4 92 1 " 18 3/17/98 1100.0 11.4 117.4 93 1 " 19 3/17/98 1100.0 13.3 109.1 91 3 " ' 20 3/18/98 FG 9.1 118.1 94 1 " 21 3/18/98 FG 10.5 117.0 93 1 " ' 22 3/18/98 FG 11.2 115.3 92 1 " 23 3/18/98 FG 12.1 117.3 93 1 " 24 3/18/98 FG 9.9 117.7 93 1 " ' 25 3/18/98 FG 10.8 117.1 93 1 " 26 3/18/98 1100.0 11.3 115.5 92 1 " t27 3/18/98 1100.0 11.7 119.4 95 1 If 28 3/19/98 1097.0 10.6 116.3 92 1 It 29 3/19/98 1098.0 11.4 117.2 93 1 " ' 30 3/19/98 1099.0 11.1 115.8 92 1 " 31 3/20/98 1099.0 10.6 116.4 92 1 " ' 32 3/20/98 1099.0 11.2 118.8 94 1 if 3/24/98 Page 1 TABLE I RESULTS OF COMPACTION SUBGRADE & BASE Job No. 033701.23 KAPA Date: MARCH 98 Test No. Test Date Elev / Depth Moisture I Content nit Dry Density (PCF) Rel. Comp (%) Soil Type Location SEE PLATE 1 33 3/20/98 1099.0 9.7 115.5 92 1 " 34 3/20/98 1099.0 10.2 113.5 90 1 " 35 3/20/98 1099.0 10.1 118.3 94 1 " 3/24/98 Page 2 _ -- _-- -- - -- - --1 _ -- - -- -- - -- T 1!�SlLWW�p...ntiin iiin....i ....u..... I logo u1uun .� L_ 3 1 j a JIM AIREEL c1cI Rvaroscv �yJ1.�*�U-�ACI®1 c�CUM /q AG PAmw (rw..) b1 MWtbF A PCL 411--s_ fAMMEMW AWA _ m. ► = fitAtOW T� ACL j#1 AWW? / I I � � `_— � { F.F.E. � �� � 11Qt.7� , %�E. 1 f41C.� F.FE.; ` 1 �T.•x'f 'AV - /1Q�.�I 0 1101M .ti r'7w a 1101.88 AID 0i i Wes I3 } 1.AAC 04 UNION III Nall 18IL"pajolmills loom gall J ` '.....,.. ,� ..u..........r......�...... ... � � I g ,It'll T molls "oil ... y •lu• 'u C ®- APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF COMPACTION TEST ' r_-- PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING _ 11.11111111 APPROXIMATE LIM ffS OF GRADING T COMPACTION TEST LOCATIONMAP RFnHAWK BUSINESS PARI: VAIL RANCH COMMERCLAL GJ� TEMECULA AREA RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA WORK ORDER: 03370113 DATE: MARCH 1994 PLATE: 1 0 1 VISTA DEL SOL STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH OF TEMEC r --UUUNTY qF RIVERSIDE 1 I I I I NST. PARCEL NO 25 843. C'D- 6/21/97 I 1 I --------------------- Ixi 1 I v � 1 I I 1 1 I — —T— j 1 1 I 3 t I (N7J22'1I-E 320 ?TT7 7777 fi�RCL�L /6 r I I.87• PARCEL 4 PARCEL S I;' h ^' ti ^ n g M1 A'1P�z s 77 q7• N79;S.3ve f M1I J I9�RC)<L ? f?MIiL^iL I h ry � �Tov e/n• $ A4ff_m_ lJ g PARCEL 6 $ N7J•n"/ ^ PARCEL /J 3 i U 87' I� b PAQM /6 3 $ PAROL JI RJRCEL j 9 7 r b r •' 2 ^°1 ^V u 2 PARCl�L J6 /04 JJ' I J /.87' 2 N7l71'Wl 4 8173" g M1 A'1P�z s 77 q7• N79;S.3ve f M1I J I9�RC)<L ? f?MIiL^iL I h ry � �Tov e/n• $ A4ff_m_ lJ g N7,777'/ 1'f ^ PARCEL /J . A . PAQM /6 3 $ PAROL JI b j 9 lOB JS' H $ B9 °7• $ A4ff_m_ lJ g PAVM 12 ^� 2 !Ol 3T /04 JJ' ,--------- ------ --� wOf v I N7J30'ID�f - I ------- - �- - - - STOR SEL ,6 _i -_ROAD VISTA DEL SOL Un L. 195.01' TEMECULA CREEK CHANNEL INDEX MAP GRAPHIC SCALE 100 0 100 200 1 inch = 100 ft. [�l on l� Call: TOLL 800 EE C. VICINITY M A P r1 % 422-4133 NOT TO SCALE TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG DATE BY MARK ENGINEER DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY REVISIONS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLOT PLAN NO. 15183 PRECISE PROPOSED LAND OWNER REDHAWK BUSINESS PARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4000 WESTERLY PLACE, SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION MR STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO. (714) 798-0100 APPLICANT KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION MR. STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO (714) 798-0100 SOILS ENGINEER - - - - - - MARIPOSA REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373 ATTENTION MR JIM HARRISON PHONE NO (909) 335-1314 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCT 4' x V WIDE CONCRETE STEP LF 974 © CITY OF TEMECULA L. F. 2350 (N7322.1 f E 520.00) L. F. -- - �p \� - COUNTY QF RIVERSIDE 09 PAINT 4' WIDE WHITE LINE PARKING STRIPING L. F. SCALE AS SHOWN 10 PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE PARKING STRIPING L,F DATE 12-12-97 r/ PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL PER UBC SECTION 11298.5 EA. 8 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 EA. 8 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCHITECTURAL. PLANS EA. I 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 PARIIEL 16N7r2211E ,• f::: J1a.ea' £A. 2 I I I I 215.5 INSTALL 36' x 36' BROOKS INLET W/ NO. 3636 TRAFFIC GRATE EA. 85 05• 77 REMOVE EXISTING V -DITCH 7200' 81 75' �0 INSTALL M.N. NO. 1 PER STANDARD DWG. NO. MH251 EA. 1 INSTALL JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO. 4 PER STANDARD DWG, NO, JS229 _ 1 EARTHWORK OUANTITIES CUT FILL IMPORT , C. Y. C. Y. C. Y. 32 24 IQ 142 69/8 I I 11787' PARCEL 4 PAill J PIRCEL 2 PARCEL I ? H I I Pilin Z S I 1 8 N H h I N h h a PARCEL MERGER NO. 1025 1 �+ ; I INST. NO.255843, RC'D. 6/21/97 _ 8222' 7 7200' 81.75' Pux�6 NJ7711 - 22J 'AB 1CJI N7T72 11 E - 1 I i ( 1 In er I PSL 15 r 8 q s Zi I - - - 0 __--- rj m z h PARCEL 7 h a ,.- ,., 108 JJ' u In - Z I � �, PARCEL !6 PARCEL l6 In In PRM 14W74 g �I 1 f+ I I N7y'33'Je'E �o I 8175lZ 72.cb JJ3.I 2 la7p °bl es esr lZ g Awl IJ $ I ; ^ ^PwAYEL B �RLi2 11 10 9 IAB JJ 1 e to � ( ACEI I I t I1 2 ti ti 1 I I h O Q I 1 PARM 12 O 1 1 I Z 87.73' 77.Op' n K e 1 I N 7 N7y 2� !0137• 108 13' .rf t---- ---1------ --f J2Z3T N7,rW,i9•1 WOLF I ST10- ROAD I �.--- -- -- - 47A , PARCEL16 -05'30'04`-2031.12 1 n,..._ Un L. 195.01' TEMECULA CREEK CHANNEL INDEX MAP GRAPHIC SCALE 100 0 100 200 1 inch = 100 ft. [�l on l� Call: TOLL 800 EE C. VICINITY M A P r1 % 422-4133 NOT TO SCALE TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG DATE BY MARK ENGINEER DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY REVISIONS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLOT PLAN NO. 15183 PRECISE PROPOSED LAND OWNER REDHAWK BUSINESS PARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4000 WESTERLY PLACE, SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION MR STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO. (714) 798-0100 APPLICANT KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4000 WESTERLY PLACE, SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION MR. STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO (714) 798-0100 SOILS ENGINEER PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING 624 EAST MARIPOSA REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373 ATTENTION MR JIM HARRISON PHONE NO (909) 335-1314 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECKED BY LUT 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, AND 46 OF TRACT NO, 23172 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 251 PAGES 94 THROUGH 99, INCLUSIVE, OF MAP IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 8S, RANGE 2W LEGEND R/W LINE PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING CONTOUR FINISH CONTOUR DAYLITE LINE TOP OF CURB FINISH SURFACE R/W P /L - (1050) -1057 58.8 TC 58.3 FS GRADING PLAN INDUSTRIAL PARK CONSTRUCTION NOTES / OUANTI T K EST/MA TES ITEM DESCRIP TION UNI F aTy.. O CONSTRUCT 3' A.C. PAVEMENT 5. F. 129,296 O2 CONSTRUCT 6' CLASS II BASE C. Y. 2395 O3 CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE 'D' CURB PER RIV. CO. STD. DWG. NO. 204 L. F. 5125 O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK S. F. 332 5C CONSTRUCT 4' x V WIDE CONCRETE STEP LF 974 © CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER PER DETAIL ON SHEET 3 L. F. 2350 17 CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER RIV.CO. STD. DWG. NO. 200 L. F. -- - FILE N0. - _412 09 PAINT 4' WIDE WHITE LINE PARKING STRIPING L. F. SCALE AS SHOWN 10 PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE PARKING STRIPING L,F DATE 12-12-97 li PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL PER UBC SECTION 11298.5 EA. 8 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 EA. 8 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCHITECTURAL. PLANS EA. 4 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 EA. 3 15 CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP PER UHC SECTION 1127B.5 £A. 2 INSTALL 18' R.C.P. (CLASS -IV) STORM DRAIN L. F. 215.5 INSTALL 36' x 36' BROOKS INLET W/ NO. 3636 TRAFFIC GRATE EA. 2 19 REMOVE EXISTING V -DITCH �0 INSTALL M.N. NO. 1 PER STANDARD DWG. NO. MH251 EA. 1 INSTALL JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO. 4 PER STANDARD DWG, NO, JS229 EA. 1 EARTHWORK OUANTITIES CUT FILL IMPORT , C. Y. C. Y. C. Y. 32 24 IQ 142 69/8 .,-TOP OF SLOPE SLOPE SEAL �- _ TOE OF SLOPE VEE -DITCH 25. The site shall be excavated to a depth of five feet below the existing FLOW FINISHGROUND 58.8 O N FG AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: �� �J -�, •' DEEP F❑❑TING N () SHEET INDEX ajr SHEET 1 TITLE SHEET SHEET 2 20' SCALE PRECISE GRADING PLAN SHEET 3 20' SCALE PRECISE GRADING PLAN SHEET 4 40' SCALE HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL DATE APPR DATE CHECKED BY COUNTY DATE ■ IMPORT SHALL BE PROVIDED BY GRADING PERMIT # 970881 PAVING NOTES 1. Minimun parking lot grade shall be 1% . 2 Minimun grade for ribbon drains shall be 0.35% 3. An approved soil sterilizer shall be used on all subgrode surfaces prior to placement of paving. 4. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rote of 0.05 gallons per square yard, asphalt emulsion shall conform to Sections 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 5. The subdivider or contractor shall apply to the Riverside County Road Deportment for on encroachment permit for all work wiyhin county right-of-way. 6. Two special inspections are required by the Building and Safety Deportment. One inspection of the time the base is placed and the second time when the A.0 or concrete has been placed. 7. The contractor shall be responsible for the clearing of the proposed work area, and relocation and cost of all existing utilities. The county shall be informed 48 hours prior to beginning of construction at (714) 275-1800. 8. A compaction report by a Soils Engineer shall certify 95% compaction of base for A.C. and 90% compaction for concrete prior to call for second inspection and placement of asphalt concrete and concrete paving. 9. If no preliminary soils report is provided specifying the paving section, the structural section shall be three inches asphalt concrete and four inches class II aggregate base SEAL COUNTY SEAL APPROVED BY DATE 25. The site shall be excavated to a depth of five feet below the existing � surface elevation and recompacted to 95% O N br AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: �� �J -�, •' FOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT. RIVER90C COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 0 5 Q rn TITLE SHEET ajr Q No. 36117 � PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK FLOWN DATED MARCH 16, 1995 ~ * Exp. 6/30/00 �. SUBMITTED B . Q CMV P�\P i119TF WOLF STORE ROAD (PRIVATE) -- - FILE N0. OFCAUF° ----- ---- - - - - __ Y k o ART BANANAL SCALE AS SHOWN R.C.E. N0._ 36117 EXP. DATE- 6-30-00 DATE 12-12-97 10. The contractor shall be responsible for obtaining paving inspections required by ordinance 457. 11. The parking area shall be surfaced with "IS phaltic concrete to current stondards as approved by the Department of Building and Safety. IVERSIDE BUILDI SA ETY APPROV REVIEWED BY D - dAIl rtra'I / 99Y Approval of th jars shall not be con rund to be e permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the state or county laws. This ,at of plans must be kept on the job until mmpintinn enterprises A California Corporation BENCHMARK SEE A80VE GRADING NOTES 1. All grading shall conform to the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 33, as amended by Ordinance no. 457. 2. All property corners shall be clearly delineated in the field prior to commencement of any constructional grading. 3. During rough grading operations and prior to construction of permanent drainage structure, temporary drainage, control should be to prevent water and damage to adjacent properties. 4. Dust shall be controlled by watering or other approved methods. 5. No fill shall be placed on existing ground until the ground has been cleared of weeds, debris, topsoil and other deleterious materials. 6. Maximum cut or fill slope = 2:1. 7. Stability calculations with a factor of safety of at least one and five tenths (1.5) shall be submitted by a Soils Engineer to the Building and Safety Deportment for cut and fill slopes over 30' in vertical height. 8. Provide 5' wide by 1' high berm or equivalent along the top of oil fill slopes over 5' high 9. Provide o brow ditch, designed to handle 100yr Q Storm flows, along the top of cut slopes. 10. Minimum building pod and drainage swole slope shall be = 1 % if cut or fill is less than 10', 2% if cut or fill is greater than 10' Drainage swoles shall be a minimum of 0.2' deep and be constructed a minimum of 2' from top of cut or fill slopes. 11 "No obstruction of flood plains or natural water courses shall be permitted. 12. All existing drainage courses on the project site must continue to function, especially during storm conditions. Protective measures and temporary drainage provisions must be used to protect adjoining properties during grading operations. 13. Finish grade shall be sloped away from all exterior walls at not less than 1/2" per foot for a minimum of 3'. 14. Cut and fill slopes equal to or greater than 3' in vertical height shall be planted with grass or ground cover to protect the slope from erosion and instability in accordance with Ordinance No. 457 prior to to final grading inspection. 15. EROSION CONTROL: All slopes required to be planted shall be provided with rosea ice plant (or equal) ground cover at 12" on center, Slopes exceeding 15' in vertical height shall be planted with approved trees spaced not to exceed 20' on center or shrubs not to exceed 10', or a combination of shrubs and trees not to exceed 15'; in addition to a gross mix or ground cover. Slopes exceeding 4' in vertical height shall be provided with an in -ground irrigation system. Slopes equal to or less than 4', may be irrigated by hose bib located at the top or toe of the slope, spaced to make us of a hose no longer than 50' in length. The irrigation system shall be provided with on appropriate backflow device per U.P.C., Chapter 10. 16. All grading shall be done in conformance with recommendations of the preliminary soils investigation by PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING dated November 17, 1997. Two sets of the final compaction report shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department which shall include design recomendations and certification that grading has been done in conformance with the recommendations of the site investigation report 17. If steep sloping terrain occurs upon which fill is to placed, it must be cleared, keyed and benched into firm natural soil for full support. Preparation shall be apporved by o suitably qualified and registered professional prior to placement of fill material. 18. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a competent soils engineer who shall certify that all fill has been properly placed and who shall submnit a final compaction report for all fills over 1' deep. 19. Final compaction report will be required for all fills greater than 1'. 20. A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit to the Building and Safety Department written clarification of completion of rough grading in accordance with the approved grading plan prior to requesting inspection and issuance of the building permit. Certification shall include line, grade, elevation and location of cut/fill slopes. 21. A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit certification of building pod elevation Where specific elevations are required, the elevation with respect to mean sea level) shall be given. If an elevation with respect to adjacent ground surface is required, the actual distance above the adjacent ground shall be given. 22 A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit to Building and Safety Deportment written certification of completion of final grading in accordance with the approved plans for all grading designated as "engineered grading". 23. The contractor shall notify the District Building and Safety Department Department at least 24 hours in advance requesting finish lot grade and drainage inspection. This inspection must be approved prior to building permit final inspection for each lot. 24. Contractor shall notify Underground Service Alert, two days before you dig at 1-800-422-4133 ew r J l< Z 0 CC O III. CAD 25. The site shall be excavated to a depth of five feet below the existing � surface elevation and recompacted to 95% O N COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: PLOT PLAN NO.15183 0 0 TITLE SHEET AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY BY PACIFIC PH❑TOGRAMMETRICS PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK FLOWN DATED MARCH 16, 1995 ~ OF 4 SHTS. 31871 Mission Trail E'(90x5 27a Q 4 WOLF STORE ROAD (PRIVATE) BENCHMARK: FILE N0. Fox:(909) 245-7927 & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT (PRIVATE) Y k o 2 1/2' BRASS DISC *IN CONC. CYLINDER 2.4 MILES SOUTHEAST ON HWY 79 FROM INTERSECTION MAIN AND FRONT STREET IN FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP. W.0 97-12-001 TEMECULA 53.5' SOUTH OF CENTERLINE HWY,79,32' EAST OF GT POLE CGT 2453) 300' EAST OF PRODUCE STAND MIDWAY BETWEEN P.P 75580 AND P.P.75581 ON LINE WITH OLD FENCE ' LINE RUNNING N. & S SET FIBERGLASS WITNESS POST 1' SOUTH OF MOVEMENT. BM NO,T-1-81 ELEV.=1026,428 C1981) tQ O COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHEET NO. PLOT PLAN NO.15183 0 TITLE SHEET PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK ~ OF 4 SHTS. 31871 Mission Trail E'(90x5 27a Q e9091 127 WOLF STORE ROAD (PRIVATE) FILE N0. Fox:(909) 245-7927 & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT (PRIVATE) Y k FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP. W.0 97-12-001 2 2 283 284 285 286 267 288 ��-----3--------- ------ -�---- -- -----T ----------- T -- -_------_------- - _ - _- --- _--- -_-------------- ---- - 15"S -- - - ----- - ------ --- -- --- T. T EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ALONG HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH 284t68J9 !STATE R '7 � SOUTH NOTE. PER RIVERSIDE COUNTY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 159 Exrsr. 60' oRrVEwAr NO GRAD/NG AND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL B£ - - - - ----------------------------------------- ----------------- ---------------------------------------------------___DO_NE__W/T_H/N_CALTR_AN_S_RCGH_T-_OF_-_WA_Y.____ _____ ------------19 --- --- O EXIST. "V" -DITCH - -- - - --- EXISTING CONC. CROSS GUTTER & SPANDREL - TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) PROPOSED S/DEWA K IMPROVEMENTS TO BE - -CAL TRANS RIGHT-OF-WAY --_----- PROPOSED SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED UNCCR SEPARATE WORK AND PERMIT. - - ------ - - ------------------ - - - - - - - . - w - - � _ _ __ - - U g U A A WO K AND ERM/T. (L� EXIST. CURB & GUTTER - - - -- - - --- - - -_ - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - _ _.. - _ -- - - - t�.c;- - ---- - - - - - - ---------------- ------------ -- - - Opts'-, �j '-•-•- i l -- - - -- ----- - -- - --tN - it ---- --- 7771U8I1 /3r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �6 - - - - - - - - - - - - s - - - - - - - - ----- - - - - - - -------------- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- --- -- - -- - -- - - tt o N 737?'71" £ R/W �_ 520.00' 82- .. . -K-7-7 . .. .. .. .. _ ---9 8 §2 10 Z 12 f3 AREA 2 D 0105LAN PE1Z 5 > 5 -LANDSCAPE AREA (SEE NOTE NO2, THIS-94t-tT) 1 02, I•P (sENOTE ro 2, 1 rHfs s�££r) Q1t5 ¢.0 i FS pi� '40 / NOTES. o NO/57 'o 1. FOR OFFS/TE GRADING A LETTER 5 rn a$ s 1 t0 5 O I tof 65111 � Tc 4 >>o 66 t' S c� 1�0I 1b 5 o 1 9 Asa i 1 59 o T 5 t O FROM THE ALlN UST BE OBTAINED o h ' `' c, N 0� hq 5 �' i i fO1. t 5 OF PERMISS/OJd Q ENT PROPERTY OWNER. v.,2 j - - - - - - - 2. LANDSCAPE BERM/NG SHALL BE FG_ _ - - - -- ----- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- --- - - - - -- - - ?rp o I O, N, r o�- �o o f t 1-zrn2� ��.o r o -' 1 "'S" � „ o m 9 6 1\ c� 'ter 0 5 N 1010 G I CONSTRUCTED WITH A M/N/MUM EC ENATION o �,• 1 1 .� a. IS 0 1 .s g O h s �, 1 .J cr G 1 G t t 0 1 2 1 �1�5 1 BUIL DING B 1\0 s 11 s t 110 ,, o y$ 110 1 + s�' NON 10 G 9 t 0 1 0 q F OF l.5' ABOVE THE EX/ST//VCr TOP OF G I \ G "� + 1 1 s F 0 I CURB ALONC HIGHWAY 79. �5 1 N o� e 1�. `�' -� p� ' h h •.' s o h >> G k 1� I 1� \ 3 F.F. ELEV.=1099.38 I; �• � � �� F5 •ww -?1c� �v'rs�r � 0 a,�., •� >> 0 � > o w r `)-' \ ©III 1 0 PAD ELEV. =1098.80 16' 10 \0 s c, 101'8585 r< 1011p1 >>O 8S\�o���sTc� 1 10 5 FS 100 h h 1 . i IF ryp. 0 6r o� 1 CONSTRUCT 3 A C PAVE �_ 02.?5�� l 25 MENT JLO -- - 1G \\o �` - �,op �o��� 110r(� -' G o ,c �►�. I 2 CONSTRUCT 6' CLASSII BASE LA=O�LoW AREA - f .cGC'S � \� �� �\� Q \1� � \ hpO (�j I I I O 1 j'0• 0 F y 1p 1p 3 3O CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE "Ik' CURB PER 1/0/.5/ X11._ 1t� 0.8 tG Y/ - � 1/01 _rjo F F,. 0 1 1p RIV CO. STD. DWG, NO 204 5 j10 F ! ,� 9� oV O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK � FG 27.1 F 160 � 1i01.40 � �--� 1p a GD 1 6 � � I , 1 11 1 .� 6 I �1t00. 3 FG 1 1 F.F. ELEV.-1102.3 F.F. ELEV.- F.F. ELEV.=1102.35 F.�. E.E-V 02.35 �'I �5 CONSTRUCT 4" x r wtnE CONCRETE PAD ELEV.=-1101.8- PAD ELEV.=1 101.85 PAD ELEV.-1 101 .85 �'AD F11 EV =1 1101 .85 STEP c ' p j I 6O CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER LIQ I '� 24' 16' �. I �V F.F. ELEV. 101.5fl ti n ! O CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER I n �o>� I PAD ELEV. =1101.00 H ���o RIV. CO. STD. DWG. NO. 200 Q �o v o0 6 0'' o:r CONSTRUCT 2' WIDE V-DIT%H �G r 9 ' D I 0 O �� 092 F5 SG+ 161 1 5 I I it L `J9 PAINT 4" WIDE WHITE L :NC. (� Op 1 05 p2 21 0 1Q F PARKING STRIPING 110 ,cc, 'o �w1N 1 1p O9g O O 5 I t1 FLN10o ti0 n fl'; b� 1�1A \p160 21 �1 F`' �1 f5 �1 t' �s� (TYR) N 1 F 111} 61 1 Op• , ]0 PARKINGPAINT ' STRIPING WIDE UE LINE W O j I J jloJ' o� 1 I1 14y 1105 N01' 1101 1N0� 111 11 i I I 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL II II �i O �• O UO O ' LLJ 1 SG I' 1 ( 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN j w 2% 1��s �o 1101.40 1011 1�0�1 11025 ip1?1 0111�'s g I� G 1 5 1 S F , 5 t c i3 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE Q o 6 3 FG SG i 5 F f F G 11 02. o O t. 9 !., I �p F5 h0 0 E 1G N 0 5 �F5 b 11 G r G I j PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS LL- tl 6 0 ON 0 ON NO F5 N9 P Y1• h f 2 0 h 0 h 1 1 \ h G \' 0 ' 1 1 0 � 3 ( 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED G$of �\� 1\p T 11Np ON. 1 \IIS N1 01. 11 F5 1\\p0' _ 01 N. 01 I I ACCESSIBILITY SIGN i � \�T 1 p• 1 1 1• p 1 a --i O p 2 i N1 >\V Z i �' \N 00. t�1 -- - . -No CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP �G �G I SGS \11 ---- G Q J � ,NppO1 .1?p� g. s � ` / �'0 1 F5 �0�"1 ,0 9 (5 �'0 6 F ,\ � 1.'tQ FS � S + \ _ /lC�99 1 110 G + 10 �' o, . `0\; # o 0`4 o� 101. o�� 01 p j 7 110090 j 166 f5 REMOVE EXISTING V DITCH FG 5 ( SG _ 1 1 bo I G 5 -IOU., 0 W 11 20 o F.F. ELEV. =1 101.50 N� 1 , 1 00 n o .- waTE�F'RCY,F WALL 1`ie, T1.�4� _Oi 11p0 L.I J to cb N1 1pp2 l�._ PAD ELEV.=1 101.00 N 1100 5 01. 95 F5 101. 2k F 'oma f 102 53 F' 'o o,,, 1 3 jF5 �� y� 1• k 5 'f. �'g. _. / 0g9Bg5 G-11 �C 4FLOCrV 11 F5 G+ � ( � INDICATES ELEVATIONS REFLECTING v 0p• 0 1 1 j G G s Rt/A/ G ovR 0 •- II I 0" CF CONDITION. Q p I2 1 1 7 G>>i l ttet- J ,tt�1 9 110 b3 1101 h 3 Og Oc ��h o 9 2 4�Q -�,"r � 1. >> 1 s I •' S N1 110 Q t, 1 `�' ,,,,,,..,.- g� �sy?� . y` of � - __ 8 Q) u, e f1 I �G tG NI OV 1 F5 >006� r� hA 9 ;r 1100 /p t t0 1101.40pt G1' S 00 h 11 t- 1 v C7 IFA 9 l 110 .60 X 1100 rc E F.F. ELEV. = 1 101 .50 PAD ELEV.=1 10i.00 No N 1N0•�Op' % �01� 65 10 0N. 11tt��jt 110�C 100.78 � J! zi I U 9 Y'101 1 ,r 1 Ilk 1- i J Y' � �! f O 6` 1p 3 , Oq 1099.35 FS q9 10 SG \100. \Z \N9h1 ry lrl�'�) 10 g 1 _.- LANOSCAPE AREA - 1 T f � 11 9q. X99 SEE SHEET NO. .3 � ----�� - 5 5 1p F5 J RECOMMENDED FOR SEAL COUNiv SEAL APPROVED BY DATE _ APPROVAL �g I -- DATE DATE BY MARK APPR. DATE CHECKED BY ENGINEER - _ - _ ------ COUNTY DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY DATE I _W_ F.F. ELEV.-'1099.85 PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 F F.F. ELEV.= 1099.85 PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 oQ� sioNq F rJ M. BA,), CFOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA c a) r :7 ¢ m No. 36117 .k Exp. 6/30/00 * SUBMITTED BY /- rT9r Cryj%_ 1 ARTURO M BANANAL VIS+ FOFCAUFOP --- SCALE 1" = 20' 36117 5-3 R.C.E. NO EXP DATE - - DATE ILI enterprises A California Corporation BENCHMARK SEE SHEET NO 5 FLOW FLOW oI SANDBAG HIGH (TYP.) 3" THICK 564-C CONCRETE OR AIR PLACED CONCRETE (OPTIONAL) a0 TYPICAL VEE -DITCH DETAIL _i G SCALE �99� SATE Underground Service Alert revel f R. ,� ns sh II not be construed to be rmit or o a gppro�al of, any violation of any Pr is ons:o i{ a st to or county Imus. This Is muss ept on the lob until completinn ,- �1�1 I Coll: TOLL FREE 1-800 10 c : 422-4133 C� 2 98'_()&3 Z TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DiG COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHEET NO. 20' SCALE 2 PRECISE GRADING PLAN 31811 Mission Trail INDUSTRIAL PARK Lake Elsinore .Co. 92530 TRACT 23172 OF 4 SHTS. Phone: (909) 245-2127 Faa(909) 245-7927 WOLF STORE ROAD FILE NO. _ & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP. W.O. 97-12-001 MPAR 'o 1. FOR OFFS/TE GRADING A LETTER 5 rn a$ s 1 t0 5 O I tof 65111 � Tc 4 >>o 66 t' S c� 1�0I 1b 5 o 1 9 Asa i 1 59 o T 5 t O FROM THE ALlN UST BE OBTAINED o h ' `' c, N 0� hq 5 �' i i fO1. t 5 OF PERMISS/OJd Q ENT PROPERTY OWNER. v.,2 j - - - - - - - 2. LANDSCAPE BERM/NG SHALL BE FG_ _ - - - -- ----- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- --- - - - - -- - - ?rp o I O, N, r o�- �o o f t 1-zrn2� ��.o r o -' 1 "'S" � „ o m 9 6 1\ c� 'ter 0 5 N 1010 G I CONSTRUCTED WITH A M/N/MUM EC ENATION o �,• 1 1 .� a. IS 0 1 .s g O h s �, 1 .J cr G 1 G t t 0 1 2 1 �1�5 1 BUIL DING B 1\0 s 11 s t 110 ,, o y$ 110 1 + s�' NON 10 G 9 t 0 1 0 q F OF l.5' ABOVE THE EX/ST//VCr TOP OF G I \ G "� + 1 1 s F 0 I CURB ALONC HIGHWAY 79. �5 1 N o� e 1�. `�' -� p� ' h h •.' s o h >> G k 1� I 1� \ 3 F.F. ELEV.=1099.38 I; �• � � �� F5 •ww -?1c� �v'rs�r � 0 a,�., •� >> 0 � > o w r `)-' \ ©III 1 0 PAD ELEV. =1098.80 16' 10 \0 s c, 101'8585 r< 1011p1 >>O 8S\�o���sTc� 1 10 5 FS 100 h h 1 . i IF ryp. 0 6r o� 1 CONSTRUCT 3 A C PAVE �_ 02.?5�� l 25 MENT JLO -- - 1G \\o �` - �,op �o��� 110r(� -' G o ,c �►�. I 2 CONSTRUCT 6' CLASSII BASE LA=O�LoW AREA - f .cGC'S � \� �� �\� Q \1� � \ hpO (�j I I I O 1 j'0• 0 F y 1p 1p 3 3O CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE "Ik' CURB PER 1/0/.5/ X11._ 1t� 0.8 tG Y/ - � 1/01 _rjo F F,. 0 1 1p RIV CO. STD. DWG, NO 204 5 j10 F ! ,� 9� oV O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK � FG 27.1 F 160 � 1i01.40 � �--� 1p a GD 1 6 � � I , 1 11 1 .� 6 I �1t00. 3 FG 1 1 F.F. ELEV.-1102.3 F.F. ELEV.- F.F. ELEV.=1102.35 F.�. E.E-V 02.35 �'I �5 CONSTRUCT 4" x r wtnE CONCRETE PAD ELEV.=-1101.8- PAD ELEV.=1 101.85 PAD ELEV.-1 101 .85 �'AD F11 EV =1 1101 .85 STEP c ' p j I 6O CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER LIQ I '� 24' 16' �. I �V F.F. ELEV. 101.5fl ti n ! O CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER I n �o>� I PAD ELEV. =1101.00 H ���o RIV. CO. STD. DWG. NO. 200 Q �o v o0 6 0'' o:r CONSTRUCT 2' WIDE V-DIT%H �G r 9 ' D I 0 O �� 092 F5 SG+ 161 1 5 I I it L `J9 PAINT 4" WIDE WHITE L :NC. (� Op 1 05 p2 21 0 1Q F PARKING STRIPING 110 ,cc, 'o �w1N 1 1p O9g O O 5 I t1 FLN10o ti0 n fl'; b� 1�1A \p160 21 �1 F`' �1 f5 �1 t' �s� (TYR) N 1 F 111} 61 1 Op• , ]0 PARKINGPAINT ' STRIPING WIDE UE LINE W O j I J jloJ' o� 1 I1 14y 1105 N01' 1101 1N0� 111 11 i I I 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL II II �i O �• O UO O ' LLJ 1 SG I' 1 ( 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN j w 2% 1��s �o 1101.40 1011 1�0�1 11025 ip1?1 0111�'s g I� G 1 5 1 S F , 5 t c i3 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE Q o 6 3 FG SG i 5 F f F G 11 02. o O t. 9 !., I �p F5 h0 0 E 1G N 0 5 �F5 b 11 G r G I j PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS LL- tl 6 0 ON 0 ON NO F5 N9 P Y1• h f 2 0 h 0 h 1 1 \ h G \' 0 ' 1 1 0 � 3 ( 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED G$of �\� 1\p T 11Np ON. 1 \IIS N1 01. 11 F5 1\\p0' _ 01 N. 01 I I ACCESSIBILITY SIGN i � \�T 1 p• 1 1 1• p 1 a --i O p 2 i N1 >\V Z i �' \N 00. t�1 -- - . -No CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP �G �G I SGS \11 ---- G Q J � ,NppO1 .1?p� g. s � ` / �'0 1 F5 �0�"1 ,0 9 (5 �'0 6 F ,\ � 1.'tQ FS � S + \ _ /lC�99 1 110 G + 10 �' o, . `0\; # o 0`4 o� 101. o�� 01 p j 7 110090 j 166 f5 REMOVE EXISTING V DITCH FG 5 ( SG _ 1 1 bo I G 5 -IOU., 0 W 11 20 o F.F. ELEV. =1 101.50 N� 1 , 1 00 n o .- waTE�F'RCY,F WALL 1`ie, T1.�4� _Oi 11p0 L.I J to cb N1 1pp2 l�._ PAD ELEV.=1 101.00 N 1100 5 01. 95 F5 101. 2k F 'oma f 102 53 F' 'o o,,, 1 3 jF5 �� y� 1• k 5 'f. �'g. _. / 0g9Bg5 G-11 �C 4FLOCrV 11 F5 G+ � ( � INDICATES ELEVATIONS REFLECTING v 0p• 0 1 1 j G G s Rt/A/ G ovR 0 •- II I 0" CF CONDITION. Q p I2 1 1 7 G>>i l ttet- J ,tt�1 9 110 b3 1101 h 3 Og Oc ��h o 9 2 4�Q -�,"r � 1. >> 1 s I •' S N1 110 Q t, 1 `�' ,,,,,,..,.- g� �sy?� . y` of � - __ 8 Q) u, e f1 I �G tG NI OV 1 F5 >006� r� hA 9 ;r 1100 /p t t0 1101.40pt G1' S 00 h 11 t- 1 v C7 IFA 9 l 110 .60 X 1100 rc E F.F. ELEV. = 1 101 .50 PAD ELEV.=1 10i.00 No N 1N0•�Op' % �01� 65 10 0N. 11tt��jt 110�C 100.78 � J! zi I U 9 Y'101 1 ,r 1 Ilk 1- i J Y' � �! f O 6` 1p 3 , Oq 1099.35 FS q9 10 SG \100. \Z \N9h1 ry lrl�'�) 10 g 1 _.- LANOSCAPE AREA - 1 T f � 11 9q. X99 SEE SHEET NO. .3 � ----�� - 5 5 1p F5 J RECOMMENDED FOR SEAL COUNiv SEAL APPROVED BY DATE _ APPROVAL �g I -- DATE DATE BY MARK APPR. DATE CHECKED BY ENGINEER - _ - _ ------ COUNTY DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY DATE I _W_ F.F. ELEV.-'1099.85 PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 F F.F. ELEV.= 1099.85 PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 oQ� sioNq F rJ M. BA,), CFOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA c a) r :7 ¢ m No. 36117 .k Exp. 6/30/00 * SUBMITTED BY /- rT9r Cryj%_ 1 ARTURO M BANANAL VIS+ FOFCAUFOP --- SCALE 1" = 20' 36117 5-3 R.C.E. NO EXP DATE - - DATE ILI enterprises A California Corporation BENCHMARK SEE SHEET NO 5 FLOW FLOW oI SANDBAG HIGH (TYP.) 3" THICK 564-C CONCRETE OR AIR PLACED CONCRETE (OPTIONAL) a0 TYPICAL VEE -DITCH DETAIL _i G SCALE �99� SATE Underground Service Alert revel f R. ,� ns sh II not be construed to be rmit or o a gppro�al of, any violation of any Pr is ons:o i{ a st to or county Imus. This Is muss ept on the lob until completinn ,- �1�1 I Coll: TOLL FREE 1-800 10 c : 422-4133 C� 2 98'_()&3 Z TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DiG COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHEET NO. 20' SCALE 2 PRECISE GRADING PLAN 31811 Mission Trail INDUSTRIAL PARK Lake Elsinore .Co. 92530 TRACT 23172 OF 4 SHTS. Phone: (909) 245-2127 Faa(909) 245-7927 WOLF STORE ROAD FILE NO. _ & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP. W.O. 97-12-001 6"srEa , I' E H, VO. 2 ?1 f7 8y j NOTE tOg9/ \opg9' 6 I i FOR OFFSITE GRADING A LETTER '+ 6 1G' A OF PERMISSION MUST HE OBTAINED - 10 f5 E I g� 2k f ���o �? I I FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER 1100'10 -_- 3 g9 F.F. ELEV=1099.85 �9� �I , �,r�r�c��i)CTIO►.c ^�{aT`- eI 1100 5 �- 10 PAD ELEV.=1099.35 091P,,`�,o Q. l lCONSTRUCT 3 A.C. PAVEMENT. 5FS GA 5 1G 2 i i J I 2� CONSTRUCT 6' CLASS II BASE �B I 6 6�j �o I 2 \ } CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE 'D' CURB PER 100• 'mop ,C 00' 6 1 09 I RIV. CO. STD. DWG. NO. 204 Q 0 \ 099- vI\gA9y8�f� fl�3 \\p98 \09 _ I O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK 1099.84 �= o� 1 o 5 \ gg 08s \. ,9 �' � o .� I I 5 CONSTRUCT 4' x 1' WIDE CONCRETE (� Q O a T 9 1 2 !09 n 1 a f s 9� r \0 gg G6 1 5 v s 12 ; ,I O STEP 00 Lr)Q �� off 109a'� F96p 1G 1 911 �c J. I4 g j0 6O CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER Q _ __ F - - - - - - 10 5 _ [ 8 � 07 �� --� _3-- - j% Q32 f5t N/NCB - /� 3 TY f5 tagg5 f5 Fi 77 CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER O O Q v p, 09 a� _� _ ��5� i i 0 2 5 '�� ---_ LANDSCAPE AREA 9 I/ �, � 1 8 \ f o G gaa 09 J I 4 RIV. CO. STD. DWG NO. 200 �. 00 fS - -_ _ 1 g S p9 ga Ft 0 9 1 0 g LJLj Q)-_ _- i/ 09 02 1\ 26 fls 3 f 1 8 1099. 9 s II II �� 3 3 I `rte 1109950 -- - -_ >099?4 1 \\Op9g• 10g9L j 13 �G mop '� g' 1 109� 10gFt O PORSDRUAIL SHEEDE2V-DITCH V7 > > _ o \ fF o g F.F. ELEV.=1099.85 �o h Q L,_l LLJ Q o �Pna 1 F5 �pys 1 f5F� P - SG+ s ; J � 01 a --- _ asst 0 9. 9 g f k r ` til Ll o °� o fO9g'S2 51 FS y� f - 4 g A 1 f5 g \ o �� Ay 5 AD ELEV.- 1099.35 y O PAINT a' WIDE WHITE LINE 1099. s 52 f� __ _- �+ @9 g9 pt TOP s Ogg•gy m 861 g� f 62 5 ? I I PARKING STRIPING v M Q I- Q s Q a - 109 9g.y 6 _� _' - = v -- I1 GB \0 Qg 10 fL 1G I ,i 10 PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE `V Q � L Cl 2 Q h 2 1 FS 5 -- - �- o-- _� fV 4G 10 g2 I PARKING STRIPING ,.� 9 52 F 6 v 5 9 I 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL F. ELEV.= 1099. 1�9/� 995�10gFL sr, 3�Ba 0 tG 1008. 09A�0 , 60 PAD ELEV.= 1099.60 F.F. ELEV.- 1 a9 10 f� 9 9 r \ 0 r 1 9 0� �S I 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN 10 PAD ELEV._ 099.60 OgBb f5 F 9.x,51 31. 9 I , \0 �\ 50 �' �✓ -1099. 1 n F•F• ELEV. = 1099.6 .5 r2 10 g ?1� g I ( 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE Q g \ 1097.GB - 1099 0 F.F. t g90 g.5 O O F �� 3 GG i PER ARCHITECTURAL. PLANS p 83 � PAD ELEV. _ 0 9 5 t I I 5 F� a ELEV. - rn g 11 tl J yf av I I I 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED W lo9B•69 Q PAD 1099.60 g ;� �G og s 83 I II� ACCESSIBILITY SIGN FG ELEV. = 109. po F f p9 Q ofl� 9'�lC 9'1`' g 0 L 99 CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP Q2% a GLOMS 5 0 ,' 1h 3 I ilt 17 INSTALL 24' R.C.P. STORM DRAIN A 1 F.F. ELEV. =1099.85 PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECS y �G D�1 s •i1 18 INSTALL 36' x 36' BROOKS INLE' � � o � tG I 7 PAD ELEV.=1099.35 h � . Q i 6 2 � j�l 10 ?� 10�� 9 I W/ NO, 3636 TRAFFIC GRATE 1098 F` F� j Ogg' I � 1 { INSTALL lo1H`NO. 1 P€R - 0°�� \ 4 ', i STANDARD DWG MH251 9 ` (OO BP t 098.8 C Y I O o �G FL 5 i 181 21 INSTALL JUNCTION STRUCTURE 1 0 1 `f NO 4 PER STANDARD DWG JS229 - - - \ 6D off' i gb \ 5 i 10 fL 3 1U Q9g U h O 6 f� 1G fl 98 I ! ! ■ INDICATES ELEVATIONS REFLECTING oilCr C.F. CONDITION. 1G Ch1 F� 910 f5 - -_ -- ___ -_ .r► d' `5' 098. 0 21 /FS t� \ 9v� 1 \0 8 • 80 �? '61 f`' G o $ 9. 9h109 9 10 0 0 600 f5 10 o \� �P� tJ O tE oo cv 1 �' Og 10091 Ogg t0 �o O I 1[✓ `_� 0 n „ \ E� o cs� 0 1 r_ n 9 1 -- 1 9 0 o oq 0 1 1 c�" fl s Zn" 0 0 g 99. 60 f5 e 0 �, o rn BUIL DING E \ 9\ ' \, o o �_ 9 0 0 o r fU \p \Og19 A� sc ?2 fs ! 056 ocs�o O y iG5 \rry �� 009 1 0 9 9 1 o�'oc1 - !0987 8'125 f �,w T F.F. ELEV.= 1098.38 ►� , \o e _- - - =- -- \o 9� 5 f °66x - W. �.�Q1 9J 00� 100 0�� oo cs, 100 F5 __�8?s �C 10g g. J Q I'I 5 1 _ \OA - `' \ FV 1 Y� " Z/ rf h �' A 9 1 fo 0 9 O9 \~\\\\ - LANDSCAPE AREA - 6 Q T J `J PAD ELEV.= i 097.80 5 o rc ! -, 'o�j9J 988�bf 9 '� 1 1C - j ZZ_fs 0� ��1009g '_ G G`� 109808 ---------- o�sx 1 G -96 S gg 1 68 Q p6 O� -- _ _ - cD 10 !�V 7G o S 6Q p F p� �� R F�� PROPOSED 18" RCP FI g 1\ Y �1 0 g cs� -- - g7 \ �0 0 \ 7 54 L. F. ® J. 09,• PROPOSED 18" RCP 9 �/� C- 3 t 10 rn - i =-- 0 / 8' \6 h �(PR/I/ATE) i? t� 207,90 L. F. 0 1.0-9 098 8 0 i� I �8 - o LANDSCAiP \ 1 9 J J o \ 1 i gg. ? 8 9 9 o�.fl s 10 > . _ _ \ a - � Z0 0 g8,6 I VA TE E AREA rG ou 5 0 Qg rG .18 tf � I I - g8 1 1 � oa'cr .a ...il 109 -P,POP. 8"s I t O 1095-515 12 Z r ? 10 0 8 3 198' rF`' 6 104 ' 109 9h'g 2 F' 1 - g a 10 8 6 s �.�s 55 \p9 109790 TG II; 64 63 t0 g5'4 / 20 g ^ LANOSCAPL Ap G I 5 -----{----- -- ------ 10 6 10 2 EA t I 9 t0 EXISTING 24" RCP -_ I �� t Og ?0 Al9/ 1 IB I I 6. 01 64+ 74.07 66 (PRIVATE) I �j 1095 10 ogb 1 y 1 g8 �8\ 14 � p� �N 10 30' DRIVEWAY -- - -- -- _ { / 'ROA 1045 ^� 109 6 Z5 FS o� \Op91 (i 8 RPJ��E�1 OSEO //j,�oQ ^T 109 V. WOLF H E� - -_ _ _ - '`-0.4' 1i.41� .4',gNC OCOM� TS C7 23 ROI�E'p S,T�,EET /iG1P � � � g1 X18 1 � k �'; F�096s8 -+ 172 Sh'EE7 4N0 QOliE/L1E�VT PLANS ,OQgb \p0968 ! EXISTING 30" RCP EXISTING 30" RCP OF 2� I 1 RE - _ • -- - (PR/VATEJ / (PRIVAT£J 69 0478001 I C�UN - ---CEPA IVERSIDf - - - - - - ROAD� _.. -y694199! - UILD& g ETY EXISTING 36" RCP- / /-/Z �P� V4 30 - _ APPROV o RAO _ 2031. 12' _ `E)IgY -.,.. �,� - _ A 7L R/ RFvlc p (� = 05 30 04 % _ - EX1 STING CATCH RASIN _ Agaroval o�t / 7 �8 D be LLLyyy111���_ � ued to L = 195.01' / / -� - --' trymit tor. a Puns &h3,1 not _� ----------- -/ an be of larwg otThy ° Prom ° Pror=1 of en I N �-9'5.3'18" E '�'---=r-•_.• _- .,__ ( /,- � ! i! � � -.__ \ _ Exl_STING FENCE -X7259_ •..._..• _ .---`--`. - -- _ . I - (f7 ! d3 - GRAPHIC - - " Underground Service 1.A lert FEMA FLOOD PLAN MTEMECUEA CREEK40 20 0 10 20 'CHANNELSCALE W 18051v A. D. 15 1\0 422-41 33 1 inch = 20 ft TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG RECOMMENDED FOR SEAL COUNTY SEA' APPROVED BY DATE__- -_ - a COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHEET NO. APPROVAL r 1 2O SCALE �SFOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY• CALIFORNIA / enterprzses PRECISE 'GRADING PLAN 3 0 Q 1- m CLOJ INDUSTRIAL PARK Q No. 36117 m __ 31911 Minion Troil a A California CorporationLake * Exp. 630/00 * SUBMITTED BY -(� Phonc (909) 2 45-92530 TRACT 23172 SH TS. ! S'l CIVIC- �Q' Fo. (909) 245-7927 S TS. LDE E BY MAPPR DATE CHECKED BY F �ARTURO M. BANANAI - WOLF STORE ROAD FILE NO. OFCAUF SCALE I- - 20' BENCHMARK & SANTOS ALIPASCOURT INEER REVISIONS COUNTY - 3611; 6-30-00 SEE SHEET N0.1GNED ev DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DATE R C.E. NO. EXP. DATE -_ DATE 11-14-97 FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP W.O. 97-t2-001 LINE DIRECTX)N DISTANCE LI NIV37.49 W _ 24.00 L2 S73'22'1I W 6.50 L3 S16*37'49rE 1 J.50 L4 S73'22'11 W 36.00 L5 N 1 637'4Er W 11.50 L6 N1637'49 W 11'so L7 _ S7S22.11 W 72.00 L8 N16'37'4 W 12.50 9 NI 637'49OW 12.50 L10 S73'22'11 W 81.00 Lll N16.37'49 W 13.46 L12 S74'23'14 W 14.00 L 1 3 N1536'46 W 54.00 L14 S74'23'14 W 12.50 L15 $74'23'14 W i 12.50 06 _ N15'36'4 W 45.00 L17 S74'2 3'147 W 11.50 L18 574'23'14 W 11.50 L19 S15-36'4 E 45.00 1_19 S74'23'14 W 11.50 L20 S74' 3'14 W 11.50 L21 N1536' 36.00 L22 574'23'14 W 12.50 L23 S74.23'I eW 12.50 _ L24 5 1 5*36'4ErE 54.00 L25 _ S74 -23-14 -W 11. L26 S 7 4* 2 3'1 e W 11.50 _ L27 _ NI36'46W 72.00 L28 _ 23-14 12.50 L29 S74'23'14 W 12.50 L30 515'36'4 E 72.00 L31 $74-23-14-W 13.50 L32 SIS'36'4 E 5.00 14.14 14.14 1' 160'00' C28 L33 N11'48'24 W 12.58 L34 N11'48'24 W 12.56 L35 S11'48'24 E 11.50 L36 SI1'48'24 E 11.50 L37 N7953'1 E_ 63.00 _ L38 S10'06'4 E 11.50 L39 S1006'4 E 11.50 L40 S10'O6'4 E 13 ,50 L41 S79'53'18'W 54.00 L42 S79'53'lfrW 9.00 L43 _ Sl0'O6'4 E 13.50 L44 S10'06'4E__ 11.50 1.45 $79'53'18 w 54.00 L46 S79 -53'19 "W- 54,00 L47 51906'4TE 11.50 L48 N1006'42 W 13.50 L49 S79'S '1 W 3.63 L50 S10'06'4 7 -E 5.10 L51 516'09'41 E 36.00 L52 N7 '50'19 E 12.50 L53 N7350'19 12.50 L54 S16'09'4t E 36.00 L55 N7S5019 E 11.50 L!56 N7S50'1 E 11.50 L57 S16'09'41 EE 72.00 L58 N73'50'19 E 11.50 L59 N 7.1'50' 1 E 11.50 ---1.80 --- 916'09'41 E ---_ C49 L61 N7S50'19 E 11.50 -L62 N73-50'1 E 11.50 _ L63 S16'09'41- -E 45.00 L84 N73'50'19 E 11.50 L65 N73 -50-19 0E 11.50 L66 S1609'41 E 90.00 L67 573'50'19 W 12.50 L68 N7S50'1 E 12.50 L69 N16'09'41 W 90.00 L70 N7S5O'1 E 13-39 L71 NI6'37'4 W 13.52 L72 _ N73.22'tt E 45.00 I N16'3749 W 11.50 L74 ,T N 163 7'49r W N73'22't 1 E - 11.50 36.00 L76 N16'37'49 W 11.50 1.7 N16'_17'49_W­___ 11.50 1.78 -----573'22'11 1.79 W --r------- N16'3T49 W -- 36.00 11.50 L80 NI637'49 W 11. L81 S7S22'11 W _ 36.00 L92 N1637'4 W _ 13.50 L83 N7S22.11 E -- 5. L54 N16'37'49 W --_ 24.00 L85 S7S22 ( I -W 366.80 L06 S15'36'46"E 196.73 L87 S15!36'46'E 57.50 1_88 N79'53't E 152.93 L89 516'09'41 E 245.62 _ L90$16'09'41 E 50.29 L91S73'50' _ W9 W9 13.03 L92 S73*50'19 W 72.32 L93 N16*09'4I W 22.00 L94SS S2� 6.10 L95 S7322'11 W 5.9 L96 SIV37'49 E 36.00 L97 S5 3'2� 9.09 L98 S73'22'11 W 8.91 L99 S 163 7'4T E 36.00 L100 N16'09'41 W 21.00 L101 N1637'49 W 16.00 L 102 N16'37'49FW 14.00 L1 03573'- 22-11 W 34.00 L104 N16'3T49 W 9.42 L105 S7(f5f1frIlt 7.42 L106 S1005'4 29.53 L107 N1609'41 -W 43.32 L108 S7S50.19 W __- 25.76 _ L109 N1006.4 W -------21,44 L110 51006'4 E 15.62 L1 t 1 S175311f W 97.41 -- L112 N1 U37'49 -W 7.38 Lt13 S7S22'1I W 153.01 _114 N107'4917W 36.00 1_1 15 N73'22'tl E 8.77 L116 N7S22'1 t E 8.38 L117 N1 T3 1 ' 4Gr W 15.95 1_118 S7S22'II W 17.86 Ll 10 S1 6*37'49rE 18.00 L120 N I 5'36'4C W 22.88 L121 N7S22'1t E 26.96 L122 3'1 4. 1.124 N74'23'14 E 14.64 L125 S7322'11 W 236 L 126 N2$36' 15 E 2.00 U27 _ -_-_ N13 -45'14'E 1150 CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA C1 7.00 11.00 9000'00 C2 4.50 14.14 1 80 '00 C3 3.50 11.00 WOO.OT C4 30.00 46.59 8658-5:7- 05 2.50 3.97 91'01'0 C6 3.50 11.00 180'00' C7 4.50 14.14 180'00' C8 4.50 14.14 18(700' C9 3.50 11_00 180 '00 CIO 6.00 _ 9.32 89'00'5 C11 4.50 14.14 180'00'00 C12 16.00 25.13 90'00'0 _ C13 3.50 11.00 18010010 C14 30. 46.07 87'59' 3 C15 2.50 3.93 90'00'00 C16--�-- 16.00 25.19 90'11'1 Ir C17 16.00 24.61 88'08'31 _ C18 C19 7.00 ---- 2135.12 11.19 6.57 _ 91'36'5 - 00'10'34 C20 2.50 3.93 90'04'02- C21 2159.12 129.85 03'26'45 C22 _ 2121.12 _ 63.01 _ - 01'42-13 C23 3.50 11.00 180'00'00 C24 2119.12 54.01 01'27'3 C25 4.50 14.14 180' 0'0 C26 C27 4.50 4.50 14.14 14.14 1' 160'00' C28 2.50 3.93 9000'0 C29 2.50 3.93 9000'00 C30 2.50 3.93 C31 6.99 10.98 -9900'Oe 9000'0 C32 16.00 25.13 __9(rDOOr C3316.00 25.13 9000' C34 2.50 3.66 _ 83.57'01 C35 30.00 50.29 96'02'59 C36 3.50 11.00 16000' C37 _ 4.50 14.14 1817001wr­ C38 4.50 14.14 18000'0 C39 4.50 14,14 18000'00 C40 4.50 14.14 180'00' C41 16.00 25.13 9000'00' C42 16.00 25.13 9000' C43 3.50 11.00 _ 160'00'00 C44 30.00 47.37 90'28.0 C45 2.50 3.91 89'31'51 C46 4.50 14.14 18000' 47 3.50 11,00 I- 80'D�0'00 J C48 4.50 14,14 18000' C49 - 2.50 3.93 9000.00"- 050 7.GO 11.00 90001 C51 1.80 2.81 89'31'51 C52 1.99 3.13 9000 0 C53 7,00 11.0 90 8'09 C54 7.00 10.94 89'31'57 055 7.00 11.05 _ 9028'09 C56 7.00 10.94 8731'51 C57 7.00 11.05 9026'09 C58 7.00 10.94 89'31'51 C59 5.00 7.33 f 3y5T01 C60 2.50 3.93 9000' C61 2.50 4.21 96'31'0 C62 5.00 7.29 83'26'5 C64 2.50 4.17 95'30'04 - C65 7.00 11.12 91'01'0 C66 699 10.96 9000' C67 7.00 10.87 88'58'5 - C68 7.00 - 11.12 91'01'0 C69 6.50 9.41 8758'1 C 0 2.01 6.39 18726'1 1 C71 1,00 1.57 90,00,00, C71 1-00 1.57 9000' The private engineer signing these plans is %Sornsrble for assuring the accuracy I 1 and acceptability Of the al•sign hereon, to the event of dscrepancles arising o/ter DATE BY MARK county opproval or oYv4ng construction, the private engineer shoN be resoonsiNe ENGINEER REVISIONS for determining on acceptable solution and reosing the plans for approval by the county. DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY t STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH 2 t t t -------------------+-------------------- -- - - - - '-- - ----------------------------------------------- ---- -- _-- - 1"5 .S RW L10 I I _J U2 I J I C4 I L14 L15 I I J I 1.17 L18 L19 J I I 1.20 I L22 I L23 I I ry 1 1 [121 11 cn 1 ao 1.26 I I E I -------------------------- t-------------------------------------------------------------- m e i -- - - - - - - - i - - 1_7 L4 1 1 g L81 L78 L75 L72 aJ C1 C50 LZ L C47 C46 C4 IL70 I L85 IFR- C44 PROPOSED TILT -UP CONCRETE 11N,91451,111AI BUILD/NO 1121 B C C70 C L94 4i C52 I L92 C51 L91 L125 C�28 071 10261 1.995 I ICI 1.64 L116 L126 " L126 11 uu v 1.124 C64 L11t --- C12 PROPOSED T/L T -UP CONCRETE A/NDUSTR/AL BUIL DIIVC 1.28 I C 1.29 3 NB n 056 cn L98 ao Z V 409 02 f C5 aS L, , UL J tim , SHEET N0711 a, ti 4 4 a OF 4 SHTS a T7�:Ll FILE NO. Y Y C5 C 3 C L94 4i C52 I L92 C51 L91 L125 C�28 071 10261 1.995 I ICI 1.64 L116 L126 " L126 11 uu v 1.124 C64 L11t --- C12 PROPOSED T/L T -UP CONCRETE A/NDUSTR/AL BUIL DIIVC 1.28 I C 1.29 3 NB 060 L I E IFAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII --markt! s: MEMO Mile 1.4 J 031 C3I a R A D 2.45 \`J 4"JOYA\f"J t -- ---.. 6- 5 TEMECULA CREEK (BY A. D. 159% RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL DATE APPR. I DATE CHECKED BY COUNTY DATE CHANNEL ---------------- I I I I I I I L4 f 1.50 C32 I C33 40 0 40 80 160 7 NEL _ 68 - _ I _ 7_ COUNTY F VERSIDE - _ DEPAR M NT - -- - BUILDI -- --APPBQVE REVIEWED t1Y RR/W e 1 M 1.cti DA Approval of t se laps s all not be construed to be =..J e permit for, o nappy val of, any violation of any q of the provisions of the state or county I.:' " laws. This set of plans m SEAL COUNTY SEAL. APPROVED BY DATE �QOQPOFESS/ON brf Q'C M eq �2C FOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA e n t e rp r2 s e s Q Y Z al r cc No. 36117 r _ - --. - A California Corporation * Exp. 6/30/00 * SUBMITTED BY� rJgT CIV1v P��P ARTURO M. BANAN _-'r FOFCAXO SCALE 1" = 20' - BENCHMARK 36117 6- 0-00 SEE SHEET N0.1 R.C.E. NO. - EXP. DATE DATE 1�-12-97 _S (,> sz 99-00_32 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 40' SCALE HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN 31611 Mission Trail PROPOSED BUSINESS PARK Lake Elsinore .Co. 92530 TRACT 23172 Phone: (909) 245-2127 Far. (909) 245-7927 STATE ROUTE 79 (SOUTH) & MAHLON VAIL ROAD FOR I W.O. nl� .rl J z M cc 0 miss Use C 056 cn L98 ao Z V 409 02 f C5 aS o a tim , SHEET N0711 a, ti 4 4 a OF 4 SHTS a a FILE NO. Y Y C5 C 3 060 L I E IFAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII --markt! s: MEMO Mile 1.4 J 031 C3I a R A D 2.45 \`J 4"JOYA\f"J t -- ---.. 6- 5 TEMECULA CREEK (BY A. D. 159% RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL DATE APPR. I DATE CHECKED BY COUNTY DATE CHANNEL ---------------- I I I I I I I L4 f 1.50 C32 I C33 40 0 40 80 160 7 NEL _ 68 - _ I _ 7_ COUNTY F VERSIDE - _ DEPAR M NT - -- - BUILDI -- --APPBQVE REVIEWED t1Y RR/W e 1 M 1.cti DA Approval of t se laps s all not be construed to be =..J e permit for, o nappy val of, any violation of any q of the provisions of the state or county I.:' " laws. This set of plans m SEAL COUNTY SEAL. APPROVED BY DATE �QOQPOFESS/ON brf Q'C M eq �2C FOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA e n t e rp r2 s e s Q Y Z al r cc No. 36117 r _ - --. - A California Corporation * Exp. 6/30/00 * SUBMITTED BY� rJgT CIV1v P��P ARTURO M. BANAN _-'r FOFCAXO SCALE 1" = 20' - BENCHMARK 36117 6- 0-00 SEE SHEET N0.1 R.C.E. NO. - EXP. DATE DATE 1�-12-97 _S (,> sz 99-00_32 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 40' SCALE HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN 31611 Mission Trail PROPOSED BUSINESS PARK Lake Elsinore .Co. 92530 TRACT 23172 Phone: (909) 245-2127 Far. (909) 245-7927 STATE ROUTE 79 (SOUTH) & MAHLON VAIL ROAD FOR I W.O. nl� .rl J z M cc 0 miss Use C C .,}t ,. cn ao 409 �a aS i< a , SHEET N0711 a, 4 a OF 4 SHTS a a FILE NO. Y Y C 3 VISTA DEL SOL STATE ROUTE 79 SOUTH I. I ^ i CITY OF TEMECULA 1 (N73 1 1' E PV N1VENJll)t SEAL.. T ................. UNIT OTY. CONSTRUCT 3' A.C. PAVEMENT . 129,296 JQ0 Ia CONSTRUCT 6' CLASS II BASE -'UOUN*FY 2395 O CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE 'D' CURB PER RIV CO. STD DWG. NO. 204 L,F. 5125 O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK S.F. 332 CONSTRUCT 4' x F WIDE CONCRETE STEP ! 974 06 CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER PER DETAIL ON SHEET 3 PARCEL 16N7J71*1,$ 2350 ; ... J1Lt90" OFCAUF� SCALE AS SHOWN BENCHMARK LF. 412 _ - 8505 7200• 7200 9r >s' PAINT 4' WIDE WHITE LINE PARKING STRIPING L.F. I 1 1 _ PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE PARKING STRIPING 8 N74•. J'II f - 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5--- - -EA. EA. 8- 1? INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 - B 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS EA.� PARIM 4 1 S RA4gEt 2 A4RCTL I INSTALL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 .. V n 15 CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP PER UBC SECTION 1127B5 EA. 2 SEL 5 iPAIR14 215.5 1B INSTALL 36' x 36' BROOKS INLET W/ NO. 3636 TRAFFIC GRATE EA. 2 1 I I I REMOVE EXISTING V -DITCH 8^ D0 INSTALL M.H. NO. 1 PER STANDARD DWG. NO, MH251 a ti I ti n - INSTALL JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO, 4 PER STANDARD DWG NO. JS229 ---------- £A. 1 PARCEL MERGER NO 1025 I EARTHWORK QUANTITIES --- -- L1 r97' CUT C, Y. 32 24 FILL C. Y. I xa4 ; I INST. NO 255843, RC'D. 6/21/97 IMPORT . C. Y. 69/6 e7zz 7 7z00 81.75 --4 + I O p N7JP7•I I'E _ 7TJ $' 1 O L 6 Q I O .�l Nzrzr/,"F Il 3 97' PARCEL 15 �I Q I _---__--I__---._�-___ m z c A4RM 7 H IG14 JJ' u O� ^� „ PARCEL 16 I PARCEL 16 11.97 2 3 $ PARCEL 14 I I IV 1 Q� J I I 1 _ 1 h >z.avi 99 sr 8 A4L IS g 1 1 109.JT .. ., ... } I v b h 2 L IJ ( JJ it 1 I h^ Z, "i PARM 12 7z (b• �• 2 1 .t I I n 7? ^r79'SJ'7B'E 701 ST IDH JJ' 1 N7SSO.ro'C ��mp -_I___-_-____ __I IJ77,dT Ni WOLF STOR `"-'"-+r n� ROAD _ �L1.ps }p'04 Re2031.12 - (N7o-a •.._ Un Lt95.Oi• TEMECULA CREEK CHANNEL INDEX MAP GRAPHIC SCALE 100 0 100 200 400 I -I --- I I --....-.-.....---- I - I 1 inch � 100 ft. 1 �L H ^' Cott• TOLL FREE A n 1-800 V; i i N TY MAP ', :. 422-4133 NOT TO SCALE TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG DATE BY MARK ENGINEER DESIGNED BY n REVISIONS -- --- -_ DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLOT PLAN NO. 15183 PRECISE PROPOSED LAND OWNER REDHAWK BUSINESS PARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4000 WESTERLY PLACE, SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION! MR. STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO. (714) 798-0100 APPLICANT KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4000 WESTERLY PLACE, SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTENTION MR. STEVE KAPLAN PHONE NO (714) 798-0100 SOILS ENGINEER PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING 624 EAST MARIPOSA REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373 ATTENTION MR JIM HARRISON PHONE NO (909) 335-1314 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, AND 46 OF TRACT NO. 23172 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 251 PAGES 94 THROUGH 99, INCLUSIVE, OF MAP IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 8S, RANGE 2W LEGEND R/W LINE PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE EXISTING CONTOUR FINISH CONTOUR DAYLITE LINE TOP OF CURB FINISH SURFACE R/W P/L - (1050) - =-1057 -- - 58.8 TC 58.3 FS GRADING PLAN INDUSTRIAL PARK CONSTRUCT/ON NOTES / QUANTI TY EST/MA TES SEAL.. l TEM Of SCRIP TION UNIT OTY. CONSTRUCT 3' A.C. PAVEMENT S. F. 129,296 JQ0 Ia CONSTRUCT 6' CLASS II BASE C. Y. 2395 O CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE 'D' CURB PER RIV CO. STD DWG. NO. 204 L,F. 5125 O4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK S.F. 332 CONSTRUCT 4' x F WIDE CONCRETE STEP LF 974 06 CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER PER DETAIL ON SHEET 3 L. F. 2350 0 CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER RIV. CO. STD. DWG. NU 200 OFCAUF� SCALE AS SHOWN BENCHMARK LF. 412 _ - -- 0 PAINT 4' WIDE WHITE LINE PARKING STRIPING L.F. IO _ PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE PARKING STRIPING -� L F. _ - 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5--- - -EA. EA. 8- 1? INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 - B 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS EA.� I 4 14 INSTALL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY SIGN PER UBC SECTION 1129B.5 EA. 3 15 CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP PER UBC SECTION 1127B5 EA. 2 INSTALL 18' R,C.P. (CLASS -IV) STORM DRAIN L. F. 215.5 1B INSTALL 36' x 36' BROOKS INLET W/ NO. 3636 TRAFFIC GRATE EA. 2 0 REMOVE EXISTING V -DITCH D0 INSTALL M.H. NO. 1 PER STANDARD DWG. NO, MH251 EA. 1 1 - --- INSTALL JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO, 4 PER STANDARD DWG NO. JS229 ---------- £A. 1 EARTHWORK QUANTITIES --- -- CUT C, Y. 32 24 FILL C. Y. 10142 IMPORT . C. Y. 69/6 -TOP OF SLOPE SLOPE �/ - --'��E OF SLOPE VEE -- DITCH ------FLOW FINISH GROUND 58.8 n FG v n n DEEP FOOTING SHEET INDEX SHEET I TITLE SHEET SHEET 2 20' SCALE PRECISE GRADING PLAN SHEET 3 20' SCALE PRECISE GRADING PLAN SHEET 4 40' SCALE HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL DATE APPR. DATE CHECKED BY COUNTY DATE * IMPORT SHALL BE PROVIDED BY GRADING PERMIT # 970881 PAVING NOTES 1 Minimun parking lot grade shall be 17. . 2 Minimun grade for ribbon drains shall be 0.35%. 3. An approved soil sterilizer shall be used on all subgrode surfaces prior to placement of paving. 4. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than fourteen days following placement of the asphaltsurfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 c�olions per square yard, asphalt emulsion shall conform to Sections 31and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 5. The subdivider or contractor shall apply to the Riverside County Rood Department for on encroachment permit for all work wiyhin county right-of-way. 6. Two special inspections are required by the Building and Safety Deportment. One inspection at the time the base is placed and the second time when the A.0 or concrete hos been placed, 7. The contractor shall be responsible for the clearing of the proposed work area, and relocation and cost of all existing utilities. The county shall be informed 48 hours prior to beginning of construction at (714) 275-1800. 8 A compaction report by a Soils Engineer shall certify 95% compaction of base for A.C. and 90% compaction for concrete prior to call for second inspection and placement of asphalt concrete and concrete paving. 9 If no preliminary soils report is provided specifying the paving section, the structural section shall be three inches asphalt concrete and four inches class It aggregate base. 10. The contractor shall be responsible for obtaining paving inspections required by Ordinance 457. 11. The parking area shall be surfated with a'sphattic concrete to current standards as approved by the leportment of Buillding and Safety. SEAL COUNTY SEAL.. APPROVED BY DATE QppFE3S^ 101 o M ©^%. �F� b e rs t e r'p r°Tse s � FOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA JQ0 Ia Z a?� Na 38117 r m Exp. &311W * A Cciliforni¢ Corporation - SUBMITTED BY * CIVIL ��P ---r------------ - - - - f/���--- ART BANANAL. OFCAUF� SCALE AS SHOWN BENCHMARK 36117 6-30-00 R.0 E. NO -_-___ EXP DATE -_ SEE ABOVE DATE 12-12-97 GRADING NOTES 1. All grading shall conform to the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 33, as amended by Ordinance no. 457. 2. All property corners shall be clearly delineated in the field prior to commencement of any constructional grading. 3. During rough grading operations and prior to construction of permanent drainage structure, temporary drainage, control should be to prevent water and damage to adjacent properties. 4. Dust shall be controlled by watering or other approved methods. 5. No fill shall be placed on existing ground until the ground has been cleared of weeds, debris, topsoil and other deleterious materials. 6. Maximum cut or fill slope = 2:1. 7. Stability calculations with a factor of safety of of least one and five tenths (1.5) shall be submitted by o Soils Engineer to the Building and Safety Department for cut and fill slopes over 30' in vertical height 8. Provide 5' wide by 1' high berm or equivalent along the top of all fill slopes over 5' high. 9. Provide a brow ditch, designed to handle 100yr Q Storm flows, along the top of cut slopes 10. Minimum building pad and drainage swole slope shall be = 1 % if cut or fill is less than 10', 2% if cut or fill is greater than 10' Drainage swoles shall be a minimum of 0.2' deep and be constructed a minimum of 2' from top of cut or fill slopes. 11. "No obstruction of flood plains or natural water courses shall be permitted. 12. All existing drainage courses on the project site must continue to function, especiolly during storms conditions. Protective measures and temporary drainage provisions must be used to protect adjoining properties during grading operations. 13. Finish grade shall be sloped away from all exterior walls at not less than 1/2" per foot for a minimum of 3'. 14. Cut and fill slopes equal to or greater than 3' in vertical height shall be planted with gross or ground cover to protect the slope from erosion and instability in accordance with Ordinance No. 457 prior to to final grading inspection. 15 EROSION CONTROL: All slopes required to be planted shall be provided with rosea ice plant (or equal) ground cover at 12" on center. Slopes exceeding 15' in vertical height shall be planted with approved trees spaced not to exceed 20' on center or shrubs not to exceed 10', or a combination of shrubs and trees not to exceed 15'; in addition to a grass mix or ground cover Slopes exceeding 4' in vertical height shall be provided with on in -ground irrigation system. Slopes equal to or less than 4', may be irrigated by hose bib located at the top or toe of the slope, spaced to make us of a hose no longer than 50' in length. The irrigation system shall be provided with on appropriate bockflow device per U.P.0 , Chapter 10. 16. All grading shall be done in conformance with recommendations of the preliminary soils investigation by PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & TESTING dated November 17, 1997. Two sets of the final compaction report shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Deportment which shall include design recomendations and certification that grading has been done in conformance with the recommendations of the site investigation report. 17. If steep sloping terrain occurs upon which fill is to placed, it must be cleared, keyed and benched into firm natural soil for full support. Preparation shall be apporved by a suitably qualified and registered professirnol prior to placement of fill material. 18. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a competent soils engineer who shall certify that all fill has been properly placed and who shall submnit a final compaction report for all fills over I' deep. 19. Final compaction report will be required for oil fills greater than 1' 20. A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit to the Building and Safety Department written cerfication of completion of rough grading in accordance with the approved grading pion prior to requesting inspection and issuance of the building permit. Certification shall include line, grade, elevation and location of cut/fill slopes. 21. A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit certification of building pod elevation. Where specific elevations are required, the elevation with respect to mean sea level) shall be given If an elevation with respect to adjacent ground surface is required, the actual distance above the adjacent ground shall be given. 22. A suitably qualified and registered professional shall submit to Building and Safety Deportment written certification of completion of final grading in accordance with the approved plans for all grading designated as "engineered grading . T� 23 The contractor shall notify the District Building and Safety Department Department at least 24 hours in advance requesting finish lot grade and drainage inspection. This inspection must be approved prior to building permit final inspection for each lot. 24. Contractor shall notify Underground Service Alert, two days before O you dig of 1-800-422-4133. 25. The site shall be excavated to a depth of five feet below the existing surface elevation and recompocted to 95%. to N AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: v o AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY BY PACIFIC PHOTOGRAMMETRICS �- ? FLOWN DATED MARCH 16, 1995. S BENCHMARK: Q 2 1/2' BRASS DISC IN CONC CYLINDER 2.4 MILES SOUTHEAST ON HWY 79 FROM INTERSECTION MAIN AND FRONT STREET IN 1 = TEMECULA 53.5' SOUTH OF CENTERLINE HWY.79,32' EAST OF GT POLE CGT 2453) 300' EAST OF PRODUCE STAND MIDWAY BETWEEN P.P.75580 AND P.P.75581 ON LINE WITH OLD FENCE 3 LINE RUNNING N. & S. SET FIBERGLASS WITNESS POST i' SOUTH OF MOVEMENT BM NO. T-1-81 ELEV =1026,428 (1981) L Q r COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHEET NO ° PLOT PLAN NO.15183 TITLE SHEET j W }107 wsbn trail PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL PARK - Lake Elsinore .Co. 92530 OF 4 SHTS.Phone: (909) Q Fox! (909) 245-7927 245-2127 WOLF STORE ROAD (PRIVATE.) a & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT (PRIVATE) FILE NO. , FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP W.O. 97-12-001 287 283 284 285 - -- 286 287 288 - -- - EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS LONG HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH 284168.39 NIS TATE ROUTE 7 9 SOUTH - NO GRADING AND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE PER RIVERSIDE COUNTY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 159 EXIST. 60' DRIVEWAY _ _-----------------------------------------------------------------------+--------------------------------- -- _ ___ ___ _ ____ DONE WITHIN CAL TRANS RIGHT-OF-WAY 19 EXISTING CONC. CROSS GUTTER & SPANDREL EXIST. "V"-01TCH - TO BE REMOVED (TYP. PROPOSED SIDEWA K IMPROVEMENTS TO BE - CALTRANS RICHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO SE ) CONSTRUCTED UNCER SEPARATE WORK AND PERMIT. CONSTRUCTED UNDER _� ------------------------------------ - ----- - - - - - S PARA E WORK ANO P RMIT. �\ / FL� EXIST. CURB & GUTTER r - - -- _ \<P`- - - - - - -- _4 - - - -;�n �_ - - - - - - - -N 73'22'11• E - - - - - - _ ------------- ------.RAW �_..r _ _ r _ _ _ ...... _ r 520.00' y _ 82 -- - - - - -5 ------ -- - ----- - - - ---- --- - - - - ----- -- - - �'o ------ 0 . 11 1g aa� a - _ .- - 12 10 12 1 h.. .. � 1ro3 , Fs. 11 5• 1 } FS LANDS PE AREA - h 2,2 °1. OZ. s o2• - �� - LANDSCAPE AREA 104-0 j / •--- (SEE NOTE N6 2, THIS SHEET) 110 1 1 1� 11 YZ G o q 10 �I f (SEE NOTE NO. 2, THIS SHEET] a s f s 1 - mss.- - Oo i NO TES. X99? 1 15 p�F o0 0 4 }102 Bb I 11/0'350 FS 4 11 0�8 6� oo. p��5 'oo� 9�F5 0� 3 11Q9 f5 5 0 I. FOR OFFSITE GRADING A LETTER 3 Q1 �A 5'a o l 1101 65 1 p 7G 16 j� � 0� 1 A 5 02 5g 'n 1 1 IDI. 0 OROME�HESADJACENT SION T PROPERHE TTY OWNER. 1 } 0 \ --✓�� J cs 15 0 2•� FS 'r S �� JJ c \i (G �� Jc11 O3 O T 1 11 FL r O llO/.57 I > ° - - _ -- - _ -- 1 G - - 3---i} }-�fS 11L IG - O - - -- --- - - ' - - ' r - - - 2. LANOSC4PE BERM�NG SHALL BE / ^ - -- -- -- -- -_.--- --- -- - -- fi �' o G CONSTRUCTED Wl H A MINIMUM ELEVATO FG. - �3T� o 0 102 F- s 0 y 5 �'i 0 0 1 2 0 75F 1 1 o 0 +� 1 0 11 ? 0 \ 1 \. s ( 0 y s 1 I. .� 0 'o q Q 1 0 �' 11 1 c� ' r " 102 1 5 0 ^� 1 ? 1 101.5 I5 0 o I , \ 10 V c�11 1 Q `S 1 \0 0\ 9 110 L 0 0 OF 1.5' ABOVE THE EXIST/NG TOP OF 6 11 1 '� 0 1 /0 ���^-� ; l 1 + 0 �' ` 1 \ �G F b o �' �G i5 0 m a 1 m- s 1 0 G s o 1 1 G 1 \ s II CURB ALONG HIGHWAY 79. y o p., 9' o s „� I 02 01 IYP BUIL DING O- \ 11 r 1 o f o �, 1 0 o w o S �j oT ( t 1 2 p i A 1-J. E L E V . - 1 09 9.3 8 X01 1 e, tG' �` r �� �s �y gy m k rr s gy 05 1 rG. 02�yA y \\0\0\ I \\4 p\ 31 \ \ �, `r g5 �„ �, \ 1 v v , O� 1 \ . PAD ELEV.-1098.80 1Q 11'01.8 FS \ 10 \ J \\ s TYP ! - n'/ --- '.,=ham `►wy 1 y I o`� rr. -- � 1 - if kI � - ------ ---- o �' � Of . i Y\�- rLh .1102.?s /I ryI �'. Off. FG 3� \Or0• frG ! l lO CONSTRUCT 3' AC PAVEMEN'. 6 I j SG LANDSCAPE AREAOn'. `� �G5 °i I T 2 C[]NSTRUC 6' CLASS It BASE 1 CONSTRUCT 6' TYPE 'D' CURB PER \ IID/.51 I 008 i �60 �3g.10 TG I/Uc•d �� 1101. �� 16p 1;101 ! ill I RIV CO. STD. DWG NO 204 1� 4 CONSTRUCT 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK FG- FL,�o,. FS ! 017` T19 0 /l0/40 11, 110 F.F. ELEV.= 1 102.35 Ei_F_V = ? (! J,`,' F.F. F I_EV. = 1 102.15 5 ELEV. =- 1 1 02.35 3 5 I OS CONSTRUCT 4' x 1' WIDE CONCRETE PAD ELEv.^ 1 101.85 p F �. RT PAT) F F v n f?5 D F1_Ev.=1 101.85 I I I;� STEP CONSTRUCT 3' WIDE RIBBON GUTTER F.[:, ELEV. = 1 10 1.50 24'16 7 CONSTRUCT TYPE 'A-6' CURB PER '' O�r IYP O RIV. CO. STD DWG NO 200 oY r QO�o PAD ELEV. = 1 101.00 ° X06 0 �o 1 a,� Qi SG T ® It CONSTRUCT 2' WIDE V-DITCI7 0� 92 FS G' \111 45-1 I_ 5 j } 3i O PAINT 4- WIDE WHITE LINE r\ O 1} p2 21 0\ 5 H I 110 6 ggg 5 1 ,c, 1 FL PARKING STRIPING QO� 00 100 1}��0� ;i A 60 ES 75 __ \ 1 FL 6 9 l 10 PAINT 4' WIDE BLUE LINE 0) FL11 ti 1Q 01 01. �1 �1 �1 ,�1 s� i?`CP.) \000 �1 �. ' , PARKING STRIPING 10� 112 l r , o: , ^1 0 0111. 10 10 ,0 11 I \ 11 PAINT BLUE HANDICAPPED SYMBOL. L/ � ` 3 ?+ '�o�oi +'$i�sol,u U i '' iG - 12 INSTALL HANDICAPPED SIGN Z Q w LLJ 2Z o �`�' c�o�S 1101.40 �/ 025 0215 110 F5 1\025 102`21 oa �`os� ql I 9 j ' Ljtj G G \1 F 11 F E 1 2' „� °I 13 CONSTRUCT TRASH ENCLOSURE U Q FG ( S 5 G (G 10 s l PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS Q1) Q I 6 - 3o F5 yQ 00 1G 5 9\ Q 1 2 o y5 t F5 p0 F5 1 SG 1 SG CL 9 ' 6� Q\ 0 01 1 y F 1 1A• ' o INSTALL HANDICAPPED Q \ 5 1 0 y y 0 ACCESSIBILITY SIGN 1 11 01. 10 11 F5 \�l►- 11 01 11 t' 1, ,00 0116 01' �) Q A 1121^�i � -r'o �' / `\ ', \1 5 '� � I •(G` \\? tG `!' 11V"Oi• � --- ----- - _____ ' � 15 CONSTRUCT HANDICAPPED RAMP All Q 2 1 00. } 00•� (G „o0 11 moo h�. o0 19 E roo f �6 p 1 J 1 j01'a f5 f`1 { 16 F5 O 19 REMOVE EXISTING V -DITCH 1100,99 } 1} G Q s. 1Q 1 0 10 1 ff T 110 1 rr 100' 6 �. 4 1 Q 7 1.5J 0 f 1 96 F5 5 ^ o :� WATERF'2Q7F WALL I`12, T�P4F 0� a 10 - ?YP J j II O? 20 __ F.F . F_LEV. = 1 1 01 .50 X12 t 1G J 1 (( r�� �( "i �a I�TING Tb JMIA/ 6" OVER 10 FS ■ INDICATES ELEVATIONS REELECTING L-ki0 1 3 G.9' rG TG 01,E•\/. 1 �` I 0' CF CONDITION. Q �$` , 11100 PAD ELEV. 101.00 ,}Qo' s °1• y F� °} b, p 1°2 53 o .0 1 3�F5 \�� } p FS a gy995 fc 1 i_ l 0 12 Dos 1 0 ? 1 10 111 }0.1 2 ��. p 4110} i1Q �Ej h✓�99 I 8 1 !O ��s�� J`i 4•y2 �'1.. 1'r07 , I s I F� 1 1, I ii5 � '(���GF .11s�'`� :II,'� 0 Fc, 0 1 4h \ J' 11 t0 2 h I o E !099.75 5y F�'-2. o'-- -- - 10 r0 �5''oo3j a, °, 100.711 1 F �� + 3 1 I (01.40 0 h r I Z Q 2 0 �1 I . gb 110 60 I ^ � 5 SG i i �. i ii i i .. i . i i�L,;�(� ii i r 1�1 FG Ogg 0'�' i� 1} AFL 1 g. } } 00 z 1� L .- r +L-•- :.,:.:� I Ogg 0. q 5 rt5 t� 1 10 1 93 I 5 j 0 O1. 6'J ry y. , iM Ti- Or P%A.& , 1 y ._� 1 tib ,\� 1� TO 9 j I l FLOW y FLOW � ofjj� \1�Q11 0 � r ,• 1.��' ELEV.=1099.85 - 5 rrF� PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 ,� \o9gga 0099 `' rr �o rc. I \1 m h - 5 a �'o \ 5 l'0 6 5 09 1 1 s" STEP e _ o0 4 5 o l o r?o \ 0 N� \ \0 b o s \ o • 1 00 0 1 OQ pyo -SANDBAG y HIGH TYP. 9 p 4` Ogg 2 C 1 1G G - 1G s T C ! 1 k \ 7 .j I '� ,\ 3" THICK 564-.0 E 0 S 5 3 FS �o FS 'o a t 5 A 'o o s 9� i�o9 i 3 00� F F5 1101' ib 110} g2 c? 01. F ' o }p F ! dQ°' f G�o9o`s 9 ST 111 l AIRPLACEDR 2 102 A2 } 1G :, 110 J 11 3 �^� 11� 3 �\ 1099, l5 l h\ c `' S I( I CONCRETE (OPTIONAL) 11 00 0 16' 2aeL F.F. ELEV.= 1 101.50 110 gt 00 �? G PAD ELEV.=1 101.00 }r00' Ili 'oo 6 d� i► 01 FS ! +, g°+g"�SG. / I 0 TYPICAL VEE -DITCH DETAIL 0 0 y1 ti \� y E5 �p l l 10 5 1101.28 rC N sTc (G \\� z 1\ gg' 0 k gy y g�. 0' S 12 E NO SCALE 1 }'01 0 �qG ,00 B ES 7 F5 F� 6 I 2 10 ° og 951Q 0 CD1 6 5 10 1. kn v�lc, 6 0 � o II G Q 109 9g 3 0 g 2 1 V"' 10 O F 140' "S 00 �y 119 II iI 0 1 1 11 101 Q6 1' O 6 �i 11 O° ro99 84 TC 6\ F� 10g \Q IZ Q>, of 1 11 I , \ G SG Fs g 1 ^ _ _Underground W � Q 5 J 0 , .fly r \ ( �' � o �� �� gg 1 I j I � Service Alert J I ��� r g.60 fl' 5 b1 F epg yF og rG F.F. ELEV.=1099.8b G l w w o' 1� 1p9 10 91 7 \n 5 q e FL PAD ELEV.= 1099.35 yt 1-I1 can: TOLL FREE F �( /3 1 - 1 00 �99 - - - -- - _. _ �9 g Og gg a y 11 11 l �i •Q -- _ ___ G g 0 Li - - - - - _P Tse AREA - -- 422 4133 - - - o' ..- - -- -- 0 5 I _ �2 F G __ r -LANDSCAPE �� w Ogg _��"' 4. 1-800 �� /� Qp• X21 S F5 --- - j - 3 11 1 I0 0 0 1 1 �5 ' 1110 9g � \✓ 5 10 FS 10 SEE SHEET NO. J 1�7 TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG RECOMMENDED FOR SEAL COUNTY SEA APPROVED BY DATE _ COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE br SHEET N0. APPROVAL ppFESS/Ol' e rz t e rp ri s e s 20' SCALE 2 M Bq'i%�Fy ; FOR TRANSPORTATION DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PRECISE GRADING PLAN OR cxjr INDUSTRIAL PARK • 31817 Nissho Troil Q No. 36117 y ----- A California Corporation gala EWnon .Co. 92530 OF 4 SH TS. -- ---- -__-- - * Exp s130M * SUBMITTED BY Phone: (909) 245-2127 TRACT 23172 DATE I Foxi (909) 245-7927 s� clv1� R�•� _-____ __ WOLF STORE ROAD FILE N0. DATE BY MARK APPR. DATE CHECKED BY ✓lFOFCAV40P`\P ARTURO M BANANA _ BENCHMARK & SANTOS ALIPAS COURT ENGINEER COUNTY ( SCALE 1" - 20' - _ _- _- DESIGNED B� - CHECKED BY -- DATE 36117 6-30-00 SEE SHEET N0.1 R.CE NO --_ EXP DATE DATE FOR KAPA DEVELOPMENT CORP. W.O. 97-i2-001