Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Grading for PM 24387 - Permit# BGR021053
ffDJLWC; #::;OR Pti,;vas? reweeyI'A l�/r� shoot r .. --. v -1' .L1 , - -`r• - ice.. _. _ -iar -• l� 1 - v r 4 .• � - Mme' i — I`•1 -' ' r♦1( �: 4`YU� ;A1 ' ^•- A .f7' ` - / 3X ...111111 7' 11 vF CY i ' ` � y . Y�`�• 41 : Aµ•4 N I IT or GRADING PERMIT PERMIT #: BGR021053 Status: ISSUED Job Address: 46500 PALA RD TEM Issued: 01/10/2003 Expires: 07/09/2003 Work Desc: ROUGH GRADE /SCHOOL SITE - TR23065 -2 Parcel No: 962- 020 -002 Location: 2002 TG 979 F5 /G5 Tract /Lot: PM24387 LOT 19 POR Zoning:SP ZONE APPLICANT RBF CONSULTING /PAM BARR Phone: 909 - 676 -8042 27555 YNEZ RD, TEMECULA CA 92591 CONTRACTOR OWNER BUILDER OWNER RH ACQUISITION CO 43529 RIDGE PARK DR, TEMECULA CA 925900000 FEE INFORMATION Plan Check Fees.: 2,238.84 Transfer Fee..... .00 Permit Fees.....: 1,126.40 Renewal Fee.....: .00 Addl Inspections: .00 Microfilm Fees..: .00 Addl LMS Surchg.: .00 Total Calculated Fees: 3,365.24 Additional Fees: 1,500.00 Total Permit Fees: 4,865.24 CALL FOR INSPECTION Requests for inspection shall be made at least 24 hours in advance by telephone at (909) 600 -6100 Additional info at www.tlma .co.riverside.ca.us /lms /lms.htm COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Department of Building and Safety BUILDING PERMIT This permit shall expire by limitation and become null and void if work is not commenced and a written request for inspection filed within 180 days from the date of issuance or if work has been suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days between the filin¢ of written reauests for inspection. RATION: I hereb affirm under penalty of perjury that I am licensed under provisions of nse No. Division 3�f�eBu' and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. Date / -10 "6�5 Contractor 0 OWNER- BUILDER DECLARATION: I b for the following reason (Sec. 7031.5, Business at demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issu licensed ursuant to the provisions of the Contrac and Professions Code) or that he or she is exempt applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a ❑ 1 asowneroftheproperty ormy or odered for sale (Sec. 7044', Busm who builds or improves thereon, and improvements are not intended or ofl F er - builder will have the burden ( as owner of the property, am e: 5essions Code: The Contractors contracts for such projects with a cot ❑ 1 am exempt under Sec. , Date 1 -(0 -63 penalty of perjury that 1 am exempt from the Contractors License Law Any city or county which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, he applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that heor she is hapter 9 rrcommencing with Section 70001 of Division 3 of the Business asis for tfie alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any more than five hundred dollars [$5001.): •.es with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended Professions Code: The Contractors License Law does not apply to the owner of property )es such work himself or herself or through his or her own employees, provided that such sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the ag that he or she did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.). ly contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who s) licensed pursuant to the Contractors License Law.). WORKERS COMPENSATION DECLARATION: 1 hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: ❑ I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self - insure for workers compensation, as provided for by Section 370 of the Labor C,��ttde for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. r F I (rave and will maintain workers com ensation insurance, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this penr}i�'is issued y w k r compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Carrier Policy Number 7( ( / I — O� (This section need not be completed if the permit is for one hundred dollars I or less). ❑ 1 certify that in the per onnance of the work for which this permit is issued I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the workers compensation laws of California, and agree that it 1 should become subject to the workers compensation provisions of Section'3700 of the Labor Code, 1 shall forthwith comply with those provisions., / -/d WARNING: FAILURE TO SECURE WORKERS COMPENSA EMPLOYER TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND CIVIL FINES ADDITION TO THE COST OF COMPENSATION, DAMAGES INTEREST, AND ATTORNEY'S FEES. Y COVERAGE IS UNLAWFUL, AND SHALL SUBJECT AN TO ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100000), IN PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 3706 OF THE LABOR CODE, CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097, Civ. C. . Lender's CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE AND THORIZATION OF ENTRY: I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct. 1 agree ply i all county ordinances and state laws relating to building construction, and hereby authorize re rresenta s of tltJss county me up t abov - mentioned prop for inspectje+f p\tre_sses. INSPECTION INFORMATION: Work may proceed only at the direction of the field inspector. To request an inspection of work completed, call the appropriate o ice iste a ow. ur office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. West County: Riverside Office (909 955 -1800 South County: South County Office (909) 600 -6100 East County: Indio Office (760; 863 -8271 REINSPECTION FEE: Reinspection fees maybe assessed when the permit card is not properly posted on the work site, the approved plans are not readily available tote inspector, for failure to provide access on the date for which the inspection is requested, or for deviating from plans requiring approval of the Building Official. A reinspection fee may be assessed for each inspection or remspection when such portion of work for which inspection is called is not complete or when corrections previously called for are not made. OCCUPANCY: Buildings or structures shall not be used or occupied until the Building Official has issued a Certificate of Occupancy (or for residential we mtl�' gs, [he sign -off of the final inspection on the job card by the building inspector). 284 -208 (09199) ti 0 Y RAFZO COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING, AND SAFETY APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT WORKSHEET REF: BGR 010525 PROJECT INFORMATION Permit # v 34 05 Jobsite Address No. Street Name Rd/St/Etc. Space # Deer Hollow Way Thomas Guide Page # Grid Location 979 F5/G5 City/Community State Zip Code Assessors Parcel Number CA 92592 Temecula Property Owners Last Name First Temecula Valley Unified School District -FIC EiQSE��ONLX.W'4� 7 a anningi ase PI 0 66V T,,6idt1MapY1 V Probir, I!P -vM As- AL r�Ad!�A 11reb-allj2p, 0IMpth APPLICANT /AGENT INFORMATION Note: The applicant will receive ALL billings, correspondence and refunds for deposit-based fee permits. Applicant/Agent's Last Name: RRF Consulting I First Mailing Address No. Street Name Road/Street lRoad Space # 27555 Ynez 400 City/Community State Zip Code I Phone Number Temecula CA 92591 909 676-8042 Permit Use: /57CAz,-V/ 5/ +c Rough Grading Has or will grading exceed 50 cubic yards? (Circle One NO Has or will fill be greater than 1 foot? (Circle One YES,) NO CONTRACTOR OR OWNER/BUILDER INFORMATION (Circle One) Calif. Contractor EXP. Type Firm Name License # Date 1. 691857 7/31/04 B Powell Gia PaPDas Construction Mailing Address No. Street Name Road/Street/Etc. Space # 32245 Callesito Sadrique City/Community TPmPrula I State rA 1 Zip Code 92592 Phone Number: 1(909 ) 289-8275 284-19908/01 M ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPLICATION FOR WASTE WATER DISPOSAL APPROVAL APPLICANT. Submit this form with four copies of a SCALED plot plan (1 " =20' to 1' =40' SCALE) drawn to County specifications as Indicated on the attached check list. A non - refundable filing fee Is required when the application Is submitted Check must be made payable to the County of Riverside Approval of this application shall remain valid for a period not to exceed one year from date of payment Agent, Contractor, Contact Person Address City State Zip Telephone Owner Address City State Zip Telephone ll Q!! Z Job Property Address.' City Lp U Lot Size Water Agency/Well Use of Permit, P /P, SUP, PUP, etc Legal Description DBA LU U) :-/ tl it /: Lvi� r - Dwelling, MH Site Prep, etch' I / i xl _) Signa e'of Appllwnl _ . Date . , I-' FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CHECK BOX IF REQUIRED If any box is checked, this application shall be considered rejected until the O Detailed Contour Plot Plans Required (t to 5 foot Interval) Information Is provided and the fee paid. Resubmiltals later than 90 days after date noted below may require repayment of fees U Other U Staff Specialist Lot Inspection Required CD Q Holding Tank Agreements Completed Z 0 Q Certification of Existing S.D. System Required Thomas Bros, Page Gnd__ F— WQ WOCS Clearance Required Q Date Lot Inspection Completed Initials (0 (Attach for DOH - SAN -007, Santa Ana Region Only) Remarks Q Soils Percolation Report Required Q Maintenance Booklet Provided Q Special Feasibility Boring Report Requred Q Final Inspection by Department of Environmental Health is required. Q Rereview Required Initials Date Please call 24 hours PRIOR to Inspection C 142 / Soils Percolation Epping Report By UcJPmjecl # Date Soils Map Page Soil Typo Approved By No. of Systems Type of Systems) No. Dwelling Units fl) Septic Tank Sall Rate Grease /Sand Q Holding Tank Q Replacement Bedrooms, Fixture Units Grease Intcp /Lint Trap Q New Q Addition Q Exisbng Q Connect to Sewer Gal Gal Sq Ft Total Linear Sidewall Allowance Leach Red sq ft Bottom Area Ft 0. rock/ sq 0 running IT InstallLine(s)_ft. Zang_ It wide of Bottom Area Inlet Tested Depth— U N/A with min Inches rock below drambnes U Proposed Bottom Tested Depth or Z Leach fines/bed special design for slope. (3) Pit Diameter No Pile Pit Below Inlet (131) Seepage Pit Maximum Other. O Applicable Total Depth Allowable H Depth U W N/A Overburden Factor Q 5' ❑ 6' TD U) Well Review Approved: Date: Well Drilling Permit# 61G�IM���j •7� Grading Plan Approved. /{ /�,� +� �`� Date / -_- Plan Check Only Approved. �f Date _ REMARKS: This application Is APPROVED /DENIED for the category checked In SECTION B above, regarding the design of a disposal system as Indicated on the accompanied plot plan, using the requirements set forth In SECTION C above. A building permit is necessary for the installation of lhe'above. Revenue Code -__Fee f designed system No construction Is permitted In the required resouhred 100% expansion area. Check # (1) Septic Tank must be 100' minimum from any wells Z(2) Leach lines must be 100' minimum from any wells, including expansion Dale O area ---Initial P (3) Sewer lines must be 50' minimum from any wells W (0 (4) Seepage pits must be 150' minimum from any wells, including expansion RIVERSIDE: 909 - 955 -8980 area. INDIO: 760 - 863 -7000 SOUTHWEST: 909. 600.6180 Signature; Date. November 05, 2001 STEVEFORD REDHAWK COMMUNITIES INC 43529 RIDGE PARK DR TEMECULA, CA 92590 RECEIPT OF YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) has received and processed your NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. Accordingly, you are required to comply with the permit requirements. Your WDID identification number is: 9 33S316916. Please use this number in any future communications regarding this permit. SITE DESCRIPTION OWNER: REDHAWK COMMUNITIES INC DEVELOPER: CENTEX HOMES COUNTY: RIVERSIDE SITE ADDRESS: DEER HOLLOW AND ANZA RD TEMECULA, CA 92590 COMMENCEMENT DATE: 11/15/01 EST. COMPLETION DATE: 8/30/02 When construction is complete or ownership has been transferred, dischargers are required to notify the Regional Water Board by submitting a Notice of Termination (NOT). All State and local requirements must be met in accordance with Special Provision No. 7 of the General Permit. Enclosed is a NOT for your future use. If you do not notify the State Water Board that construction activity has been completed you will continue to be invoiced for the annual fee each October. Please contact your Regional Water Board at (858) 467 -2952 if you have any questions regarding permit requirements. To obtain storm water related information and forms, please visit the storm water web page at www.swreb .ca.gov /stormwtr/index.html. Sincerely, Storm Water Section Division of Water Quality Enclosure California Environmental Protection Agency 01 Recycled Paper State-:VVater`I2csources: lontrol Board Division of Water Quality Winston H. Hickox Secretaryfor 10011 Street • Sacramento, California 95814-(916)341-5537 Gray Davis Environmental Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1977 • Sacramento, California • 95812 -1977 Governor Protection FAX (916) 341 -5543 • Internet Address: http: //w .s b.mgov November 05, 2001 STEVEFORD REDHAWK COMMUNITIES INC 43529 RIDGE PARK DR TEMECULA, CA 92590 RECEIPT OF YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) has received and processed your NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. Accordingly, you are required to comply with the permit requirements. Your WDID identification number is: 9 33S316916. Please use this number in any future communications regarding this permit. SITE DESCRIPTION OWNER: REDHAWK COMMUNITIES INC DEVELOPER: CENTEX HOMES COUNTY: RIVERSIDE SITE ADDRESS: DEER HOLLOW AND ANZA RD TEMECULA, CA 92590 COMMENCEMENT DATE: 11/15/01 EST. COMPLETION DATE: 8/30/02 When construction is complete or ownership has been transferred, dischargers are required to notify the Regional Water Board by submitting a Notice of Termination (NOT). All State and local requirements must be met in accordance with Special Provision No. 7 of the General Permit. Enclosed is a NOT for your future use. If you do not notify the State Water Board that construction activity has been completed you will continue to be invoiced for the annual fee each October. Please contact your Regional Water Board at (858) 467 -2952 if you have any questions regarding permit requirements. To obtain storm water related information and forms, please visit the storm water web page at www.swreb .ca.gov /stormwtr/index.html. Sincerely, Storm Water Section Division of Water Quality Enclosure California Environmental Protection Agency 01 Recycled Paper SaeWalxRewiwn aWdBene u \® NOTICE OrANTENT - TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WQ ORDER No. 99- 08-DWQ) b' 1TATUS SEE INSTRUCTIONS .LARK ONLY ONE ITEM 1. New Constrttcfion 2. Charge of Infamadon for WDID # PonPFPTV nWNFR pme Cordact Pecs" Redhawk Communities Inc. Mr. Steve Ford .tiling Address rime 43529 Ridge Park Drive V.P. Development ,ty Sate I Zip Ptane Temecula, CAi 92590 909 506 -6556 INFORMATION Centex Homes m g Address 2280 Wardlow Circle :y Corona rnuernnr•T1nN Pon IFCT INFnRMAT1nN MEMO= 909; 279_4000 ie/ProjeC Name Site Contact Person Redhawk - Tract 23065 -2 Mr. Steve Alford ymt Address/L b- tatiLide Longiuxle Comty Deer Hollow & Anza Road Riverside nearest GK1 Zip Site Phone Number Ernevency Phone Number Temecula 92590 90 279_4000 root sire d cor swc bon site area C. Percent of site imper%iousrtess Cmdr+cfag roogops): 23065-2 Acres D. Tract Ncmtber(s): 60.05 edge Consbucboo: % roil area to be dSbnbed: Acres (%d Iota! 10 1 Alter CassbVcbM % E. Mite Post Marker is the coffAmcbm site pan da anger common pan of deydWff zt a Sale? G. Name of plan ar development X YES No Redhawk 1 1 ,15 � 01 J. Projected construction dates: corKtrt�aa, oann�.tceraerd date: 051 Oil 0 2 0 8 f 3 Of 0 2 Comddeeradino: - -- Cernoete prefect-- — X d tdb fo Ea mass graded: �� Type of Construction (Check 64 gtR rW Con 1. � 2 Cammerdal ]. Ytdt¢tdal t. Reconstruction 5. Transportation 6. utdrq' Deserlpti— 7. Wer(Please UsQ: nu •run ruenou Atsnu ' ' Name Contact Persurt [ND BCM TO: OWNER (as In L above) Malting Address PlnndFax DEVELOPER as in m. altose Ctrl' Sena' rim O _fr'� kdonnatim at Name or local agery County of Riverside 't is this project or any Part Eheroo(. subject to eoncli"ts hnposed under a CWA Section 404 prnnit of 401 Water Quality Cettifitation7................ ......... .... YES ti )es, prwlde NO p n /I ,evil rdetails: -- a -- _– -__ 1. Indirectly to waters of the U.S. 2. Storm drainsysrem -Enter owners name: Riverside County Flood Control 7. Directly to vyaters of U.S. (e.g., river, take, creek, stream, bay, ocean, etc.) n/a i Name d receiving water. (dyer. lake, credit stream bay, ocean): _ n / a I OF NPDFS • SWPPP has been *pared ror this faa'fty and is avmlaWe for review. Date Prepared: r I_ Date ArneMed: I r_ • SWPPP will be prepared and ready for review by (eider date): 11, 3Q 01 A tentative schedule has been included in the SWPPP for activities such as grading. street co astnnction, home coratnhction, etc. A monitoring and mabaenance schedule has been developed that 4xiudes mspe0lion of the construction BMPs before antidpated storm events and a0a adual storm everts and is available for review. N checked above: A Qualified person has been assigned respam'bilty for Pre-stomr and post -sham BMP inspections b Identify eeecti� and rrxessa7 repairs w design ch arges .................................................................. ............................... YES NO Name: Phone: ( ) – A glaffad person has peen assigned mspxmnxW b ennae fA rmpuarc with the Permit and b implement an eiemenes d the Sbrm Water Pollution prevention Wan including: ��� t. Preparing an annual oumprance ewh afian ....._ ...................... _ _._._.................................................................. ............................... � YES 1 No Name: Mr. Steve Alford Phone 1 9091 273 4000 \/ . VICINITY MAP AND FEE mat show 4b bca6m in relation to nearest named streets, imtersectiora, etc) nave you Included a VlCLr*^W wltii this sW nllt37 _.. __ ...... _ ...................... ............................ YES NO lave you bdWed payment of the amud be with INS SabmiCaR...___.___._.._....._.._.___—.._------- _ ... _ ............ ............................... YES NO i certity under penalty of lawthat this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction and supervision in aocoreartw vith a system designed td assure that qualified persommei properly gather and evaluate the Information submitted. Based on my Inquiry )f the person or persons who'manage the system; or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information ubmitted js; to the best of my knowledge and belief, trim, accurate, and.iomplete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information. kmcluding the possibility of fire or lmprisoSUnermt. In addition. l certify that the provisions ot.the permit, nduding the development and Implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and a Monitoring Program Plan will be omplied with.* ;ynatun: //n Date: 10 -12 -01 H1ef President ■ o ■ CIONSULTING LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: County of Riverside Building and Safety Department 39493 Los Alamos Rd. Murrieta, CA 92563 ATTN: AbdulBehnawa DATE: 9/13/02 RBF JOB No: 15- 100312 REFERENCE: Redhawk /BGR No Of No. of 010525 DESCRIPTION: PA 13 Rough Grading Plan SENT To You VIA: Mail Your Pick -Up 8 RX Overnight Delivery (Carrier) Email RBF Messenger Messenger (Other Courier) No Of No. of DESCRIPTION Copies Originals 5 TR 23065 -2 PA 13 Rough Grading Plan 1 Sewer and Water Plans 1 Street Improvement Plans 1 Hydrology Study 1 Soils Report 1 Application SENT FOR YOUR: Approval Review Comments Per Your Request B Signature Use Information B B REMARKS: COPIES TO: RBF CONSULTING BY, II -Erf—zabeth Lobsted Design Engineer Riverside Region H PDA TA1151003121adm inlTransmR1312trns421 doc PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 92591 -4679 ■ 909 676 8042 • Fax 909 676 7240 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada • . RBFcom . t. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ® o WO CONSULTING To: County of Riverside, Building & Safety 39493 Los Alamos Rd. Murneta. CA 92563 ATTN: Paul Zolfaghari OuRECEIVED o y Qf RIVOMfde BUilding & Safety OCT 01 2002 MURRIETA DATE: 9/23/02 RBF JOB No: 15- 100312 REFERENCE' School DESCRIPTION: Rough Grading SENT To YOU VIA: ❑ Mail ❑ Your Pick -Up ❑ Overnight Delivery (Carrier) ❑ Email X RBF Messenger ❑ Messenger (Other Courier) No. of No. of DESCRIPTION Copies Originals 3 5 Revised Tract 23065 -2 Rough Grading 1 1 Notice of Intent Tract 23065 -2 1 1 Receipt of Notice of,lntent SENT FOR YOUR: ❑ Files REMARKS: . COPIES TO: X Approval ❑ Review ❑ Comments ❑ Per Your Request ❑ Signature Use ❑ Information ❑ • 1/ ' I] .�• • T• Design Engineer •- Region PLANNING ■ DESIGN 0 CONSTRUCTION 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 92591 -4679 ■ 909 676 8042 • Fax 909 676 7240 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada • www RBFcom COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATIONAND LAND MANAGEMENT Building and Safety Department MEMORANDUM T.H. Ingram Director Date: September 25, 2002 TO: Stuart E. Mckibbin Flood Control and Water Conservation District Stop #2990 From: Paul Zolfaghari Building and Safety, Engineering Services Division Stop #5155 RE: REFERENCE COPY OF GRADING PLAN LOG NO. 021053 TRACT 23065 -2 (SCHOOL SITE) The proposed grading plan for the above project is submitted for plan review to this department. Clearance from Flood Control District is required prior to the issuance of grading permit. Please send us the clearance or comments for the proposed project. 39493 Los Alamos Rd, Mumeta, CA 92563 PH (909)600 -6118 FAX (909)600 -6145 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT Building and Safety Department MEMORANDUM T.H. Ingram Director Date: September 25, 2002 TO: Khaled Othman Transportation Department, Review Division Stop #2016 From: Paul Zolfaghari Building and Safety, Engineering Services Division Stop #5155 RE: REFERENCE COPY OF GRADING PLAN LOG NO. 021053 TRACT 23065 -2 (SCHOOL SITE) The proposed grading plan for the above project is submitted for plan review to this department. Clearance from Transportation Department is required prior to the issuance of grading permit. Please send us the clearance or comments for the proposed project. 39493 Los Alamos Rd, Murrieta, CA 92563 PH (909)600-6118 FAX (909)600 -6145 A TO THE APPLICANT: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Building and Safety Department T. H. Ingram Director DATE: September 26, 2002 The following list of corrections needs your attention and follow -up. Please revise the plans and supporting calculations, if any, and resubmit these recheck including a correction response. Indicate on the corrected plan where the corrections are made and clearly distinguish all revisions using clouds, revision triangles, etc. so plan check can be accomplished in a timely manner. BUILDING AND SAFETY, GRADING DIVISION >> PLAN CHECK CORRECTIONS << • SITE: Tract 23065 -2 Rough Grade (School Site) • P/C LOG #: BGR 021053 �9 111: 17 1"Ia131'AF.17if Wei ItT7t''1iAa� Phone: (909) 600 -6194 Fax: (909) 600 -6145 002 Obtain Flood Control approval prior to approval of grading plans. <CONDITION> 03 Obtain Transportation Department approval prior to approval of grading plans. <CONDITION> A reference copy of the grading plan submitted has been forwarded to the Transportation Department (Plan Check Division) for inter - departmental processing. Unless otherwise directed by Transportation Department staff, no further action is required by the applicant. However, for situations considered to be urgent, inquiries regarding grading clearance status from the Transportation Department may be directed to Mr. Eric Fletcher (phone 909 - 955- 6761). OObtain Planning Department approval and clearance for all items of Condition 60 before grading plans can be approved. <CONDITION> County of Riverside, South County Office 0 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 0 Phone: (909) 600 -6100 000Fax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPImCheck'remplate I .doc 06 Construction activities including but not limited to clearing, grading or excavation of land, which disturbs 5 acres or more, or on sites which are part of a larger common plan of development which disturbs 5 acres or more are required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) and shall before grading permit to submit the following: 1ok' A copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) filed with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) including discharger's identification number. IN The name, address and phone number (including 24 -hour of the person responsible for implementing, inspecting and reporting of the site Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plan (S WPPP). Any change of such person, address or phone number shall be filed within 24 hours with the Department of Building and Safety and shall include the grading log number. Full text of the County NPDES requirements are available in the County Ordinance 457. 083 Bond is required prior to grading permit. Contact Steve Dondalski at phone (909) 955 -2000 extension 57793. <0457> 084 Bonds and erosion landscape plans are required prior to grading permit. Contact Steve Dondalski at phone (909) 955 -2000 extension. This is not a balanced job. Indicate precise location of export placement prior to approval of grading plans. <B0302> 4 02 rovide street names, edge of pavement, right of way dimension, direction of flow, and grades of streets and TC/FL elevations as indicated below: <B3309> 6.406rrect 45.34/TC for Deer Hollow Way, sheet 2. Clarify the surface/subsurface drainage and elevations for Deer Hollow Way, sheet 3. Refer to the red - line copy of pltaa' . 'VM A' wd7 A"." I TN lr '► S a, lI an"'Show original ground contours and contour elevations legibly on sheets 2 -5. <B3309> tOf Show daylight line of all cuts/fills. <130302> V2 Show or correct proposed contours, grades and elevations as indicated below: <B3309> $}(w elevation of contour line northerly of contour 1146.5, sheet 2. ,,Aow elevations of top of slopes easterly of Pala Road, sheet 2. County of Riverside, South County Office 0 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 0 Phone: (909) 600 -6100 000Fax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPlanCheckTemplate a.doc 2 Show proposed contours southerly of Deer Hollow Way, sheet 2. Show elevation of toe of slope northerly of Pechanga Road, sheet 4. Show proposed contours for the area westerly of Primrose Ave., sheet 4. Also clarify the FG elevation at the southerly comer of pad. Show elevation at toe of slope westerly of cross - section of Peach Tree Street and Primrose Ave., sheet 5. 032 Show the location and details of all surface and subsurface drainage facilities on plan as indicated below: <B3315> Show typical details of swale shown on sheets 2 -5 or clarify by providing proposed contours on the plan. ,iarify on the plan how drainage is being handled at low point of swales. Refer to sheets 2 and 4. r onsite stone drains adjacent to Deer Hollow Way, clarify the inlets, size, and elevations. Refer to Meet 2. in details all surface and subsurface drainage facilities on the plan. 033 inimum lot drainage towards (future) drainage swales is 2% for cut/fill greater than 10' and 1% for cut/fill 10' or less. Comply at: <B3315> f,.8heets 3 and 4. Please refer to red line copy of plan. JYJgo�minimum grade for drainage is 1 %. Comply at: <B3315> Sheets2 -5. Please refer to red line copy of plan. 6A69 Show location of retaining walls, including elevations of top of wall and footings, on the plan. Comply at: <B3309> Retaining walls on sheet 5. Show elevations of TW /TF or FG /TW on the plan. 0?6010,f retaining walls are proposed, a separate permit is required. Add `BY A SEPARATE PERMIT" to SECTION D, sheet 5. <B 1609 0457 _ / Please show /correct the information on the plan as indicated below: County of Riverside, South County Office U 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 D Phone: (909) 600 -6100 DDOFax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPlanCheckTemplate I.doc ow adequate overlay to match the grade; see MATCHLINE sheets 2 -5. ✓" "ass refer to red line copy of plan and clarify the symbols, lines, etc. on sheets 2, 3, and 5. ,P61'Indicate "SCHOOL SITE" on the Title Block or Title Sheet. In addition, indicate on the plan "N.A.P." for the area southerly of Primrose Ave., sheet 5. <P009> information only: After issuance of a permit authorizing rough grading work, a permit authorizing finish grading work shall be obtained regardless of finish grading quantities of excavation or fill. 010 Upon completion/approval of plan review and prior to the issuance of grading permit, five blue line sets of the approved grading plans shall be submitted to this department. All sets, including all sheets of plans, shall be wet signed and stamped by the engineer of record. Note: Please submit two revised copies of detailed plans for further review. County of Riverside, South County Office 0 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 0 Phone: (909) 600 -6100 00017ax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPlanChmkTemplate I Am 4 TO THE APPLICANT: R.13 r t'Ax 6 7� - 7210 A77-7-N. S4AZABo-rH IOV.STf D �l SS=Zoz3 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATIONAND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Building and Safety Department T H. vtgram Director DATE: October 02, 2002 The following list of corrections needs your attention and follow -up. Please revise the plans and supporting calculations, if any, and resubmit these recheck including a correction response. Indicate on the corrected plan where the corrections are made and clearly distinguish all revisions using clouds, revision triangles, etc. so plan check can be accomplished in a timely manner. BUILDING AND SAFETY, GRADING DIVISION >> PLAN CHECK CORRECTIONS << • SITE: Tract 23065 -2 Rough Grade (School Site) • P/C LOG # : BGR 021053 B • PREPARED BY: Paul Zolfaghari, P.E. Phone: (909) 600 -6194 Fax: (909) 600 -6145 "' t�'BiObtain Flood Control approval prior to approval of grading plans. <CONDITION> 12 tl 1 Obtain Transportation Department approval prior to approval of grading plans. <CONDITION> U A reference copy of the grading plan submitted has been forwarded to the Transportation Department (Plan Check Division) for inter - departmental processing. Unless otherwise directed by Transportation Department staff, no further action is required by the applicant. However, for situations considered to be urgent, inquiries regarding grading clearance status from the Transportation Department may be directed to Mr. Eric Fletcher (phone 909 - 955- 6761). Obtain Planning Department approval and clearance for all items of Condition 60 before grading plans 0 can be approved. <CONDITION> County of Riverside, South County Office 0 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 Phone: (909)600 -6100 000Fax: (909)600 -6145 RevPlanCheckTemplate I .doc 068 Construction activities including but not limited to clearing, grading or excavation of land, which disturbs 5 acres or more, or on sites which are part of a larger common plan of development which disturbs 5 acres or more are required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) and shall before grading permit to submit the following: B. The name, address and phone number (including 24 -hour emergency phone number) of the person responsible for implementing, inspecting and reporting of the site Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Any change of such person, address or phone number shall be filed within 24 hours with the Department of Building and Safety and shall include the grading log number. Full text of the County NPDES requirements are available in the County Ordinance 457. �1 83 Bond is required prior to grading permit. Contact Steve Dondalski at phone (909) 955 -2000 extension 57793. <0457> 1.4 X Bonds and erosion landscape plans are required prior to grading permit. Contact Steve Dondalski at phone (909) 955 -2000 extension. 020 Provide street names, edge of pavement, right of way dimension, direction of flow, and grades of streets and TC/FL elevations as indicated below: <B3309> Clarify the surface /subsurface drainage and elevations for Deer Hollow Way, sheet 3. Refer to the area adjacent to storm drain headwall. n 032 Show the location and details of all surface and subsurface drainage facilities on plan as indicated below: <B3315> Show typical details of drainage swale shown on sheets 2 -5 or clarify by providing proposed contours on the plan. V 033 Minimum lot drainage towards (future) drainage swales is 2% for cut/fi11 greater than 10' and I% for cut/fill 10' or less. Comply at: <B3315> Areas northerly and westerly of temporary detention basin, sheet 2. Area northwesterly of PE=I 148.6, sheet 3. The drainage for areas southeasterly of PE=I 152.0 and easterly of PE=I 152.5 is directed towards the pad; please clarify /correct. County of Riverside, South County Office U 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 0 Phone: (909) 600 -6100 000Fax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPlanCheckTemplate I .doe Upon completion/approval of plan review and prior to the issuance of grading permit, five blue line L7 U/ sets of the approved grading plans shall be submitted to this department. All sets, including all sheets of plans, shall be wet signed and stamped by the engineer of record. Note: Please submit one revised copy for further review. In addition, include a note on the plan indicating that proposed grade and drainage swales shown are temporary and for mass grading only. The precise grading will comply with all the requirements of UBC as amended by Ordinance 457. County of Riverside, South County Office U 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A 0 Murrieta, California 92563 0 Phone: (909) 600 -6100 000Fax: (909) 600 -6145 RevPlanCheckTemplatel doc 1;7 HR Engineering, Inc. Engineers Planners Surveyors FOUNDERS Curds E. Hawkins Charles E. Robertson OCTOBER 9, 2002 KHALED OTHMAN SENIOR MANAGING ENGINEER RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P O BOX 1090 RIVERSIDE CA 92502 -1090 Mp B( „� 67)x5,3 RE: TRACT 23065 -2 ROUGH GRADING PLAN PLAN CHECK NO. 8 Dear Mr. Othman PRINCIPALS Dale G. Gladding Alex R Cabral As requested by the Riverside County.Flood Control District, HR Engineering has completed Plan Check No. 8 for the subject project In accordance with the conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map 23065, as.adopted by the Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988, the following plans, prepared by RBF Consulting, have been submitted to the District on September 25, 2002 for review: Revised Rough Grading Plan — Temecula Valley Unified School District High School site, printed September 30, 2002, consisting of 5 sheets. The following are comments for the Engineer's review and /or revisions as necessary: The westerly portion of the site adjacent to Pala Road is in the Pechanga Creek 100 -year flood plain. No grading is permitted on this site until a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA. Reference is made to the letter from Mekbib Degaga of the Flood Control District, dated May 8, 2002, in response to an application for a CLOMR, "If the levee is to be considered a flood control facility and be credited to provide flood protection for the purposes of the CLOMR, it has to meet the criteria set in CFR 44 Part 65.10 of the National Blood Insurance Program (NFIP) (enclosed). A public entity must maintain the levee to be accepted by FEMA. Proof of maintenance by a public entity shall be included in the CLOMR package.” 2. "'The District is willing to maintain this levee once it is shown to meet the District's Standards and the criteria 'set in CFR 44, Part 65.10 of -the NFIP. A.plan and profile of the levee shall be submitted. The levee shall be protected with concrete facing and/or rip rap. The proper easements,' including maintenance access roads on the top and at the bottom of the levee, shall be obtained. 1919 Atlas Drive. Suite A / Riverside, California 92501 / (9091684-9522 / FAX (909) 684 -2146 hrengineers@aol com P` KHALED OTHMAN TRACT 23065 -2 OCTOBER 9, 2002 PAGE 3. The Plan and Profile Plans of the levee shall conform to the District's Drafting Manual. The City of Perris must ensure that the developer has obtained a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction permit prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Sincerely, '6-t, & DALE G. GLAI CIVIL ENGINE STUART E. McKIBBIN, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT c: RBF Consulting Attn: Elizabeth Lovsted Department of Building & Safety Attn: Tony Ramsamocj Riverside County Flood Control District Attn: Mekbib Degaga 02 -1246 pck\cg1W30860 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT To:li. Ls VS Fax: ` 7 % '7 Z vo Date: I I I --e l O -t• Subject: FAX TRANSMITTAL From: RQKSF. Dt LPG t`LO Phone: (4000 — 40 (01-0 Pages: t ttL t 3c4s -z. scHoaL SITE. Comments: 5uppLEMEf4TAL DEROS11- REJa?'D -Z C09TUJU£ WOP1K ON Youlz P2ovEGT r Case #: 000.10 S3 ZIA P Amount: (Sw- *a CdSe #: A P D Amount: Case #: A P D I Amount: Case #: A P D Amount: TOTAL Please take this sheet to the Cashier at time of 326-001 8/97 payment `• . Thank You . el To: VS T From: Fax: & ? ` ? s vO REKEE DELPiKO - GRADI u S Phone: (,000- 40 1 010 Date: t i I-&-* IQ z' Pages: t subject: TtL Z3c*T -Z 9—*t'°Q1 S'TE Comments: 5VppLEMeJ1TP.L. DEMSIr REQ'D lb C09TIOUS WOP1K ON YduR Ppl" EGT Case #: A P Amount: Case #: A P Amount: TOTALi loo -oo Alease taLre this sheet to the Cashier at time of 326-001 vex paymeoF' ` ~•. Thank You N 0 * T A ount: ISM -C4 Case #: O 1 S3 A p o a�oN lInsad sa6ed awtl liels Amount: Case #: A P D Case #: A P Amount: Case #: A P Amount: TOTALi loo -oo Alease taLre this sheet to the Cashier at time of 326-001 vex paymeoF' ` ~•. Thank You OS:ST ZOOZ OZ AoN T'd 4 *� -4-- a0 daZ1 -IuOD � TWSUIe..iL SVT9- 009 - 606 :Xp3 3QISdGAId bo AiNnoD N 0 * T 6V,O 6b:ST'OZ -IHWNON OVU -9296 a�oN lInsad sa6ed awtl liels apoW .aagwnN auogdajal OS:ST ZOOZ OZ AoN T'd 4 *� -4-- a0 daZ1 -IuOD � TWSUIe..iL SVT9- 009 - 606 :Xp3 3QISdGAId bo AiNnoD December 16, 2002 City of Temecula Public Works Department 43200 Business Park D ,v,.Temecula, CA 92590-Mailing Address, PO Box 9033-Temecula, CA 92559 -9033 19091 694 -64 1 1 • Fax 19091 694 -6475 County of Riverside Department of Buildin_e & Safety Grading Section P. O. Box 1440 Riverside, CA 92502 Re: Deer Hollow — High School Site Grading Permit To Whom It May Concern: At the request of the Temecula Valley Unified School District, we have reviewed the Grading Plans and Hydrology Report prepared for the District's High School #3 project as it relates to any potential affects on the drainage system through downstream properties located within the City of Temecula. The grading project includes a three -acre by two feet deep on -site retention basin. The Hydrology Report prepared by the District's Civil Engineers, Cornerstone Group, demonstrates that when the school site is fully developed and all buildings and hardscape areas have been completed, the retention basin is sufficiently sized to ensure that there will be no incremental increase in runoff leaving the school site versus the current undeveloped site. Although the City has not completed it's review and several minor items need to be addressed, as a result of this conceptual design and analysis, the City of Temecula has no objections to the commencement of site grading for the High School #3 project. If you have any questions or need further clarification, you may contact me at (909) 694 -6411. Very truly yours, Ronald J. Parks Deputy Director of Public Works RJP:aa 12. \PARRSR\2002 \letters \COR_Deerl lollow HS doc ® Printed on Reryow PePei 11 8 0—& 5 4 /1 12/18/2002 09:31 FAX TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES SERVICES DEPARTMENT 31350 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, CA 92592 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET DATE: December 18, 2002 TO: Abdul Behnawa COMPANY: Riverside County Grading Department FAX: (909) 600 -6145 FROM: Dave Gallaher PHONE: (909) 506 -7914 FAX: (909) 695 -7114 RE: High School #3 Number of pages, including cover sheet: MESSAGE: 2 Ig 001 12%18/2002 09:32 FAX December 16, 2002 19 002 City of Temecula Public Works Department 43200 Business ParX Drlve•Temecula, CA 92590•Mailing At)dress: P.O. Box 9033.1 "eme[ula, CA 92589 -9033 (9091 694.641 1 • Fax 19091 694 -6475 County of Riverside Department of Buildine & Safety Grading Section P. O. Box 1440 Riverside, CA 92502 Re: Deer Hollow — High School Site Grading Permit To Whom It May Concern: At the request of the Temecula Valley Unified School District, we have reviewed the Grading Plans and Hydrology Report prepared for the District's High School #3 project as it relates to any potential affects on the drainage system through downstream properties located within the City of Temecula. The grading project includes a three -acre by two feet deep on -site retention basin. The Hydrology Report prepared by the District's Civil Engineers, Cornerstone Group, demonstrates that when the school site is fully developed and all buildings and hardscape areas have been completed, the retention basin is sufficiently sized to ensure that there will be no incremental increase in runoff leaving the school site versus the current undeveloped site. Although the City has not completed it's review and several minor items need to be addressed, as a result of this conceptual design and analysis, the City of Temecula has no objections to the commencement of site grading for the High School #3 project. If you have any questions or need further clarification, you may contact me at (909) 694 -6411. Very truly yours, Ronald J. Parks Deputy Director of Public Works "ram. R:\PARKSR \2002 \lct eis\COR DccrViollow IIS.doc 9 PiIXea on Iie[yrlat Pa(kr o� 5- 7-r . i / /, /a 3 b,,-.(2. �p �e- 5-�S �S -sq., -�-< �� or , `LL X , -5 -&�, cZ, P. "'P o, , [Abdul Behnawa - Re: Grading permit for Temecula Valley High School Page 1 From: Dave Stahovich To: Juan Perez; Marshall Lee Date: 1/10/03 3:24PM Subject: Re: Grading permit for Temecula Valley High School Juan: believe you are referring to the grading permit and not the building permit. Also, the perimeter roads are Pala Rd., Deer Hollow Way, Peach Tree St., Primrose St. and Pechenga. Thanks. ...Dave >>> Juan Perez 01/10/03 03:19PM >>> Marshall: The Transportation - Department agrees to clearing the building permit for the subject site, which I understand needs to be done-today. Please add a condition on the permit that they need to comply with the terms of the agreement going to the Board of Supervisors on Jan. 14, 2003, and that they will need to have constructed, by October 2003, full -width road and drainage improvements on the perimeter of the school site, as well as traffic signals at Deerhollow /Pala and Deerhollow /Peachtree. Please advise if we need to do anything further from our end to clear the permit. Thanks for your assistance. CC: Abdul Behnawa; George Johnson; Khaled Othman; Nick Anderson; Stuart McKibbin; Tim Davis G A4"-jr- H5 To C-0 ul P L-7 bIN To T—H"C i oAA-P SL-c fk�A- 0tJ 3AN 14, Z�� 3 A tJO 1'l}A I -OH 6-L( 0610 C/r 60 N5M- NC_Tco b U Gi'U �,+vlL 'Loo 3 1'U LL _ w I D'! H 9-0A P A 0 D flP- AlntAc INQN— aJl�wtF. aJ�S oN -r(fi-FL �fL c �"f(L7f�iZ O� TNT S�l�vuL S�T�, As wKL-L /� �ri�,ti llvt,Lo wA^t L-A m 'TsL1�� fL ST,� P >Z 1 rat (C-a 5 S 7 / A" / -,� )1/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page:.l 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 3RADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS EVERY DEPARTMENT 10. EVERY. 1 SP -SP 217 CONSIST OF Parcel: 962 - 020 -002 Specific Plan No. 217 shall consist of the following: a. Exhibit "A ": Specific Plan Text b. Exhibit "B Specific Plan Conditions of Approval 10. EVERY. 2 SP - PRECEDENCE If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the specific plan text or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence. 10. EVERY. 3 SP - CONFORM TO ORD'S AND LAWS The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of all Riverside County ordinances including Ordinances Nos. 348 and 460 and state laws; and shall conform substantially with adopted Specific Plan No. 217 as filed in the office of the Riverside County Planning Department, unless otherwise amended. 10. EVERY. 4 SP - CHANGE, WAIVE OR MODIFY No portion of the specific plan which purports or proposes to change, waive or modify any ordinance or other legal requirement for the development shall be considered to be part of the adopted specific plan. 10. EVERY. 5 SP - COMPLY W /AGENCIES The project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the following agency letters and /or the requirements set forth by these agencies at the development stage: a. Road Department: February 23, 1988 b. Flood Control: February 23, 1988 c. Fire Department: February 10, 1988, February 24, 1988 d. Sewer Agency: February 5, 1988 e. Health Department: January 26, 1988 f. County Geologist: February 24, 1988 g. County Administrative Office: February 24, 1988 INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 2 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10. EVERY SP -HOLD HARMLESS Parcel: 962- 020 -002 The applicant or its successor shall defend indemnify, and hold harmless the County of Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul an approval of the County of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Specific Plan No. 217. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the applicant or its successor of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the County of Riverside fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the County of Riverside. 10. EVERY. 7 SP - CONFORM TO UBC All development in the project area will conform to Uniform Building Code Standards related to groundshaking. 10. EVERY. 8 SP - CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS The following summarizes our findings regarding the fiscal impact analysis for the project identified above. The appendiz attached summarizes the basic assumptions used in analysis. Please note that these results reflect the current levels of service provided by the County based on Fiscal Year 1986 -1987 actual cost (per capita factor) and Departmental and Auditor - Controller review of operations and facility costs for services reviewed using case study analysis. Staff to the Growth Fiscal Impact Task Force and Departments are currently reviewing service levels provided and the need to increase the levels of service. Current findings are that existing levels of service are not adequate in most cases. Should the desired level of service be utilized in the fiscal analysis performed, it would significantly increase the costs associated with this development. Facility Agency Funding Source (Shortfall) 1. Fire Station County Fire Fire Mitigation Fees 2. Rancho Library Library Library Mitigation INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 3 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 Parcel: 962 - 020 -002 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10. EVERY. 8 SP - CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS (cont.) INEFFECT Fees Flood Control See Note 4 below The following special circumstances apply to this project and mitigation measures should be considered: 1. The fiscal impact analysis prepared assumes a service ration of 1.5 patrol deputies per 100 population. The CAO consultant's analysis assumes the current level of service of .85 deputies per 1000 population. The Sheriff's Department has indicated that the current level of service is inadequate. 2. The fiscal impact analysis prepared estimates library costs on a per capita cost higher than current library staff estimates, and provides no estimate of the project share of capital costs associated with the new Rancho California Library. CAO staff has therefore reviewed library costs with Library personnel and incorporated operations and maintenance costs into the analysis. Using Library staff estimates of the costs of providing the current level of service, the increase in population from this project should result in a one -time capital facility cost of $464,500 (library space, volumes). Library staff has indicated that the current level of service is not adequate. However, this project would be served by the proposed Rancho California branch for which a $100 per unit mitigation fee would be collected and used in conjunction with other funding sources. The fiscal analysis prepared includes revenue from 28 acres of commercial property developed into 304,920 square feet of retail sales area at buildout. Although no market absorption analysis has been provided or requested for this project, there is some question as to the ability of the projected population to support significant retail facilities early in the development process. Other specific plan proposals in the vicinity also contain significant commercial components, complicating the ability of the local population to support significant commercial facilities. The review analysis utilizes a value of $145 sales tax /square foot indicated in the fiscal analysis provided. The fiscal analysis provided does not assess the 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 4 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 Parcel: 962- 020 -002 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10. EVERY. 8 SP - CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS (cont.) (cont.) operations and maintenance cost associated with Flood Control District facilities required in this project. Discussions with Flood Control staff indicates no contact was made with their office to discuss the project's fiscal impacts on the Flood Control District. According to David Sheldon, Senior Civil Engineer with the District, property tax generated within Flood Control Zone 7 has historically been insufficient to fund operations and maintenance costs for necessary flood control facilities. It is therefore anticipated that insufficient revenue will be generated within the project to provide for maintenance of facilities within the project. Fees collected from the area drainage plan should generate sufficient revenue to construct new facilities. Flood Control staff indicated that possible mitigation measures for maintenance revenue shortfall could be a cash deposit, or the formation of an assessment district. The use of a County Service Area for the maintenance of major drainage facilities was specifically not recommended. 5. CSA 4143 is proposed to maintain two parks (totaling 29.2 acres), all open space, and parkways in the project. 10. EVERY. 9 SP - LANDSCAPING TO REDUCE NOI Areas adjacent to roadways will use landscaping measures such as vegetated berms, trees and decorative block walls to reduce noise impacts from traffic. 10. EVERY. 10 Hillside Design: SP - HILLSIDE DESIGN Most areas of twenty -five (25) percent slopes or greater will be designated as open space. 10. EVERY. 11 SP -WATER TANK PLACEMENT It is recommended that the Rancho California Water District place the proposed water tank outside of the Redhawk Specific Plan area, southwest of E1 Chamisal Road. Topographic maps show that if the tank should rupture, the INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT X1 /10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 5 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 Parcel: 962- 020 -002 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10. EVERY. 11 SP -WATER TANK PLACEMENT (cont.) resultant flow would initially move away from the property then turn back and enter the site at the golf course and open space area. BS GRADE DEPARTMENT 10.BS GRADE. 1 SP - GRADED SLOPES LANDSCAPED Graded slopes will be landscaped in accordance to County Standards. 10.BS GRADE. 2 SP - GRADING DURING RAINY SEAS Grading that occurs during rainy periods will include sand bagging and desiltation basins in on -site grading activities as necessary. 10.BS GRADE. 3 SP -DUST CONTROL Water trucks will be used to control dust. 10.BS GRADE. 4 SP - EARTHEN DIKES Earthen dikes will be temporarily placed along the perimeter of drainage courses in accordance to Department of Building and Safety directives. 10.BS GRADE. 5 SP - PALEONTOLOGIST PRESENT A paleontologist will be present during grading operations to recover any fossils associated with the Pauba Formation. 10.BS GRADE. 6 SP -LOOSE ALLUVIAL FAN MATERI The removal and recompaction of near surface loose alluvial soils, as well as the addition of compacted fill materials will reduce the potential for liquefaction. E HEALTH DEPARTMENT 10.E HEALTH. 1 SP -SEWER FACILITIES General : Throughout the document it is stated that the Rancho Villages Assessment District is the proposed funding vehicle to provide the required sewer facilities. In the event the proposed assessment district is unable to provide INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 6 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 Parcel: 962- 020 -002 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10.E HEALTH. 1 SP -SEWER FACILITIES (cont.) these facilities other means for their provision must be made. 10.E HEALTH. 2 SP -EMWD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT General: Some, but not all, of the proposed project is in EMWD's Improvement District U -8 (refer to the attached map). Annexation of these areas currently not in the improvement district to U -8 is required before sewer service can be provided. 10.E HEALTH. 3 SP - EFFLUENT DISPOSAL General: We request that more consideration be given to the issue of effluent disposal. Treated effluent use is required for this project unless other mitigations for effluent disposal can be presented. FIRE DEPARTMENT 10.FIRE. 1 SP -WATER MAINS & HYDRANTS All water mains and fire hydrants providing required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the appropriate sections of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and /or No. 546 subject to the approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. 10.FIRE. 2 SP -FIRE PROT IMPACT MIT PROG The project proponents shall participate in the fire protection impact mitigation program as adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. 10.FIRE. 3 SP - FUNDING SOURCE FISCAL IMP Fiscal impact analysis for this project must include a funding source for ongoing operation and maintenance of fire protection services. Annual service costs equate to $100.00 per dwelling unit and $.19 per square foot for retail, commercial and industrial. INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 7 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 10.PLANNING. 1 SP -EA CONDUCTED Parcel: 962- 020 -002 An environmental assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, plot plan, specific plan amendment, or any other discretionary permit required to implement the specific plan. At a minimum, the environmental assessment shall utilize the evaluation of impacts addressed in the EIR prepared for Specific Plan No. 217. 10.PLANNING. 2 SP - ADDITIONAL FAULT STUDIES We, Earth Research and Associates, recommend that additional faultstudies be performed in the Alquist - Priolo Special Studies Zone at the southwest portion of the project and along the north west trending lineaments of the wolf Valley fault mapped by Kennedy, 1977, within the site. These studies should be considered in the design phases and conditions of approval for projects covered by the subject specific plan. 10.PLANNING. 3 SP - SUBDIV COMPLY W /SP 217 The subdivider or any successor -in- interest shall comply with the provisions of Specific Plan 217. 10.PLANNING. 4 SP -LOTS CREATED Lots created by a tentative map shall be in conformance with the development standards of Specific Plan 217. TRANS DEPARTMENT 10.TRANS. 1 Road Grades: SP -ROAD GRADES All roads within and connecting the property will be fifteen (15) percent gradient or less. 10.TRANS. 2 SP -HWY 79 WIDENED Highway 79 should be widened to a six -lane expressway from I -15 to Anza Road, as delineated by CalTrans guidelines. INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 01/10/03 Riverside County LMS Page: 8 16:23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GRADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 Parcel: 962 - 020 -002 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS 10.TRANS. 3 SP -ROAD IMPROVEMENTS INEFFECT All road improvements within the project boundaries shall be constructed to ultimate County Standards in accordance with Ordinance No. 460 and 461 as a requirement of the implementing subdivisions for the Specific Plan, subject to approval by the Road Commissioner. 10.TRANS. 4 SP - TRAFFIC SIGNAL MITIGATION INEFFECT The project proponent shall participate in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as approved by the Board of Supervisors. 10.TRANS. 5 SP - LANDSCAPING W /ROAD RIGHTS INEFFECT Any landscaping within public road rights of way will require approval by the Road Commissioner and assurance of continuing maintenance through the establishment of a landscape maintenance district or similar mechanism as approved by the Road Commissioner. 10.TRANS. 6 SP -NEW HIGHWAY CORRIDORS INEFFECT Caltrans has expressed concerns relative to cumulative impacts and the need to implement demand management strategies or provide for the development of additional highway corridors. It is our understanding that Caltrans is requesting a study of new highway corridors to address increasing demands. This project shall participate in such study in a manner as prescribed by Caltrans. 90. PRIOR TO BLDG FINAL INSPECTION DEPARTMENT 90•• 2 BP - PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADE APPR INEFFECT ALL IMPROVEMENTS, ON -SITE AND OFF SI APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED BY OCTOBER 2003. INCLUDE FULL -WIDTH ROAD AND DRAINAGE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT AND TRAFFIC PALA AND DEERHOLLOW /PEACHTREE. rE,AS PER AGREEMENT ON JANUARY 14, 2003 THESE IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SIGNALS AT DEERHOLLOW/ )1 /10/03 16:23 Riverside County LMS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1RADING PERMIT Permit No: BGR021053 90. PRIOR TO BLDG FINAL INSPECTION B &S DEPARTMENT L:Z Parcel: 962 - 020 -002 BP* - WALL /FENCE LOCATION Wall and /or fence locations shall conform to the approved wall and fence treatment program for Specific Plan No. 217. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 90.PLANNING. 2 BP* - LANDSCAPE /IRRIG INSTALL All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. 90.PLANNING. 2 BP* - LANDSCAPE /IRRIG INSPECT All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by a Planning Department field inspection. 90.PLANNING. 2 BP* - ACOUSTICAL STUDY Not withstanding pother conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. Page: 9 INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT INEFFECT 'RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER.CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995:b0JdMT STREET RIVERSIDE, CA .92501 -1770 VOICE: 909/955-•1200 FAX:,909/684 -8409 a*'x* transmittal PAGES.: 4 , including cover sheet. a2 AT TN,- FAX NUMBER; DU FROM: DATE: RE: -4v--T S -- C,h, r S: � cteaYD, caw DL c :m - N Crsvc:klav-z -41.9. s�LA - j'n`i42 1 p,?�0351 ��.e s�5ep�`��oalNOO a0o-p #3 lf&VQti�CL Gw`E ldu� rS� • Ttp :E0 E0. 0L wuf N 1995 MARKET STREET DAVID P. ZAPPE, ��q ^py RIVERSIDE. CA 9:501 Oe dMaOager- ChiefEnginecr o �� 9091275•f200 m a 909/799.9965 FAX c I - RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Date, ) xwA& CLEARANCE .NO. - TLMA/191dg. Safety Dept. -Land, Use Division Attention: (requestor)- Regarding Log No. Fax CLEARANCE CHECKLIST CASENO, r Z000 - G- LOT NO(S). 7he FEE Ci leo'RANCE (PAID ?) Yes No G PFRMIT CLgARANCE Rough [ 1 [ Mass [ 1 [ J Precise Lot No(s). �� �.,,,c{ Jam, [ l bcl All ar��;d4cdai7U�ar.hl� ' �i. _ l 1 d (Dc'k b� 4j,Z CO2 cLV(?-uLY!lC'.rP� fit) , `'�� 1SJ eUl DING2 RMIT CLF RA ANCE NCB [ l [ 1 �La.SrS) .1�\ -owe jF, t-A gCCUPANCY PI`QMIT CLEARANGE Revised 3 /14197.HLD (RCFCRWCD) pzre, k O. MASTER(Clear(rm) Signature ( �/ Print Name Phone Number� 3� 6,5 -108iHOD Q0071 WdTO:EO E0, OT Hdf y. a HR Engineering, Inc. Engineers Planners Surveyors PR, Pat mg NCFA9 pale G aiedd Epy�F� AMA Alex R. Cabmi' Chafes E RObercn OCTOBER 9, 2002 KHALED OTSMAN SENIOR MANAGING ENGINEER RMR$MlL COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P O Edx 1090 RMRSME CA '92502-10.90 RF: • TRACT 23065 -2 ROUGH GRADING PLAN PLAN CH1iCK NO, 8 Dear Mr, Othman As requested by the Riverside County Flood Control District, HR Engineering has completed Plan Check No. 8 for the subject project. In accordance with the conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map 23065, as adopted by the Board.of ,. Supervisors on November 8, 1988, the following plans, prepared by RBp Consulting, have been sub'mittad to the District on September 25, 2002 for review: 1. Revised Rough Grading Plan — Temecula Valley Unified Sohool District High Schooli site printed September 30, 2002, consisting of S Sheets, The following are comments far the Engineer's review andlor revisions as necessary: 1. The westerly portion of the, site adjacent to Pala Road is in the Pechanga Creek 100 -year flood plain. No grading is permitted on this site until a (onditional Letter of Map Revision. (CLOMR) has barn received from FEMA. Reference is made to the letter from Mekbib Degaga,If the twee is be District, dated May 8, 2002, in response to an application for a CLOMR, considered .a flood control facility and be credited to provide flood protection for the purposes of the CLOMR, it has to meet the criteria set in CPR 44 Part 65.10 of the National Blood Insurance Pgr m (NFIF) (enclosed). A public entity must maintain the levee to be accepted by FEMA• Proof maintenance by a public entity shall be included in the CLOMR package" 2• The District is willing to maintain this levee once it shown profile of the levees District's Standards submitted d the criteria set in C1 R 44 Part 6510 of the NF1P. A p P levee shag be proteoted with concrete facing andlor rip rep. The proper easements, including maintenance access, roads on the top and at'the bottom of the levee, shall be obtained. t 919 Atlas Drive. Suite A / Riverside, California 92501 / 1gOa1 684.9522 / FAX (909) 684.2145 hrengineers®sol.com E "d -10b11,10J 0001) 1,i8T0:EO CO, OT Ndf WULED OTHMAN TRACT 23665.2 OCTOBER 9.2042 PAGE �. The. Plan and Profile Plans of the levee shall conform to the District's Drafting Manual. The City of Perris must ensure that the developer has obtained a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Syttem' OODHS) construction permit prior to the issuance of a grading permit. QQPpFESS�q�,�l Sincerely. C� CP , 4• . i No. 17D55 M DALE.G. GLADDING * Fxp.6.30.2005 ,* CIVIL ENGINEXR s CIViL P �� OF CA�1F 1.7=VAJRT E.' cMBIN; SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER . RIVERS01 COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND RATTER CONSERVATION DISTRICT c: RBF Consulting Attu: Elizabeth Lovsted Department of Building & Safety ,Attn: Tony'Ramsamcoj Riverside County Flood Control District Attn; Mekbib Degaga 02-12"4xkV,0030160' 7•d -10JINOD GOO-1A Wd20:£0 £0. 0L Ntlf n a CONSULTING LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: Riverside County Building & Safety 39493 Los Alamos Rd. Mun ieta, CA 92563 ATTN: Paul ZOlfagharl RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety JAN 2 3 2003 MURRIEM DATE: 1/23/2003 RBF JOB No: 15- 100312 REFERENCE: Tract 23065 -2 DESCRIPTION: Rough Grading SENT TO YOU VIA: ❑ Mail ❑ Blueprinter ❑ Overnight Delivery (Carrier) ❑ E -Mail ❑ Your Pick -Up ® RBF Messenger ❑ Messenger (Other Courier) No. of No. of DESCRIPTION Copies Originals 5 4 Rol Gradino l 021053D) 1 Plan Check SENT FOR YOUR: ❑ Approval ❑ Review ❑ Comments ❑ Per Your Request ❑ Files ❑ Signature ® Use ❑ Information ❑ REMARKS: 66 - -30 (,/-2, COPIES TO: RBF CONSULTING BY: 2k4j, Elizabeth Lovsred Design Engineer Riverside Region H \PDATA\ 15100312 \atlmm\Transmil\312tmv169 doc PLANNING O DESIGN O CONSTRUCTION 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 92591 -4679 • 909 676 8042 • Fax 909 676 7240 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada • www RBF com COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATIONAND LAND MANAGEMENT Building and Safety Department MEMORANDUM T.H. Ingram Director Date: January 27, 2003 TO: Stuart E. Mckibbin Flood Control and Water Conservation District Stop #2990 From: Paul Zolfaghari Building and Safety, Engineering Services Division Stop #5155 RE: REFERENCE COPY OF GRADING PLAN LOG NO. 021053 TRACT 23065 -2 A copy of approved proposed grading plan for the above project is sent for reference only. 39493 Los Alamos Rd, Mumeta, CA 92563 PH (909)600 -6118 FAX (909)600 -6145 WARREN D. WILLIAMS �OVdTr r o0 General Manager -Chief Engineer 0 i p a c �9r�NJ6RVAi lOH °xSS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT January 28, 2003 Mr. Khaled Othman Senior Managing Engineer Riverside County Transportation Department County Administrative Center Riverside, California Dear Mr. Othman: Re: Tract 23065 -2 Account No. 137 -0 -3 -0860 Storm Drain Plans 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 80531 1 This letter is in reference to the following storm drain plans for Tract 23065 -2, which have been reviewed and approved previously by the District on December 12, 2002: Deer Hollow Way Storm Drain, Pechanga Road Storm Drain, Primrose Street Storm Drain. plans, dated December 6, 2001, consisting of 30 sheets, received by the District December 9, 2002. The mylars are currently in the possession of the Transportation Department for your signature. This is to inform you that due to an agreement with the developer, Centex Homes, the following sheets should not be signed as they are no longer necessary: Sheets 2I, 9I, 16I, 17I, 18I 19I, 20I and 21I. Questions regarding this matter may be directed to Kris Flanigan of this office at 909.955.1283. c: Centex Homes Attn: Steve Alford Jeff Acker RBF Consultants Attn: Elizabeth Lovested Dept. of Building and Safety Attn: Tony Ramsamocj KF:slj Very truly yours, -� v-, V__ STUART E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer w r No. 44553 M Exp. 3 -31 -06 C 1V 1l. lair 0 0 CONSULTING March 17. 2003 Riverside County Department of Building & Safety Grading Division 39439 Los Alamos Rd., Suite A Murrieta, CA 92563 Subject: Centex Homes - Tentative Tract 23065 Street Base Grade To Whom It May Concern: RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety MAR 19 2003 MURRIETA JN 15100447.001 Based on a field survey performed on March 14, 2003 after installation of underground utilities, the Street Base Grade areas) listed below was (were) found to be in substantial conformance with the elevations dictated by the base and pavement sections also listed below. Those sections were obtained.from.the approved plan or from superseding section modifications determined by others. The tolerance of the observed check shots was within that stated in the "Greenbook" Standard Specifications 'for Public Works Construction as well as could be expected in normal and acceptable survey practice for this type of work. Street Name Anza Road From / To Station 58 +00/68 +83 Pavement Section Base Section 4 -3/8" Sincerely, �ND G. �qG Ernest G. Wade Exp.6 -30 05 Vice President, Surveying & Mapping u'! Riverside Region OF CgI�E�� _r cc: " . •Steve Alford' - Centex Homes 7" H \PDATA \15100447WDMIN \447.001 \LETTERS \447LTR006 DOC,. PLANNING B DESIGN O CONSTRUCTION 27555 Vnez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 92591 -4679 • 909.676.8042 • Fax 909.676.7240 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada • w .RBEcom a M4 CONSULTING RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety April 16, 2003 Mr. Abdul S. Behnawa APR 21. 2003 JN 15- 100312.002 Riverside County Building and Safety 39493 Los Alamos Rd. Murrieta, CA 92563 MURRIETA Subject: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grading Reference Project: Grading Log Number: BGR #0201053 Address: Deer Hollow Way and Pala Road Tract/PM 23065 -2 School Site Building Pads 1 -10 South East Parking Lot & Fields (As shown on the attached exhibit) Based on a field survey subsequent to the rough grading of the subject project, the area referenced above was found to be in substantial conformance (vertical tolerance of ±0.1') with the County of Riverside approved rough grade plans with respect to line and grade. No significant field changes were made, and the original grading plan may be considered adequate as an as -built grading plan. This approval is based upon a survey completed on April 16, 2003. Sincerely, Michael A. Tylma Vice President, Civil Engineering Riverside Region cc: John Leway, Garrett Group Dan Crown, Douglas E. Barnhart Frank Moore, Ninyo & Moore u TnATA 9IWILNDNITW r=RT lIMA 014 DOC e RCE 43090 EXP. -0/31/04 CNk PLANNING [3 DESIGN G CONSTRUCTION 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 92591-4679 • 909.676.8042 • Fax 909 676 7240 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada • www RBEcom r r + i r jf / S l / 1 I r � 'LIMIT OF r` CERTIFICATION,:: iN BAs/ %�" ;: CF \\ SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT I ROAD, � 40 In ■ TEECULA, CALF OR,A 9259-4679 HIGH SCHOOL SITE CONSULTING 909.676.8042 • FAX 909.676.7240 • w .RBF.cm SCALE JOB NO APRIL 16, 2003 1' =300' 15100312 E a W) 0 In 0 J W 3 0 cd 3 Q N O X W N N H m 2 X W / 3 O N M O O N a r a 0 a / TO: RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUILDING AND SAFETY RECEIVED GRADING DIVISION County of Riversi RIVERSIDE, HEMET OR INDIO DISTRICT OFFICE Building & Safety MAY 2 1 2003 RIVERSIDE DISTRI1 GRADING CONTRACTOR STATEMENT OF CONFORMANCE GRADING LOG NUMBER: -aCt oUoS3 PROJECT ADDRESS: � Z 2— Vk-o t(0LJ t lA to � ScLy k �a(P� TRACT /PARCEL MAP, etc: �Oc- L R c LOT (S) I I declare under penalty of perjury that the grading was done in accordance with the plans and specifications, ordinance 457, and the recommendations of the civil engineer, soils engineer and engineering geologist. It is understood that this statement of conformance includes. only the aspects of the work that can be determined by me, as a licensed grading contractor. The estimated cubic yards for this grading project were: EXCAVATION �/ % `� C.Y. FILL l �j ��� C.Y. IMPORT (IF ANY) EXPORT (IF ANY) GRADING CONTRACT C.Y D C9Od C. Y. OR 5 15 z 3 Silhatute Date LICENSE \�0.( G% 5 % NAME UA IR. U S-t- N C-- ADDRESS 1I 0 1J U --)6 3 l LL) PHONE NO. G'Q 2-,J ZC) 284.259 Grading 3/93 The Power to Change The Power to Build March 22, 2004 Mr. Khaled Othman Senior Managing Engineer Riverside County Transportation Department PO Box 1090 County Administrative Center Riverside, California 92502 -1090 Dear Mr. Othman: Re: Tract 23065 -2 Account No. 137 - 030 -0860 (Improvement Plan Ck. #10) As requested by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Berryman and Henigar has completed plan check number 10 for the subject project. The following plans, reports prepared by RBF Consulting have been submitted to the District for review: Pechanga Creek Levee Protection Plan, Drawing No. 7 -388, plotted March 2, 2004, consisting of 2 sheets. 2. Pechanga Creek Levee Protection Plan - mylars, Drawing No. 7 -388, plotted March 2, 2004, consisting of 2 sheets 3. First American Title Company preliminary report 4. RCFC & WCD Levee Easement Calculations. The following are comments for the engineer's review and /or revisions as necessary: GENERAL: 1. Correct drawing number on plans. 2. Please provide fill material between access road and piles as noted on plans. 2001 East First Street, Santa Ana, CA 92705 -4020 (714) 568 -7300 • Fax (714) 836 -5906 • www.bhiinc.com An Equal Opportunity Employer Mr. Khaled Othman, P.E. Senior Managing Engineer Riverside County 03/22/04 Page 2 of 3 3. Resubmittals must include any /all check prints. 4. A Cooperative Agreement must he in place before plans can be approved. The following plans /reports have been returned to the engineer with minor corrections: 1. Pechanga Creek Levee Protection Plan To aid with the next review, we request a response letter prepared by the engineer of work, directly addressing the above comments following the same alphanumeric order of this letter. Also please highlight/mark comments on plans /reports to make sure those were addressed. Questions regarding this matter may be directed to Lori Berryman Wolfe at (714)240 -3632 or Anis Rahman at (714)568 -7300. Sincerely Berryman & Henigar Inc, ° No.65131 Ev. W /30/05 V V Lori Berryman Wolfe, P. Plan Check Engineer ALLEN, SENIOR CIVIL ENIGNEER RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Cc RBF Consulting w /encls. Attention: Bill Green Department of Building and Safety w/o encls. Attention: Tony Ramsamocj APPENDIX B i NINYO AND MOORE REPORT DATED MARCH 3, 2000 I I I I I PETRA I 1 Bc��oZ�o53 � t SEP 13 2002 L! COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BUILDING AND SAFETY APPENDIX B i NINYO AND MOORE REPORT DATED MARCH 3, 2000 I I I I I PETRA I 1 11 11 I L c"01menial Sciences Comufta,:5 �e0•e<hrnc %1 and GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 PALA ROAD AND PECHANGA ROAD TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Ms. Janet Dixon Temecula Valley Unified School District 40516 Roripaugh Road Temecula, California 92592 PREPARED BY: Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants 5710 Ruffin Road San Diego, California 92123 March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134-01 5710 Ruffin Road San Dead, California 92 123 San Diego Irvine Ontario , Los Angeles I Phone (8 58) 576 -1000 Fax JSSS) S76-9600 Oakland Las Vegas Salt Lake City - Pnoenv .�..,.�� ,.......__. _.. � Old.. Geoiecdrncal and Ern nonmenraf Scenees Cersu4ans 1( March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 1; Ms. Janet Dixon Temecula Valley Unified School District 11 40516 Roripaugh Road Temecula, California 92592 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation Report Temecula Middle School No. 5 Temecula, California 11 Dear Ms. Dixon: In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the pro- posed Temecula Middle School No 5 in Temecula, California. This report presents our geotechnical 'f findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the proposed project Our report was pre- I pared in accordance with our proposal dated January 28, 2000. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions or com- ments regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact our once Sincerely, ���pED GFOZO 1, NINYO & MOORE 2 FRANCt50.MOREIAFID N� No 2071 CEATMED 4 EGE0LX0APKi N �iY�[if1.C�✓ (/!'2 j, GEOIOGiSi Francis O. Moreland, C.E.G 1A, OQ OF Michael R. Rahilly, G.E Senior Project Geologist CALF Chief Geotechnical Engineer Randal L. Irwin, C E.G. { tom. c7r 70, it Chief Engineering Geologist m Ei:�3rs jo `I" zt, - FOM /RI /1`4RR /rlm 1 I 2 0 No 1521 /� �� �.�.Cf C ;U`•�,: i Distribution. (6) Addressee tr cen,a�� Enc.ncnnn � OF 5710 Ruffin Road - San Diego, California 92123 _ Phone (858) 576- 1000 _ Far 1858) 576 -9600 San Diego - Irvine = Ontario - Los Angeles - Oakland - Las Vegas - Salt Lake City . Phoenix d '} Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 TABLE OF CONTENTS ,( ! Page. 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ ..............................1 �l 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES ............ ............................... .......................... ............................... 1 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................... ............ ....... ... ... ._................. ............ ........ ........ 2 4. SITE DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... ..............................2 5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING . ................ .............................. 3 r_. 5.1. Exploratory Borings ................................................................. ..............................3 5.2. Laboratory Testing ............................................................... ..............................3 6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................ ..............................3 �t 6.1. Regional Geologic Setting ........... ............................... .......... ..............................4 . 6.2. Site Geology ......................... ............................... ......... ..............................4 6.2.1. Fill ............ ............................... ........ ................. ..............................5 ' 6.2 2. Alluvium .......................... ....... ............................... .............................5 1.3. Rippability....._ ...... ............. .......... .. ... .._... ...... _................5 ' 64. Groundwater ........... ............... ............... ..............................5 6.5. Flood Hazards..... ............... ............... .... ........ ........... 5 6.6. Faulting and Seismicity ....... ........ ...................... .. ......... _........... ..................6 66.1. UBC Seismic Design Parameters ............ ..... .......... ............... 6 if 6.6.2. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture.. . .... .....................7 66.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement ........ ..... ... .... .... ...... I.... 8 6.6.4. Tsunamis........... 8 6 7. Landsliding . .... .................. ........ ... ... ...... ........ ....................1. 8 7. CONCLUSIONS ................. .. ......._ ......... ......... ............. .... ..............8 8. RECOMMENDATIONS ..... ....... .... ...... ...... .......... ..._ ..... ........ ...... ._ ... _.... .................. 9 8.1. Earthwork ................. __.......... .. ......................... ..............................9 �} 8.1.1. Pre - Construction Conference... ........... ..... .. 9 8.1.2. Construction Observation....... ... .. . ....... ..... .......... .... ....... ... 10 8.1.3. Site Preparat ion ...................... ............................... .............................. 10 C: ,(. 8.1.4. Treatment of Existing Alluvial Soils ......................... ............................... 10 8.1.5. Excavation Characteristics.. ............ ...... __ ..... .... .......... _....................... 11 8.1.6. Materials for Fill ............ ......................... .......... .... ....................... 1 1 ,I 8.1.7. Compacted Fill.. .. ._ .................... ........... ........ .... .......... .......... 11 8.1.8. Slopes ............... ........... ............. .... .... ........ ..........................13 8.1.9. Temporary Slope Stability ......................... .... ....... ...........................13 8.1 10 Trench Backfill ............ ............. ............. ... ........................ 14 8.1.11. Drainage. ....... ... .... ... ....................... ............ ............................14 8 2. Foundations ........................... ......... .._ ................ ........ 15 8.11. Shallow Foundations.. _ .... ............................... .... .............................15 l V ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 9. LMTATIONS .................................................................................... .............................19 10. SELECTED REFERENCES .................................. ............................... ..........................21 Tables Table 1 — Seismic Design Parameters ........................................................ ..............................7 ' ( Table 2 — Recommended Pavement Sections.. .......... .......... ........ .... 18 l Fi ures ( Figure 1 —Site Location Map ( Figure 2 — Geotechnical Map Figure 3 — Fault Location Map Appendices Appendix A — Boring Logs ' Appendix B — Laboratory Testing Appendix C — Typical Earthwork Guidelines r 1! - 11 I 4134.OIGRB d« uIqj§P B/ UdOQ ®� O�y d ll�Cl S Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 '[ 1. INTRODUCTION 1 In accordance with your request and our proposal dated January 28, 2000, we have performed a ,I geotechnical evaluation for the design of the proposed Temecula Middle School No. 5 at the "Redhawk" site in the Temecula area, California. Our geotechnical evaluation was in conformance �i with Chapter 18A of Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of the 1998 California Building Code. This report presents the results of our field exploration and laboratory testing, our conclusions regarding the Il(( geotechnical conditions at the subject site, and our recommendations for the design and earthwork i construction of this project. We have also performed a fault hazard study for the site, the results of which are presented in a separate report. In addition, we concurrently performed a geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Temecula High School No. 3, which will be located northwest of, and adjacent to, the subject site The results of our geotechnical evaluation for Temecula High School No. 3 are also presented in a separate report . 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES Ninyo & Moore's scope of services for this phase of the project included review of pertinent background data, performance of a geologic reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis with regard to the proposed middle school construction. Specifi- 'I cally, we performed the following tasks. • Review of background data listed in the Selected References section of this report. The data reviewed included topographic maps, geologic data, stereoscopic aerial photographs, fault ' maps, Special Studies Zones maps, and a conceptual site plan for the project. • Performance of a geologic reconnaissance of the proposed site, including the observation and mapping of geologic conditions and the evaluation of possible geologic hazards which may impact the proposed project ' • Subsurface exploration consisting of 32 exploratory borings. The boring depths ranged from 10 to 75 feet below the ground surface. • Laboratory testing consisting of in -situ dry density and moisture content, expansion index, sieve analysis, direct shear, consolidation, R- value, maximum density /optimum moisture con - ' tent, and soil corrosivity tests <ixnicRO eon t ��b(7/�/ ®� ®OO Ct G E Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 �1 ,( • Compilation and engineering analysis of the data obtained. • Preparation of this geotechnical design and data report presenting our findings and conclu- sions regarding the proposed middle school site. The report also includes geotechnical recommendations for the design and earthwork construction of the subject project. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on current conceptual plans, the Temecula Middle School No 5 is to be constructed on the southern portion of the Redhawk site, separated from the future high school to the north by the planned Peach Tree Road. The middle school will consist of eight buildings, including classrooms f and administration. Paved parking will be provided adjacent to Peach Tree Road to the north, and 11 Pechanga Road to the south. Athletic fields will also be provided on the eastern side of the middle school site. We anticipate that the new buildings will be one -story, slab -on -grade structures of 'I wood- frame, steel- frame, or reinforced concrete construction. Building loads are expected to be ii typical of this type of relatively light construction ,t 4. SITE DESCRIPTION The Redhawk school site is an irregularly shaped parcel located to the northeast of the intersec- tion of Pala Road and Pechanga Road in Temecula, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The middle school portion of the site is generally flat with several minor drainage channels ap- proximately 2 to 3 feet deep along the southwestern side of the site adjacent to Pechanga Road. The property is bordered to the northwest by agricultural fields, to the northeast by a golf course, to the southeast by scattered residential properties, and to the southwest by Pechanga Road. The southern side of the site, adjacent to Pechanga Road, appears to be in a natural state with the re- mainder of the site previously used for agricultural purposes. Site elevations range from approximately 1,170 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the southeastern corner of the site to approximately 1,150 feet MSL at the northwestern corner of the site Vegetation consists of me- dium to large sized trees, brush, and weeds in the southern portion of the site �Cf7® Z %S&Tm u- oicaeaM z k�- ` im I) Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 1( '( 5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Our field exploration of the subject site included a geologic reconnaissance and subsurface ex- ploratory work conducted on February 8 through 14, 2000. The subsurface evaluation consisted of drilling 32, 8 -inch diameter continuous flight, hollow -stem auger borings The boring locations 1` were selected based on the results of our background geotechnical review, field reconnaissance, and the currently proposed building layout. Prior to commencing the subsurface exploration, Underground Service Alert was notified for mark -out of the existing utilities. 11 5.1. Exploratory Borings A total of 32 exploratory borings were excavated at the site on February 8 through 14, 2000 at the approximate locations indicated on Figure 2. The borings were drilled with a truck mounted, continuous flight hollow -stem auger drill. Boring depths ranged from 10 to 75 feet. Detailed logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A. li 5.2. Laboratory Testing 11 Samples were obtained during our subsurface evaluation for laboratory analysis Testing in- cluded in -situ dry density and moisture content, expansion index, sieve analysis, direct shear, Ifconsolidation, R- value, maximum density /optimum moisture content, and soil corrosivity tests. The results of the in -situ dry density and moisture testing are presented on the boring ,I logs presented in Appendix A. Other laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. �i. 6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ' Our findings regarding regional and local geology, including faulting and seismicity, landslides, rippability (excavatibility), and groundwater conditions at the subject site are provided in the following sections. i- 1L 3 L��% 3 01GRB doe R.� IVOS /nV JV NUT '�. d11] im „ Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 'i 6.1. Regional Geologic Setting The project area is situated in the coastal section of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. ' This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to the southern tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province varies in width from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of rugged mountains underlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimen- tary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous rocks of the southern California batholith. The portion of the province in Riverside County that includes the project area consists generally of uplifted and dis- sected Cretaceous granitic basement rocks and late Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary units. The subject site is underlain by relatively deep alluvial soils. The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of sub - parallel faults and fault zones trending roughly northwest. Several of these faults, which are shown on Figure 3, Fault Lo- cation Map, are considered active faults. The San Jacinto and San Andreas faults are active fault systems located northeast of the project area and the Agua Blanca — Coronado Bank, San Clemente, and Newport- Inglewood faults are active faults located west of the project area. ,i The Wildomar Fault segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone has been mapped near the eastern limits of the project site Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right- lateral, strike -slip movement. Further discussion of faulting relative to the site is provided in the Faulting and Seismicity section of f this report and in the separate fault hazard evaluation report 't 6.2. Site Geology ' Geologic units encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation include minor amounts of artificial fill and alluvium Generalized descriptions of the earth units en- countered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface exploration are provided in the ' subsequent sections More detailed descriptions are provided on the boring logs in Appen- dix A 11 41Y OIGN9da 4 f fn7f Go s MOO � 't i�- Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula.Middle School No. 5 6.2.1. Fill March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 Scattered fill materials were encountered during our evaluation of the subject site associ- ated with past agricultural activities. In general, the fills are shallow and of limited extent. The fill materials are similar to the alluvial soils underlying the site and consist of silty sand and sandy silt. Scattered concrete debris, pieces of steel, and wood are also present in some of these soils. 6.2.2.Alluvium Alluvium was encountered in our exploratory borings to the maximum depth explored of 85 feet. In general, the alluvial materials encountered consisted of light yellowish brown, damp, interbedded silty fine - grained sand, poorly graded sand, and silt. 6.3. Rippahility Based on our subsurface exploration of the site, the on -site fill and alluvium are expected to be rippable with normal heavy -duty earthmoving equipment. 6.4. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings. Based on our subsur- face exploration of the site, we anticipate that the actual groundwater table is at a depth in excess of 90 feet. Fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface geologic conditions and stricture, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors 6.5. Flood Hazards According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map, the majority of the site is considered to be outside of a 100 -year floodplain. The map indi- cates the 100 -year flood would be contained in a low area along the southwestern and southern sides of the site adjacent to Pala and Pachanga Roads We anticipate that these low C273o�5 a 10 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 areas will be raised above the 100 year flood level during grading of the site. Based on review of topographic maps, the site is not located downstream of a dam or within a dam inundation '{ area. Based on this review and our site reconnaissance, the potential for significant flooding j of the site is considered low. 1� 6.6. Faulting and Seismicity i The project area is considered to be seismically active, as is most of southern California. Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as on our geologic field mapping, the subject site, where structures are currently planned, is not underlain by known active or potentially active faults (i e , faults that exhibit ' evidence of ground displacement in the last 11,000 years and 2,000,000 years, respectively). ff The eastern portion of the site, however, is within the Alquist- Priolo earthquake fault zone ,I for the Wildomar Fault, which is part of the Elsinore (Temecula segment) Fault Zone. The easterly most portion of the site, where school buildings are currently planned, is within the Special Studies Zone and is the subject of our fault hazard study, the results of which are provided in a separate report. According to the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC), the proposed project site is within a UBC Near - Source Zone and is within Seismic Zone 4. 'j In eeneral, hazards associated with seismic activity include; strong ground motion, ground I surface rupture, liquefaction, seismically induced settlement, and tsunamis These hazards are discussed in the following sections. ,( 6.6.1.UBC Seismic Design Parameters ' Table 1 includes the seismic design parameters for the site as defined in, and for use with, the 1997 edition of the UBC (ICBO, 1997) '} 4O"Icnea,1 6 lfG7C�0 &NOOOO�C� i �, /r I 1 1 11 11 I 11 1! 1( 11: t <s. 11 1 11 Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 Table 1 — Seismic Design Parameters March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 Parameter Value 1997 UBC Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16 — I Soil Profile Type SE Table 16 — J Seismic Coefficient C. 0.36N, Table 16 — Q Seismic Coefficient C. 0.96N, Table 16 — R Near- Source Factor, N. 1.3 Table 16 — S Near- Source Factor, N,, 1 6 Table 16 — T Seismic Source Type B Table 16 — U 6.6.2. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture Based on a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Western United States, issued by the United States Geological Survey (1999), the project site is located in a zone where the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years is 0 54g. Based on the California Division of Mines and Geology Map Sheet 48 (1999), the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years is between 0 50g and 0.608 The requirements of the governingjurisdictions and ap- plicable building codes should be considered in the project design. The closest known active fault is the Wildomar Fault of the Elsinore Fault Zone (Temecula segment) located approxi- mately 250 feet northeast of the proposed school buildings. The Elsinore Fault (Temecula segment) has an assigned maximum earthquake magnitude of 6.8 (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998). Based on our review of the referenced literature, no active faults have been mapped across the project site where school buildings are currently planned Based on background informa- tion and our fault hazard study (provided in a separate report), the potential for ground rupture due to faulting is considered low in areas where school buildings are currently planned However, lurching or cracking of the ground surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible. 41 Y+ICR9 a« 1L)G17l Og ®OOG C� 1l. 11 ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 �i '( 6.6.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non- plastic silts that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible to liquefaction. f Based on the absence of a shallow groundwater table, it is our opinion that the potential for 't liquefaction and seismically induced settlement at the subject site is low. It should be noted, however, that fluctuations in the groundwater level might occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface geologic conditions and structure, rainfall, irriga- tion, and other factors. However, the likelihood that the water table would rise from its present depth to the shallow depths needed to produce liquefiable conditions, is also ' considered low. '( 6.6.4. Tsunamis ( Tsunamis are long seismic sea waves (long compared to the ocean depth) generated by ' sudden movements of the ocean bottom during submarine earthquakes, landslides, or volcanic activity. Based on the inland location of the site, the potential for damage due to ' tsunami is considered nil ' t 6.7. Landsliding Based on our review of published geologic literature and aerial photographs, and our geo- logic reconnaissance, no landslides or related features underlie the subject site. F7. CONCLUSIONS Based on our review of the referenced background data, geologic field reconnaissance, subsurface evaluation, and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that construction of the proposed middle 1ischool is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint Based on our review of published geologic maps F and our field evaluation, the project site, where school buildings are planned, does not appear to 'i aixuicae e« 8 �l�JF17�® &/'BOO S� /I ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 be underlain by faults or landslides. In our opinion, however, the following geotechnical factors will I be significant in the planning of the proposed middle school design and construction. • The upper portions of the alluvial soils underlying the subject site are in a loose condition. In order to mitigate the potential for future differential settlement of these soils, we recommend that they be removed to a depth of 8 feet below finish grade and replaced with compacted fill. '1 • The subject site is underlain by loose sandy soils. Although no groundwater was encountered to the maximum depth explored of 85 feet (on the adjacent high school site), there is a poten- tial for the groundwater level to rise during extremely wet years. Liquefaction is possible if the 'l groundwater level rises above a depth of roughly 20 to 30 feet. However, such a significant rise in the water table at the site is considered unlikely. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our understanding of the project, the following recommendations are provided for the 'I ff design and construction of the proposed middle school. 'i 8.1. Earthwork Details of proposed site earthwork are not known at this time; however, it is anticipated that cuts ' and fills needed to bring the site from its current grade to its finish grade will be minor, on the or- der of 5 feet or less. We recommend that the upper 8 feet of soil below finished grade underlying 'I the site consist of a compacted fill mat to reduce the potential for differential settlement. The re- moval and recompaction of loose soils should extend 10 feet or more beyond proposed building '! limits. The following sections present our recommendations regarding earthwork for the project In addition, Typical Earthwork Guidelines for the project are included as Appendix C. 8.1.1.Pre- Construction Conference We recommend that a pre - construction conference be held. Owner representatives, the civil engineer, geotechnical consultant, and contractor should be in attendance to discuss the plans and the project. �Y I [1 1 1 1 i_ 11- Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 8.1.2. Construction Observation The recommendations presented in this report are based on our understanding of the proposed project and on our evaluation of the data collected. The interpolated subsur- face conditions should be evaluated in the field during construction. Final project drawings and specifications should be reviewed by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the commencement of construction. The project geotechnical consultant should observe the grading and backfilling operations. Compacted fill and backfill soils should be tested for specified compaction by the geotechnical consultant. 8.1.3. Site Preparation ,The project site should be cleared and grubbed prior to grading. Clearing and grubbing should consist of the substantial removal of vegetation and other deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas. The debris generated during clearing and grubbing should be re- moved from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal dumpsite 8.1.4.Treatment of Existing Alluvial Soils We recommend that existing alluvial soils in structural areas on the site, including parking ar- eas, be removed to a depth of 8 feet below proposed finish grades and replaced with compacted fill. The exposed surface of the remedial excavation should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and compacted and the suitable removed materials, or imported materials, re- placed as compacted structural fill. The areal extent of, and depths to which the alluvium should be removed, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant's representative in the field based on the materials exposed. Any unsuitable materials such as organic matter or over- sized material should be selectively removed and disposed of off site. U t5 1 1 IL 11 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 8.1.5. Excavation Characteristics The results of our field exploration program indicate that the project site, as presently proposed, is underlain by alluvium. The on -site materials should generally be excavatable by heavy -duty earthmoving equipment in good working condition. 8.1.6. Materials for Fill On -site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume are suitable for use as fill. Fill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 6 inches in largest dimension, and not more than 40 percent larger than 1 -1/2 inches Utility trench backfill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 3 inches in largest dimension and not more than 40 percent larger than 1 -1/2 inches Larger chunks, if generated during excavation, may be broken into acceptably sized pieces or disposed of off site Any imported fill material should be a low or very low- expansion potential (UBC. Expansion Index of 50 or less) granular soil with a plasticity index of 12 or less Materials for use as fill should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant's representative prior to filling or importing 8.1.7. Compacted Fill Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation of the exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise recommended, the exposed ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uniform moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content The scarified materials should then be compacted to 90 percent or more of the maximum density in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 1557 -91 The evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to no- tify the geotechnical consultant and the appropriate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review ' Temecula Valley Unified School Distfict Temecula Middle School No. 5 L [1 1. 11 11 March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 Excavated on -site materials which are in general compliance with the recommendations presented in Section 8.1.6 may be utilized as compacted fill provided they are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension. Oversize material should be disposed of off site. During grading, the contractor may encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the preliminary geotechnical study. The geotechnical consultant should be consulted to evaluate the suitability of any such soils for use as compacted fill. Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant should be notified three working days or more in advance of importation in order that it may evalu- ate, sample and/or test the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials should be delivered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evalua- tion by the geotechnical consultant. Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils should be generally uniform throughout the soil mass We note that as encountered in our borings, the shallow alluvial soils are currently dry of optimum. Accordingly, significant moisture conditioning during grading should be antici- pated. al Yf ] GKB dw Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill should be prepared to re- ceive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifis of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve near optimum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other appropriate compacting rollers, to a relative compaction of 90 or more percent of the maximum dry 12 M1J I? Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 density as evaluated by ASTM D 1557 -91. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. ' 8.1.8. Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulat- ing agencies, permanent cut and fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Compaction of the face of fill slopes should be performed by backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope height, or as dictated by the capability of the available ' equipment, whichever is less. Fill slopes should be backrolled utilizing a conventional t sheepsfoot -type roller. Care should be taken to maintain the desired moisture conditions and /or reestablish the same, as needed, prior to backrolling. Upon achieving final grade, ' the slope should again be moisture conditioned and backrolled. The placement, moisture conditioning and compaction of fill slope materials should be ' done in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 8 1.7, "Compacted Fill " ' Site runoff should not be permitted to flow over the tops of slopes Positive drainage should be established away from the top of slopes. This may be accomplished by utilizing ' brow ditches placed at the top of cut slopes to redirect surface runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not otherwise available The on -site soils are likely to be susceptible to erosion, therefore, the project plans and specifications should contain design features and construction requirements to mitigate erosion of on -site soils during and after construction. Slopes and other exposed ground surfaces should be appropriately planted with protective ground cover ,l 8.1.9. Temporary Slope Stability ' We recommend that trenches and excavations be designed and constructed in accordance with OSHA regulations These regulations provide trench sloping and shoring design pa- rameters for trenches up to 20 feet deep based on a description of the soil types �t O nFl EIl 0IGKB d. 13 + /ll�l/7�✓%Ja�.,1V /1`�©r'U'2 �� T2a<3o��s ✓� v lea ' Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 1... I I t I '1 1- March 3', 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 encountered. Trenches over 20 feet deep should be designed by the Contractor's engi- neer based on site - specific geotechnical analyses. For planning purposes, we recommend that the following OSHA soil classifications be used: Alluvium Type C Compacted Fill Tjpe B Upon making the excavations, the soiUrock classifications and excavation performance should be evaluated in the field by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with OSHA regulations. Recommendations for temporary shoring can be pfovided, if requested. In general, temporary slopes above the water table and excavated in competent alluvium should be inclined no steeper than 1 -1/2.1 (horizontal :vertical). Temporary excavations in compacted fill should be inclined no steeper than 1 1. Temporary excavations that en- counter seepage may need shoring or may be stabilized by placing sandbags or gravel along the base of the seepage zone. Excavations encountering seepage should be evalu- ated on a case -by -case basis 4131 IGR9 d« 8.1.10. Trench Backfill Backfill for utility trenches should be compacted to 90 percent or more relative compac- tion as evaluated by ASTM D 1557 -91. Lifts should be of appropriate thickness to allow compaction to be achieved with the equipment used. 8.1.11. Drainage Roof, pad, and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and structures to suitable discharge areas by nonerodible devices (e.g., gutters, downspouts, concrete swales, etc.). Positive drainage adjacent to structures should be established and maintained. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the foundations of the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5 feet or more outside the building perimeter, and further maintained by a graded swale leading to an appropriate la 19 iTemecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 C' 1.. I I 1 I I 1[._ March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil engineer and /or land- scape architect. Surface drainage on the site should be provided so that water is not permitted to pond. A gradient of 2 percent or steeper should be maintained over the pad area and drainage patterns should be established to direct and remove water from the site to appropriate outlets. Care should be taken by the contractor during final grading to preserve any berms, drain- age terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of final grading should be maintained for the life of the project. The property operators should be made very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns might be detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance 8.2. Foundations Details of the future construction on the site are unknown at this time. Based on our under- standing that the future middle school buildings will be one -story, wood - frame, steel- frame, and /or reinforced concrete structures, we are providing the following preliminary foundation recommendations. Additional geotechnical evaluation studies may need to be performed once details of construction are known. <ua.oices dM 8.2.1. Shallow Foundations Continuous and /or spread footings should be founded in compacted fill. Footings founded as recommended may be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psO. The allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one - third when considering loading of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. Rec- ommendations for lateral resistance for footings are presented in Section 8.2.2. Foundations should have an embedment depth of 18 inches or more below the lowest adjacent grade into granular, very low or low expansive compacted fill. Continuous 15 NAVO& *410TG°r U 1 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No 5 Project No. 104134 -01 1 footings should be 12 or more inches wide and spread foundations should be 18 or more 1 inches square. Footings should be reinforced in accordance with the structural engineer's 1 recommendations. From a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend that footings founded in non - expansive granular materials be reinforced with two No. 4 or larger reinforcing 1 bars, one placed near the top and one near the bottom of the footings. 8.2.2. Shallow Foundation Lateral Resistance For resistance of foundations to lateral loads, we recommend an allowable passive pres- sure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used with a maximum of 3,000 psf This value assumes that the ground is horizontal for a 1 distance of 10 feet or more, or three times the height generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater We recommend that the upper one -foot of soil not protected by 1 pavement or a concrete slab be neglected when calculating passive resistance. 1 For frictional resistance to lateral loads, we recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.35 be used between soil and concrete If passive and frictional resistance are to be used in 1 combination, we recommend that the friction coefficient be reduced by two- thirds. The passive resistance values may be increased by one -third when considering loads of short 1 duration such as wind or seismic forces 'C.8.2.3. Settlement We estimate that the proposed structures, designed and constructed as recommended herein, will undergo total settlements of less -than approximately one inch. Differential settlements are typically less than about one -half of the total settlement. 1! 11 8.3. Slabs -on -Grade We recommend that conventional, slab -on -grade floors, underlain by very low to low expan- sive compacted fill, be 4 or more inches in thickness and be reinforced with No. 3 or larger 1� <ix -oicee aM 16/�b'17�r�/' 1� 11 ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No 5 Project No. 104134 -01 reinforcing bars spaced 24 inches on center each way. The reinforcing bars should be placed ' near the mid -point of the slabs. As a means to help reduce shrinkage cracks, we recommend tthat the slabs be provided with expansion joints at intervals of approximately 15 to 20 feet, each way or as recommended by the structural engineer. The slab reinforcement and expan- sion joint spacing should be designed by the structural engineer. If moisture sensitive floor coverings are to be used, we recommend that slabs be underlain by ' a vapor barrier and capillary break system consisting of a 6 -mil polyethylene (or equivalent) membrane placed over 4 inches of clean sand and overlain by an additional 2 inches of sand to help protect the membrane from puncture during placement and to aid in concrete curing. The exposed subgrade should be moistened just prior to the placement of concrete. ' Exterior concrete flatwork should be 4 inches or more in thickness and should be reinforced with No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 24 inches on- center both ways. The vapor barrier may ' be deleted for exterior flatwork 8.4. Pavements Based on the results of our subsurface evaluation, laboratory tests, and our experience with soils similar to those encountered at and near the site, we have assumed an R -value of 70 for the preliminary basis for design of flexible pavements at the project site. Actual pavement ' recommendations should be based on R -value tests performed on bulk samples of the soils that are exposed at the finished subgrade elevations across the site at the completion of the mass grading operations. We understand that traffic will consist primarily of automobiles, light trucks and occasional heavy trucks. For design we have used a Traffic Index (TI) of 9 5 for access drives and 6.0 `` for parking. We recommend that the geotechnical consultant re- evaluate the pavement de- sign, based on the R -value of the subgrade material exposed at the time of construction. The preliminary recommended pavement sections are as follows: I 40"IGRB doe 17 I)- ' Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 1 I 1 I 'i Table 2 — Recommended Pavement Sections March 3, 2000 Project No 104134 -01 As indicated, these values assume a traffic index of 9.5 for site access roads and 6.0 for parking areas where very little truck traffic is anticipated. In addition, we recommend that the upper 12 inches of the subgrade be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent. The above pavement sections should provide an approximate pavement life of 20 years. If traffic loads are different from those assumed, the pavement design should be re- evaluated. We suggest that consideration be given to using Portland cement concrete pavements in areas where dumpsters will be stored and picked up. Our experience indicates that refuse truck traffic can significantly shorten the useful life of asphalt concrete sections. We recommend that in these areas, 6- inches of 600 psi flexural strength portland cement concrete reinforced with No. 3 bars, 18- inches on center, be placed over 3 or more feet of very low to low ex- pansive soil compacted to the recommendations presented in Section 8 1.7 8.5. Corrosion Laboratory testing was performed on samples of the on -site soils to evaluate pH and mini- mum electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents The pH and minimum electrical resistivity tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method 643, and the sulfate and chloride tests were performed in accordance with California Test Methods 416 and 422, respectively. These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. The results of the corrosivity testing indicated a minimum electrical resistivity of the samples tested of 4,400 to 15,700 ohm -cm The soil pH of the samples was 6 2 to 6.8, and the chlo- L dId101GRBdo 1_ 18 gtl jhzi n®g �OO ,—& ' .� \; a3 Asphalt Class 2 Aggregate Area R -Value Traffic Concrete Base Index inches inches Access Roads 70 9.5 5 8 Parking 70 6.0 3 8 As indicated, these values assume a traffic index of 9.5 for site access roads and 6.0 for parking areas where very little truck traffic is anticipated. In addition, we recommend that the upper 12 inches of the subgrade be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent. The above pavement sections should provide an approximate pavement life of 20 years. If traffic loads are different from those assumed, the pavement design should be re- evaluated. We suggest that consideration be given to using Portland cement concrete pavements in areas where dumpsters will be stored and picked up. Our experience indicates that refuse truck traffic can significantly shorten the useful life of asphalt concrete sections. We recommend that in these areas, 6- inches of 600 psi flexural strength portland cement concrete reinforced with No. 3 bars, 18- inches on center, be placed over 3 or more feet of very low to low ex- pansive soil compacted to the recommendations presented in Section 8 1.7 8.5. Corrosion Laboratory testing was performed on samples of the on -site soils to evaluate pH and mini- mum electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents The pH and minimum electrical resistivity tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method 643, and the sulfate and chloride tests were performed in accordance with California Test Methods 416 and 422, respectively. These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. The results of the corrosivity testing indicated a minimum electrical resistivity of the samples tested of 4,400 to 15,700 ohm -cm The soil pH of the samples was 6 2 to 6.8, and the chlo- L dId101GRBdo 1_ 18 gtl jhzi n®g �OO ,—& ' .� \; a3 ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 ride content was 15 to 30 ppm. Based on results of our corrosivity tests, the on -site soils may be considered to have a low to moderate potential for corrosion of ferrous metals. Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical deterioration Laboratory testing indicated a sulfate content of the samples tested of 0 to 30 ppm, which is considered slight for sulfate attack. We recommend that 2 inches or more of concrete cover be provided over reinforcing steel for structures in ' contact with the soil. Although the results of the sulfate tests were not significantly high, due to the variability in the on -site soils and the potential for import soils, to be prudent we also ' recommend that Type V modified cement be used for concrete structures in contact with soil ' and that the water to cement ratio not exceed 0.45. 9. LIAIITATIONS The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical ,! report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care i exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area No other war - ranty, express or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condi- tion. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through additional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed '(f upon request. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical I., aspects of the project, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, ' ( flood potential, or the presence of hazardous materials. !4 This document is intended to be used only in its entirety No portion of the document, by itself, is ' t designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. 4 nq nn 41l OlGkOdog 19 J4 ' Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 1� March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 This report is intended for design purposes only and may not provide sufficient data to prepare an ac- curate bid by some contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant perform an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas..The independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechmcal reports prepared for the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing. Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site condi- tions. Ifgeotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request It should be understood that the conditions of a site can change with time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to govenunent action or the broadening of knowledge The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no control. This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclu- sions, and /or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said parties' sole risk. 413 01 GP.9 do 20 119PJ70 g�1MWIR 15 ,I Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No 5 Project No. 104134 -01 '( 10. SELECTED REFERENCES American Public Works Association and Associated General Contractors of California (APWA), 1991, ,l Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction: BNI Building News, Los Angeles, California. 'III Anderson, J.G., M. ERRI, Rockwell, T.K. and Agnew, D.C., 1989, Past and Possible Future f Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region: Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 2. California Building Standards Commission, 1998, California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Vol - 'E'.` umes I and 2. California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known 'I Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: dated February. �j California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1990, State of California Special Studies Zone, Pechanga 7.5 Quadrangle. 'r California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1999, Seismic Shaking t Hazards Maps of California. Map Sheet 48. [ Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1996, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Riverside County, �! Community Panel Number 060245 3355 D: dated November 20. 'ICBO, 1997, Uniform Building Code Standards: International Conference of Building Officials. € Jennings, C.W , 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas: California Division of I Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale 1:750,000 ' E Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Geologic Map of the Elsinore Fault Zone Southern Riverside County, California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 131. i __. Norris, R M. and Webb, R. W., 1990, Geology ofCahfomia, Second Edition: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1989, Engineering Geology Field Manual. 1 - United States Geological Survey, 1968 (photo- revised 1988), Pechanga Quadrangle, California, ' Riverside County, 7.5- Minute Series (Toppgraphic). Scale 1.24,000. United States Geological Survey, 1999, National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project, World Wide Web, http: / /geohazards.cr.usgs gov /eq. 'l 1[ !1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Source Date Flight Numbers Scale USDA 8 -27 -53 AXM -1K 171 and 172 1:20,000 a111 01GRBdoc 7r-e,P30 � a� 1� tj A 2000 0 2000 4000 Approximate Scale in Feet U S G S PECHANGA QUADRANGLE. ] 5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHICI. DATED 1968, PHOTOREVISED 1982 A PfIl 7YO & i 4 L J \ SITE �IN111: I: ESER A7IUN 'x•+23 _ _ = __ _ l'. -� _ a, et S - - -- Temecula Middle SITE UMITS �� School No.S APPROXIMATE 2000 0 2000 4000 Approximate Scale in Feet U S G S PECHANGA QUADRANGLE. ] 5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHICI. DATED 1968, PHOTOREVISED 1982 A PfIl 7YO & A MV SITE LOCATION MAP TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NO.5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA I ti PROJECT NO DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 1 11 i 4 L J A MV SITE LOCATION MAP TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NO.5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA I ti PROJECT NO DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 1 11 I 11 1 1 is 1 1 1 1 1 1 1� r 1 r r� 1� m 0 n U f rR 4yCy Rp D r D I F ace A F c PRI MIDDLE LEGEND Q al Alluv,um B -328 �, Approximate locotion of explorat 0 250 500 scale feet GEOTECHNICAL MAP ,AECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 0 BIE SITE PuN PROODE0 OT" TEMECULA VALLEY UIlEICD SC100L f NO. NOTE PLW PREPARED DURING DN -SITE RECCNN4.SANCE AND 5NDULD NDi 0{ A ALL DIMENSIONS ARE A`PRDxIMnTE 1 DATE FIGURE 3/00 2 PC I I 1 �•$'l /��� _ �?- I \� rAr Jrrren/re re. 1 arr CO. nC e �. SAMYA ARIA �� ��•. C SA SANT, WO u I sw CZFA(E 6/.vv �1 0 30 60 scalp miles Hr: MAR C7fY HfYEXSIOE� Tg,u^_+V SW s < \\ �MLI/'�OSFRNGS LAKE % 9ELSMOCRE ,'SITE CCZWP SAr D/[OO CO. /1/inya &/roars �Ww A� ournw fAI J[R/ R /Y[RS /Df CO • s CDf -- 1mram Co. SALTON \fir CEW� •SAX CYCGO ,W■ a \ xu1co a� 4� .p�rro■'MfXJCO co tq FAULT LOCATION MAP TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NO.5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 3 1101 I I !J [1 i 11 I 11. 11 11 3o I Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula Middle School No. 5 March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 ' APPENDIX A BORING LOGS Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following methods. Bulk Samples i Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory excava- tions. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Spoon Disturbed drive samples of earth materials were obtained by means of a Standard Penetration Test spoon sampler. The sampler is composed of a split barrel with an external diameter of 2 ,I inches and an unlined internal diameter of 1 -3/8 inches. The spoon was driven into the ground ii 12 to 18 inches with a 140 -pound hammer free - falling from a height of 30 inches in general accordance with ASTM D 1586 -84 The blow counts were recorded for every 6 inches of ,I penetration, the blow counts reported on the logs are those for the last 12 inches of penetra- tion. Soil samples were observed and removed from the spoon, bagged, sealed and transported to the laboratory for testing Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following methods. 'I The Modified Split- Barrel Drive Sampler The sampler, with an external diameter of 3 0 inches, was lined with 1 -inch long, thin brass rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into the ground with the weight of a 140 -pound hammer, in general accordance with ASTM D 3550 -84 The driving weight was permitted to fall freely The approximate length of the fall, the weight of the hammer, and the number of blows per foot of driving are presented on fthe boring logs as an index to the relative resistance of the materials sampled. The samples ` were removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the labo- ratory for testing. 1{ 1 Ro IW97 41N 01GU d« 31 1 r- i 1� f_ if t U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES (. A SSIFTCATION U.S. Standard Grain Sim In Well graded gravels or gavel -sand mixtures little or no Sieve Size Minimeten GW fines Above 305 GRAVELS 12" to 3" Poorly graded gavels or gavel -sand mixtures, little or GRAVEL (More than 1/2 of coarse GP no fines GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures O ^ H fraction q 'Z, > No. 4 sieve size) No. 4 to No. 200 4 76 to 0.074 coarse No 4 to No. 10 0 Medium No. 10 to No 40 2.00 to 0 420 GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures d o °.t SILT & CLAY SW Well graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines w y� € z SANDS SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines p(More than 1l2 of coarse SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures U fraction <No. 4 sieve size) SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or ML clayey fine sands or clavey silts with sli t plasticity SILTS & CLAYS Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly Liquid Limit <50 clays, sandy clays sil cla ys lean clays N 0 N o U OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity ,> `3 Inor g anic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or o 1\�d silty soils, elastic silts CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays w ° z Z � v . SILTS & CLAYS Liquid Limit >50 Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty OH clays, organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils CLASSIFICATION CHART (Unified Soil Classification System) GRAIN SIZE C13ART U S c S cvssmcnnoN Cxnnr d« m e A a0 CL 0 10 C ML M &OL ML a 10 w a0 w 60 60 M BO Uouio UMrr tut. x PLASTICITY CHART U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF GRAIL SIZES (. A SSIFTCATION U.S. Standard Grain Sim In Sieve Size Minimeten BOULDERS Above 12" Above 305 COBBLES 12" to 3" 305 to 76.2 GRAVEL 3" to No 76.2 to 4.76 Coati 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 Fine 3/4" to No. 4 19.] to 4.76 SAND No. 4 to No. 200 4 76 to 0.074 coarse No 4 to No. 10 4.76 to 2.00 Medium No. 10 to No 40 2.00 to 0 420 Fine No. 40 to No. 200 1 0.420 to 0.074 SILT & CLAY I Below Na. 200 1 Bdm 0.074 GRAIN SIZE C13ART U S c S cvssmcnnoN Cxnnr d« m e A a0 CL 0 10 C ML M &OL ML a 10 w a0 w 60 60 M BO Uouio UMrr tut. x PLASTICITY CHART U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION I 'L 11 L 13 DRILLED BORING NO. SYMBOL SAMPLES ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING DRIVE WEIGHT DROP SAMPLED BY LOGGED BY REVIEWED BY DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION y = w o U) Q to O p 3 co - ° w t~it g LL U d w O r o U M Z DATE GROUND Qtn 96 �)j g 0 Solid line denotes unit change. Dashed line denotes material change. Modified split - barrel drive sampler. No recovery with modified split - barrel drive sampler. Q Seepage. 5 s- Groundwater encountered during drilling. i i Groundwater measured after drilling. Standard Penetration Test (SPT). No recovery with a SPT. XX/ XX Shelby tube sample. Distance pushed in inches/length of sample recovered . in inches. No recovery with Shelby tube sampler. 10 Bulk sample. Attitudes: Strike /Dip b: Bedding c: Contact j: Joint f: Fracture F: Fault cs: Clay Seam 15 s: Shear bss: Basal Slide Surface sf: Shear Fracture sz: Shear Zone sbs: Sheared Bedding Surface The total depth line is a solid line that is drawn at the bottom of the boring. ?0 ®� ®& ®®re (� BORING LOG EXPLANATION OF BORING LOU SIMEIOIS PROJECT NO. S} IS.AtdP DATE Re,. 1/99 FIGURE A-1 13 .r i i-- %7e :2& Cam& 5 -=P- 3q w U z DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -IB °—' O GROUND ELEVATION SHEET I OF 3 m tail O w >- Q� m U6 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Aueer = w o N o V mj DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" Q C m � > -i SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI p cc U DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown and grayish brown, dry to damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 11 1.6 106.9 .__--- ----- ------- -----' ---- SP - --- -------- ---- ' '-------------------- -- ------ ---'-----._------ -- -- -- ._...._.._'-- Grayish brown, damp, loose, poorly graded fine to medium SAND; trace silt. 5 11 2.3 87.6 ---- --- --- --- --- - - - -- IE E€ ° -- ----- ---- SM ----- - -- --------------------------------------------"-- Grayish brown, loose, silty fine to coarse SAND; trace gravel. 10 EEIEEE�[ EE Ittj fEE 17 1.6 90.1 [[ f �Ef E�EE� 15 IE 14 7.9 114.1 E Little clay; slightly micaceous. [j --------------------- ------- ------ - --- --- '--------- ML ----- -'- -------------------------------------------- ------------------------ Brown, moist, stiff, fine to medium sandy clayey SILT; slightly micaceous. 20 BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NS TEMECUA, CALIF ORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -I %7e :2& Cam& 5 -=P- 3q ,I 'I) 1 I 1 m w EL J g Q O LL m o w m LL U >- ~ cc O J O N z QN U J u_ U)j v DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -IB GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 3 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 20 ML ALLUVIUM: (Continued) 14 S.9 117.4 Brown, moist, stiff, fine to medium sandy clayey SILT; slightly micaceous. 25 -- - --- - - - - - -- ------- -- ------- SM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------"--"--------------- Brown, moist, loose, silty fine to medium SAND; little clay. :EEff tE`� 30 �EttEE €jEt € €ll 22 12.3 116.1 E E �� 135 It �[ �fE II i c ��iE {{€ 40 II BORING LOG TE�IE MIDDLE SCHOOL pS I� � ULA, CALIFORh TEM MEC CALIFORNIA EC PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -2 15 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i I 1i 11— IIO F = IIa. C) W (n 0 m w CC to U d } L: w > m N Z QN Y(3 n (n� U DATE DRILLED 02 114/00 BORING NO. B -1B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 3 OF 3 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stan Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 40 � i 45 50 27 24 € j E f E E �E EE:.o SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) Grayish brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND. 55 otal Depth = 51.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/14/2000. 60 ®N Off V& ® ®9 BORING LOG TE�1ECULA AfIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -0I DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -3 W Ir 'l 'l 'II t f St U) w LL 2 DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -2B H 00 o � O F- GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF I to to LL w tr r F w O Q to U METHOD OF DRILLING S" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger EL c N w 01 yj DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" o '— m U SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI 00 o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SM ALLUVIUM; Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 5 9 3.7 97.5 1 E� E 10 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 15 20 BORING LOG . ^+ TENIECULAMIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMEC ECULA• CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -4 St 1:. w U Z DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -3B Ja H a O GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 m O w > m Q V1 IQit LL METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diam ter Hallow -Stem Aueer ~ v~—i w N 30" ttn >- DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 0 m 2 v SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI D o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium II SAND. II II 5 14 1.9 103.6 10 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/14/2000. 15 20 BORING LOG TEMECULA SCHOOL p5 TEMECULA, LA, CAL CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03100 A-5 I I I I 1 1 [J S9 DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B-46 ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF I METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Di=eter H ❑ -Stem Aueer _ DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION m IIm w III d 0 J_ U) O O m ° w v~i U a > O-i w > o w t w z DATE GROUND a� LL U v ulO c.1 0 II II II 5 II9 II II 6.2 101.3 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine SAND. II I, 10 15 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 20 N ®®re OL BORING LOG TEM1fECULA LA, CALIFORNIA SCHOOL #5 TEh1ECULA, CA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -6 [J S9 I 1 I! 1 1 ,I ,1 'I 11, .W DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B-511 GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 2 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION w = II W Cc w tan O O O m w cc to g u a > F O 0 M z [1 a n U Cj N � U C 0 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, clamp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 6 4.7 97.8 E E 15 7 4.5 106.9 I�E 10 10 IN Et (( �Ek 20 .i Few coarse sand. SP -------- - - - - -- ----------------------------------- Light brown to brown, damp to moist, medium dense, poorly graded fine to medium SAND; trace silt. 15 24 1.9 107.6 - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — SM i — — — - ----- -- --------- ---------- -- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - Brown, dam to moist, loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 20 nure BORING LOG TEME MIDDLESCHOOL k5 5� ®& TEMEC MECULA, CALIFORNIA ov PROJECT NO. DATE 1 FIGURE 104134 -01 03100 A-7 .W u 3 3 u w a Q rn F O to o ¢ F— (0 LL z w0 cc O m N z O_ F- Qn O CJ L N 0 j caJJ DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -5B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 2 METHOD OF DRILLING 8' Diamder Hollow -Stem AIIQCi DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c o r20 1 1 r------ r ' 12 2.4 ------------- 116.4 SM ML ------------ ALLUVIUM: (Continued) Brown, damp to moist, loose, silty fDe to medium SAND. Brown, moist, medium dense, fine sandy SILT; few clay. --------------------------- ------------------ -------------------- r 1 r5 r to Total Depth = 31.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/14/2000. r ®re BORING LOG TEMECULA ESCHOOL pS MI TE ULA LA, , CA CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -8 i I I i H u _ 5 J Q N F O LL O m w m O 2 u U > F— z > o O 10 z O_ 1— ¢ri U u U vi u DATE DRILLED 02/11 /00 BORING N0. B -613 GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 3 ' to 9 1.7 104.5 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. �5 10 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. /� ®� ®& ®®rtl BORING LOG NS TEAIEMECULA, CALIFORNIA TE<`f ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -9 i i 1 a Q N F 0 0 m o W N LL a 0 o m u) Z O QN U U LL �j u DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -7B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION C Q ' ' 7 -- ------ 6.0 -"--'- 94.7 -- -- --- SP - -------- -- ML ALLUVIUM: Light brown, damp, very loose, poorly graded fine and medium SAND; trace silt. - --- --- - - ---- -- -----._- --------- ------------------------- "---------------------------- -............ Brown, damp, firm, clayey SILT; scattered rootlets and roots up to approximately 3/4" in diameter. ' '0 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02111/2000. tLi Livilywa&ffinure BORING LOG TEME MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMEC MECULA, CALIFORNL4 PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03!00 FIGURE A -10 I A w Q O LL N 30 m o w t=— � U } F z 0 ¢ O m >- z FO Q� U U LN Nj v DATE DRILLED 02 /I1 100 BORING N0. B -8B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF I METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY R1 DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION O 0 5 6f E E E� SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 0 ' 'IS 1 120-- Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. ' Backfilled on 02/11/2000. ®� ®� Ore BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMECULA, CALIFORI:IA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -ll 4q 1� _ LL U Z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -9B p ~O 0 c 1 GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 Q O w } JO QN Nc LL ~ U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger LL p N o >- ")j DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" i 1 o no v SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI cr o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND; scattered 1 rootlets. 1 1 11 2.5 104.8 . Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. 1 Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 1 1 IS 1 1 10 . BORING LOG MI, DLE SCHOOL TEMEMEC MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 1 ®1i4ya ®®re ®� TECULA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03100 A -12 I i 0 N LL z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -10B Ja F E' v 00 w t- GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 3 4 N ¢ H o m Qv U U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger LL vi u p o W Qj DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" ; m u SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SM ALLUVIUM: Light brown, dry to damp, very loose, silty fine to medium SAND; slight 1 pinhole porosity. 1 € 7 5.7 88.6 �i ��€ E 16 3.7 111.3 ` Light brown to brown; moist; loose. 1 1 , E[E[j{j{{ 0 EEEE EE`E 11 6.0 105.2 l f.. 1 1 I I� E 1 I 15 l� 14 6.1 109.3 [ Brown; micaceous; scattered thin calcium carbonate stringers. �lE 1 t 0 BORING LOG ®� TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 y ffinure. TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. D ATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A- 13 0 4 LL Z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -10B a N o a O O F- . GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 3 Q O F —1 O Q� ¢ O Q0 LL U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger I p S2 W >- W j DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" 1 -J 0 n3 v SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI ° DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION E SM ALLUVAIM: (Continued) 1 25 3.9 116.6 Ej Brown, moist, medium dense, silty fire to medium SAND; scattered ebarcoal fragments. 1 � 1 ` 1 1 1 E 1 18 Loose. 1 1 i 1 I E E IIIE`� IEE e BORING LOG TEMECULA qS CALIF PNLA TEM ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -0 03/00 A -14 4 _v u Q Off— O 0 O m w ¢ � H O LL a N z cc w O m 2i z Qtn U6 w� �j U DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -10B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 3 OF 3 METHOD OF DRILLING 8' Diuneter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c Q 0 ' 10- ' 17 22 SM jEf Ef I i ALLUVRJM: (Continued) Brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND. Moist to wet. ' 1 �5 1 1 0 Total Depth = 51.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. ��ggq�Pp IV7 ® ®® M BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 1 03100 FIGURE A -15 /1 � V i i 1 Q- 2 N 1- O °- N m o W ¢ 2 a H z W o m N z O Q<U) U U LLN V) j U DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -11B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c o ' tf 9 5.2 95.1 SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND; scattered pinhole size pore spaces. !0 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling.. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 6 ® / /� ®� ® ®�� BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLESCHOOLp5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03100 FIGURE A -16 .I i ' /Inn `f 7 .0 J g Q O O co _ w cc 1:- o LL U } t— Z Wo Cc 03 03 : N Z t- ui U 6 Q= u DATE DRILLED 02 /11!00 BORING N0. &12B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem AuRcr DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION ; o 0 SM ALLUVIUM: ' Grayish brown, damp to moist, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. 7 6.1 104.0 i0 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. rs to ®®rte! BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL q5 `O TEh1ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 _ A -17 1 I 50 1 1 1 1 1 w u_ Z DATE DRILLED 02/11 100 BORING NO. B -13B F — U GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 2 Q O u- w cc r F- J U Q� U 6 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diarncter Hollow -Stem Auger H Z . O o N vLL—iN DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" m 2 Qj u SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp to moist, very loose to loose, Silty fine to medium SAND; scattered layers of light brownish gray; poorly graded fine to medium sand. 11 1.4 106.9 E E € 12 2.2 106.7 E (t Brown' incrase in clay content. y I E 11 7.2 112.5 {! Layer of light brown; fine to coarse sand. f 18 4.5 113.4 4[ f ttt lEtE� EE t'l BORING LOG MECULA MIDDLE S k 5 TEMECUA, CAL IFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -IS I i 5 I /I 7 to E Z DATE DRILLED 02 /11/00 BORING N0. B-13B 1 a 2 F _ o d O_ I- GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 2 Q m 0 w >- O m Q - O U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger V) H Z LL� C 0 N N U) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" 1 m u SAMPLED BY ' RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI cc cc DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) Brown, damp to moist, loose, silty fine to medium SAND; little clay. 1 15 7.7 107.8 1 20 [[[ ' Total Deptb = 31.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. ' Backfilled on 02/14/2000. •5 t 1 to- BORING LOG ® TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMEC MECULA, CALIFORNIA IF PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -19 /I 7 I lJ 1 a Q O O LL O m a w m I7- o U a } F- Z co N z Qvi U 6 N to Q] u DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -14B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET I OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION o 10 2.7 103.1 E {€ I E� SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND; few gravel. Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/14/2000. BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NS TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -20 i S3 1 d Q N F O O a n1 a w ¢ F Ln U U y ~ z wo cc ° J O ti z O Qvi U LLtn �� U DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -15B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 am METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Dieter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION cO ° 12 3.8 107.0 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND; little clay. ' 1 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 0 i ®�� ®� ® ®p Y BORING LOG TEME MIDDLE SCHOOL NS TEM MEC ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -21 J 1 i 1 i i I 1 I I 1 r5 I BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL k5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE 104134 -01 03/00 FIGURE A -22 S5 DATE DRILLED 02111/00 BORING NO. B -16B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diem ter Hollo , -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION w < (nn ~ 0 O U- m w cc Ln u_ a r N w o J m Z 0 1'- Y6 LL . �j U C 15 4.0 96.7 SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. - Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Back-filled on 02/11/2000. BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL k5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE 104134 -01 03/00 FIGURE A -22 S5 5 1 t ,0 1 15 1 I V 10 1 1.6 1 103.9 z V)_ Q- - ~O O LL a o 7 v N O U) O no w O z w D m S" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger ■ CO N� cc 1401bs. DROP 30" 5 1 t ,0 1 15 1 I V 10 1 1.6 1 103.9 z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -17B O F GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 Q to U U METHOD OF DRILLING S" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger tL (A CO N� DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI U DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. �iy�nyo��noor BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03 /00 A -23 5'7 z DATE DRILLED 02/74/00 BORING N0. B -18B ' a H e = a O 0 GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 7 OF 2 LL w } H m Q N U U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger Q�_ I=- Z u. Nj DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" O Q SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY R1 O U 0 DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION ' SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 11 2.8 98.9 EEE[ t10 1.5 101.6 lff`EIE �E'!E (E€ 14 6.3 105.4 Et Brown; damp to moist. 1 € €`E.E [ 1 E. r ' 21 € i (k f� Fine to coarse sand. BORING LOG TEME SCHOOL pS Munre � VIIIIIIiIIIIIIII TEMEC ULA, CALIF ORNIA PROJECT NO- DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -24 5'7 5 1 1 S 1 U) w o_ Q LL O < O N O c 0 J „- m 0 rL F- N O 2 LL U o_ } F rn Z w } O 25 1 2.1 1 108.7 0 J 0 m } N Z O Q t/1 U Lj !�� U O Q U DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -18B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 2 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION ALLUVIUM: (Continued) Brown to grayish brown, damp to moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND. - ------- ---- - ---- ------ ----' ' ML Brown, moist, stiff, fine to medium sandy clayey SILT; a few scattered light brown stringers. Total Depth = 31.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/14/2000. BORING LOG j %7j1®& 1M3 ®p a TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL k5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -25 al v 0 N g m O U- 3 O to _ e w F=- o U U } F Z o cc cc ro >- to z 1— U U Ui � U DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -19B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET I OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION C O SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. 1 5 8 2.6 93.9 f I Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 15 1 0 BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE pS CALIFORNIA TEP1ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -26 5/ ME V a N F O O \ 0 p no o w ¢ H o LL d } w Cr m (0 Z O f- vi U U wN Q:� U DATE DRILLED 02/15/00 BORING NO. B -20B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140Ibs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION o SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fore to medium SAND; few gravel. 1 5 15 2.4 109.5 E E I 1 `E 10 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/15/2000. l5 1 0 ®re BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N5 Wfoy®&® ffiTEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -27 ME 1 1 5 8 1 0.9 1 93.3 12 1 2.0 1 101.2 23 1 2.7 1 108.0 26 1 4.1 1 103.3 z N nJ F- o u a F Q O O \ w m O O O U) O U 1 1 5 8 1 0.9 1 93.3 12 1 2.0 1 101.2 23 1 2.7 1 108.0 26 1 4.1 1 103.3 z DATE DRILLED 02 /15/00 BORING NO. B -21B O F GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 2 QU) O U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger � N �j DRIVE WEIGHT 140 Ibs. DROP 30" uSAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. Medium dense; few gravel. BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -28 &I N to z DATE DRILLED 02 /15/00 BORING NO. B -21B a F- O o a O O } _J F- GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 2 LL W F m LL U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger Ui c 0 �_ � N Nj DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30' 00 67 O Q u SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 S ALLUVIUM: (Continued) 16 7.0 117.3 Brown, damp to moist, loose, silty fine to medium SAND; few clay. 25 1 ! i '0E 30 Medium dense. 1 i Total Depth = 3 1. 5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. ' Backfilled on 0211512000. 35 0 • BORING LOG TEMECULA pS TEM ECULA, CALIFORNIA CALIF RNLA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -29 N 0 w a < va7 F- O O ?r. m _ ° w 'c F- F- 2 LL } � w > ❑ m Z O Q vi U U LL �� DATE DRILLED 02 /11/00 BORING N0. B -22B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Au,Cr DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c ❑ 1 1 ' 11 3.8 88.7 f I. SM AI.IIIJVNM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 0 1 15 1 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 20 &®®re BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEM ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -30 0 1 a f o U O Q p N w Q� GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 to N to 1 Q ) J O n O w ¢ (n >- Lo 1 1 1 t 1 1 12 1 2.1 1 95.2 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/15/2000. C. -.; ": -7M BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA F PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -31 0 Z DATE DRILLED 02 /15/00 BORING NO. B -23B O Q� GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 03 a U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger (n >- Lo DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI U DESCRIPTIONANTERPRETATION SM AnuyruM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/15/2000. C. -.; ": -7M BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA F PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -31 0 1 /o N nJ. to ~O 0 no ... o w O LL n0. } w o 0 } N z O Q UU LL V � Q= CJi DATE DRILLED 02/11 /00 BORING N0. B -24B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 1 1 € 5 ' 11 2.2 100.2 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. - Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 15 1 1 =10 ® BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL qS CALIF NLA TEM ECUTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -32 1 /o m 'D w < ca/> ~ O O v1 0 m o w H V 1i; > t: w > O 0 m (n z O 1- Qto O U In En Nj U SAMPLED DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -25B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION Q SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. i 5 9 2.4 100.2 1 I� !0 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. - 1 IS 20 ® ®�e BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL NS ®�� ®& TEM ECUTA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -33 T� -2go &5 14 5- 1 1 '10 t 15 20 9 1 8.6 1 101.7 Z I Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. BORING LOG TEM ECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -34 7 w U Z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -26B a p _ ~QN GROUND ELEVATION SHEET I OF 1 d tan O U- w } J m O U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auacr 0O t~n u~—i w g u Nj DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" O m V) u SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI cc o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SM ALLUVIUM: J Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. 5- 1 1 '10 t 15 20 9 1 8.6 1 101.7 Z I Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. BORING LOG TEM ECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -34 7 i w a Ln H O O 0 O to a w W v~_i O U a. > N w O o m Z O Q N O U LL U) Q U DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -27B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Aueer DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c ? SM ALLUVIUM: p Brown, damp, loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. 1 j[II ' f 5 ' 10 2.7 101.7 € l i 1 { 1 €� 10 Total Depth = 10 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. ' Backfilled on 02/11/2000. - IS 20 ®®re BORING LOG SCHOOL XS TEMEMECUL ®& ,CAL TETIECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03/00 FIGURE A -3S Err, w LL Z DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -28B d g 1-- 00 a O_ H GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 3 v _ ' Q w r F O Q� O U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger t 30 _N 0 140 DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" to O Q U SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI 'DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION 0 SP ALLUVIUM: Light grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, fine to medium SAND; ' trace silt. ' 6 t S ' 11 2.1 108.8 0 ---'__ -- ---- --'--- --- -------- ML - - ------ -------------------- ... ---------- ----- --------------------------- ----------------------------- Brown, damp to moist, loose, fine to medium sandy SILT; trace clay. 12 82 104.7 - 1 15 ' 14 8.9 109.0 Increase in clay content. ----------------- -------- --------- -- - - - -. ......------------------------------------------------------------------- i SM Grayish brown, moist, loose, silty fine to coarse SAND; few clay. f i ''0 BORING LOG ® ®& ®®re SCHOOL b5 TEMEMEC '®/I � LA, CALIFORNIA TEbf ECUL.4, CA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 1 104134 -01 03100 A -36 N � LL U Z DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING NO. B -28B 1 g GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 3 Q } F- O QN U) LL m co U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger ? ~ Z LL� C p to o N �� DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" to O > Q u SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI 0 0 DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION € SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) E' Grayish brown, moist, loose, silty fine to coarse SAND. 18 10.4 105.8EE 1 � 1 r F- 10 Interlayers of brown; moist to wet; stiff; clayey silt. iEEE� iiE€ E ,E E > €i� 1 i`E 1 €E !E'�Ilf E 3 €jEEE[` E`: €EEE BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 ® TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134-01 03/00 A -37 _ a Q V O N 0O n� _ w ¢ F � E U a Z w O O m � >- Z QN U U wN U)� U DATE DRILLED 02 /14/00 BORING N0. B -28B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 3 OF 3 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION c SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) 28 Light grayish brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND. f 5 28 €€ ' Total Depth = 51.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. _ Backfilled on 02/14/2000. 55 1 1 0 e ®®r� BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE HOOL NS CAUF TEMECUI -F., CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -38 1 N a g Q F- t\ N to o w J t- Ln LL d r H U) Z o O O m Z O QN U U LLN (n U DATE DRILLED 02/15/00 BORING NO. B -29B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 am METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Dieter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RT LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI W DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION C SM ALLUVIUM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 1 S ' 14 1.6 97.5 1 f E Total Depth = 10 feet - Groundwater not encountered during drilling. ' Backfilled on 02/15/2000. 1 5 1 1 0 @y BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL q5 a/ TEMEC MECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO- DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03100 A -39 1 7a 73 LL z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING N0. B -30B t a F O _ e a O GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 4 Q 0 w ¢ Q O � m UCJ METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger 0O w t2 Nj DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" D 00 ¢ v SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI Q DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: Light brown, damp, loose, silty fine SAND; scattered rootlets; scattered charcoal fragments. 9 4.6 89.7 1 10 { Eck ! 15 4.4 108.1 jE[Ep( [ Blown; moist. pt.. 1 t E� f 5 1 20 5.1 106.2 i,E( ` E I E� ffEt` fEj i E[€ BORING LOG g ^+ ®� ®& ®®r TEMEMEC MIDDLE SCHOOL p5 V TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -40 73 1 ' w a F O v_ 0O m _ c w cc N LL a F w O Z O Q m N U V g u �� U DATE DRILLED 02 /11 /00 BORING NO. B -30B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 2 OF 4 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) 1 28 5.3 106.6 Light brown, damp to moist, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND; micaceous. 1 � 1 1 1 1 f� E 29 1 II 1 E 5 o g ^+ ®re BORING LOG SCHOOL qS TEMEMECUL , CALIF RNLA TEM ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03100 A -41 ' a < tan O O N 0O to w 2 U U a r w D > o z Q� to U U >- LL �j DATE DRILLED 02111/00 BORING NO. B -30B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 3 OF 4 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diarn ter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 14016x. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) ' 21 Light brown to brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine SAND; scattered thin calcium carbonate stringers. IE E 1 ff E -33 € Dense. E 1 5 1 [ ;r. iEE �EEI 0 BORING LOG TEMECULA qS CALIFORNIA TEf,tECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 03/00 A -42 15 ' ' w Q- N F O O ut co _ w cc m G a > u~—i w O ¢ o z O F- Q to m O U u- 6 N mm� DATE DRILLED 02111/00 BORING NO. 11-30B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 4 OF 4 METHOD OF DRILLING S" Diametcr Hollow -Stcm Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RCS LOGGED BY RCS REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION O ' SM ALLUVIUM: (Continued) Light brown, damp to moist, medium dense to dense, silty fine to coarse SAND. Lost SPT down hole; drilled out to recover SPT. 5 ' 1 Total Depth = 75 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. 0 BORING LOG TEMEMECULA, CALIF SCHOOL RNLA pS TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 104134 -01 DATE 03 100 FIGURE A -43 7(o 1 1 5 1 V) g Q O m 0 Co a w cc LL U } F- wo U Z F- U �j u DATE DRILLED 02 111/00 BORING N0. B -31B GROUND ELEVATION SHEET I OF 1 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow -Stem Auger DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs.. DROP 30" SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION c o 12 3.9 96.6 SM ALLUVIUM: Brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine SAND. Total Depth = 6.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. ® ® ! ORING LOG EC IDDLE SCHOOL p5 LijATEENIECULA, CALIFORNIA TE /00 FIGURE A -44 12 1 10 1 2.1 1 100.5 15 1 Total Depth = 6.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. W. r .. BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE inerae -m n'iioo A -45 if U z DATE DRILLED 02/11/00 BORING NO. B -32B 'w i IL p _ o _ U p GROUND ELEVATION SHEET 1 OF 1 vai O w > m Quj U METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diamet r Hollow-Stem Auger t2 w N LL �6 DRIVE WEIGHT 1401bs. DROP 30" � t to U SAMPLED BY RTW LOGGED BY RTW REVIEWED BY RI o DESCRIPTION /INTERPRETATION SM ALLUVHJM: Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND. 1 10 1 2.1 1 100.5 15 1 Total Depth = 6.5 feet. Groundwater not encountered during drilling. Backfilled on 02/11/2000. W. r .. BORING LOG TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE inerae -m n'iioo A -45 if I IL 11 L [1 [] Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488 -93. Soil classifications are indicated on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A. In -Place Moisture and Density Tests ' The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the ex- ploratory excavations were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937 -94. The test results are presented on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A. Gradation Analysis Gradation analysis tests were performed on selected representative soil samples in general accor- dance with ASTM D 422 -63. The grain -size distribution curves are shown on Figures B -1 through B -3. These test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance ' with the Unified Soil Classification System. ' Consolidation (Settlement Potential) Tests Consolidation tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed soil samples in general ac- cordance with ASTM D 2435 -90. The samples were inundated during testing to represent adverse field conditions. The percent of consolidation for each load cycle was recorded as a ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original height of the sample The results of the tests are summarized on Figures B -4 through B -7. I 11 Direct Shear Tests Direct shear tests were performed on undisturbed and remolded samples in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 -90 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions The results are shown on Figures B -8 through B -12. Expansion Index Tests The expansion index of selected materials was evaluated in general accordance with U B.C. Stan- dard No. 18 -2. Specimens were molded under a specified compactive energy at approximately 50 percent saturation (plus or minus 1 percent). The prepared 1 -inch thick by 4 -inch diameter speci- mens were loaded with a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and were inundated with tap 413.DIGRB do 2 Rev 109) M/1 ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 3, 2000 Temecula Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 1 ' water. Readings of volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours The results of these tests are presented on Figure B -13. ' Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Tests The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of selected representative soil samples ' were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 1557 -91. The results of these tests are sum- marized on Figure B -13. ■r' R -Value The resistance value, or R- value, for subgrade soils was evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2844 -94. Samples were prepared and each was tested for exudation pressure and R- value. The graphically evaluated R -value at an exudation pressure of 300 pounds per square inch is reported. The test results are shown on Figure B -14. Soil Corrosivity Tests ' Soil pH, and minimum resistivity tests were performed on a representative samples in general ac- cordance with California Test (CT) 643. The chloride contents of selected samples were evaluated in general accordance with CT 422. The sulfate contents of the selected samples were evaluated in ' general accordance with CT 417 The test results are presented on Figure B -15. 1._ 1I 1( 11 11 <uamcRBd� 3 R�. ION] 11 $r 1 SAND I I I I �I I I I I I I I I I I L FINES Coarse Fine PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 -53 1 GRI A VI E L I � f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I Z I I I w 3 I I I I I I I m rc I I I I I I I w I I I I I I I I i w I I I I I I I w a I I I Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I -- I I I I I l lt Pla U S STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 3' 1 -1T 1 3A 1? 318 4 8 16 30 50 10D 20 1w 80 TD LL a0 30 0 10 0 10 10 1 01 001 owl GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Symbol Hole Number Depth (feet) Liquid Limit Pasc m stit Index S oil T e B -20B 2 -6 0 S 0N876 as 00001 GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 B -1 1 0N876 as 00001 GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 B -1 1 1 t a2aaa -3s�, l_ Symbol Hole Number De th feet LI uld Umd Plastic Lt Plasticd Index Soil T e • B -288 2 -3.5 -- -- -- SP GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 31 00 B -2 GRAVEL S SAND F FINES coarse F Fine C Coarse I M Medium F Fine S Silt C Clay US STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS H HYDROMETER ws.. 4 B 16 30 5 50 1 100 21x1 1W I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I so 80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ZO I i Z I I 3 6 60 I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I� I I I I Z I I I 1 1 1 1 I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 1� 4 40 1 1 1 1 1 I I w 3 30 1 ( I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 ( I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I II I I 1 11 I I I I I I i i 0 100 m m 1 0 01 0 001 D Dom D Doom GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 -63 T e • B -288 2 -3.5 -- -- -- SP GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 31 00 B -2 GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 31 00 B -2 1 i 1 i i 1: i 1 i 1 1 1' IL 1�- il. S mbol Hote Number GRAVEL SAND FINES Plasticit Index Soil T e Coarse Fine Coarse I Medium Fine Silt Clay US STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 3 1.112" 1" 14 ' 1R' W' a 8 16 30 50 too 200 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Bo I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 20 3- 3 60 I w so LL I I I II I I I I I I I Z 4D w a 1 I I I I I w 30 u I I I II I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II i0 I I I II I I I I I I I I I I 0 100 10 1 01 001 0001 00001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 -63 S mbol Hote Number De th feet Liquid Llmd Plastic Llmd Plasticit Index Soil T e • B -288 30 -315 -- -- -- SM 628B 3631 5 .6 Il_ GRADATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -3 1 r' 1 0.1 -4.0 r -3.0 z 0 v 2.0 z a n X w -1.0 1.0 2.0 m w z 3.0 Y _U S H a 4.0 a 0 5.0 z w U w 6.0 a Z O a 7.0 O J 0 N 0 8.0 U mej 10.0 STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 1.0 10.0 - - - - Seating Cycle Boring No. B-113 e Loading Prior to Inundation Depth (ft.) 10 -11.5 Loading After Inundation Soil Type SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435 -90 100.0 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 Ym ®'� ® ®�® _ TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA �i PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B-4 SS 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 i i� i� 11 11. 0.1 -4.0 r- -3.0 z 0 z 2.0 z x x w -1.0 [exit 1.0 2.0 N W z 3.0 Y U_ F 4.0 a 0 5.0 z z U w 6.0 a z 0 0 7.0 0 0 8.0 U Sim 10.0 STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 1.0 10.0 - - - - Seating Cycle Boring No. B -10B o Loading Prior to Inundation Depth (ft.) 2 -3 5 Loading After Inundation Soil Type SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTm D 2435 -90 100.0 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 Z"Yo ® ®r� — TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA �Y�60s� PROJECT NO. DATE FIEB5 a,oe:osb. 104134- 011p4134_01 3/00 s� t i i 0.1 -4.0 r -3.0 0 z 0 FI) z 2.0 z a x w -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 1.0 10.0 - - • - -Seating Cycle • Loading Prior to Inundation • Loading After Inundation PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435 -90 aloe a, 545 Boring No. B -10B Depth (ft.) 5 -6.5 Soil Type SM CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 B -6 59 1 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1� 1! 1�- If 11 0.1 -4.0 -3.0 z o -2.0 z a a x w -1.0 •m 1.0 2.0 Y 3.0 _U F w 4.0 a 0 5.0 z w U w 6.0 a z O a 7.0 0 0 0 8.0 U (Z 10.G STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 1.0 10.0 100.0 ♦ - - Seating Cycle Boring No. B -18B • Loading Prior to Inundation Depth (ft.) 2 -3.5 Loading After Inundation Soil Type SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435 -90 6�BB ]d 5tls CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE l 104134 -01 3100 B -7 V 1 1 1 1 1 'i f 4000 3500 3000 N 2500 CL N 2000 N K Q N 1500 1000 500 I I 0 1 I I I I 500 1000 II I I till III +H+ I I I I I 2000 2500 STRESS (PSF) I it I I f l I 3000 3500 4000 Peak 320 31 SM I I III I i 1500 NORMAL Description Symbol Boring Number Depth (ft) Shear Strength Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (deg) Soil Type Silty Sand • B -1 B 5-100 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3 /00 B -8 59 Peak 320 31 SM DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3 /00 B -8 59 1 1. 1.. 4000 Symbol Boring Number Depth (ft) Shear Strength Cohesion (psi) Friction Angle (deg) Soil Type yp 3500 I I I B -18B 2 -3.5 Peak I I I I SM I 3000 I N 2500 a_ m N 2000 N K Q I w 1500 H# I 1000 I I I I I I I 500 I I i i l l I I I I l l I I I I 1 I I I I I I 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Description Symbol Boring Number Depth (ft) Shear Strength Cohesion (psi) Friction Angle (deg) Soil Type yp Silty Sand • B -18B 2 -3.5 Peak 130 31 SM DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE 104134 -01 3/00 0 B-9 & 5 ? 90 4000 Symbol 1 Depth (ft) Shear Cohesion (psi) Friction Angle (deg) 3500 I LL III I III[ I it III Strength I 3000 I • I I Peak N 2500 I SM I 1 a_ N N i I 2000 I F I it Q m 1500 III lilt litl I I 1 Il' 1000 1 I I I I I I 500 _ I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Description Symbol Boring Depth (ft) Shear Cohesion (psi) Friction Angle (deg) Soil Type Number Strength Silty Sand • B -19B 2 -6.0 Peak 350 29 SM DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FDIGURE 104134 -01 3100 q t 'I 't- or- 4000 3500 3000 N 2500 a_ rn X 2000 F K Q uj N 1500 1000 500 1 � 0 7- I II 1 1 1111 II IIII 500 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I' 1000 1500 NORMAL Depth (ft) I TFTE I I 1 1 it I I 3000 3500 4000 yp Number Strength Silty Sand a B -288 2 -3.5 Peak 210 34 SP I I I I t I I J I I I I 2000 STRESS 2500 (PSF) Boring Shear Friction Angle Soil Type Description Symbol Depth (ft) Cohesion (psf) (deg) yp Number Strength Silty Sand a B -288 2 -3.5 Peak 210 34 SP DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3 1 00 ) 8-11 e 1� 4000 I Symbol Number Depth ( (pst) e (deg) I 3500 Silty Sand ° B -308 0 -10 Peak 200 3000 SM m 2500 I a_ I fn I 2000 N I K I Q i I N 1500 I I 1000 I II II I � II I I I II I I III I I 500 I I I II I I I I II I III I I I II I I I D I I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) Boring Friction :ng Description Symbol Number Depth ( (pst) e (deg) Soil Type Silty Sand ° B -308 0 -10 Peak 200 33 SM DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 8-12 } �7 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH UBC STANDARD 18 -2 SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DEPTH FT INITIAL MOISTURE % COMPACTED DRY DENSITY PCF FINAL MOISTURE % VOLUMETRIC SWELL IN. EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL B -1 B 2 -3.5 Z8 116.4 150 0.0004 0 Very Low B -1 B 5-10 7.0 1207 113 00023 2 Very Low B -1 0B 2 -3.5 8.4 1149 217 0.0001 0 Very Low B -13B 2 -15 7.8 1167 155 00010 1 Very Low B -16B 2 -60 79 1160 167 00001 0 Very Low B -20B 2-60 7.9 117.2 12.5 00001 0 Very Low B -30B 0-100 74 118.7 126 00001 0 Very Low MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS PERFORMED III GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 1557 -91 SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DEPTH (FT) SOIL DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (PCF) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT B-16 10-150 Grayish brown, silty SAND. 131.1 80 B -19B 2-60 Grayish brown, silty SAND 1306 82 B -30B 0-100 Light brown, silty SAND 133.5 B4 EXPANSION INDEX AND MAXIMUM DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #3 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -13 7- I I 1 1 11 'l '1 'd f -- ,1 R -VALUE TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DEPTH (FT) SOIL TYPE R -VALUE B -12B 2-60 SM 79 B -19B 2 -6.0 SM 73 B -30B 0-100 SM 78 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE wI I R As I M U [aaµya R -VALUE TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 B -14 45 I C LI [1 [1 CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DEPTH (FT) PH _ RESISTIVITY' (ohmtm) WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE CONTENT IN SOIL" (PPm) CHLORIDE CONTENT--' (PPm) B -3B 2 -6.0 62 15,685 30 20 B -4B 2-70 68 13,640 0 15 B -12B 2 -60 65 4,365 20 30 B -16B 2-60 64 12,275 0 15 B -19B 2 -60 64 9,500 12 20 B -30B 0-100 62 12,960 0 15 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST 643 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST 417 ^• PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST 422 CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 'I PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -15 I I I 1. 97 1 1 ' APPENDIX C TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES 1 r r r r 1 r r r 1. r -� r r r_ r�. Gwdd.N dog q� I 11 i. Ninyo & Moore TABLE OF CONTENTS Typical Earthwork Guidelines Fiaures Page 1. GENERAL ........................................................................................... ............................... l 2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES ............................ ............................... ............................. 2 3. SITE PREPARATION ........................................................................ ............................... 3 4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS ................................................... ..............................4 5. COMPACTED FILL .............................................................................. ..............................4 6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL ................................................................. ..............................7 7. SLOPES ............................................................................................. ............................... 8 8. TRENCH BACKFILL ......................................................................... .............................I1 9. DRAINAGE _ ......... ............................... .............. ............................... _........_.. 12 10. SITE PROTECTION ................... .... .... ........... I ...... . ..... ... .......... ......... ....... I.. ..... ....... 13 11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS .... .......... ....... _................_........ .... ... . .... - ... ...................... 15 Fiaures Figure A — Fill Slope Over Natural Ground or Cut Figure B — Transition and Undercut Lot Details Figure C — Canyon Subdrain Detail Figure D — Oversized Rock Placement Detail Figure E — Slope Drainage Detail Figure F — Shear Key Detail Figure G — Drain Detail T,,W E Mail. Gwd,W, dot I TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES 1. GENERAL These Guidelines and the standard details attached hereto are presented as general procedures for ' earthwork construction. They are to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These Guidelines are considered a part of the geotechnical report, but are superseded by recom- mendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could super- sede these specifications and/or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It is the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these Guidelines as well as the geotechni- cal report and approved grading plans. The contractor shall not vary from these Guidelines without prior recommendations by the geotechnical consultant and the approval of the client or the client's author- ized representative. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant and /or client ' shall not be considered to preclude requirements for approval by the jurisdictional agency prior to the execution of any changes. 1 2. The contractor shall perform the grading operations in accordance with these specifi- cations, and shall be responsible for the quality of the finished product notwithstanding the fact that grading work will be observed and tested by the geo- technical consultant. 1.3. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to notify the geotechnical consultant ' and the jurisdictional agencies, as required, prior to the start of work at the site and at any time that grading resumes after interruption. Each step of the grading operations shall be observed and documented by the geotechnical consultant and, where neces- sary, reviewed by the appropriate jurisdictional agency prior to proceeding with ' subsequent work. 1.4. If, during the grading operations, geotechnical conditions are encountered which were not anticipated or described in the geotechnical report, the geotechnical con- sultant shall be notified immediately and additional recommendations, if applicable, �( may be provided. C 1.5. An as- graded report shall be prepared by the geotechnical consultant and signed by a '{ registered engineer and certified engineering geologist. The report documents the t geotechnical consultants' observations, and field and laboratory test results, and pro- vides conclusions regarding whether or not earthwork construction was performed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations and the grading plans Recom- mendations for foundation design, pavement design, subgrade treatment, etc., may ff also be included in the as- graded report. �t ' Typed Eve k Gwddma dm /00 Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines 1.6. For the purpose of evaluating quantities of materials excavated during grading and /or locating the limits of excavations, a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall be retained. ' 1.7. Definitions of terms utilized in the remainder of these specifications have been pro- vided in Section 11. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES The parties involved in the projects earthwork activities shall be responsible as outlined in the 1' following sections. 2.1. The client is ultimately responsible for all aspects of the project. The client or the client's authorized representative has a responsibility to review the findings and rec- ommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The client shall authorize the contractor and /or other consultants to perform work and /or provide services. During ' grading the client or the client's authorized representative shall remain on site or re- main reasonably accessible to the concerned parties to make the decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. 2.2. The contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of grading and other associated operations, including, but not limited to, earthwork in ' accordance with the project plans, specifications, and jurisdictional agency require- ments During grading, the contractor or the contractor's authorized representative shall remain on site. The contractor shall further remain accessible at all times, in- ' cluding at night and during days off. 2.3. The geotechnical consultant shall provide observation and testing services and shall make evaluations to advise the client on geotechnical matters. The geotechnical con- sultant shall report findings and recommendations to the client or the client's authorized representative. 2.4. Prior to proceeding with any grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be notified at least two working days in advance to schedule the needed observation and '( testing services. 4 2.4.1. Prior to any significant expansion or reduction in the grading operation the geo- technical consultant shall be provided with two working days notice to make appropriate adjustments in scheduling of on -site personnel. 2.4.2. Between phases of grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be pro- vided with at least two working days notice in advance of commencement of additional grading operations. ' GwdO.m doi T Rev 1199 JO/ I 1( '1 '1 i{ IC Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines 3. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the following sections. 3.1. The client, prior to any site preparation or grading, shall arrange and attend a pre - grading meeting between the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geo- technical consultant, and representatives of appropriate governing authorities, as well as any other involved parties. All parties shall be given at least two working days notice. 3.2. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the substantial removal of vegetation, brush, grass, wood, stumps, trees, tree roots greater than 1/2 -inch in diameter, and other deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing shall extend to the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas 3.3. Demolition in the areas to be graded shall include removal of building structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, etc.), and other manmade surface and subsurface im- provements, and the backfilling of mining shafts, tunnels and surface depressions. Demolition of utilities shall include proper capping or rerouting of pipelines at the project perimeter, and abandonment of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition 3.4. The debris generated during clearing, grubbing and /or demolition operations shall be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal dump site. Clearing, grubbing, and demolition operations shall be performed under the observa- tion of the geotechnical consultant 3.5. The ground surface beneath proposed fill areas shall be stripped of loose or unsuit- able soil. These soils may be used as compacted fill provided they are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and approved for use by the geotechnical consultant. The resulting surface shall be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to proceeding. The cleared, natural ground surface shall be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the specifications presented in Section 5. of these Guidelines. 3.6. Where fills are to be constructed on hillsides or slopes, topsoil, slope wash, collu- vium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Where the exposed slope is steeper than 5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit, or where recommended by the geotechnical consultant, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be benched and a key as shown on Figure A of this document shall be provided by the contractor in accordance with the specifications presented in Sec- ' f Typmal EnMw,l GwdeWedot Re. 1199 J /D � ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines tion 7. of this document. The benches shall extend into the underlying bedrock or, where bedrock is not present, into suitable compacted fill as evaluated by the geo- technical consultant. ' 4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS ' Removals and excavations shall be performed as recommended in the following sections. 4.1. Removals 4.1.1. Materials which are considered unsuitable shall be excavated under the observa- tion of the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the recommendations contained herein. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, vet, organic, compressible natural soils, fractured, weathered, soft ' bedrock, and undocumented or otherwise deleterious fill materials. 4.1.2. Materials deemed by the geotechnical consultant to be unsatisfactory due to moisture conditions shall be excavated in accordance with the recommendations ' of the geotechnical consultant, watered or dried as needed, and mixed to a gener- ally uniform moisture content in accordance with the specifications presented in Section 5. of this document. 4.2. Excavations ' 4.2.1. Temporary excavations no deeper than 5 feet in firm fill or natural materials may be made with vertical side slopes. To satisfy CAL OSHA requirements, any ex- cavation deeper than 5 feet shall be shored or laid back at a I -I inclination or flatter, depending on material type, if construction workers are to enter the exca- vation. 5. COMPACTED FILL ' Fill shall be constructed as specified below or by other methods recommended by the geotechni- cal consultant. Unless otherwise specified, fill soils shall be compacted to 90 percent or greater relative compaction, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557 -91. 5.1. Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor shall request an evaluation of the exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise recom- mended, the exposed ground surface shall then be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uni- form moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The scarified '�- materials shall then be compacted to 90 percent or more of the maximum density. The evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical consultant shall not be considered ' to preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is ' T,,i l Gmdcl dm ; 0.n 1/96 /03 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines the contractor's responsibility to notify the geotechnical consultant and the appropri- ate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review. 5.2. Excavated on -site materials which are in general compliance with the recommenda- tions of the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill provided they are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension. During grading, the contractor may encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the preliminary geotechnical study. The geotechnical consultant shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of '.' any such soils for use as compacted fill. 5.3. Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant shall be notified at least three working days in advance of importation in order that it may sample and test the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials ' shall be delivered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evaluation by the geotechnical consultant. ' 5.4. Soils imported for on -site use shall preferably have very low. to low expansion po- tential (based on UBC Standard 18 -2 test procedures). Lots on which expansive soils may be exposed at grade shall be undercut 3 feet or more and capped with very low ' to low expansion potential fill. Details of the undercutting are provided in the Tran- sition and Undercut Lot Details, Figure B of these Guidelines. In the event expansive soils are present near the ground surface, special design and construction considera- tions shall be utilized in general accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. 5.5. Fill materials shall be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior 11 to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils shall be generally uniform throughout the soil mass 5.6. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill shall be pre- pared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction 5.7.Compacted fill shall be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness Prior to compaction, each lift shall be watered or dried as needed to achieve near opti- mum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other appropriate com- pacting rollers, to the specified relative compaction Successive lifts shall be treated in a ' like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. 5.8. Fill shall be tested in the field by the geotechnical consultant for evaluation of gen- tj eral compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. ' 1 T.ymal EUth�ak GwdcW >dci RcV 98 5 164 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' Field density testing shall conform to ASTM D1556 -90 (Sand Cone method), D2937 -83 (Drive- Cylinder method), and /or D2922 -91 and D3017 -88 (Nuclear Gauge method). Generally, one test shall be provided for approximately every 2 ver- tical feet of fill placed, or for approximately every 1000 cubic yards of fill placed. In addition, on slope faces one or more tests shall be taken for approximately every 10,000 square feet of slope face and/or approximately every 10 vertical feet of slope height. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found to be out of conformance with the grading recommendations shall be removed, moisture con- ditioned, and compacted or otherwise handled to accomplish general compliance with the grading recommendations. 5.9. The contractor shall assist the geotechnical consultant by excavating suitable test pits for removal evaluation and /or for testing of compacted fill. 5.10. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall "shut down" or re- ' strict grading equipment from operating in the area being tested to provide adequate testing time and safety for the field technician. ' 5.11. The geotechnical consultant shall maintain a map with the approximate locations of field density tests. Unless the client provides for surveying of the test locations, the locations shown by the geotechnical consultant will be estimated. The geotechnical ' consultant shall not be held responsible for the accuracy of the horizontal or vertical control points. ' 5.12. Grading operations shall be performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant Testing and evaluation by the geotechnical consultant does not preclude the need for approval by or other requirements of the jurisdictional agencies. ' 5.13. Fill materials shall not be placed, spread or compacted during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rains, the filling operation shall not be resumed until tests indicate that moisture content and density of the fill meet the project specifications. Regrading of the near - surface soil may be needed to achieve proper moisture content and density. 5.14. Upon completion of grading and termination of observation by the geotechmical con- sultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings, foundations, retaining walls or other features, shall be performed without the in- volvement of the geotechnical consultant. 5.15. Fill placed in areas not previously viewed and evaluated by the geotechnical consult- ' ant may have to be removed and recompacted at the contractor's expense. The depth and extent of removal of the unobserved and undocumented fill will be decided based upon review of the field conditions by the geotechnical consultant. 'i T,pinl E�,Y Gmdfm -do, 6 R, 1198 105 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines 5.16. Off -site fill shall be treated in the same manner as recommended in these specifica- tions for on -site fills. Off -site fill subdrains temporarily terminated (up gradient) shall be surveyed for future locating and connection. ' 5.17. Prior to placement of a canyon fill, a subdrain shall be installed in bedrock or com- pacted fill along the approximate alignment of the canyon bottom if recommended ' by the geotechnical consultant. Details of subdrain placement and configuration have been provided in the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, of these Guidelines. 5.18. Transition (cut/fill) lots shall generally be undercut 3 feet or more below finished grade to provide a generally uniform thickness of fill soil in the pad area. Where the depth of fill on a transition lot greatly exceeds 3 feet, overexcavation may be in- ' creased at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Details of the undercut for transition lots are provided in the Transition and Undercut Lot Detail, Figure B, of these Guidelines. ' 6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL ' Oversized material shall be placed in accordance with the following recommendations ' 6 1. During the course of grading operations, rocks or similar irreducible materials _ereater than 6 inches in dimension (oversized material) may be generated. These materials shall not be placed within the compacted fill unless placed in general ac- cordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. 6.2. Where oversized rock (greater than 6 inches in dimension) or similar irreducible material is generated during grading, it is recommended, where practical, to waste such material off site, or on site in areas designated as "nonstructural rock disposal areas." Rock designated for disposal areas shall be placed with sufficient sandy soil to generally fill voids. The disposal area shall be capped with a 5 -foot thickness of fill which is generally free of oversized material. 6.3. Rocks 6 inches in dimension and smaller may be utilized within the compacted fill, ' provided they are placed in such a manner that nesting of rock is not permitted. Fill shall be placed and compacted over and around the rock. The amount of rock greater ' than 3/4 -inch in dimension shall generally not exceed 40 percent of the total dry weight of the fill mass, unless the fill is specially designed and constructed as a "rock 6.4. Rocks or similar irreducible materials greater than 6 inches but less than 4 feet in dimension generated during grading may be placed in windrows and capped with finer materials in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consult- ant, the approval of the governing agencies, and the Oversized Rock Placement Detail, Figure D, of these Guidelines. Selected native or imported granular soil (Sand Equivalent of 30 or higher) shall be placed and flooded over and around the wind - '� rv.i E.nn.,t cwa:t�eo 7 1;eC57 �5 O &5 k_. 1198 lob I [1 [1 U i! I. t i Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines rowed rock such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized materials shall be stag- gered so that successive windrows of oversized materials are not in the same vertical plane. Rocks greater than 4 feet in dimension shall be broken down to 4 feet or smaller before placement, or they shall be disposed of off site 7. SLOPES The following sections provide recommendations for cut and fill slopes. 7.1. Cut Slopes 7.1.1. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (hori- zontal:vertical). The maximum recommended height of a cut slope shall be evaluated by the geotechrtical consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace drains (swales) in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided in Figure E of these Guidelines. 7.1.2. The geotechnical consultant shall observe cut slopes during excavation The geotechnical consultant shall be notified by the contractor prior to beginning slope excavations. 7.1.3. If excavations for cut slopes expose loose, cohesionless, significantly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable materials, overexcavation of the unsuitable material and replacement with a compacted stabilization fill shall be evaluated and may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise specified by the geotechnical consultant, stabilization fill construction shall be in general accor- dance with the details provided on Figure F of these Guidelines. 7.1.4. If, during the course of grading, adverse or potentially adverse geotechr&al con- ditions are encountered in the slope which were not anticipated in the preliminary evaluation report, the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate the conditions and provide appropriate reconunendations 7.2. Fill Slopes T2.1. When placing fill on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), topsoil, slope wash, colluvium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Near- horizontal keys and near - vertical benches shall be excavated into sound bedrock or firm fill material, in accordance with the recommendation of the geotechnical consultant. Keying and benching shall be accomplished in general accordance with the details provided on Figure A of these Guidelines Compacted fill shall not be placed in an area subsequent to keying and benching until the area has been observed by the geotechnical consultant. Where the natural gradient of a slope is less than 5 1, benching is generally not necessary. However, fill shall not ' I- T, [Ea -,I G.&W�dot 8 P.v 1.98 7 fo ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines be placed on compressible or otherwise unsuitable materials left on the slope face. ' 7.2.2. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a temporary slope, benching shall be conducted in the manner described in t Section 7.2.1. A 3 -foot or higher near- vertical bench shall be excavated into the documented fill prior to placement of additional fill. 7.2.3. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (hori- zontal:vertical). The height of a fill slope shall be evaluated by the geotechr&al ' consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace drains (swales) and backdrains in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided in Figure E of these Guidelines. ' 7.2.4. Unless specifically recommended otherwise, compacted fill slopes shall be over- built and cut back to grade, exposing firm compacted fill. The actual amount of ' overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes shall be overexcavated and reconstructed in accor- dance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of ' overbuilding may be increased until the desired compacted slope face condition is achieved. Care shall be taken by the contractor to provide mechanical compac- tion as close to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface as practical. ' 7.2.5. If access restrictions, property line location, or other constraints prevent over- building and cutting back of the slope face, an alternative method for compaction ' of the slope face may be attempted by conventional construction procedures in- cluding backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope height, or as dictated by the capability of the available equipment, whichever is less. Fill slopes shall be backrolled utilizing a conventional sheeps foot -t}Pe roller. Care �., shall be taken to maintain the desired moisture conditions and/or reestablish the same, as needed, prior to backrolling. Upon achieving final grade, the slope shall again be moisture conditioned and backrolled. -` 72.6. The placement, moisture conditioning and compaction of fill slope materials shall be done in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 5. of these Guidelines 7.2.7. The contractor shall be ultimately responsible for placing and compacting the soil out to the slope face to obtain a relative compaction of 90 percent or more of the maximum dry density and a moisture content in accordance with Section 5. The geotechnical consultant shall perform field moisture and density tests at intervals of one test for approximately every 10,000 square feet of slope face and/or ap- proximately every 10 feet of vertical height,of slope. 11- T,,,.i La ,k G.&ch do, 9 R_ 1190 tot I _1 Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines 7.2.8. Backdrains shall be provided in fill slopes in accordance with the details pre- sented on Figure A of these Guidelines, or as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.2.9. Fill shall be compacted prior to placement of survey stakes. This is particularly important on fill slopes. Slope stakes shall not be placed until the slope is com- pacted and tested. If a slope face fill does not meet the recommendations presented in this specification, it shall be recognized that stakes placed prior to completion of the recompaction effort will be removed and/or demolished at such time as the compaction procedures resume. 7.3. Top -of -Slope Drainage 7.3.1. For pad areas above slopes, positive drainage shall be established away from the top of slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm and pad gradient of 2 percent or steeper at the top -of -slope areas. Site runoff shall not be perm tted to flow over the tops of slopes. 7.3.2. Gunite -lined brow ditches shall be placed at the top of cut slopes to redirect sur- face runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not otherwise provided. 7.4. Slope Maintenance 7.4.1. In order to enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting shall be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope plants shall consist of deep - rooting, variable root depth, drought - tolerant vegetation. Native vegetation is generally desirable. Plants native to semiarid and and areas may also be appropriate. Large - leafed ice plant should not be used on slopes A landscape architect shall be consulted re- garding the actual types of plants and planting configuration to be used. 7.4.2. Irrigation pipes shall be anchored to slope faces and not placed in trenches exca- vated into slope faces. Slope irrigation shall be maintained at a level just sufficient to support plant growth. Property owners shall be made aware that over watering of slopes is detrimental to slope stability Slopes shall be monitored regularly and broken sprinkler heads and/or pipes shall be repaired immediately. 7.4.3 Periodic observation of landscaped slope areas shall be planned and appropriate measures taken to enhance growth of landscape plants 7.4.4. Graded swales at the top of slopes and terrace drains shall be installed and the property owners notified that the drains shall be periodically checked so that they may be kept clear. Damage to drainage improvements shall be repaired immedi- ately. To reduce siltation, terrace drains shall be constructed at a gradient of 3 percent or steeper, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil engineer 7.4.5. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant shall be contacted immediately for field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair T.IW Gwddme dot Rc, ['99 10 a Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' S. TRENCH BACKFILL The following sections provide recommendations for backfilling of trenches. ' 8.1. Trench backfill shall consist of granular soils (bedding) extending from the trench bottom to 1 or more feet above the pipe. On -site or imported fill which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant may be used above the granular backfill. The cover soils directly in contact with the pipe shall be classified as having a very low expansion potential, in accordance with UBC Standard 18 -2, and shall contain no rocks or chunks of hard soil larger than 3/4 -inch in diameter. 8.2. Trench backfill shall, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical ' means to 90 percent or more of the maximum dry density as evaluated in accordance with ASTM D1557 -91. Backfill soils shall be placed in loose lifts 8- inches thick or ' thinner, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the recommenda- tions of Section 5. of these guidelines. The backfill shall be tested by the geotechnical consultant at vertical intervals of approximately 2 feet of backfill placed and at spacings along the trench of approximately 100 feet in the same lift. 8.3 Jetting of trench backfill materials is generally not a recommended method of densi- fication, unless the on -site soils are sufficiently free - draining and provisions have been made for adequate dissipation of the water utilized in the jetting process. 8.4. If it is decided that jetting may be utilized, granular material with a sand equivalent greater than 30 shall be used for backfilling to the areas to be jetted. Jetting shall generally be considered for trenches 2 feet or narrower in width and 4 feet or shat- ' lower in depth Following jetting operations, trench backfill shall be mechanically compacted to the specified compaction to finish grade 8.5. Trench backfill which underlies the zone of influence of foundations shall be me- ,. chanically compacted to 90 percent or more of the maximum dry density, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM D1557 -91 The zone of influence of the foun- dations is generally defined as the roughly triangular area within the limits of a 1:1 projection from the inner and outer edges of the foundation, projected down and out from both edges. 8.6. Trench backfill within slab areas shall be compacted by mechanical means to a rela- tive compaction of 90 percent or more of maximum dry density, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM D1557 -91 For minor interior trenches, density testing may ,�. be omitted or spot testing may be performed, as deemed appropriate by the geotech- nical consultant. 8.7. When compacting soil in close proximity to utilities, care shall be taken by the grading contractor so that mechanical methods used to compact the soils do not dam- age the utilities. If the utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use T,aW Ea ,,k Gwddmn dm 1 t P.- 1198 //0 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, then the grading con- tractor may elect to use light mechanical compaction equipment or, with the approval of the geotechnical consultant, cover the conduit with clean granular material. These ' granular materials shall be jetted in place to the top of the conduit in accordance with the recommendations of Section 8.4 prior to initiating mechanical compaction proce- dures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review by the geotechnical consultant and the utility contractor, at the time of con- struction. 8.8. Clean granular backfill and /or bedding materials are not recommended for use in - slope areas unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential for buildup of seepage forces or piping of backfill materials. ' 8.9. The contractor shall exercise the necessary and required safety precautions, in accor- dance with OSHA Trench Safety Regulations, while conducting trenching operations. Such precautions include shoring or laying back trench excavations at l :l or flatter, depending on material type, for trenches in excess of 5 feet in depth. The geotechnical consultant is not responsible for the safety of trench operations or sta- bility of the trenches 9. DRAINAGE ,. The following sections provide recommendations pertaining to site drainage 9.1. Canyon subdrain systems recommended by the geotechnical consultant shall be in- stalled in accordance with the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure D, provided in these ' Guidelines. Canyon subdrains shall be installed to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on project plans. The actual subdrain location shall be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant in the field during grading. Materials speci- fied in the attached Canyon Subdrain Detail shall not be changed or modified unless so recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrains shall be surveyed by a li- censed land surveyor /civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of filling over the sub- drains. 9.2. Typical backdrains for stability, side hill, and shear key fills shall be installed in ac- cordance with the details provided on Figure A and Figure F of these Guidelines. 9.3. Roof, pad, and slope drainage shall be directed away from slopes and structures to suitable discharge areas by nonerodible devices (e g., gutters, downspouts, concrete swales, etc.). 9.4. Positive drainage adjacent to structures shall be established and maintained. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the foundations of ` the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5 feet or more out- ' T>T'.i E.w,,,� awdfl.n do 12 v.,v vos Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines side the building perimeter, further maintained by a graded swale leading to an ap- propriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil engineer and/or landscape architect. 9.5. Surface drainage on the site shall be provided so that water is not permitted to pond. A gradient of 2 percent or steeper shall be maintained over the pad area and drainage patterns shall be established to direct and remove water from the site to an appropri- ate outlet. 9.6. Care shall be taken by the contractor during final grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of final grading shall be maintained for the life of the project. Property owners shall be made very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns may be detrimental to slope stabil- ity and foundation performance. 10. SITE PROTECTION The site shall be protected as outlined in the following sections 10.1. Protection of the site during the period of grading shall be the responsibility of the contractor unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties. Completion of a portion of the project shall not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the need for site protection, until such time as the project is complete as agreed upon by the geotechnical consultant, the client, and the regulatory agency. 10.2. The contractor is responsible for the stability of temporary excavations Recommen- dations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, shall not be con- sidered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant shall also not be considered to preclude more restrictive re- quirements by the applicable regulatory agencies 10.3. Precautions shall be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavation, and grading to protect the site from flooding, ponding, or inundation by surface runoff. Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately direct sur- face runoff away from and off the working site ``'Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps shall be provided to remove water as needed during periods of rainfall. 10.4. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be used as needed to reduce the potential ' ( for unprotected slopes to become saturated. Where needed, the contractor shall install t check dams, desilting basins, riprap, sandbags or other appropriate devices or methods to reduce erosion and provide safe conditions during inclement weather Rev 1198 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' 10.5. During periods of rainfall, the geotechnical consultant shall be kept informed by the contractor of the nature of remedial or precautionary work being performed on site (e.g., pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting, other labor, dozing, etc.). 10.6. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the geotechnical consultant and arrange a walk -over of the site in order to visually assess rain - related damage. The geo- technical consultant may also recommend excavation and testing in order to aid in the evaluation. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall make exca- vations in order to aid in evaluation of the extent of rain- related damage. 10.7. Rain- or irrigation- related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other adverse ' conditions noted by the geotechnical consultant Soil adversely affected shall be classified as "Unsuitable Material" and shall be subject to overexcavation and re- placement with compacted fill or to other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 10.8. Relatively level areas where saturated soils and /or erosion gullies exist to depths ' greater than I foot shall be overexcavated to competent materials as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant Where adverse conditions extend to less than 1 foot in depth, saturated and /or eroded materials may be processed in- place. Overexcavated ' or in -place processed materials shall be moisture conditioned and compacted in ac- cordance with the recommendations provided in Section 5. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, and compacted until the specifications are met 10.9 Slope areas where saturated soil and /or erosion gullies exist to depths greater than I ' foot shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where adversely affected materials exist to depths of 1 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture condition- ing in -place and compaction in accordance with the appropriate specifications may 'h— be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, and compacted until the specifications are met. ' As conditions dictate, other slope repair procedures may also be recommended by the geotechnical consultant ' 10.10. During construction, the contractor shall grade the site to provide positive drainage away from structures and to keep water from ponding adjacent to structures. Water shall not be allowed to damage adjacent properties Positive drainage shall be main- tained by the contractor until permanent drainage and.erosion reducing devices are installed in accordance with project plans. ' T)YmJ Ear4ixiA Gwd:Wc dm 14 fte. voe i�3 ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' 11. DEFINTTIONS OF TERMS ALLUVIUM: Unconsolidated detrital deposits deposited by flowing water; includes sediments deposited in river beds, canyons, flood plains, lakes, fans at the foot of slopes, and in estuaries. 1 AS- GRADED (AS- BUILT): The site conditions upon completion of grading. BACKCUT: A temporary construction slope at the rear of earth- retaining ' structures such as buttresses, shear keys, stabilization fills, or walls. < retaining BACKDRAIN: Generally a pipe- and - gravel or similar drainage system ' placed behind earth - retaining structures such as buttresses, stabilization fills, and retaining walls. ' BEDROCK: Relatively undisturbed in -place rock, either at the surface or beneath surficial deposits of soil. ' BENCH: A relatively level step and near- vertical riser excavated into sloping ground on which fill is to be placed BORROW (IMPORT): Any fill material hauled to the project site from off -site areas. BUTTRESS FILL: A fill mass, the configuration of which is designed by engi- ,- neering calculations, to retain slopes containing adverse geologic features. A buttress is generally specified by mini- mum key width and depth and by maximum backcut angle. 'I A buttress normally contains a back drainage system. CIVIL, ENGINEER: The Registered Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible _ for preparation of the grading plans and surveying, and veri- fying as- graded topographic conditions. CLIENT: The developer or a project - responsible authorized represen- tative. The client has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations made by the geotechnical I consultant and authorizing the contractor and/or other con- sultants to perform work and/or provide services. ' COLLUVIUM: Generally loose deposits, usually found on the face or near the base of slopes and brought there chiefly by gravity through slow continuous downhill creep (see also Slope ' Wash). COMPACTION: The densification of a fill by mechanical means. '1 �� � � � � � _� Typical F,eMv.ik Gwdc Lno dm Rcv 1198 li ' Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines ' CONTRACTOR: A person or company under contract or otherwise retained by the client to perform demolition, grading, and other site improvements. 1 DEBRIS: The products of clearing, grubbing, and/or demolition, or contaminated soil material unsuitable for reuse as compacted ' fill, and/or any other material so designated by the geotech- nical consultant. 1/5 ENGINEERED FILL: A fill which the geotechnical consultant or the consultant's '? representative has observed and/or tested during placement, enabling the consultant to conclude that the fill has been placed in substantial compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant and the governing agency re- quirements. 1 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST: A geologist certified by the state licensing agency who ap- plies geologic knowledge and principles to the exploration and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil, as re- lated to the design of civil works. EROSION- The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the ' movement of wind, water, and /or ice. ' EXCAVATION: The mechanical removal of earth materials. EXISTING GRADE: The ground surface configuration prior to grading; original grade. FILL. Any deposit of soil, rock, soil -rock blends, or other similar ff 11..: materials placed by man. FINISH GRADE: The final as- graded ground surface elevation that conforms 1� to the grading plan. GEOFABRIC: An engineering textile utilized in geotechnical applications such as subgrade stabilization and filtering. GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT- The geotechnical engineering and engineering geology con- sulting firm retained to provide technical services for the project For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the geotechnical consultant include observations by the geotechnical engineer, engineering geologist and other per- sons employed by and responsible to the geotechnical consultant. 1� ' T�yael Eanhx9� Gwddm> dol 16 Re 119P 1/5 Ninyo & Moore Typical Earthwork Guidelines GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: A licensed civil engineer and geotechnical engineer, ap- proved by the state licensing agency, who applies scientific methods, engineering principles, and professional experience to the acquisition, interpretation, and use of knowledge of materials of the earth's crust to the resolution of engineering problems. Geotechnical engineering encompasses many of the engineering aspects of soil mechanics, rock mechanics, geology, geophysics, hydrology, and related sciences. GRADING: Any operation consisting of excavation, filling, or combina- tions thereof and associated operations. LANDSLIDE DEPOSITS: Material, often porous and of low density, produced from instability of natural or manmade slopes. MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY: Standard laboratory test for maximum dry unit weight Un- less otherwise specified, the maximum dry unit weight shall be evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557 -91. OPTIMUM MOISTURE. The moisture content at the maximum dry, density RELATIVE COIvIPACTION: The degree of compaction (expressed as a percentage) of a material as compared to the maximum dry density of the material. ROUGH GRADE: The ground surface configuration at which time the surface elevations approximately conform to the approved plan. SHEAR KEY: Similar to a subsurface buttress; however, it is generally con- structed by excavating a slot within a natural slope in order to stabilize the upper portion of the slope without encroach- ing into the lower portion of the slope. SITE: The particular parcel of land where grading is being per - formed. SLOPE: An inclined ground surface, the steepness of which is gener- ally specified as a ratio of horizontal units to vertical units. SLOPE WASH: Soil and /or rock material that has been transported down a slope by gravity assisted by the action of water not confined to channels (see also Colluvium). SLOUGH- Loose, uncompacted fill material generated during grading operations T,,,a E ,,V G.&I.n doi 17 kc. uv3 1I Ninyo & Moore ' SOIL: Typical Earthwork Guidelines Naturally occurring deposits of sand, silt, clay, etc., or com- binations thereof STABILIZATION FILL: A fill mass, the configuration of which is typically related to slope height and is specified by the standards of practice for enhancing the stability of locally adverse conditions. A minimum stabilization fill is normally specified by minimum key width and depth and by maximum backcut angle. A sta- bilization fill may or may not have a back drainage system specified. SUBDRAIN: Generally a pipe- and - gravel or similar drainage system placed beneath a fill along the alignment of buried canyons or former drainage channels. TAILINGS: Non - engineered fill which accumulates on or adjacent to equipment haul roads. - TERRACE: A relatively level bench constructed on the face of a graded slope surface for drainage control and maintenance purposes. TOPSOIL: The upper zone of soil or bedrock materials, which is usually dark in color, loose, and contains organic materials. WINDROW: A row of large rocks buried within engineered fill in accor- dance with guidelines set forth by the geotechnical consultant. T)TtcalE vik GwdeW=do1 U Rav 1199 1/7 'I I I ' I I 1 I I FILL SLOPE OVER CUT NATURAL GROUND / 20' MIN.* OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE 2 ,,-- COMPACTED FILL ---� / / M,pS ER�pi / UN501T PALE / Rc MOVE / BENCH INCLINED / / . 4' TYP. SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE 0' TYP --.j BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BACKDRAIN AND T— CONNECTION (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) *MINIMUM KEY WIDTH DIMENSION. ACTUAL WIDTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY OEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON EVALUATION OF SITE — SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS. NOTES: CUT SLOPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E ea-tn lo.tl.g NOT TO SCALE FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND OR CUT FIGURE FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND SWALE AT TOP of SLOPE r 2 = COMPACTED FILL --" f / OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE j / CIVIL ENGINEER / / LE MMp16RTp / P8 / UNSU11 NATURAL GROUND REMOVE. / / BENCH INCLINED 4' TYP. SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE i �_10' TYP BEDROCK OR / COMPETENT MATERIAL, 3' MIN. 2% � AS EVALUATED BY THE T� _ 15' MIN. AND T— CONNECTION BACKDRAIN T GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT CTION (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) FILL SLOPE OVER CUT NATURAL GROUND / 20' MIN.* OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE 2 ,,-- COMPACTED FILL ---� / / M,pS ER�pi / UN501T PALE / Rc MOVE / BENCH INCLINED / / . 4' TYP. SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE 0' TYP --.j BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BACKDRAIN AND T— CONNECTION (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) *MINIMUM KEY WIDTH DIMENSION. ACTUAL WIDTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY OEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON EVALUATION OF SITE — SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS. NOTES: CUT SLOPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E ea-tn lo.tl.g NOT TO SCALE FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND OR CUT FIGURE 'I I �I tl. '( I (I 'I I! �E. t� TRANSITION (CUT- FILL) LOT R COMPACTED FILL / R / / / BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / NATURAL GROUND / / I 5' MIN. -4 1 3' MIN. OVEREXC�AVATE AND REPACT NATURAL GROUND UNDERCUT LOT y / R / 5' MIN -►–I j COMPACTED FILL -, OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT dIC BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE DETAILS ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE. ea Hhfb.dwg 3' MIN. NOT TO SCALE TRANSITION AND /I UNDERCUT LOT DETAILS FIGURE B I CANYON SUBDRAIN NATURAL GROUND COMPACTED FILL / REMOVE / BEDROCK OR SEE FIGURE A UNSUITABLE FOR DETAILS of BENCHES MATERIAL COMPETENT MATERIAL, 9 e ` 91�TL AS EVALUATED BY THE fGEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT LOWEST BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN : 0. SUBDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINATION SUBDRAIN PIPE .- OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER _ C ,a.mic.ewy A DESIGN FINISH GRADE "*l COMPACTED FILL CUTOFF WALL CONSTRUCTED _ OF GROUT, CONCRETE, BENTONITE, i OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT 10' MIN. -�= FILTER MATERIAL NON— PERFORATED PIPE I PERFORATED PIPE 20' MIN. �� MIN. NOT TO SCALE & ®®rP.,j CANYON SUBDRAIN_ DETAIL, u on ioc r 1r �1 I 'I WINDROW SECTION 30 S.E. SOIL (FLOODED) 6 " -48" ROCK � L_ i i V' OR RECTANGULAR TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET DEEP AND 5 FEET WIDE EXCAVATED INTO COMPACTED FILL OR NATURAL GROUND PAD SECTION FINISH GRADE STREET ZONE A MATERIAL . ' 5' MIN- , 0 1o_. 15' MIN. - 2 ZONE B MATERIAL o O o � 8' DEEP OR 2' BELOW DEEPEST WINDROW (TYPICAL) o O-T o PROPOSED UTILITY, ` WHICHEVER \ 5' MIN. IS GREATER O L- a--15' MIN. - -+� BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT ZONE A: COMPACTED FILL WITH ROCK FRAGMENTS NO GREATER THAN 6 INCHES IN DIAMETER. ZONE B: COMPACTED FILL WITH ROCK FRAGMENTS BETWEEN 6 AND 48 INCHES IN DIAMETER MAY BE PLACED IN STAGGERED FLOODING. UP ROCK FRAGMENTS IN LESS THAONN6 NCDHES IN SURROUNDED IMETERY MAY BE PLACOEID IN COMPACTED I FILL SOIL. SI FIED BY NOTE: SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E. NOT TO SCALE mrt hid.dWg P14 ®& ®®Cp OVERSIZED ROCK /V PLACEMENT DETAIL, FIGURE`D I 1 1� - i I 1 it i� i� 1� i, i� i� 1� 1� I 1� i� II ea- inle.dw9 MID -SLOPE BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) NON- PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE TERRACE WIDTH* - - -j REINFORCED CONCRETE- PAVED TERRACE (SWALE) -� COMPACTED FILL 2% MAXIMUM VERTICAL SLOPE HEIGHT, H (FEET) LESS THAN 30 60 120 GREATER THAN 120 SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE MI N. _ 2 i� BENCH INCLINED SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE 9W BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT WHEN POSSIBLE, LOWEST BACKDRAIN SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE BASE OF KEY (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) _ t TERRACE WIDTH AND LOCATION NO TERRACE REQUIRED ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 6 FEET WIDE AT MIDHEIGHT ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 12 FEET WIDE AT APPROXIMATELY MIDHEIGHT AND 6 -FOOT WIDE TERRACES CENTERED IN REMAINING SLOPES DESIGNED BY CIVIL ENGINEER WITH APPROVAL OF GOVERNING AUTHORITIES NOTES: 1. MID —SLOPE BACKDRAINS SHOULD BE PLACED IN FILL SLOPES IN CONJUNCTION WITH EACH TERRACE. 2. TERRACES SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST A 5- PERCENT GRADIENT, AND RUN OFF SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO AN APPROPRIATE SURFACE DRAINAGE COLLECTOR. 3. TERRACES SHOULD BE CLEANED OF DEBRIS AND VEGETATION TO ALLOW UNRESTRICTED FLOW OF WATER. 4. TERRACES SHOULD BE KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR. 5. REFER TO UBC CHAPTER 70 FOR ADDITIONAL REOVIREMCNTS. NOT TO SCALE SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL . /ac� - FIGURE.E I ■I COMPACTED FILL UNSTABLE '- MATERIAL �- ' PLANE OF WEAKNESS �7 BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, J rAS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT f4 :; f l_ PROPOSED GRADED SURFACE BENCH INCLINED � SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE (SEE FIGURE A) BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) COMPACTED FILL I L.e KEY WIDTH --►-i EXISTING GROUND SURFACE d 7.5 T DEPTH _ OF KEY NON — PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE NOTES: t. THE DEPTH AND WIDTH OF KEY WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON ANALYSIS OF SITE— SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS. , 2. AN ADDITIONAL MID —SLOPE BACKDRAIN AND TERRACE DRAIN MAY BE RECOMMENDED FOR SLOPES OVER 30 FEET HIGH. SEE SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL, FIGURE E. 3. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E. egrlhff.d�g NOT TO SCALE %/�'�® at ®®CQ SHEAR. KEY DETAIL 1013 FIGURE F i 1 1 i 1 i i 1 1 i 1. �N APPENDIX C NINYO AND MOORE REPORT DATED MARCH 3, 2000 it PETRA . ti q. 0 11 1 �\ /riiiX /fin'EiL"�I� r /EIFi F iT y�iyl' 'M * 1¢ ,4 ;k FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL NO. 3 AND MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 PALA ROAD AND PECHANGA ROAD TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Ms. Janet Dixon Temecula Valley Unified School District 40516 Roripaugh Road Temecula, California 92592 PREPARED BY: Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants 5710 Ruffin Road San Diego, California 92123 March 6, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 5710 Ruffin Road = San Diego, California 92123 - Phone (858( 576 -1000 • Fax,(858( 576 -9600 San Diego - wine , Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland - Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Phoenix /as & V "" ' Geolecm,cal and Environmental Seim es Consulrants ' March 6, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 1 Ms. Janet Dixon t Temecula Valley Unified School District 40516 Roripaugh Road Temecula, California 92592 Subject: Fault Hazard Evaluation Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 ' Temecula, California ' Dear Ms. Dixon 1 In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a fault hazard evaluation for the pro- posed Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 in Temecula, California. This report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the proposed project. Our re- ' port was prepared in accordance with our proposal dated January 28, 2000. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions or com- ments regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, g 0 NYO & MOORE �� IN 4' ' ISO. No 2T71 CERTIFIED ENGINEEAfN(i OLOG1Sf �Q/ Francis O. Moreland, C.E.G. GE 9TFpp CAL�FOP� Chref el R. RaWllyl G.E. Engineer Senior Project Geologist $y g Randal L. Irwin, C.E.G. X53 in Ge 706 L1 Chief Engineering Geologist ter. at ° /`z, I 111\G F FOM/RUI`4Mrlm/kmf Distribution: (6) Addressee 5710 Ruffin Road San Diego, California 92123 Phone 18581 576 -1000 Sari Diego Irene - Ontario - Los Angeles Oakland Las Vegas - Salt Lake Ciry -. Phoenix Fax 18581576-9600 �a� Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134-01 1 9. SELECTED REFERENCES. ............................................ .... ... . ............. . .... ..... - 9 5. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION .................................................................................. ........ 3 6 GEOLOGY ................................. ................................................................ ....................... 4 6.1. Regional Geologic Setting ............ ........................................................................... 4 6.2. Site Geology .............................. .............................................................................. 5 6.2.1. Fill .............................. ................................... ................................................ 5 6.2.2. Alluvium .................. .......................................... .................. ......................... 5 63. Groundwater... ..................... ............... ................................................................... 5 6.4- On-Site Faulting .................................................... ................................................. 6 1 9. SELECTED REFERENCES. ............................................ .... ... . ............. . .... ..... - 9 11 11 I 134-01FHR d- Fi2ures Figure I - Site Location Map Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map Figure 3 - Fault Location Map Appendices Appendix A - Log of Exploratory Trench T -1 Appendix B -Log of Exploratory Trench T-2 11 11 I 134-01FHR d- ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 ' 1. INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and our proposal dated January 28, 2000, we have performed a 1 fault hazard evaluation for the proposed Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 at the "Redhawk" site in the Temecula area, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The pur- 1 pose of our evaluation was to assess the possible presence and location of geologic faults (if any) at the site where structures for human occupancy (i e., structure intended for 2,000 person -hours or more per 1 year) may be proposed. The northeastern portion of the project site is located within a State of Califor- nia Alquist -Priolo (AP) Earthquake Fault Zone (Special Studies Zone). Therefore, in accordance with lState of California requirements, a geologic fault hazard evaluation was performed. lThis report presents the results of our field exploration, our conclusions regarding fault hazards at the subject site, and our recommendations for this project. We have also performed geotechnical 1 design evaluations for the proposed Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5, which will be located on the Redhawk site. The results of our geotechnical evaluations for Teme- cula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5, which included the exploratory borings shown on Figure 2, are presented in separate reports 1 2, SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services for this study included the following: 1 • Review of background data listed in the Selected References section of this report. The data reviewed included topographic maps, geologic data, stereoscopic aerial photographs, fault maps, Special Studies Zones maps, and a conceptual site plan for the project. �' • Subsurface evaluation consisting of the excavation of two exploratory trenches located on the eastern portion of the site. The trenches were logged in detail by California Certified Engi- neering Geologists from our firm. • Compilation and analysis of the data obtained. 1� Preparation of this illustrated report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommenda- tions regarding the site. 1�- 11 1d13 01FHKdx t /�"'No & *,ZTT°�' - -V �a� ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 ' 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is our understanding that the northwestern portion of the Redhawk site is to be utilized for the ' future Temecula High School No. 3. The high school will consist of approximately 13 buildings including classrooms, a gym, a shop building, a cafeteria and performing arts building, and an ad- ministration building. Paved parking will be provided between the school buildings and Pala Road. Athletic fields are planned to the northeast and southeast of the structures. Based on current con- ceptual plans, the Temecula Middle School No. 5 is to be constructed on the southern portion of the Redhawk site, separated from the future high school to the north by the planned Peach Tree Road. The middle school will consist of eight buildings, including classrooms and administration. Paved parking will be provided adjacent to Peach Tree Road to the north, and Pechanga Road to the south Athletic fields will also be provided on the eastern side of the middle school site. We anticipate that the new buildings will be one -story, slab -on -grade structures of wood -frame, steel- frame, or reinforced concrete construction. 4. SITE DESCRIPTION The Redhawk school site is an irregularly shaped parcel located to the northeast of the intersection of Pala Road and Pechanga Road in Temecula, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The site is 'I ( generally flat with a drainage channel approximately 5 feet deep along the southwestern side of the site adjacent to Pala Road. Several minor drainage channels approximately 2 to 3 feet deep are also present 'i along the southwestern side of the site adjacent to Pechanga Road. The property is bordered to the northwest by agricultural fields, to the northeast by a golf course, and to the southwest by Pala Road. Site elevations range from approximately 1,175 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the southeastern ' comer of the site to approximately 1,140 feet MSL at the northwestern corner of the site. Vegetation consists of a sparse growth of grass and weeds over the majority of the site and medium to large sized ' ± trees, brush, and weeds in the southern portion of the site. '1 '4 413401 FHR doc 2 /�� ®Ffi7 O& U� l; 9 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 ' S. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION Between February 14 and 18, 2000, California Certified Engineering Geologists from our office con- ' ducted a geologic subsurface evaluation of portions of the site where future school buildings are planned within the AP Earthquake Fault Zone (Figure 2, Geotechnical Map). The evaluation included the excavation of two backhoe trenches. The first trench (T -1) was approximately 385 feet long and was located in the northeastern portion of the high school site. The second trench (T -2) was approxi- mately 510 feet long and was located in the eastern portion of the middle school site Both trenches were excavated roughly perpendicular to the limits of the AP Earthquake Fault Zone and extended from a point 100 feet outside the Earthquake Fault Zone to a point 100 feet beyond the building ex- ' tending furthest into the Earthquake Fault Zone at each school. The exploratory trenches were excavated utilizing a tracked excavator and were oriented generally in a northeasterly direction, ' roughly perpendicular to mapped fault traces associated with the Wddomar fault system in the site area. The excavations ranged in depth from approximately 9 to 19 feet. The geologic units and features exposed in the excavations were logged by California Certified Engineering Geologists from our firm. Discussions of the units and conditions encountered during ' our subsurface evaluation are presented in Appendices A and B and are briefly summarized in ' Section 6 2. In addition, the geologic conditions, as encountered, are shown graphically in Ap- pendices A and B. Following the completion of our logging, the trench excavations were backfilled using the exca- vated on -site soils. It should be noted that some settlement of the backfill and the surrounding alluvium may occur and that the backfill and alluvium, in their present condition, are not consid- ered suitable for support of settlement - sensitive improvements. It is anticipated that the construction of a compacted fill mat, as recommended in our geotechnical reports for the high school and middle school, will remove mitigate the potential for settlement of the trench backfill and native alluvium. 1 ' A134 -01 rHR da 3 g (,?,/, I'T's l36 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 6. GEOLOGY ' Our findings regarding regional and local geology at the subject site are provided in the following sections. 6.1. Regional Geologic Setting The project area is situated in the coastal section of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to the southern tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province varies in width from approximately 30 to 100 miles- In general, the province consists of rugged mountains underlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimen- 'i tary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous rocks of the southern California batholith. The portion of the province in Riverside County that includes the project area consists generally of uplifted and dis- sected Cretaceous granitic basement rocks and late Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary units '( The subject site is underlain by relatively deep alluvial soils. The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of sub - parallel faults and fault zones trending roughly northwest. Several of these faults, which are shown on Figure 3, Fault Lo- {{ cation Map, are considered active faults. The San Jacinto and San Andreas faults are active fault 't systems located northeast of the project area and the Agua Blanca— Coronado Bank, San Clemente, and Newport- Inglewood faults are active faults located west of the project area. The Wildomar Fault segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone has been mapped near the eastern trt:; limits of the project site. Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within t this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right - lateral, strike -slip movement. ' ( The subject site is within the Temecula Segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone. Three faults associ- j ated with the Elsinore Fault Zone are near the site. The Wolf Valley and Willard faults are located on the western side of the site and approximately 2,500 feet southwest of the site, respectively. The Wildomar fault is located near the eastern limits of the site. The Wolf Valley and Willard faults show evidence of late Quaternary movement, however, insufficient evidence of Holocene move- ' ment has been established to warrant zoning as an AP Earthquake Fault Zone. The Wildomar 41301FHR da 4 o I31 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 Fault has been designated as being within an Earthquake Fault Zone by the State of California based on substantial evidence of Holocene movement. These faults trend generally in a northwest- ' erly direction along the base of the slopes on either side of Wolf Valley., 6.2. Site Geology Geologic units encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation include minor amounts of artificial fill and alluvium. Generalized descriptions of the earth units en- countered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface exploration are provided in the subsequent sections. More detailed descriptions are provided on the trench logs in Appendi- ces A and B. 6.2.1. Fill Scattered fill materials were encountered during our evaluation of the subject site associ- ated with past agricultural activities. In general, the fills are shallow and of limited extent. The fill materials are similar to the alluvial soils underlying the site and consist of silty sand and sandy silt. 6.2.2.Alluvium Alluvium was encountered in our exploratory trenches to the maximum depth explored of 19 feet. In general, the alluvial materials encountered consisted of grayish brown, brown, and light brown, dry to moist, loose, interbedded silty fine - grained sand, poorly graded sand, and silt. An older alluvial unit was encountered in the eastern end of trench T -1 which consisted of reddish brown to light brown, damp, medium dense to very dense, silty fine to medium sand. The alluvium contained numerous cross strata, graded beds and channel infills. 6.3. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory trenches or in the exploratory borings drilled for our geotechnical evaluations. Based on our subsurface exploration, we anticipate '{413d -OIFHR do< /3 O- Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 that the actual groundwater table is at a depth in excess of 90 feet. Fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface geologic conditions and structure, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors. ' 6.4. On -Site Faulting Based on observations of the geologic units exposed in our exploratory fault trenches, no evidence of faulting was encountered. The geologic units, as depicted on the trench logs, are ' generally continuous. No offset surfaces or structures were observed. However, we note that faults could be on the site, easterly of our exploratory trenches. At this time, however, we understand that structural improvements are not currently planned in these areas. 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of our fault hazard evaluation was to assess the geologic conditions with respect to faulting at the project site where buildings are planned. The site consists of a relatively flat parcel previously used for agricultural purposes at the intersection of Pala and Pechanga Roads adjacent ' to the southern Temecula city limits in Riverside County. The northeastern portion of the project ' site is located within a State of California Special Studies Zone for Earthquake Faults. Accord- ingly, our fault hazard evaluation was performed pursuant to State of California requirements. Our conclusions are based on,a review of background information, geotechnical literature, and the performance of subsurface exploration. Our subsurface exploration consisted of the excavation and logging of two exploratory trenches that were generally oriented in a northeast direction in the eastern portion of proposed building areas. The exploratory trenches were oriented to inter- `: cept faults, if any, based on the northwesterly trend of known faults in this part of Wolf Valley. Our evaluation indicates that man -made fill soils, and natural deposits of alluvium, underlie the site. Our background review indicated that faults had not been mapped on portions the site planned for school buildings. However, our review did indicate one active fault mapped near the eastern limits of the site. No evidence of faulting was encountered in the exploratory trenches ex- 4 I1' 01 FHR do p{ /33 Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 cavated on the site. Based on the above, the likelihood of there being active faults or potential for ground surface rupture due to faulting on the site where buildings are currently planned is consid- ered low. Should construction of the project proceed, we recommend that remedial excavations for the rec- ommended compacted fill pad beneath building areas, as discussed in our geotechnical design reports for the project, be observed by a Certified Engineering Geologist. We also recommend that if any building locations are changed from those currently planned, that the new building lo- ' cations be kept at least 50 feet westerly of the easterly extent of the exploratory fault trenches. ' 8. LEN1ITATIONS ' The field evaluation and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geo- technical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No other warranty, express or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this re- port There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construc- tion Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through' additional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the project, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, flood potential, or the pres- ence of hazardous materials. This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site condi- tions, If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office 11- 1x01FHRd. 7 * &NO& *UU a l3� ' Temecula Valley Unified School District March 6, 2000 Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 Project No. 104134 -01 should be notified and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request. It should be understood that the conditions of a site can change with time as a result of natural processes ' or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to government action or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Nmyo & Moore has no control. This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclu- sions , and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said parties' sole risk. e13"IFH2dx s & 'go &4IMSTc ►3S I Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 9. SELECTED REFERENCES March 6, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 Anderson, J.G., M. ERRI, Rockwell, T.K. and Agnew, D.C., 1989, Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region: Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 2. California Building Standards Commission, 1998, California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Vol- umes 1 and 2. California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada: dated February. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1990, State of California Special Studies Zone, Pechanga 7.5 Quadrangle. California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, 1999, Seismic Shaking Hazards Maps of California Map Sheet 48. ICBO, 1997, Uniform Building Code Standards: International Conference of Building Officials. Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas: California Division of Mines and Geology, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale 1:750,000. Kennedy, M.P., 1977, Geologic Map of the Elsinore Fault Zone Southern Riverside County, California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 131. Norris, R M. and Webb, R W, 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition John Wiley & Sons, Inc. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1989, Engineering Geology Field Manual. United States Geological Survey, 1968 (photo- revised 1988), Pechanga Quadrangle, California, Riverside County, 7.5- Minute Series (Topographic): Scale 1:24,000. United States Geological Survey, 1999, National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project, World Wide Web, http : / /geoliazards.cr.usgs.gov /eq. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Source Date Flight Numbers Scale USDA 8 -27 -53 AXM -1K 171 and 172 1:20,000 4110.01 FHR d.a 9 �dGii�E4r 3 ®Cu`fa'� 136 I I i I I /L rR �HC N Rp B D 6A PROPOSED F — f _ il-= : MIDDLE SCHOOL NO.5 a (SITE B) B -_ Qal Alluvium - Qal of exploratory boring (Site A) B -328-1 Approximate location of exploratory boring (Site 8) T -2 Approximate location B- B -4A B -7A B -8A B -12A FAIRVIEW \ E3 IA B= B -13A B-20A s -]P I!ht eR4 ayssc[ ._ ac i ---- B -16A -f noa ER+' •:VC .aT E. NG O 'ur Hurt: o -14A 13- 15AuIlioui'�m B- A 8 19A B -9A B- 10 R, B -27 um 26A zn B -78A I A B - 34A B -� B- A B -49A B -57A B -2 A B-38A I B -43A B -44A B -50A B- 56A B - 81A g- 37A/-B -45A / B- S5Aq_Fne♦ Q al 7, • Qal ` 11ip Qal v"s -y AVENUE B 21A, B-23 O Qa 24 B- 30A PROP HIGH SCF B-8 -29� �✓IA -Y II B -32A AUI 31A TREI B -83A T -1 FAULT TRENCH Y A i n 0 250 500 scale feet GEOTECHNICAL MAP TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL NO. 3 AND MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE -104134 701 I 3/00 Dff)/31 PROPOSED °\ LEGEND MIDDLE SCHOOL NO.5 a (SITE B) Qal Alluvium B -67A -q�- Approximate location of exploratory boring (Site A) B -328-1 Approximate location of exploratory boring (Site 8) T -2 Approximate location of exploratory fault trench m 0 i B6E SOE RI-AN RPCVIDEO By TEUECOU VALY UNIrIEO SCHOOL DISTRICT , V NOTE PINT PREPARED DURING ON -SITE RECONN,RSSANCE uND SNOULO NOT BE CONSIDERED A RECORD Of SUIZVM ALL DIMENSIONS IRE APPROrINATE Qal ` 11ip Qal v"s -y AVENUE B 21A, B-23 O Qa 24 B- 30A PROP HIGH SCF B-8 -29� �✓IA -Y II B -32A AUI 31A TREI B -83A T -1 FAULT TRENCH Y A i n 0 250 500 scale feet GEOTECHNICAL MAP TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL NO. 3 AND MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE -104134 701 I 3/00 Dff)/31 I I I I I 3 E � ' � tII )rtllfNll [I. NUN to. ----- utlriraia. � ,usot ncraRvarr \ • sw erw` mm arnrHOS `�s �srx.�mrtm iITE '�" ON Nrco Co. \\ . ". •rsoo+ moo ca.,.w se..a+ sow CLEMENM XSLAW ucco 0 30 60 scale miles I �emnAo e � ii to. _. FAULT LOCATION MAP TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL NO.3 AND MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA Olson PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 3 136 � i � � � � � � � � � � � � � r 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1� 1 1 1.. 1 1_ Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 413 01 FHR do APPENDIX A LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH T -1 March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 ,yo 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41 MA1 / N45°E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 i✓ EXISTING GROUND SURFACE v — — 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — © CROSS - STRATIFIED i SANDY SILT LAYER 0 O O b8 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FI b �8 �D to a O UNIT DESCRIPTIONS AGRICULTURAL FILL (PLOWED SOIL): CA) Brown, damp, very loose, silty fine to medium SAND ALLUVIUM: U Grayish brown, damp, very loose to loose, silty fine to medium SAND; abundant cross - strata; scattered medium and coarse sand deposits in paleo channels. Brown to dark brown sandy and clayey SILT layers, continuous except where channel erosion has occurred Cross - stratified sands generally grade coarser to the southwest end of trench, alternating fine to medium and medium to coarse sand layers, with gravel layers. Dark grayish brown, moist, loose, fine sandy SILT; slightly micaceous; finely laminated with gray fine and coarse sand. (R Grayish brown, damp to moist, loose, fine to medium SAND; with some coarse sand, 3� gravel lag in paleo channels, locally cross- stratified. Dark brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine SAND to fine sandy SILT Brown to dark brown, moist, medium dense, clayey to silty, fine to coarse SAND; scattered U root hairs and roots up to approximately 1/32" in diameter; scattered subrounded gravel, (generally massive). Grayish brown, damp, medium dense to dense, silty fine to coarse SAND; scattered gravel and cobbles; somewhat porous. t� Light grayish brown, dry to damp, loose, silty fine to coarse SAND; few gravel; scattered .J chunks of reddish brown fine to coarse sand (chunks of older alluvium). D, Brown, damp to mast. dense, clayey fine to coarse sandy GRAVEL; scattered subrounded cobbles and occasional clasts of intensely weathered to decomposed granitic rock; locally porous. -`ii �o0 / = O Light brown, damp, loose, fine to coarse SAND; graded layers (fining upward) roughly CE,, 2 to 18 inches thick, interlayered with gray, damp, loose, fine to medium SAND, cross - strata. Dark brown, moist, loose, silty line SAND with clay; interlayered with thin layers of fine to J coarse sand. I1 Light brown, damp, loose, poorly graded fine to coarse SAND; scattered gravel and cobbles. ! 1 1 41 NA2 / N45 °E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 65 70 75 BO 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 J J — DARK BROWN, FINE - — — SANDY, CLAYEY SILT LAYER © CROSS - STRATIFIED Cn _ m � Lu Zw -- i>1i J Q ___ _ _ -- G) © QW EROSIONAL -- _ — — — — m Z SURFACES —— —-—----- --- --- ----- >m L © w .E a -- - - - - - - - - - - - -G� 4:r;sVl^ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ T) l R i ffil7 11 & 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Verbcal) [nFAULT RY TRENCH LOG (T-1) HAZARD EVALUATION LA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND ULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE =A-2 104134 -01 31000 �4 30 r / 1 V ' 4134A3 1 t 1 1 1 / N45°E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 200 to m� m my1 �n C= Mr mZ Dm A 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical) [EXPLORATORY TRENCH LDN FAULT HAZARD EVALUATIO TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL N3 TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOO TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE =AXU3 104134 -01 3/00 I I34 STATION (IN FEET) 265 270 v w¢ zw J cc 2� ULL ¢w �w w Co / N45°E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) 275 280 285 290 295 300 305 310 315 320 325 330 + + + + + + + + + -- + + I ,0 Cn m� M m G7 n c= Sr m D m m 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T -1) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 quo I 41] M 1 i lt5 / N45 E STATION (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY (IN FEET) WALL OF TRENCH) 330 335 340 345 350 355 360 365 370 375 380 385 390 + + -t- + + { + + + + EXISTING GROUND SURFACE --__—_— CROSS - STRATIFIED W Q Z w © DARK BROWN -r 2 SANDY SILT LAYER - 2 0 /— — _ Li MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND LAYER _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ — _ _ — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I�) 0 0 0 I 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feel zontal and Vertical) RY TRENCH LO HAZARD EVALUATION nTEMECULA, D(T-1) LA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AULA MIDDLE SCHOOL N CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE L 104134 -01 3/00 =A-6 i lt5 1 1 i 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 Temecula Valley Unified School District Temecula High School No. 3 and Middle School No. 5 APPENDIX B LOG OF EXPLORATORY TRENCH T -2 41bs -01 FHR doc I March 3, 2000 Project No. 104134 -01 /0 areom / N66°E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE L + + + + + + © GRAVEL\ _ — ---- — — — — — — ------- - - - -—- yo ° ° °g° °--.,.,GRAVE o Co m TD C m Z 1 1p fr1 N © G , RAVEL o 8 OC GRAVEL a- O G ° o � D PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -1 /4%7I UNIT DESCRIPTIONS GEOLOGIC CONTACTS AGRICULTURAL FILL (PLOWED SOIL): — — — — — Gradational contact A Brown to light brown, dry to moist, very loose, silty fine to medium SAND; Sharp contact scattered coarse sand and gravel; scattered organic material (e.g. grass, roots, etc.). ALLUVIUM: C, Light brown, dry to damp, very loose to loose. silty fine to coarse SAND; scattered roots and rootlets; scattered charcoal fragments; scattered pinhole porosity; micaceous. (_C) Light brown to white, dry to damp, loose, medium to coarse SAND; scattered 0 5 10 - fine gravel; zones of cross - strata. Approximate Scale in Feel \) Brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND; scattered (Horizontal and Vertical) coarse sand; slightly micaceous; scattered porosity. D I Light brown to brown, damp to moist, loose, silty fine SAND; scattered medium to coarse sand, gradational upper and lower contacts. EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T-2) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TE HIGH SCHOOL AND ����Q &A ftur C TEMECUL A MIDDLE SCHOO L ri5 PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -1 /4%7I 419 82 N66E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 + + L + + + + T L -f- rk + -------------------------- ---------- ----------------------------------------------- — — — — - — ----- W Cb Z w J Q O c� �w U) s\— j yi17yo &*oore m3 M -n > C C = M r mz tp m 6) 0 5 10 Appronmate Scale in Feet (Honzontal and Vertical) M RY TRENCH LOG (T -2) HAZARD EVALUATION LA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND LA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 ECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3100 B -2 /u� 4134 / N66 E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 120 125 130 - 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 O` ROOTS ' ': ROOTS ss+� m� m m -Dt �n c= 3r M mm A 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical) EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T -2) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA rPAOJECT NO. � DATE FIGURE l 104134 -01 3/00 B -3 s T O + + + I- + + + + - PA " -r �•a.e:i� nv a. i l'i LLI CO Z W D cc: F— L w �o m— O` ROOTS ' ': ROOTS ss+� m� m m -Dt �n c= 3r M mm A 0 5 10 Approximate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical) EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T -2) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL #5 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA rPAOJECT NO. � DATE FIGURE l 104134 -01 3/00 B -3 s 41.w / N66'E (VIEW OF SOUTHERLY WALL OF TRENCH) STATION (IN FEET) 180 185 190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240 O + + + + + + + + + + + + Zw ROOTS --- -—�—-�-- ---------- -- -- -- -. —. •. x`w ._ - - — — — — -- � — U — - -. LL w —� C 9 .Y —�° GRAVEL�� ROOT yJ OD Cn m� m -n G7 n C= 77 r M m m to 0 5 10 ApproAmate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical) EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T-2) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL 95 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT N, . DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -4 -7" )( 013 Dlay a 150 s..e. f�f> .< " >':- Lp'i�. A%1rJ' °i�� `.:,iii , ,'"` _ — — — ct.3'`f- `�-r�J . -�...• _ _ _ v — — — — — _ _ _ _ _ — — _ _ 'CiAYEY - .e r . r 9 .Y —�° GRAVEL�� ROOT yJ OD Cn m� m -n G7 n C= 77 r M m m to 0 5 10 ApproAmate Scale in Feet (Horizontal and Vertical) EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG (T-2) FAULT HAZARD EVALUATION TEMECULA HIGH SCHOOL #3 AND TEMECULA MIDDLE SCHOOL 95 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT N, . DATE FIGURE 104134 -01 3/00 B -4 -7" )( 013 Dlay a 150 I [1 1 I 1 1 [1 APPENDIX D STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS P E T R A 15) I STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS These specifications present the usual and minimum requirements for grading operations performed under the control of Petra Geotechnical, Inc. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specifically superseded in the preliminary geology and soils report, or in other written communication signed by the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist. 1 I. GENERAL A. The Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist are the Owner's or Builder's representative on the protect. For the pun pose of these specifications, supervision by the Soils Engineer includes that inspection performed by any person or persons ' employed by, and responsible to, the licensed Civil Engineer signing the soils report. B. All clearing, site preparation, or earthwork performed on the protect shall be conducted by the Contractor under the supervision of the Soils Engineer. C. It is the Contractor's responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fills to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer and to place, spread, mix, eater, and compact the fill in accordance with the specifications of the Soils Engineer, The Contractor shall also remove all material considered unsausfactoty by the Soils Engineer. t D. It is also the Contractor's responsibility to have suitable and sufficient compaction equipment on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed. If necessary, excavation equipment will be shut down to permit completion of compaction. Sufficient watering apparatus will also be provided by the Contractor, with due ' consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and time of year. E A final report shall be issued by the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist attesting to the Contractor's conformance wnh these specifications. II. SITE PREPARATION ' A All vegetation and deleterious material such as rubbish shall be disposed of offsae This removal shall be concluded prior to placing fill ' B. Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Soils Engineer as being unsuitable for placement in compacted fills shall be removed and wasted from the site. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by the Soils Engineer, C After the ground surface to receive fill has been cleared, o shall be scarified, disced, or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction. ' The scarified ground surface shall then be brought to opunnim moisture, mixed as required, and compacted as specified. If the scarified zone is greater than 12 inches in depth, the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts restricted to 6 inches. Page 1 - 'I 102 I ' STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Prior to placing fill, the ground surface to receive fill shall be inspected, tested, and approved by the Soils Engineer. D. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipe lines, or others are to be removed or treated in a manner prescribed by the Soils Engineer. E. In order to provide uniform bearing conditions in cut/fill transition lots and where cut lots are partially in soil, colluvium, or unweathered bedrock materials, the bedrock portion of the lot extending a minimum of 3 feet outside of building lines shall be overexcavated a minimum of 3 feet and replaced with compacted fill. (Typical details are given on Plate SG -I.) COMPACTED FILLS A. Any material imported or excavated on the property may be utilized in the fill, provided each material has been determined to be suitable by the Soils Engineer. Roots, tree branches, and other matter missed during clearing shall be removed from 'I the fill as directed by the Soils Engineer. B. Rock fragments less than 6 inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill provided 'I 1. They are not placed in concentrated pockets. 2. There is a sufficient percentage of fine grained material to surround the rocks. ii '1 3. The distribution of rocks is supervised by the Soils Engineer. C. Rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter shall be taken offsite or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. (A typical detail for Rock Disposal is given in Plate SG -2.) D. Material that is spongy, subject to decay, or otherwise considered unsuitable shall not be used in the compacted fill. E. Representative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed c ! by the laboratory of the Soils Engineer to determine their physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading, the appropriate analysis of this material shall be conducted by the Soils Engineer as soon '{ las possible. F. Material used in the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed 6 inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer The fill shall be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherwise approved by the Soils Engineer, G. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that required by the Sods Engineer, the Contractor shall rework the fill until it is approved by the Soils Engineer. Page 2 - ' STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS ' H. Each layer shall be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. (In ' general, ASTM D 1557 -78, the five -layer method, will be used.) If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized by the controlling governmental agency because of a specific land use or expansive soils condition, the area to ' received fill compacted to less than 90 percent shall either be delineated on the grading plan or appropriate reference made to the area in the soils report. All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil, colluvium, alluvium or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of 5 horizontal to 1 vertical, in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer. J The key for side hill fills shall be a u numum of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials, unless otherwise specified in the soils report. (See detail on Plate SG -3J K. Subdrainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency, or with the recommendationsof the Soils Engineer or Engineering Geologist. (Typical Canyon Subdrain devils are given in Plate SG -4J �FL The contractor will be requited to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finish slope face of fill slopes, buttresses, and stabilization fills. 'tt{{ This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the i compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face will, suitable equipment, or by any other procedure which produces the required compaction. '[ M. All fill slopes should be planted or protected from erosion by other methods specified in the soils report. i N. Fill- over -cut slopes shall be properly keyed through topsoil, colluvium or creep material into rock or firm materials, and the transition shall be stripped of all soils prior to placing fill. (See detail on Plate SG -7J IV. CUT SLOPES A. The Engineering Geologist shall inspect all cut slopes at vertical intervals not exceeding 10 feet. ' B. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potenually adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, Joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soils Engineer, and recommendations shall be made to treat these problems. (Typical details for stabilization of a portion of a cut slope are given in Plates SG -5 and SG -8.) C Cut slopes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be protected from slope wash by a nonerodrble interceptor swale placed at the top of the slope. Page 3 - t 1s 9 'f ,I 1f ,I 11 l BUTTRESS OR STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL TO TOP OF BACK CUT 15' MIN �— FINISHED GRADE NOTES 1 MAXIMUM VERTICAL SPACING OF PERFORATED PIPE OF 30 FEET 2 MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL DISTANCE BETWEEN NON- PERFORATED PIPE OF 100 FEET, 3 MINIMUM GRADIENT OF TWO PERCENT OF ALL PERFORATED PIPE AND NON - PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE -- 100' MAX. --�i 27. MIN OUTLET PIPE (TYPICAL) 2Z MIN PERFORATED PIPE (TYPICAL) 155 4'1 SUBDRAIN } J� L I SEE DETAIL 30' MAXIMUM SPACING a ? PLATE SG -6 FINISHED GRADE I 2P 4' SUBDRA IN ! li TYPICAL BENCHING 2'MIN 2Z. MIN 7 WIDTH VARIES (15' MIN) NOTES 1 MAXIMUM VERTICAL SPACING OF PERFORATED PIPE OF 30 FEET 2 MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL DISTANCE BETWEEN NON- PERFORATED PIPE OF 100 FEET, 3 MINIMUM GRADIENT OF TWO PERCENT OF ALL PERFORATED PIPE AND NON - PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE -- 100' MAX. --�i 27. MIN OUTLET PIPE (TYPICAL) 2Z MIN PERFORATED PIPE (TYPICAL) 155 BUTTRESS OR STABILZATION FILL SUBDRAIN APPROVED FILTER MATERIAL. SLOPE FACE 5 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR FOOT. WITHOUT FILTER FABRIC, 3 CUBIC FEET WITH FABRIC A �- 2% MIN.,' 4 -INCH PERFORATED PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS DOWN. MINIMUM CL 2% GRADE TO OUTLET PIPE. 12' u �y12, MIN 4 -INCH NON- PERFORATED PIPE. MINIMUM 2% GRADE TO OUTLET APPROVED ON SITE MATERIAL PER SOILS ENGINEER COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90% MAXIMUM DENSITY. 4 -INCH NON- PERFURATED PIPE SECTION A -A PIPE SPECIFICATIONS 1.4 -INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER, PVC SCHEDULE 40, OR ABS SDR -35. 2.MINIMUM 16 PERFORATIONS PER FOOT ON BOTTOM ONE -THIRD OF PIPE. FILTER MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE FILTER MATERIAL PER CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATION 68 -1.025 CLASS 2 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING I -INCH 100 3/4 -INCH 90 -100 3/8 -INCH 40 -100 NO. 4 25 -40 NO. 8 18 -33 NO 30 5 -15 NO 50 0 -7 NO. 200 0 -3 ALTERNATE OPEN GRADED GRAVEL ENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC.(MIRAFI 140N OR EQUAL) OPEN- GRADED STEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 1 1/2 -INCH 88 -100 1 -INCH 5 -40 3/4 -INCH 0 -17 3/8 -INCH 0 -7 NO. 200 0 -3 I too NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY i i i i i STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL L--:�2Z S UNSS Ai �S� i i W FINISH GRADE i i i i 4' TYPICAL VARIES 10 TYPICAL COMPACTED FILL BEDROCK OR APPROVED FOUNDATION MATERIAL NOTE I SUBDRAINS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS SPECIFIED. 2. 'W' SHALL BE EQUIPMENT WIDTH (15') FOR SLOPE HEIGHTS LESS THAN 30 FEET FOR SLOPE HEIGHTS GREATER THAN 30 FEET, 'W' SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE PROJECT SOILS ENGINEER 11 110 I I ', 1 1 L.I I 1 I Ll HYDRAULIC BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT FOR REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 -2 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA rOctober 22, 2001 JN: 15- 100312 1 1 L.I I 1 I Ll HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 -2 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 1 Prepared By 1 ■ ■ ■ CONSULTING I IJN:15- 100312 PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION 14725 ALTON PARKWAY IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92 61 8 -2027 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 ■ www.RBF.com r H:\PDATA\15100312\HD\HYDRA-RPT.DOC E 7'�� ( 0j --c;2 October 22, 2001 Prepared for., Garrett Group, LLC 43529 Ridge Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 1 Prepared By 1 ■ ■ ■ CONSULTING I IJN:15- 100312 PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION 14725 ALTON PARKWAY IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92 61 8 -2027 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 ■ www.RBF.com r H:\PDATA\15100312\HD\HYDRA-RPT.DOC E 7'�� ( 0j --c;2 Table of Contents SECTION1 — INTRODUCTION ............................................. ..............................1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ..................................................... ..............................1 1.2 EXISTING WATERSHED DESCRIPTION ............................... ..............................1 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................... ..............................1 SECTION 2 — ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY .....................3 [1 I I I 1 ` 4 2.1 HYDROLOGY .................................................................. ..............................3 2.2 STREET FLOW ................................................................ ..............................3 2.3 CATCH BASINS ............................................................... ..............................3 2.4 STORM DRAINS .............................................................. ..............................3 2.5 WATER QUALITY ............................................................. ..............................4 2.5.1 Basin Sizing ......................................................... ............................... 4 ` 2.5.2 Water Quality Outlet Calculation ........................... ..............................5 2.5.3 Stage- Storage Data ............................................. ............................... 6 SECTION3 — SUMMARY ...................................................... ..............................7 SECTION 4 — TECHNICAL APPENDIX ................................. ..............................8 List of Figures ' FIGURE1 - VICINITY MAP .......................................................... ..............................2 ' List of Tables t' TABLE 1 - WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME FOR BASIN A ....... ..............................5 TABLE 2 - WATER QUALITY BASIN OUTLET CALCULATION ............ ..............................6 TABLE 3 - WATER QUALITY BASIN STAGE - STORAGE DATA .......... ..............................6 [1 I I I 1 ` 4 i SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report summarizes the hydraulic analysis performed for Redhawk ' Communities Tract No. 23065 -2, a proposed 220 -acre residential development and high school. This report provides the basis of design for the onsite surface and underground storm drain system and water quality facilities required to ' service Tract No. 23065 -2. I I I i ' Redhawk Tract No, 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 1 Garrett Group 6 1.2 Existing Watershed Description The project watershed has a tributary drainage area of 411 acres. The land is fairly covered with open brush and sparse development. The watershed runoff . drains from the east to the west. Runoff travels along Pala Road to Temecula Creek. Approximately 240 acres of the watershed is in the Pechanga Indian Reservation, which is sparsely developed. Three holes from the Redhawk Golf Course are currently within the project boundaries of the watershed. ' 1.3 Project Description The project site is located in an unincorporated area Riverside County. The vicinity map with the project site location is displayed in Figure 1. The ' development area is bound by the Pechanga Indian Reservation on the East, Pechanga Road on the South, Pala Road on the West and Dear Hollow Road on the North. The proposed land uses for the development include' /4 -acre single family homes, multi - family apartments, and a high school. I I I i ' Redhawk Tract No, 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 1 Garrett Group 6 1 1 1 1 1 L t 1 BGTTF„_ NORTH VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY The depth and velocity of flow in the streets were calculated using the computer program FlowMaster v6.0 by Haestad Methods, Inc. Street flow calculations and cross- sections for the 10- and 100 -year flows are provided in Appendix A of this report. 2.3 Catch Basins 2.1 Hydrology Flow rates used for the hydraulic analysis in this report were obtained from the 1 RBF Report titled Hydrologic Analysis for Redhawk Tract No. 23065 dated February 28, 2001. The 10 -year flow rates were used to design the flow -by or on -grade type catch basins and assure the flow conveyed by the streets will not exceed the top of curb. The 100 -year flow rates were used to design the catch basins in sump or sag conditions. The 100 -year flows conveyed by the streets remain within the right -of way. 1 regular sections. The flow in a system may alternate between supercritical, 2.2 Street Flow The depth and velocity of flow in the streets were calculated using the computer program FlowMaster v6.0 by Haestad Methods, Inc. Street flow calculations and cross- sections for the 10- and 100 -year flows are provided in Appendix A of this report. 2.3 Catch Basins 7 Catch basins were designed using the computer program FlowMaster v6.0 by Haestad Methods, Inc. Catch basin calculations and summary tables are provided in Appendix B of this report. ' 2.4 Storm Drains The Water Surface Pressure Gradient (WSPG) Hydraulic Analysis Computer Program was utilized to design the proposed storm drains. WSPG was developed by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. The program computes and plots uniform and non - uniform steady flow water surface profiles and pressure gradients in open channels or closed conduits with irregular of regular sections. The flow in a system may alternate between supercritical, subcritical or pressure flow in any sequence. The computational procedure is based on solving Bernoulli's equation for the total energy at each section and Manning's formula for friction loss between the sections in a reach. Confluences are analyzed using pressure and momentum theory. The WSPG input and output files are provided in Appendix C of this report. Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 3 Garrett Group 7 I LJ ' 2.5 Water Quality A hydrologic analysis was performed to estimate the volume of water assumed as the water quality volume for the water quality basin. The water quality basin has been sized to accommodate the volume of water to be treated, also referred to as the water quality capture volume. The numeric sizing criteria assumed for by the sizing of the water quality basins are based on criteria defined the California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region. Several BMP sizing criteria have been defined which may be applicable to constructed BMPs within the San Diego region. One criteria used for sizing BMPs is defined as.... `The volume of runoff produced from each and every storm event up to and including a historical record -based reference 24 -hour rainfall criterion for 'treatment' (0.6 inch approximate average for the San Diego County area) that achieves approximately the same reduction in pollutant loads achieved by the 85th percentile 24 -hour event." This criteria was used for sizing the water quality basin within the Redhawk project. Hydrodynamic separators will be used for catch basins downstream of the water quality basin. 2.5.1 Basin Sizing The volume of runoff was calculated using the method prescribed in the Water Environment Federation Manual of Practice No. 23 1ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87 — An Approach for Estimating Storm Water Quality Capture Volume (Pg. 175). The analytical procedure is based on a simple transformation of each storm's volume of precipitation to a runoff volume using a coefficient of runoff. A third -order regression equation to calculate the runoff coefficient was derived for this transformation. The runoff coefficient is calculated with the following equation. C = 0. 858P — 0. 78f +0.7741 +0.04 Where ' C = runoff coefficient, and i = watershed imperviousness ratio. The following equation uses the prescribed precipitation depth of 0.6 inch and relates it to the "maximized" detention volume. Po= (a'C)'P6 Where Po = maximized detention volume determined using the volume capture ratio as its basis, watershed inch; a = 24 hour drain time regression constant from least- squares analysis; Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 4 Garrett Group H I 1 1 i 1 L i C = watershed runoff coefficient; and P6 = mean storm precipitation volume (0.6 inch), watershed inch. Table 1 below summarize the water quality basin volume calculated using the procedure above. Table 1 — Water Quality Capture Volume for Basin A Description Values I Notes Imperviousness Ratio i 1 0.50 JPIate E -6.3 RCFCD Hydrology Manual Runoff Coefficient C 0.34 IC = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04 Drain Time of Capture Volume, hrs t 24 Regression Constant a 1.582 ITable 5.4 ASCE Manual No. 87 Mean Storm Precipitation, in P6 0.6 1 Figure 5.3 ASCE Manual No. 87 Maximized Detention Volume, in Po 0.32 1130 = a' C - P6 Po converted to ac -ft/ac Po 0.027 Watershed Area, Acre A 151.5 Total Tributary Area to System "A" Basin Volume, ac -ft Vo 4.07 Additional 20% for sediment, ac -ft V 4.88 The water quality basin is designed as a flow- through type basin. The water quality capture volume of 4.88 ac -ft will fill the basin to a depth of 5.4 feet. Larger storms through the 100 -year event will flow over a weir at the 5.5 -foot depth and into the 72" storm drain Line "A -1 ". 1 2.5.2 Water Quality Outlet Calculation An orifice at the basin outlet structure will hydraulically control the outflow of the water quality capture volume to meet required 24 hour drain time. The orifice is 1 sized using the following equation from the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Project Planning and Design Guide. a 2A(H —Ho) 5 = (7x10'� (H— Ho1o.s = I 3600CT(2g)"' CT Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 5 Garrett Group where: a = area of orifice (ft) A = average surface area of the pond (ft2) ' C = orifice coefficient T= drawdown time of full pond (hrs.) g = Gravity (32.2 ft/s2) H = elevation when the pond is full (ft) Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 5 Garrett Group Ho = final elevation when pond is empty (ft) Orifice diameter for Basin A is 0.72 ft. Table 2 below shows the calculation for the orifice size. Table 2 - Water Quality Basin Outlet Calculation a = area of orifice (ft2) 0.406 d = diameter of orifice ft 0.719 A = average surface area of the pond (ft2) 39,640 C = orifice coefficient 0.66 T = drawdown time of full pond hrs. 24 = Gravity 32.2 fUs2 32.2 H = elevation when the pond is full ft 1151.50 Ho = final elevation when and is em ft 1146.00 2.5.3 Stage- Storage Data The Stage- Storage data for the water quality basin is given in Table 3 below. Table 3 - Water Quality Basin Stage- Storage Data Depth Elevation Surface Area Volume Total Volume ft ft ac ac -ft ac -ft 0 1146 0.6249 0.00 0 1 1147 0.7171 0.67 0.67 2 1148 0.8138 0.77 1.44 3 1149 1 0.9226 0.87 2.30 4 1150 1.0318 0.98 3.28 5 1151 1.1423 1.09 4.37 6 1152 1.2540 1.20 5.57 7 1153 1.3703 1.31 6.88 8 1154 1.5283 1 1.45 8.33 9 1155 1.6606 1.59 9.92 10 1156 1.7667 1.71 11.64 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Hydraulic Analysis October 22, 2001 6 Garrett Group r I SECTION 3 - SUMMARY This hydraulic study provides guidance to the development of the project on drainage and runoff management/water quality issues as individual phases are constructed during the development period of the project. This study consists of ' two general components: 1. Design of the storm drain system to adequately convey the 10 -year storm ' runoff in the street and the 100 -year runoff within the right -of -way. 2. Estimates of the stormwater quality capture volume to be used in designing Ithe water quality facilities. Runoff from the watershed will discharge into the Pala Road Channel currently under design by Lohr & Associates. Overflow from Pechanga Creek will also add to the runoff discharging into the Pala Road Channel. References ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87, WEF Manual of Practice No. 23, Urban Runoff Quality Management, 1998. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, Water Quality Control Basin Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Hydrology Manual, 1978. State of California Department of Transportation, Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Project Planning and Design Guide, May 2000 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis 7 Garrett Group -7"�C� 30�.5 -C2 /I 1 r i i 1 r 1 1 r r SECTION 4 - TECHNICAL APPENDIX APPENDIX A — STREET /GUTTER FLOW CALCULATIONS APPENDIX B — CATCH BASIN CALCULATIONS APPENDIX C — WSPG STORM DRAIN HYDRAULICS APPENDIX D — WATER QUALITY BASIN OUTLET CALCULATIONS Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Hydraulic Analysis October 22, 2001 8 Garrett Group 1A I 1 L I 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Hydraulic Analysis APPENDIX A STREET /GUTTER FLOW CALCULATIONS REDHAW K TRACT NO. 23065 m October 22, 2007 Garrett Group /3 maw Mm M M M M M M r1= s M M M MINN M Gutter Report Gutter Location Slope (ft/ft) - Discharge (cis) Gutter Width (ft) Gutter Cross Slope (ftift) Road Cross Slope (ft/ft) Spread (tt) Mannings Coefficient Flow Area (ft =) Depth (it) Gutter Depression (in) Velocity (ft/s) 10 -Year Deer Hollow N/E of Pala Road 0.005000 910 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 18.03 0.015 3.3 0.46 1.1 2.74 10 -Year Deer Hollow Road S/W of Peach Tree 0.030000 6.30 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 10.89 0.015 1.3 031 1 1 5.02 10 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow N/W Side 0.019200 7.50 2.00 0.083000 0.020000 12.42 0.015 1.7 0.37 1.5 4.50 10 -Year Peach Tree Rd. S/E of Deer Hollow 0.006500 1.60 1.50 0.083000 0020000 8.41 0.015 0.6 0.26 1.1 2.06 10 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrose North Side 0.009000 1290 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 18.42 0 015 3.5 0.46 1.1 3.73 10 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrose South Side 0.009000 6.40 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 13.98 0.015 2.0 0.37 1.1 3.16 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 41 East Side 0.005000 7.50 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 16.72 0.015 2.9 0.43 1.1 2.62 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 42 East Side 0.005000 8.00 1.50 0083000 0.020000 17.14 0.015 3.0 0.44 1.1 2.66 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 43 East Side 0.007000 9.70 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 17.31 0.015 3.1 0.44 1.1 3.16 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 North Side 0.007000 0.90 1 50 0.083000 0.020000 6.33 0.015 05 0.22 1.1 1.91 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 South Side 0.007000 1580 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 20.91 0.015 4.4 0.51 1.1 3.56 100 -Year Deer Hollow N/E of Pala Road 0.005000 14.20 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 21.41 0.015 4.7 0.52 1.1 3.05 100 -Year Deer Hollow Road S/W of Peach Tree 0.030000 - 9.80 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 13.03 - 0.015 1.8 0.36 1.1 5.54 100 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow N/W Side 0.019200 11.80 2.00 0.083000 0.020000 15.02 0.015 2.4 0.43 1.5 4.96 100 -Year Peach Tree Rd. S/E of Deer Hollow 0.006500 2.50 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 10.18 0.015 1.1 0.30 1.1 2.26 100 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrose North Side 0.009000 20.20 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 21.90 0.015 4.9 0.53 1.1 4.15 100 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrose South Side 0009000 10.00 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 16.68 0.015 2.9 0.43 1.1 3.51 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 41 East Side 0.005000 11.70 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 19.87 0.015 4.0 0.49 1.1 2.91 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 42 East Side 0.005000 12.50 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 20.38 0.015 4.2 0.50 1.1 2.96 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 43 East Side 0.007000 1520 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 20.60 0.015 4.3 0.51 1.1 3.52 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 North Side 0.007000 1.50 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 8.04 0.015 0.7 0.26 1.1 2.09 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 South Side 0.007000 31.00 1.50 0.083000 0.020000 27.06 0.015 7.4 0.64 1.1 4.19 Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost d Associates FlowMaster v6 0 (614b) 05/12/01 05:25:02 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M MI M A M M i M M M M i!= M M =1 M Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Deer Hollow N/E of PALA R.O. Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 ft/ft Discharge 9.10 cis Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wit Spread 1803 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V :1 0.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h1pdataN 15100312 \hdViowmstr\312fmO5l201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost & Assoolates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b( 05/12101 05:34:55 PM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 rs �• r �. r r M on or r r rr )r M, r ■r r M iir Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Deer Hollow Road S/W of PFA4i -rRFE Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0300 Wit Discharge 6.30 cfs Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slo11.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 ft/ft Spread 10.89 tt Mannings Coeffic 0.015 v.vv 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 VA0.0N HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (6141b) (� 05/12/01 05:35:17 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow tl/W 5 r PE Type Gutter Section Salve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0192 tVft Discharge 7.50 cfs Gutter Width 2.00 it Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 ft/ft Spread 12.42 it Mannings Coefflc 0.015 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 V:1 0.0 N HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:lpdata% 15100312 V1dVlowmstr1312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Bern, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b] ,� ` 05112/01 05:35:31 PM 1D Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 rIMI r r r r r M it M r IM r mm r r• �r Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Peach Tree Rd. S/E of DE EP. t40LLov.1 Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0065 Wit Discharge 1.60 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slol 1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 it/ft Spread 841 R Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0. 0. 0.- 0+00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 VAO.ON H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdVlowmstr\712fm051201.fm2 Robert Bein, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6 01614bj 05/12/01 05:36:09 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Peach Tree Road East of PrimroiE 004LTA 51PE Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0090 Wilt Discharge 12.90 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slo(i.0830 Wft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wft Spread 18.42 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V: 10.0 L\ HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE 1 h:tpdala\ 75100312 V1dVlowmstr\312im051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b) 05/12101 05:36:26 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 r� ii�ir ii• r ir1 r r� r � r r r r r r r rr Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primro6E 50v7N t i c F_ Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0090 fVft Discharge 6.40 cfs Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slo[ 1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 ft/ft Spread 13.98 If Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 V:10.0� H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hWlowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b] O 05/12101 05:36:47 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 41 FilsT Sl c>F_ Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 iVft Discharge 7.50 On Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slol 1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Will Spread 16.72 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 V :10.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beim, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6 0 1614b) 05/12101 05:37:02 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 r �. ii. �■. r� r � i� � � �. i� i� i�r r r r i�r � Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 42 EASr i 10 F- Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 tt/ft Discharge 8.00 cfs Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 h/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 fVft Spread 17.14 If Meanings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V: 10.0 NTS ` Title Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE V h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hcMlowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Assacletes FlowMaster v6.0 I614bj 05/12/01 05:37:15 PM ® Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 r M = M = w = " = = = = M M = M = M Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 43 EAST Sipe- Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0070 Wit Discharge 9.70 cis Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wit Spread 17.31 ft Mannings Coeffic 0.015 Ia .AIIN i 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V: 1 0.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer, RHE "h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hcMowmstr\312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 6 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 f614bj ILA 05/12/01 05:37:44 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 Uo(RTN Sr17C. Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 10070 Nit Discharge 0.90 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slott 0830 Nit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Nft Spread 6.33 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.50' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 v:10.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:lpdata1 15100312 1hdVlowmstr1312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 )614b1 05/12/01 05:37:54 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 � � r i� � ii♦ i� f• � ■� ice■ i� iii � i� i� i� f• � Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 S OOT H 5109- Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0070 ft/ft Discharge 15.80 cfs Gutter Width 1.50 It Gutter Cross Slop.0830 tt/ft Road Cross Slop 10200 Wit Spread 20.91 It Mannings Coeffic 0.015 (11141-1 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 V: 1 0.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE !� h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdVlowmstr\312fmO51201.im2 Robert Bein, William Frost A Associates FlowMaster v6.0 1614bj N05/12101 05:38:07 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M = OiiBif• M = if• = = = = = Oifiif• = M i M = = Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Deer Hollow N/E of PALA JZO^97 Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 iUtt Discharge 14.20 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Sloli.0830 fl/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 tuft Spread 21.41 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.55 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA 0.0 HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:lpdata %l 5100312 UtdViowmstr1312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 3 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 05/12/01 05:39:05 PM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M M M M M M M M ! ! M M M M M M M M M Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Deer Hollow Road S/W of FCAc.14 TREE - Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0300 ft/ft Discharge 9.80 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slo11.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wit Spread 13.03 ft Mannings Coefflc 0.015 v 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 V:10.0N H:1 NITS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Protect Engineer* RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 6 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) ,� ` 05/12/01 05:39:33 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Worksheet Type Solve For Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section 100 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow P/w St PC Gutter Section Spread Section Data Slope 10192 Will Discharge 11.80 cis Gutter Width 2.00 it Gutter Cross Slo110830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 10200 1Uft Spread 15.02 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 VA O.O N H:1 NITS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE 9*4 hApdata\ 15100312 \hdVlOwmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 1614bj 05112/01 05:40:20 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description worKsneer f uu -rear reacn I fee H0. 5/t of UEF_fi Nor.1.. W Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0065 tt/ft Discharge 2.50 cis Gutter Width 1.50 tt Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 iVft Spread 10.18 If Mannings Coeffic 0.015 V 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 VA O.O N H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdViowmstr1312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 0511001 05:41:07 PM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M mom Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrose AiOttT H i t PF- Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0090 Wit Discharge 20.20 cis Gutter Width 1.50 If Gutter Cross S1011.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Will Spread 21.90 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 1 .1 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA O.OL H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group - Project Engineer: RHE O h:lpdata\ 15100312V1d \flowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b) 05/12101 05:41:19 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06706 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 # iii ii a M M M " = l� �. r• 1� Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Peach Tree Road East of Primrobc Sourµ- 5 t yr Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 10090 Will Discharge 10.00 cis Gutter Width 1.50 It Gutter Cross S10110830 Wit Road Cross Slop 10200 Wit Spread 16.68 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 VA O.O L HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE W h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdVlowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 8 Assoclates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b] \ 05/12/01 05:41:41 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 4111111111 iii No its no no as � am Mil iii M M � r M Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 41 Fg5T 7117E Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 Wit Discharge 11.70 cfs Gutter Width 1 50 It Gutter Cross Slol 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 ft/ft Spread 19.87 It Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.55 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA 0.0 HA (4TS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fm051201 -fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6 016141b) /`+ 05/12/01 05:41:53 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 W W* � IM r Im 'two am M " =O W N" no m ate• " im r Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 42 EAs1- stCE Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0050 ft/ft Discharge 12.50 cfs Gutter Width 1.50 It Gutter Cross Slol 1.0830 fVtt Road Cross Slop 1.0200 tt/8 Spread 20.38 ft Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.55 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA 0.0 HA NTS (� Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE l�-`A• h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdVlowmstr\312fm051201.1m2 Robert Bein, Wllllem Frost 3 Assxletes FlowMaster v6.0 1614bj "M 05/12/01 05:42:05 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of t wa s r 'm Mom am 901 iiw an a soon it ON on, am' r M Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 43 EAST S InIE Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 10070 ft /ft Discharge 15.20 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slo(1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wit Spread 20.60 ft Mannings Coeffic 0.015 0.55 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA 0.0 HA NITS ('� Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE W hA pdata115100312 NdVIowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b] 05/12101 06:01:44 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 Po W11i S 106 Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope 1.0070 IVft Discharge 1.50 cis Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slot 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Nit Spread 8.04 it Mannings Coeffic 0.015 O 0. 0. 0. 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 VA 0.0 HA NTS ' _• Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer. RHE W h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\tlowmstr\9121mO51201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) tl\ 05/12101 05:42:39 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 r �, r �7iij ■t! t• i�iir iiifr it Mom vft r jw ■■i. m s Cross Section Cross Section for Gutter Section Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primerose Ave. at Node 44 Sovr4 S r pE Type Gutter Section Solve For Spread Section Data Slope ).0070 ft/ft Discharge 31.00 cis Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slol1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slop 1.0200 Wft Spread 27.06 ft Mannings Coeftic 0.015 0.70 0.60 0.50r 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 v:10.0 HA NITS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:lpdata %l 5100312 U)Wlowmstrt312fmO51201.im2 Robert Bain, William Frost 8 Assoclates FlowMaster v6.01614b] 05/12/01 05:42:51 PM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 11 I I F I I C] I I I 1 File name: 312ST100.RES HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. B.0 Release Date: 01/01/99 License ID 1264 Analysis prepared by: Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 _____________________________________________ _______________________________ TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 16: 2 5/12/2001 +•,•,•u +• +• +• +•.a + +• +• * +• DESCRIPTION OF STUDY "• +••ra. +.•. +.• +•,aa+.• +a • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 ` • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 ' • FIRST MODEL SHOWS FLOW FROM SOUTH SIDE EXCEEDS CROWN »» STREETFLOW MODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« _____________________________________________ _______________________________ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) = 0.007000 CONSTANT STREET FLOW(CFS) = 31.00 -_ -- _ ow AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL STREET HALF- WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 10.00 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL CURB HEIGHT(FEET) = 0.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- WIDTH(FEET) = 1.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- LIP(FEET) = 0.03125 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- HIKE(FEET) = 0.12500 FLOW ASSUMED TO FILL STREET ON ONE SIDE, AND THEN SPLITS — STREET FLOWING FULL•`+ STREET FLOW MODEL RESULTS: NOTE STREET FLOW EXCEEDS TOP OF CURB. THE FOLLOWING STREET FLOW RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT NEGLIBLE FLOW OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE STREET CHANNEL. THAT IS, ALL FLOW ALONG THE PARKWAY, ETC., IS NEGLECTED. STREET FLOW DEPTHWEET) = 0.58 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.00 PRODUCT OF DEPTH &VELOCITY = 1.73 .a,a + +.• +a a. +.•...+. +..a.a DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ••a. +. +... :. +.•.aa. +..,.aa • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 ' • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 ` • SECOND MODEL SHOWS HALF - STREET FULL FLOW EQUALS 15.61 ` »»STREETFLOWMODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« __ __ _ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) 0.007000 CONSTANT STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.57 AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 Page 1 FL ,,j 04 SOL" S��E 5r7 Da [ 11 I I F I I C] I I I 1 File name: 312ST100.RES HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. B.0 Release Date: 01/01/99 License ID 1264 Analysis prepared by: Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 _____________________________________________ _______________________________ TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 16: 2 5/12/2001 +•,•,•u +• +• +• +•.a + +• +• * +• DESCRIPTION OF STUDY "• +••ra. +.•. +.• +•,aa+.• +a • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 ` • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 ' • FIRST MODEL SHOWS FLOW FROM SOUTH SIDE EXCEEDS CROWN »» STREETFLOW MODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« _____________________________________________ _______________________________ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) = 0.007000 CONSTANT STREET FLOW(CFS) = 31.00 -_ -- _ ow AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL STREET HALF- WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 10.00 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL CURB HEIGHT(FEET) = 0.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- WIDTH(FEET) = 1.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- LIP(FEET) = 0.03125 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- HIKE(FEET) = 0.12500 FLOW ASSUMED TO FILL STREET ON ONE SIDE, AND THEN SPLITS — STREET FLOWING FULL•`+ STREET FLOW MODEL RESULTS: NOTE STREET FLOW EXCEEDS TOP OF CURB. THE FOLLOWING STREET FLOW RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT NEGLIBLE FLOW OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE STREET CHANNEL. THAT IS, ALL FLOW ALONG THE PARKWAY, ETC., IS NEGLECTED. STREET FLOW DEPTHWEET) = 0.58 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.00 PRODUCT OF DEPTH &VELOCITY = 1.73 .a,a + +.• +a a. +.•...+. +..a.a DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ••a. +. +... :. +.•.aa. +..,.aa • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 ' • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 ` • SECOND MODEL SHOWS HALF - STREET FULL FLOW EQUALS 15.61 ` »»STREETFLOWMODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« __ __ _ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) 0.007000 CONSTANT STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.57 AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 Page 1 FL ,,j 04 SOL" S��E 5r7 1 Date: 05/12/01 I I u .1 ti I I t I I File name: 312ST100.RES CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL STREET HALF- WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 10.00 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL CURB HEIGHT(FEET) = 0.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- WIDTH(FEET) = 1.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- LIP(FEET) = 0.03125 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- HIKE(FEET) = 0.12500 FLOW ASSUMED TO FILL STREET ON ONE SIDE. STREET FLOW MODEL RESULTS: _______ ____ ________________ ___________ WARNING: STREET FLOW SPLITS OVER STREET- CROWN. NOTE: STREET FLOW EXCEEDS TOP OF CURB. THE FOLLOWING STREET FLOW RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT NEGLIBLE FLOW OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE STREET CHANNEL. THAT IS, ALL FLOW ALONG THE PARKWAY, ETC., IS NEGLECTED. STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.57 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 HALFSTREET FLOW(CFS) = 15.61 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.07 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = 1.75 ............... +.+ +. :...+. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY +. +.............. +. +...... • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 • THIRD MODEL SHOWS FLOW WILL EXCEED CROWN ON NORTH SIDE WITH SOUTH SPLIT Page 2 »»STREETFLOW MODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« _____________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ______ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) = 0.007000 31.0 _ 15.6 = 15.'i * Spur TO Acs-TA CONSTANT STREET FLOW(CFS) = 16.90 AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL STREET HALF- WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 10.00 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALLIDECIMAL) =.0.020000 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL CURB HEIGHT(FEET) = 0.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- WIDTH(FEET) = 1.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- LIP(FEET) = 0.03125 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- HIKE(FEET) = 0.12500 FLOW ASSUMED TO FILL STREET ON ONE SIDE, AND THEN SPLITS -STREET FLOW SPLITS OVER STREET - CROWN ^• FULL DEPTH(FEET) = 0.57 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 FULL HALF - STREET FLOW(CFS) = 14.97 FULL HALF - STREET VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.02 SPLIT DEPTHIFEET) = 0.32 SPLIT FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.51 SPLIT FLOW(CFS) = 1.93 SPLIT VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 1.88 STREET FLOW MODEL RESULTS: _______________________________ NOTE: STREET FLOW EXCEEDS TOP OF CURB. THE FOLLOWING STREET FLOW RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT NEGLIBLE FLOW OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE STREET CHANNEL. THAT IS, ALL FLOW ALONG THE PARKWAY, ETC., IS NEGLECTED. STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.57 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.02 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = 1.71 16.9 f- FI.o%0 to WOVp Tel 9 8' Date: 05/12/01 File name: 312ST100.RES Page 3 ........ +...... ,. ,...`...' DESCRIPTION OF STUDY " " ^ " "' "' "' " .. "'" • REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RBF JN: 15- 100312 RHE 5/12/01 ` • 100 -YEAR STREET FLOW IN PRIMROSE AVENUE AT NODE NO. 44 ' • FOURTH MODEL SHOWS DEPTH OF STREET FLOW WITH FLOW SPLIT EVENLY ' »» STREETFLOW MODEL INPUT INFORMATION«« __________________ _______________________________ CONSTANT STREET GRADE(FEET /FEET) = 0.007000 F CONSTANT STREET FLOW(CFS) = 32.50 ` 3(.� + t•5 = 3 L.5 AVERAGE STREETFLOW FRICTION FACTOR(MANNING) = 0.015000 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL STREET HALF- WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 t DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 10.00 / INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020000 Z = I (,.LS c.FS la EA. SIPS CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL CURB HEIGHT(FEET) = 0.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- WIDTH(FEET) = 1.50 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- LIP(FEET) = 0.03125 CONSTANT SYMMETRICAL GUTTER- HIKE(FEET) = 0.12500 FLOW ASSUMED TO FILL STREET EVENLY ON BOTH SIDES ..`STREET FLOWING FULL "' STREET FLOW MODEL RESULTS: _____________________________________________ _______________________________ NOTE: STREET FLOW EXCEEDS TOP OF CURB. THE FOLLOWING STREET FLOW RESULTS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT NEGLIBLE FLOW OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE STREET CHANNEL. THAT IS, ALL FLOW ALONG THE PARKWAY, ETC., IS NEGLECTED. STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.58 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.00 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 3.14 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = 1.81 1 m 1 APPENDIX B CATCH BASIN CALCULATIONS REDHAW K TRACT NO. 23065 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis B Garrett Group /P man= M M r r r man r Redhawk Tract 23065 JN: 15- 100312 Garrett Group M = = r r r Curb Inlet Catch Basins On -Grade Dischar a Calculation Curb Depth at Discharge Discharge + Intercepted Bypass Catch Total Storm Catch Catch Opening Basin Invert from Bypass Flow Flow Efficiency Interception Discharge Basin ID Basin Type Length Basin Type Hydrology Hydrology Factor Length ft ft ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs Sump ft 20.2 CB -3 On -Grade 14 0.43 7.5 7.5 6.3 1.2 0.84 21.9 0.72 CB -4 On -Grade 14 0.46 8.0 9.2 7.2 2.0 0.78 24.6 dCB -5 On -Grade 21 0.47 9.7 11.7 10.3 1.4 0.88 30.3 0 CB -7 Sump 14 17.3 50% 34.5 0.88 CB -8 On -Grade 21 0.37 7.5 7.5 7.2 0.3 0.96 25.3 CB -9 On -Grade 21 0.46 9.1 9.1 8.8 0.3 0.97 24.4 `m CB -3 On -Grade 14 0.49 11.7 11.7 8.3 3.4 0.71 28.1 d } CB -4 On -Grade 14 0.54 12.5 15.9 10.0 5.9 0.63 33.2 0 ° CB -5 On -Grade 21 0.56 15.2 21.1 15.1 6.0 0.71 41.9 Curb Inlet Catch Basins In Sump Discharge Calculation Curb Discharge Modified Depth at Catch Catch Opening from Clogging Storm Discharge Basin Invert Basin ID Basin Type Length Hydrology Factor ft cfs cfs ft CB -1 Sump 21 20.2 50% 40.4 0.74 CB -2 Sump 7 10.0 50% 20.0 0.72 c CB -6 Sump 14 17.3 50% 34.5 0.88 0 CB -7 Sump 14 17.3 50% 34.5 0.88 M M M go do Redhawk Tract 23065 JN: 15- 100312 Detailed Catch Basin Output Storm 10 -Year 100 -Year Catch Basin Location CB -3 CB -4 CB -5 CB 8 CB -9 CB -1 CB -2 CB -3 CB -4 CB -5 CB -6 CB -7 Basin Type On -Grade On -Grade On -Grade I On -Grade On -Grade Sum Sum On -Grade On -Grade On -Grade Sum Sum Discharge cfs 7.5 9.2 11.7 7.5 9.1 40.4 20 11.7 15.9 21.1 34.5 34.5 Slope ft/ft 0.005 0.005 0.007 0.0192 0.005 0 0 0.005 0.005 0.007 0 0 Spread ft 16.72 18.1 18.62 12.42 18.03 15.79 14.66 19.87 22.36 23.37 22.46 22.46 Gutter Width ft 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Gutter Cross Slope fVft 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 Road Cross Slope (ft/ft) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Mannin s Coefficient 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 ' 0.015 0.015 0.015 " ?i' .':'::: . Efficiency 0.84 0.78 0.88 0.96 0.97 "; "' 0.71 0.63 0.71 Curb Opening Length ft 14 141 21 21 21 21 7 14 14 21 14 14 Opening Height/Width ft a, ;::, It- y,.,C::. ', a,y,,:,:. 0.83 0.83 :;: °r' ":::,;: -,<' a:•:i,.r 0.83 0.83 CurbThroatT e s= . "'F: "' >w+';F'y' ds'dF'I': ri',= r Inclined Inclined >1' ? +si +s; °: i,.`- 'Inclined Inclined Local De ression in 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Local De ression Width tt 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Throat Incline An le de rees :?; ^.: : < *N[Uf_� _sci4; -;; :o iFr >,,qj'. li , " 56.31 56.31 €: 'R . V"r 56.31 56. Interce ted Flow cfs 6.3 7.19 10.3 7.19 8.84 p;ir'. ;, "= a »`i4= %' 8.33 9.97 15.07 B ass Flow cfs 1.2 2.01 1.4 0.31 0.26 i' :3;1' "- ?'.;F ' -it „' r `.'" 3.37 5.93 6.03 De lh ft 0.43 0.46 0.47 0.37 0.46 0.74 0.72 0.49 0.54 0.56 0.88 0.88 FlowArea W 2.9 3.3 3.5 1.7 3.3 asi,'ts 4 5.1 5.5 Ginter De ression in 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 Total De ression in 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.5 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 Velocit ft/s 2.62 2.75 3.31 4.5 2.74 "- - "'' -: 2.91 3.14 3.81 E uivalentCrossSlo a fVft 0.0481 0.0459 0.0451 0.0742 0.046 :..�. :'' "'- ''�' " "'�' 0.0435 0.0407 0.0398•;''.'. Len th Factor 0.64 0.57 0.69 0.83 0.86 '„ 0.5 0.42 0.5 Total Interce tion Len th (ft 21.9 24.55 30.34 25.29 24.4 : ;Y;;i:' >.'_ . +`;. +s,: -; 28.05 33.17 41.9 .: W m m tIMI mM11 r m mm m r m m m s m ri Catch Basin Summary Catch Basin Location 3ischarge (cis) interceptec Flow (cis) Bypass Flow (cfs) Efficient Depth (ft) , Curb Opening Length (it) Total nterceptio Length (it) Spread (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Local 3epressio (in) Local epressio Width (ft) Opening eight/Width (ft) 10 -Year Deer Hollow Rd N/E of Pala Rd. CB- 9.10 8.84 0.26 097 0.46 21.00 24.40 18.03 0.0050 40 4.00 10 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow NIW 7.50 7.19 0.31 0.96 0.37 21.00 25.29 12.42 0.0192 4.0 4.00 10 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 41 CB -3 7.50 630 1.20 0.84 0.43 1400 21.90 16.72 0.0050 4.0 4.00 10 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 42 CB -4 9.20 7.19 2.01 0.78 0.46 14.00 24.55 18.10 0.0050 4.0 4.00 10 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 43 CB -5 11.70 10.30 1.40 0.88 0.47 21.00 30.34 18.62 0.0070 4.0 4.00 100 -Year Peach Tree East of Primrose North 40.40 0.74 21.00 15.79 0.0000 4.0 4.00 0.83 100 -Year Peach Tree East of Primrose Sout 20.00 0.72 7.00 14.66 0.0000 4.0 4.00 0.83 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 41 CB -3 11.70 8.33 3.37 0.71 0.49 14.00 28.05 19.87 0.0050 4.0 4.00 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 42 CB -4 15.90 9.97 5.93 0.63 0.54 14.00 33.17 22.36 0.0050 4.0 4.00 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 43 CB -5 21.10 15.07 6.03 0.71 0.56 21.00 41.90 23.37 0.0070 4.0 4.00 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 44 North Sic 34.50 0.88 14.00 22.46 0.0000 4.0 4.00 0.83 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 44 South Si 34.50 1 1 1 0.881 14.001 1 22.4610.00001 4.0 4.00 0.83 y w w a Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata \15100312\hd\ lowmstr\3121m051201.tm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.01614b) W 05/14/01 01:21:31 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT O6708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 2 �r �r lr 1w� r r r r r' r• r ■r r rr rr lr r �r r Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primrose Ave at Node `i l (.II -3 Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 7.50 cis Efficiency 0.84 Slope 1.0050 ft /ft Gutter Width 1.50 It Gutter Cross SlopE 1.0830 ft /ft Road Cross Slope 1.0200 fl/ft Mannings CoefficiE 0.015 Curb Opening Len. 14.00 it Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression % 4.00 it 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 VAO.0N HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:t pdata\ 15100312Vtd \flowmstr\312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 3 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 05/12101 05:38:21 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 +• r. �. iII� Iii = r r s r M Iii Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 42 C s-Li Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 9.20 cis Efficiency 0.78 Slope 1.0050 tv" Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slope 1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slope 1.0200 ft /ft Mannings CoefficiE 0.015 Curb Opening Leni 14 00 ft Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression \ 4.00 ft 0.50' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V :10.0 N H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 75100312 \hd\fbwmstr\312fm051201.im2 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6 0 [614b] 05/12101 05:38:34 PM C Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M M M r M Ill♦ r r Ili Ili irk M r r M r r= 110111 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 45 G6 - 5 Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 11.70 cfs Efficiency 0.88 Slope 1.0070 ft/ft Gutter Width 1.50 It Gutter Cross SlopE1.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slope 1.0200 ft /ft Mannings Coeffick 0.015 Curb Opening Len! 21.00 It Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression \ 4.00 It 0.50' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 V:1 0.0 N H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE A h:\pdata \75100312\ d\110 mstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bolin, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b) V ` 05/12/01 05:38:50 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Pala Road S/E of Deer Hollow N/w SIDE. C-M-S Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 7.50 cis Efficiency 0.96 Slope 1.0192 ft/ft Gutter Width 2.00 ft Gutter Cross Slope 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slope 1.0200 ft/ft Mannings CoefficiE 0.015 Curb Opening Lenl 21.00 ft Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression \ 4.00 ft 0.50' (_1 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 V: I 0.0 HA NITS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdViowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost b Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b] y 05/12/01 05:35:54 PM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section -for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 10 -Year Deer Hollow Rd N/E of PaIA R-v. Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 9.10 cfs Efficiency 0.97 Slope W050 ft /ft Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slopi 1.0830 it/ft Road Cross Slope 1.0200 ff/ft Mannings Coeffick 0.015 Curb Opening Lens 21.00 It Local Depression 40 in Local Depression \ 4.00 ft 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 0 +20 VA 0.0� HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 75100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fmO51201.hn2 Robert Mn, William Frost d Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b) V[1 05/14/01 01:35:38 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet In Sag Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Peach Tree East of Primrose Nofkri4 $tDE Lg- Type Curb Inlet In Sag Solve For Spread Section Data Discharge 40.40 cfs FL-ow pou6t -E.t> FOfz 5c, FAC.'1'ofL Spread 15.79 it Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slope 0.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slope 0.0200 Wit Curb Opening Len! 21.00 N Opening Height 0.83 ft Curb Throat Type Inclined Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression % 4.00 ft Throat Incline Angl 56.31 degree 0.50T 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 0 +18 V:10.0� H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer RHE h:lpdata\ 15100312 VIdViowm91rt312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost A Associates FlowMaster v6.0 I6141b) 05/12/01 05:40:32 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 M M M M == m == r M = == M M M Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet In Sag Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Peach Tree East of Primrose SouTN 51 M G15 - Z Type Curb Inlet In Sag Solve For Spread Section Data Discharge 20.00 cis ----7 F1-(Dw C>vOb :1=0 FOP. 507 C-t-Vc c loo 1`=AGT01- Spread 14.66 it Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross SlopE 0.0830 Wtt Road Cross Slope 0.0200 ft/ft Curb Opening Len. 7.00 ft Opening Height 0.83 ft Curb Throat Type Inclined Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression l 4.00 fl Throat Incline Angl 56.31 degree 0.50T 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +02 0 +04 0 +06 0 +08 0 +10 0 +12 0 +14 0 +16 V: 1 0.0 H:1 NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer. RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 [614b) CA- 05/12/01 05:40:54 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node Li 1 C- (S -3 Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 11.70 cfs —ii loo --(R- FLo ,J To r =A�c -. C{y -PASS To Scj_%P DA51'1S C6-4 !w0 c-6 -7 Efficiency 0.71 Slope 1.0050 tuft Gutter Width 1.50 N Gutter Cross Slope 1.0830 tttft Road Cross Slope 1.0200 Wit Mannings CoeffICIE 0.015 Curb Opening Len, 14.00 ft Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression \ 4.00 ft 0.55 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA O.O L H:1 NTS (1� Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer. RHE �\ h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hd\flowmstA312fmO51201.tm2 Robert Bale, William Frost 3 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614bj 05/12101 05:43:06 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 15.90 cis loo -`(1r- PIo.J To tAt_ -. $Y -PASS TO SVNP 045. 1 N3S C-13-G Aup 1.13 -7 Efficiency 0.63 Slope 1.0050 Wit Gutter Width 1.50 it Gutter Cross Slope 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slope 1.0200 Wit Mannings CoeBicie 0.015 Curb Opening Lenl 14.00 it Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression % 4.00 ft row-Tom 0.50(, 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 V: I 0.0 H:1 NTS p _ Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer RHE h:\pdata% 15100312 V1dVlowmstr\312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bein, William Frost 6 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 05/12/01 05:43:22 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 I11111W 1111110 M 1• M M M1111110 M= M M i M1111110 M M M M Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet On Grade Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at NodC 43 CJ$ - 5 Type Curb Inlet On Grade Solve For Efficiency Section Data Discharge 21.10 cis —: (oO -YR-. FLOW To GALL- L3Y- PA' 5 To 301.1- 5AS 1eli CO-G Aalp C{y -7 Efficiency 0.71 Slope 1.0070 ft/ft Gutter Width 1.50 tt Gutter Cross Slope 1.0830 Wit Road Cross Slope 1.0200 Wtt Mannings Coefficie 0.015 Curb Opening Lens 21.00 it Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression % 4.00 it 0.60 0.50,' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 V: 10.0 H:1 NITS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:%pdata\15100312VrdVio mstA312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Seln, William Frost & Associates FlowMaster v6.0 1614b) 05/12/01 05:43:35 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 III III i� IIII� III illy III III illy � a• I� � � III � � illll� � Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet In Sag Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 44 Sou-170 S 1 DE G Q Type Curb Inlet In Sag Solve For Spread Section Data Discharge 34.50 cts FLOw 17001st -,£P FOIL- 15c)% LL- 06A106t FAC -TOF Spread 22.46 ft Gutter Width 1.50 ft Gutter Cross Slope 0.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slope 0.0200 ft/ft Curb Opening Len! 14.00 it Opening Height 0.83 ft Curb Throat Type Inclined Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression % 400 It Throat Incline Angl 56.31 degree 0.60 0.50'' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 VA0.0N HA NTS Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer RHE h:\pdata \15100312\hd\llow str\,312fmO51201.fm2 Robert Beln, William Frost 8 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 05/12101 05:44:00 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Curb Inlet In Sag Project Description Worksheet 100 -Year Primrose Ave. at Node 44 NO" S f PF– L13 - % Type Curb Inlet In Sag Solve For Spread Section Data Discharge 34.50 cfs —� FLOw Dou15 t-£D Fo IL So% C. 0Gi4tN(i PAe TOR Spread 22.46 it Gutter Width 1.50 tt Gutter Cross Slope 0.0830 ft/ft Road Cross Slope 0.0200 ft /ft Curb Opening Len! 14.00 it Opening Height 0.83 it Curb Throat Type Inclined Local Depression 4.0 in Local Depression \ 4.00 ft Throat Incline Angl 56.31 degree 0.60 0.50' 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 +00 0 +05 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 v:1 0.0N H:1 NTS ., Title: Redhawk Tract No. 23065 Garrett Group Project Engineer: RHE h:\pdata\ 15100312 \hdVbwmstA312fm051201.fm2 Robert Bain, William Frost 3 Associates FlowMaster v6.0 (614b) 05112/01 05:43:50 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 Redhawk Tract No 23065 Hydraulic Analysis APPENDIX C WSPG STORM DRAIN HYDRAULICS REDRAW K TRACT No. 23065 October 22, 2001 C Garrett Group JG I 0 1 REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A -1 FROM BASIN A TO CHANNEL 3 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE APRIL 2001 SO 1039.901127.80 1 1132.53 1187.711128.24 1 .013 t 1187.711128.24 1 2 .013 9.9 1133.16 90.00 R 1250.661128.22 1 .013 1 3 67.5 1130.24 60.00 t1255.331129.22 1695.331135.12 1 R 1700.001135.17 1 1 2196.091140.74 1 2200.761140.93 1 1 2292.741143.23 1 R 2312.221143.74 1 .024 1H 2312.221143.74 1 1153.26 D 1 4 6.00 CD 2 4 1.50 ID 3 4 3.00 I [> r► I I I 11 I I I I �z tTE: 10/21/2001 I ME: 21:47 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ,LARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP 1 4 6.00 �CD CD 2 4 1.50 CD 3 4 3.00 1 �r r I r r I .9f 1 l� t 1 1 7ie6-,;236) 60 S -=-,-2 PAGE NO 3 59 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - tREDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP EADING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A -1 FROM BASIN A TO CHANNEL �EADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE APRIL 2001 1 l� t 1 1 7ie6-,;236) 60 S -=-,-2 PAGE NO 3 59 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 1039.90 1127.80 1 ELEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 1187.71 1128.24 1 0.013 W S ELEV 1132.53 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 3 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT-2 N 03 O4 INVERT -3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 1187.71 1128.24 1 2 0 0.013 9.9 0.0 1133.16 0.00 90.00 0.00 IHE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING ELEMENT NO 4 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1250.66 1128.22 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 SHE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING * ' ELEMENT NO 5 IS A JUNCTION • ' * U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -i LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 1255.33 1129.22 1 3 0 0.014 67.5 0.0 1130.24 0.00 60.00 0.00 ELEMENT NO 6 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1695.33 1135.12 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 7 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1700.00 1135.17 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 ELEMENT NO 8 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2196.09 1140.74 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 9 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2200.76 1140.93 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 ELEMENT NO 10 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2292.74 1143.23 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 11 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1 2312.22 1143.74 1 0.024 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 I � �o I F 0 5 1 5 P IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING _ ELEMENT NO 12 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 2312.22 1143.74 1 1153.26 NO EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING I I r� i 11 I 11 I C I 11 1 It 1 I PAGE NO 3 (01 kENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO J F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LINE A-1 FROM BASIN A TO CHANNEL RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE APRIL 2001 �TATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. G VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR ftxxxfr »xxrrrff txxrfffttxxr rfffftxrrf ffttttrfrttff xrrrrteff xfrrt »ff txrrteferfrrrefffttxxrrftfxxrrrftx xrrrrrffttxrrrfrrffrrxxrrrrr ' 1039.90 1127.80 5.111 1132.911 357.2 13.92 3.009 1135.920 0.00 5.111 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 13.39 0.00298 .006456 0.09 6.000 0.00 ' 1053.29 1127.84 5.431 1133.271 357.2 13.27 2.735 1136.006 0.00 5.111 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 76.46 0.00298 .006396 0.49 6.000 0.00 1129.75 1128.07 5.941 1134.008 357.2 12.65 2.486 1136.494 0.00 5.111 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 13.29 0.00208 .006797 0.09 6.000 0.00 1143.04 1128.11 6.000 1134.107 357.2 12.63 2.478 1136.585 0.00 5.111 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 44.67 0.00298 .007075 0.32 6.000 0.00 1187.71 1128.24 6.185 1134.425 357.2 12.63 2.478 1136.903 0.00 5.111 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 16NCT STR 0.00000 L PtT A, - \ .006920 0.00 0.00 1187.71 1128.24 6.456 1134.696 347.3 12.28 2.343 1137.039 0.00 5.053 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 62.95 -.00032 .006725 0.42 0.000 0.00 '1 1250.66 1128.22 6.899 1135.119 347.3 12.28 2.343 1137.462 0.00 5.053 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �UNCT STR 0.21413 L, i'rT A - Z .006431 0.03 0.00 1255.33 1129.22 7.220 1136.440 279.8 9.90 1.521 1137.961 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 146.10 0.01341 .005034 0.74 3.400 0.00 1401.43 1131.18 6.000 1137.179 279.8 9.90 1.521 1138.700 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 2.83 0.01341 .004895 0.01 3.400 0.00 1404.26 1131.22 5.973 1137.190 279.8 9.90 1.522 1138.712 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �YDRAULIC JUMP 0.00 ' 1404.26 1131.22 3.431 1134.648 279.8 16.74 4.352 1139.000 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 99.03 0.01341 .012934 1.28 3.400 0.00 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A-1 FROM BASIN A TO CHANNEL RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE APRIL 2001 LATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ 2L NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER 'L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 2R i *rtlffflRlf irtrtf tf# # *l lfffflkf ## *rtrtrtfff!!! #rtrtf!!llflf ff *!!!llflf *f *!!llfllf *rtlttfflklf i!!ff#1fi! *!f!R #frtrtff!!!#f ii!!tll lff iiilrtlff!! 1503.29 1132.55 3.446 1135.991 279.8 16.65 4.304 1140.295 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 192.04 0.01341 .012098 2.32 3.400 0.00 ' 1695.33 1135.12 3.585 1138.705 279.8 15.87 3.912 1142.617 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.01071 .011366 0.05 3.655 0.00 1700.00 1135.17 3.583 1138.753 279.8 15.88 3.918 1142.671 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 256.55 0.01123 .011849 3.04 3.599 0.00 1956.55 1138.05 3.492 1141.542 279.8 16.38 4.169 1145.711 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 148.47 0.01123 .013133 1.95 3.599 0.00 2105.02 1139.72 3.358 1143.076 279.8 17.18 4.586 1147.662 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 91.07 0.01123 .014873 1.35 3.599 0.00 2196.09 1140.74 3.231 1143.971 279.8 18.02 5.044 1149.015 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.04068 .015479 0.07 2.461 0.00 2200.76 1140.93 3.273 1144.203 279.8 17.74 4.887 1149.090 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 '21.95 0.02500 .014507 0.32 2.821 0.00 2222.71 1141.48 3.364 1144.843 279.6 17.14 4.564 1149.407 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 23.41 0.02500 .013051 0.31 2.821 0.00 2246.12 1142.06 3.499 1145.563 279.8 16.35 4.149 1149.712 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 17.54 0.02500 .011540 0.20 2.821 0.00 '2263.66 1142.50 3.640 1146.143 279.8 15.59 3.772 1149.915 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 12.97 0.02500 .010217 0.13 2.821 0.00 2276.63 1142.83 3.791 1146.618 279.8 14.86 3.429 1150.047 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 9.52 0.02500 .009063 0.09 2.821 0.00 !0 3 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A-1 FROM BASIN A TO CHANNEL RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE APRIL 2001 iTATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 2286.15 1143.07 3.951 1147.016 6.59 0.02500 2292.74 1143.23 4.123 1147.353 '6.67 0.02618 2299.41 1143.40 4.182 1147.587 10.31 0.02618 2309.72 1143.67 4.371 1148.046 2.50 0.02618 2312.22 1143.74 4.579 1148.319 E�� r 1 1 1 1 1 PAGE 3 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR :e 279.8 14.17 3.117 1150.133 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .008055 0.05 2.821 0.00 279.8 13.51 2.834 1150.187 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .021874 0.15 3.891 0.00 279.8 13.30 2.745 1150.332 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .020311 0.21 3.891 0.00 279.8 12.68 2.496 1150.542 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .018182 0.05 3.891 0.00 279.8 12.08 2.268 1150.587 0.00 4.579 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 (moo SS 1, Z k' ° I.7- ( Z.. -tom K) = Z- I Z. ' I148.3i- t z.7z - 1151• i t0 I 1 REDHANK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15- 100312 SO 102.171133.16 103.711135.64 103.711135.64 CD 1 4 1 [I I 1 1 Is I 1 [1 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-1 RHE MAY 2001 1 1134.70 1 .013 1.50 &s DATE: 10/21/2001 �I ME: 22: 5 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 'CARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y00) CODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �CD 1 4 1.50 1 I i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 &� F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 3 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP �EADING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -1 �EADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15-100312 FINE MAY 2001 1 1 1 i i �1 i -7-,�3 I F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV ' 102.17 1133.16 1 1134.70 NO 2 IS A REACH �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 103.71 1135.64 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 103.71 1135.64 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC 11 1 1 I 1 1 i 1 I i 1 1 1 bf LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F05 15P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -1 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 'STATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER I�L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR i #rtrtfff # * #ffflf # *irttfff kk111#fffflf #fffff l4 Y #}fflff #! #rtrtff111flrtrtfff llf # #rtrtrtf ffff #llifff if rtlf # *rtiflf lfi Yff!!f *irtf rtffftllf #rtrtrtf ff #!R ' 102.17 1133.16 0.659 1133.819 11.8 15.78 3.864 1137.683 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.08 1.61039 .077182 0.01 0.300 0.00 102.25 1133.30 0.668 1133.963 11.8 15.51 3.733 1137.696 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.61039 .070738 0.01 0.300 0.00 '0.21 102.46 1133.62 0.693 1134.317 11.8 14.77 3.387 1137.704 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.18 1.61039 .062211 0.01 0.300 0.00 102.64 1133.92 0.719 1134.636 11.8 14.08 3.079 1137.715 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.16 1.61039 .054735 0.01 0.300 0.00 102.80 1134.18 0.746 1134.925 11.8 13.44 2.805 1137.730 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.15 1.61039 .048201 0.01 0.300 ' 102.95 1134.41 0.775 1135.187 11.8 12.81 2.549 1137.736 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.13 1.61039 .042488 0.01 0.300 0.00 103.08 1134.62 0.805 1135.424 11.8 12.22 2.317 1137.741 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.61039 .037466 0.00 0.300 0.00 '0.11 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 103.19 1134.80 0.836 1135.639 11.8 11.65 2.107 1137.746 0.00 1.306 0.10 1.61039 .033082 0.00 0.300 0.00 103.29 1134.96 0.870 1135.833 11.8 11.10 1.913 1137.746 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.09 1.61039 .029254 0.00 0.300 0.00 103.38 1135.11 0.905 1136.010 11.8 10.58 1.739 1137.749 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.300 0.00 0.07 1.61039 .025891 0.00 1 103.45 1135.23 0.942 1136.170 11.8 10.09 1.582 1137.752 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.07 1.61039 .022958 0.00 0.300 0.00 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -1 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 'STATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH ,L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ... .......... ._---------------------- ......... PAGE 2 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 103.52 1135.33 0.982 1136.315 11.8 9.62 1.438 1137.753 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.06 1.61039 .020398 0.00 0.300 0.00 ' 103.58 1135.42 1.024 1136.447 11.8 9.18 1.307 1137.754 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.04 1.61039 .018169 0.00 0.300 0.00 0 0.00 103.62 1135.50 1.070 1136.567 11.8 8.75 1.188 1137.755 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.04 1.61039 .016237 0.00 0.300 0.00 103.66 1135.56 1.119 1136.676 11.8 8.34 1.080 1137.756 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 r0.03 1.61039 .014568 0.00 0.300 0.00 103.69 1135.60 1.173 1136.774 11.8 7.95 0.982 1137.756 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.01 1.61039 .013158 0.00 0.300 103.70 1135.63 1.234 1136.864 11.8 7.58 0.893 1137.757 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.01 1.61039 .012008 0.00 0.300 0.00 i103.71 1135.64 1.306 1136.946 11.8 7.23 0.811 1137.757 0.00 1.306 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 LOSS 1,Z \,,/ = I.z 0.811) = o,`1 -1 I 71, VJSE'• _ \ \"S6.`1S k 0-'1 -1 = 1%,57.97- ?v 1 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-2 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 50 103.001130.24 1 1136.44 215.001130.80 1 .013 'H 215.001130.80 1 CD 1 4 3.00 11 I [1 I I I I :7i 'ATE: 10/21/2001 �ME: 22: 5 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE 2L 2R INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP ICD 1 4 3.00 ! ! 1 i 1 1 !7z HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - �EADING LINE NO 2 IS - �ADING LINE NO 3 IS - 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -2 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 PAGE NO 3 GAM I F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 103.00 1130.24 1 1136.44 PAGE NO 2 NO 2 IS A REACH �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 215.00 1130.80 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 215.00 1130.80 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING * WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC [1 I C ?y �I PAGE 1 CENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A-2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER �L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR iff #klliiiitfff *iii Yffl R #R #!i #iifff # *kiiifflf Rflf * *rtiiff if # *iiiiifff# *iiiiiif if fifff # #liiff# *iiiiiif if *rtliiiff #R* *iiiiiif RRR*iitff ' 103.00 1130.24 6.200 1136.440 67.5 9.55 1.416 1137.856 0.00 2.623 3.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 112.00 0.00500 .010242 1.15 3.000 0.00 215.00 1130.80 6.787 1137.587 67.5 9.55 1.416 1139.003 0.00 2.623 3.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 1 Eo i L msS ' t.2 kv i\ 3-7. 51 } 1.70 = 1131.29 i i i 1 1 �s 7(p 1 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A -2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 SO 2441.731146.12 1 1153.12 2870.901147.41 1 .013 1 2875.571148.11 3 2 2 12.3 12.31149.831149.83 90.00 90.00 R 3010.291149.01 3 3010.291149.01 3 2 15.1 1152.10 60.00 3250.061150.62 3 JX 3254.731151.14 5 4 10.0 1152.62 60.00 3524.091152.60 5 % 3524.091152.60 5 4 8.3 1154.60 60.00 3783.411154.03 5 R 3788.081154.05 5 1 3950.001156.30 5 1 4107.891159.49 5 J% 4131.841160.77 6 7 97.2 1160.77 30.00 6 O4178.931161.22 4225.391161.67 6 x 4225.391161.67 6 4 9.9 1163.00 60.00 R 4256.061161.97 6 �X 4256.061161.97 6 2 4.9 1164.30 90.00 4579.021165.00 6 SH 4579.021165.00 6 1 4 7.50 �0 D 2 4 2.00 CD 3 4 6.00 D 4 4 1.50 D 5 4 5.50 D 6 4 4.50 CD 7 4 3.50 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 7(p 1 DATE: 10/12/2001 ME: 9:43 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D i 4 7.50 D 2 4 2.00 CD 3 4 6.00 CD 4 4 1.50 RD 5 4 5.50 D 6 4 4.50 CD 7 4 3.50 1 ?? HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - ACING LINE NO 2 IS - ACING LINE NO 3 IS - 1 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LINE A -2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 PAGE NO 3 ?Y F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 2441.73 1146.12 1 1153.12 'ELEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2870.90 1147.41 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 'ELEMENT NO 3 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 2875.57 1148.11 3 2 2 0.014 12.3 12.3 1149.83 1149.83 90.00 90.00 ,ELEMENT NO 4 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3010.29 1149.01 3 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 5 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT-2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 . 3010.29 1149.01 3 2 0 0.014 15.1 0.0 1152.10 0.00 60.00 0.00 HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING THE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING 'ELEMENT NO 6 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3250.06 1150.62 3 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ' ELEMENT NO 7 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT-2 N 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 ' 3254.73 1151.14 5 4 0 0.014 10.0 0.0 1152.62 0.00 60.00 0.00 ELEMENT NO 8 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3524.09 1152.60 5 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ' ELEMENT NO 9 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 3524.09 1152.60 5 4 0 0.014 8.3 0.0 1154.60 0.00 60.00 0.00 THE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING 1 9 F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 10 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 3783.41 1154.03 5 0.014 PAGE NO 3 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 9 LEMENT NO 11 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3788.08 1154.05 5 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 'ELEMENT NO 12 IS A REACH * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3950.00 1156.30 5 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 13 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 4107.89 1159.49 5 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 14 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 ' 4131.84 1160.77 6 7 0 0.014 97.2 0.0 1160.77 0.00 30.00 0.00 ELEMENT NO 15 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 4178.93 1161.22 6 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 16 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 4225.39 1161.67 6 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 17 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 4225.39 1161.67 6 4 0 0.014 9.9 0.0 1163.00 0.00 60.00 0.00 HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING ' ELEMENT NO 18 IS A REACH * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 4256.06 1161.97 6 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ' ELEMENT NO 19 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 4256.06 1161.97 6 2 0 0.014 4.9 0.0 1164.30 0.00 90.00 0.00 HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING .1 Em F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING PAGE NO 4 ELEMENT NO 20 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H ' 4579.02 1165.00 6 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 21 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS 1 U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 4579.02 1165.00 6 0.00 NO EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING IWARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I D I L] S/ LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A -2 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH CIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR wwwrttxxxtwwwwrtttxtwxwwrrtttttttwwwrrttttttrtwtwwrrrttttwwwrtttettttrwwwwrrrtxrwtrttxrrtttttwwrrw rtttttxxrwwwerrrttt »ttxwwwwwtte ' 2441.73 1146.12 7.000 1153.120 365.1 8.51 1.124 1154.244 0.00 4.943 7.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 339.74 0.00301 .002004 0.68 5.396 0.00 2781.47 1147.14 6.547 1153.688 365.1 8.92 1.236 1154.924 0.00 4.943 7.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 85.91 0.00301 .002078 0.18 5.396 0.00 2867.38 1147.40 6.431 1153.830 365.1 9.06 1.273 1155.103 0.00 4.943 7.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 Y �DRAULIC JUMP 0.00 2867.38 1147.40 3.745 1151.144 365.1 16.55 4.255 1155.399 0.00 4.943 7.50 0.00 0.00 •0 0.00 ' 3.52 0.00301 .009126 0.03 5.396 0.00 t2870.90 1147.41 3.734 1151.144 365.1 16.62 4.287 1155.431 0.00 4.943 7.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 NCT STR 0.14989 L- p%7 A3 4- A 'I1 .008949 0.04 0.00 ' 2875.57 1148.11 5.010 1153.120 340.5 13.50 2.830 1155.950 0.00 5.010 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 124.53 0.00668 .006985 0.87 5.328 0.00 ' 3000.10 1148.94 5.305 1154.247 340.5 12.87 2.573 1156.820 0.00 5.010 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 10.19 0.00668 .006709 0.07 5.328 0.00 ' 3010.29 1149.01 5.306 1154.316 340.5 12.87 2.572 1156.888 0.00 5.010 6.00 '0.00 0.00 0 0.00 'UNCT STR 0.00000 L� A'r % - 5 .006652 0.00 0.00 3010.29 1149.01 5.988 1154.998 325.4 11.51 2.057 1157.055 0.00 4.912 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 198.17 0.00671 .006400 1.27 4.972 0.00 3208.46 1150.34 5.910 1156.251 325.4 11.54 2.070 1158.321 0.00 4.912 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �YDRAULIC JUMP 0.00 ' 3208.46 1150.34 4.017 1154.358 325.4 16.17 4.060 1158.418 0.00 4.912 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 41.60 0.00671 .011584 0.48 4.972 0.00 00- ICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LINE A-2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 �TATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR xxrtrtrtffffrrttrtffwffffeffrtrtfxrtfffffefffftrtrtxrtffffeefffrrrtttrtrtffffffeeffrrftxtxxtrtrtfffefrttrtxxtrtrtffefrtfxxrtrtfffffffrtretfffxfftrtx 3250.06 1150.62 3.878 1154.498 325.4 16.83 4.400 1158.898 0.00 4.912 6.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 JUNCT STR 0.11135 L A'r t% - ` .010666 0.05 0.00 ' 3254.73 1151.14 4.856 1155.996 315.4 14.21 3.134 1159.130 0.00 4.856 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 19.81 0.00542 .009013 0.18 5.500 0.00 ' 3274.54 1151.25 5.212 1156.459 315.4 13.55 2.849 1159.308 0.00 4.856 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 43.13 0.00542 .009483 0.41 5.500 0.00 3317.67 1151.48 5.500 1156.981 315.4 13.28 2.737 1159.718 0.00 4.856 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 206.42 0.00542 .010173 2.10 5.500 0.00 13524.09 1152.60 6.493 1159.093 315.4 13.28 2.737 1161.830 0.00 4.856 5.50 0.110 0.00 0 0.00 NCT STR 0.00000 L AT _ -7 .009965 0.00 0.00 ' 3524.09 1152.60 6.752 1159.352 307.1 12.93 2.595 1161.947 0.00 4.808 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 259.32 0.00551 .009699 2.52 5.500 0.00 ' 3783.41 1154.03 7.837 1161.867 307.1 12.93 2.595 1164.462 0.00 4.808 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.011428 .009699 0.05 5.500 0.00 3788.08 1154.05 7.992 1162.042 307.1 12.93 2.595 1164.637 0.00 4.808 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 161.92 0.01390 .009699 1.57 3.844 0.00 3950.00 1156.30 7.313 1163.613 307.1 12.93 2.595 1166.208 0.00 4.808 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 157.89 0.02020 .009699 1.53 3.368 0.00 4107.89 1159.49 5.654 1165.144 307.1 12.93 2.595 1167.739 0.00 4.808 5.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 INCT STR 0.05344 L AT A -'9 .011456 0.27 0.00 4131.84 1160.77 5.195 1165.965 209.9 13.20 2.705 1168.670 0.00 4.098 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 47.09 0.00956 .013213 0.62 4.500 0.00 S'� LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P t WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LINE A-2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 4178.93 1161.22 5.367 1166.587 46.46 0.00969 4.098 ' 4225.39 1161.67 5.531 1167.201 0 0.00 �NCT STR 0.00000 LAr A -ck 4225.39 1161.67 5.975 1167.645 ' 30.67 0.00978 4256.06 1161.97 6.043 1168.013 'UNCT STR 0.00000 GAT A-10 ' 4256.06 1161.97 6.281 1168.251 322.96 0.00938 0.00 ' 4579.02 1165.00 6.937 1171.937 0.00 1 0.00 200.0 12.58 2.456 1170.101 1 4.036 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .011996 0.37 PAGE 3 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 209.9 13.20 2.705 1169.292 0.00 4.098 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .013213 0.61 4.500 0.00 209.9 13.20 2.705 1169.906 0.00 4.098 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .012605 0.00 0.00 200.0 12.58 2.456 1170.101 0.00 4.036 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .011996 0.37 4.500 0.00 200.0 12.58 2.456 1170.469 0.00 4.036 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .011706 0.00 0.00 195.1 12.27 2.337 1170.588 0.00 4.003 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .011416 3.69 4.500 0.00 195.1 12.27 2.337 1174.274 0.00 4.003 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 a I 0 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -3 AT CB-6 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 103.751150.85 1 1153.12 1 117.861152.24 1 .013 117.861152.24 1 CD 1 4 2.00 I 1 I 1 I I H 1 I 1 I 1 11 gs I DATE: 10/11/2001 �ME: 9: 1 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 �ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE 2L 2R INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 I 11 1 m I I t u if PAGE NO 3 m F 0 5 1 5 P � WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - 1 REDHAWK TRACT N0.23065 GARRETT GROUP IAD ING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -3 AT CB-6 [ADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 1 I I t u if PAGE NO 3 m ' F 0 5 1 5 P 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 103.75 1150.85 1 1153.12 EMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 117.86 1152.24 1 0.013 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �EMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 117.86 1152.24 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING , WARNING NO. 2 •• - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC H I I I r 0 i RIM LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP y RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -3 AT CB -6 RBF JR. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 1 ATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH CIA ID NO. PIER ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR • xffrrrxxxfxxxrr�xxxxxrrxxxxfxfrrxxxe+ xxxxrrrrrxxeexxfrrrrxxxxfrfrrxxxxf :xfrxfrfrrx xxffxfrrrrrxxxfrrrrxxxffxxxrrrrrrxxffxfrrrrrrr 103.75 1150.85 0.909 1151.759 17.3 12.46 2.409 1154.168 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.47 0.09851 .031462 0.05 0.670 0.00 1105.22 1150.99 0.926 1151.921 17.3 12.14 2.289 1154.210 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2.48 0.09851 .028547 0.07 0.670 0.00 107.70 1151.24 0.961 1152.200 17.3 11.58 2.082 1154.282 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2.07 0.09851 .025129 0.05 0.670 0.00 109.77 1151.44 0.998 1152.441 17.3 11.04 1.893 1154.334 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.76 0.09851 .022132 0.04 0.670 0.00 111.53 1151.62 1.036 1152.652 17.3 10.52 1.720 1154.372 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 - 1.47 0.09851 .019502 0.03 0.670 0.00 113.00 1151.76 1.076 1152.837 17.3 10.03 1.564 1154.401 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.23 0.09851 .017201 0.02 0.670 0.00 114.23 1151.88 1.118 1153.001 17.3 9.57 1.422 1154.423 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.01 0.09851 .015190 0.02 0.670 0.00 115.24 1151.98 1.163 1153.145 17.3 9.12 1.293 1154.438 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.83 0.09851 .013431 0.01 0.670 0.00 116.07 1152.06 1.210 1153.274 17.3 8.70 1.175 1154.449 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.66 0.09851 .011891 0.01 0.670 0.00 116.73 1152.13 1.260 1153.388 17.3 8.29 1.068 1154.456 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.670 0.00 0.50 0.09851 .010545 0.01 117.23 1152.18 1.313 1153.491 17.3 7.91 0.971 1154.462 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.35 0.09851 .009371 0.00 0.670 0.00 ' 8 9 LICENSEE: 0.21 0.09851 .008349 0.00 R.B.F. & ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 117.79 1152.23 1.431 1153.664 17.3 7.19 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING 1154.467 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP 0.07 0.09851 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-3 AT CB-6 0.670 0.00 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 1152.24 ITATION 0.728 1154.467 0.00 1.499 NO AVBPR 0 0.00 INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER r �ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR rfxxrtrtrtrtxfrxwrtrtrtrtffff + rtxrt rtfeefrtx + +rteeefttrtrtrtrt rtffrtttwrt + +rtfrrftrtrtrtffrrttrtrtrtrtrtrrf »rtrtrtrtf trtrtrtffefwwrtrt rtffrrwwwrtrtrtrtrtrtfrxrfwrtrtrtrtfrfrwrtwrt . LoSS 1 117.58 1152.21 1.370 1153.582 17.3 7.54 0.883 1154.465 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.21 0.09851 .008349 0.00 0.670 0.00 117.79 1152.23 1.431 1153.664 17.3 7.19 0.803 1154.467 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.07 0.09851 .007459 0.00 0.670 0.00 117.86 1152.24 1.499 1153.739 17.3 6.85 0.728 1154.467 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 r rEt-1T . LoSS / o. e7 0.81' } ►►53.x`1 = 115y.�1 1 ws ��. r � i 1 go 0 0 REDHA4K TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP i RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A-4 AT CB -7 t!RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 103.751150.85 1 1153.12 137.771152.09 1 .013 137.771152.09 1 CD 1 4 2.00 i 'i t I J 1� t' q� DATE: 10/11/2001 jjME: 9: 1 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 'JARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP If 1 4 2.00 'I I it i F I mol ' FO 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP fADING LINE NO 2 is - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -4 AT CB-7 IADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 FINE MAY 2001 1' r i i PAGE NO 3 99 ' F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 103.75 1150.85 1 'LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 137.77 1152.09 1 0.013 1 W S ELEV 1153.12 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 137.77 1152.09 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING N0. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC �\1 11 1 I ICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A-4 AT CB -7 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL MGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER �. /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR +++ xxxxt++++ xtx+++++++ xttxx+++ ttxx+++++++ ttxt++++ te+ txx+ t++++ xxxt++++ eetxxxtxx+++++++ xx++ tttxtt + + +ttxxt + + + + + + + +tetxtxt + + + + + +tt ttxx 103.75 1150.85 2.270 1153.120 17.3 5.51 0.471 1153.591 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.96 0.03645 .005848 0.03 0.880 0.00 r108.71 1151.03 2.119 1153.150 17.3 5.51 0.471 1153.621 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 DRAULIC JUMP 0.00 108.71 1151.03 1.022 1152.053 17.3 10.72 1.784 1153.837 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 3.90 0.03645 .021247 0.08 0.880 0.00 112.61 1151.17 1.036 1152.209 17.3 10.52 1.720 1153.929 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 6.87 0.03645 .019502 0.13 0.880 0.00 119.48 1151.42 1.076 1152.499 17.3 10.03 1.564 1154.063 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 5.20 0.03645 .017201 0.09 0.880 124.68 1151.61 1.118 1152.731 17.3 9.57 1.422 1154.153 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 3.96 0.03645 .015190 0.06 0.880 0.00 128.64 1151.76 1.163 1152.920 17.3 9.12 1.293 1154.213 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 3.07 0.03645 .013431 0.04 0.880 0.00 0.00 131.71 1151.87 1.210 1153.079 17.3 8.70 1.175 1154.254 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 2.31 0.03645 .011891 0.03 0.880 0.00 134.02 1151.95 1.260 1153.213 17.3 8.29 1.068 1154.281 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.70 0.03645 .010545 0.02 0.880 0.00 135.72 1152.02 1.313 1153.328 173 7.91 0.971 1154.299 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.16 0.03645 .009371 0.01 0.880 0.00 136.88 1152.06 1.370 1153.427 17.3 7.54 0.883 1154.310 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.68 0.03645 .008349 0.01 0.880 0.00 n C i 7 �CENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -4 AT CB -7 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 137.56 1152.08 1.431 1153.513 0.21 0.03645 137.77 1152.09 1.499 1153.589 I 17.3 7.19 0.803 1154.316 0.00 .007459 0.00 17.3 6.85 0.728 1154.317 0.00 ErJT LOSS PAGE 2 HGT/ BASE/ 2L NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER 2R 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.880 0.00 1.499 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 I.z (Vlv, = 1.7 (O.7zg) = 0.87 LOS CL = O•x7 + 1%53.50t = IISy.Hio 96 I REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -5 AT CB -5 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 So 103.461152.10 1 1155.00 119.301154.01 1 .013 119.301154.01 1 CD 1 4 1.50 1 [I I I .1 I 1 .1 I I 1 I f L10/12/2001 IME: 9:50 F0515P HATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 tRD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT i BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(B) Y(9) Y(10) DE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP D 1 4 1.50 1 1 1 1 I i 1 i f 1 i i t 1 g� F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - 1 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP DING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -5 AT CB-5 DING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 I I I I I A vea3o65,-0 PAGE NO 3 Zz F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 103.46 1152.10 1 -EMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 119.30 1154.01 1 0.013 W S ELEV 1155.00 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �EMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 119.30 1154.01 1 0.00 'EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING N0. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I 1 I I t I L 1DD £N' (,055 to c, F- = 1. {5 +1155, = 1156•$ jo/ LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-5 AT CB -5 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR fxxt + + + +xxt + + + + +xxx xtt+++ xttt++ xtfftt + + +ffttt+ff + + + +x + ++xxt + + + + +xtxf tt+++ x++ xxxt++++ fxtt+++ fftt++ fff + + +fftf +fxeexx +x +xfxxx + + +fef xt ' 103.46 1152.10 2.900 1155.000 15.2 8.60 1.149 1156.149 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 9.39 0.12058 .020939 0.20 0.680 0.00 112.85 1153.23 1.976 1155.209 15.2 8.60 1.149 1156.358 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 JUMP 0.00 �YDRAULIC 112.85 1153.23 1.017 1154.250 15.2 11.91 2.203 1156.453 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.66 0.12058 .031938 0.02 0.680 0.00 113.51 1153.31 1.030 1154.341 15.2 11.74 2.139 1156.480 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 r1.63 0.12058 .029666 0.05 0.680 0.00 1153.51 1.076 1154.584 15.2 11.19 1.945 1156.529 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 '115.14 1.35 0.12058 .026523 0.04 0.680 0.00 ' 116.49 1153.67 1.126 1154.797 15.2 10.67 1.769 1156.566 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.09 0.12058 .023822 0.03 0.680 0.00 117.58 1153.80 1.181 1154.984 15.2 10.17 1.607 1156.591 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.12058 .021542 0.02 0.680 0.00 '0.85 0.00 0 0.00 118.43 1153.90 1.243 1155.148 15.2 9.71 1.463 1156.611 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 ' 0.61 0.12058 .019701 0.01 0.680 0.00 119.04 1153.98 1.315 1155.293 15.2 9.25 1.329 1156.622 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.26 0.12058 .018495 0.00 0.680 0.00 119.30 1154.01 1.410 1155.420 15.2 8.82 1.207 1156.627 0.00 1.410 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 £N' (,055 to c, F- = 1. {5 +1155, = 1156•$ jo/ 0 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -6 AT CB-4 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 103. 461153.13 1 1156.00 119.371156.69 1 .013 119.371156.69 1 CD 1 4 1.50 1 I I I I i i I 11 I I I 1 I I 101 DATE: 10/11/2001 ME: 9: 2 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 �ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(i) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 1 -50 1 /03 F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 3 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP �ADING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -6 AT CB-4 �ADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 1 r r r r r 1 1dS� F 0 5 1 5 P IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 103.46 1153.13 1 1156.00 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 119.37 1156.69 1 0.013 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 119.37 1156.69 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED- COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I I I I I I I !D✓ LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -6 AT CB -4 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH r. /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR if. iYixxiiii W'Rkkl if iilklf iii'f fff xxYf lxffflxxxRf x ffi x xffxfxnaaz«<xx *r** **nnnnnnn - - -- ' 103.46 1153.13 0.662 1153.792 12.5 16.62 4.290 1158.082 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.56 0.22376 .084082 0.13 0.510 0.00 105.02 1153.48 0.676 1154.154 12.5 16.15 4.050 1158.204 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2.31 107.33 0.22376 1154.00 0.702 1154.698 12.5 15.39 .075871 3.680 0.18 1158.378 0.00 1.334 0.510 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.96 0.22376 .066751 0.13 0.510 0.00 109.29 1154.44 0.728 1155.164 12.5 14.67 3.342 1158.506 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.68 0.22376 .058745 0.10 0.510 0.00 110.97 1.44 1154.81 0.22376 0.756 1155.566 12.5 14.00 3.043 .051750 1158.609 0.07 0.00 1.334 0.510 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 112.41 1155.13 0.785 1155.917 12.5 13.34 2.763 1158.680 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.23 0.22376 .045628 0.06 0.510 0.00 113.64 1155.41 0.816 1156.225 12.5 12.73 2.516 1158.741 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.08 114.72 0.22376 1155.65 0.848 1156.496 12.5 12.14 .040267 2.287 0.04 1158.783 0.00 1.334 0.510 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.92 0.22376 .035567 0.03 0.510 0.00 115.64 1155.86 0.882 1156.737 12.5 11.56 2.076 1158.813 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.79 0.22376 .031460 0.02 0.510 0.00 116.43 1156.03 0.918 1156.951 12.5 11.03 1.890 1158.841 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 r0.69 0.22376 .027865 0.02 0.510 0.00 117.12 1156.19 0.956 1157.142 12.5 10.51 1.716 1158.858 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.58 0.22376 .024716 0.01 0.510 0.00 r �o� LIENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-6 AT CB -4 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ,TATION INVERT DEPTH N.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR trww» frttrtrtrtwwfftttrtrtrtwrwftxxxrtwwrrfftrtrwr rffttrtrtwfrfftrtrtwerrrrrtrtrtwwrrxrtt +rtrtwrfrtxxfftrtrt wffxtrtrterftttwffrffxtwwwrffrrxf rwwwwfefrfft 117.70 1156.32 0.996 1157.312 12.5 10.02 1.560 1158.872 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.48 0.22376 .021978 0.01 0.510 0.00 118.18 1156.42 1.040 1157.465 12.5 9.56 1.418 1158.883 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.41 0.22376 .019595 0.01 0.510 0.00 118.59 1156.52 1.086 1157.602 12.5 9.12 1.291 1158.893 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.32 0.22376 .017527 0.01 0.510 0.00 118.91 1156.59 1.137 1157.724 12.5 8.69 1.173 1158.897 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.24 0.22376 .015766 0.00 0.510 0.00 119.15 1156.64 1.194 1157.835 12.5 8.28 1.066 1158.901 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.16 0.22376 .014284 0.00 0.510 0.00 119.31 1156.68 1.257 1157.934 12.5 7.90 0.969 1158.903 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.06 0.22376 .013105 0.00 0.510 0.00 ' 119.37 1156.69 1.334 1158.024 12.5 7.53 0.880 1158.904 0.00 1.334 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ��T t�oSS 1 I.oro ' ws E.L + I s8.O7- i 1 5c►.os 1 1 r �0 7 I 0 REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -7 AT CB-3 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 103.461154.60 1 1159.35 '119.321158.31 1 .013 119.321158.31 1 CD 1 4 1.50 1 I I I I [1 I u 1 [] I p L /o C DATE: 10/11/2001 �ME: 9: 3 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE i 'ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 1.50 1 /o9 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - 1 IADING LINE NO 2 IS - 1ADING LINE NO 3 IS - F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -7 AT CB -3 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 ad I F 0 5 1 5 P 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 103.46 1154.60 1 1159.35 PAGE NO 2 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH 1 U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 119.32 1158.31 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 119.32 1158.31 1 0.00 ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING tEDIT WARNING NO. 2 -- - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 U 1 [J 1 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT N0. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -7 AT CB -3 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 IATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER ' /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR ff #iiiiifff k *f *iiltf if lkf *iiilt!!tf#fff* * *llf kflk* i!!ll ffff* ii!ll flfflf f *!! #fff!!ff * * * *ki!!!f#fR * #! ##!f R * * * * #llffff *1f #i!llf kff l * #i ' 103.46 1154.60 4.750 1159.350 11.7 6.62 0.681 1160.031 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 13.18 0.23392 .012406 0.16 0.490 0.00 ' 116.64 1157.68 1.831 1159.515 11.7 6.62 0.681 1160.196 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �DRAULIC JUMP 0.00 116.64 1157.68 0.893 1158.577 11.7 10.68 1.770 1160.347 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.25 0.23392 .027683 0.01 0.490 0.00 116.89 1157.74 0.903 1158.645 11.7 10.52 1.719 1160.364 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.57 0.23392 .025614 0.01 0.490 0.00 1157.88 0.940 1158.816 113 10.03 1.563 1160.379 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 '117.46 0.49 0.23392 .022713 0.01 0.490 0.00 ' 117.95 1157.99 0.980 1158.969 11.7 9.57 1.421 1160.390 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.40 0.23392 .020181 0.01 0.490 0.00 118.35 1158.08 1.022 1159.106 11.7 9.12 1.291 1160.397 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.34 0.23392 .017968 0.01 0.490 0.00 118.69 1158.16 1.067 1159.230 11.7 8.69 1.173 1160.403 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.26 0.23392 .016049 0.00 0.490 0.00 118.95 1158.22 1.116 1159.340 11.7 8.29 1.068 1160.408 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.20 0.23392 .014399 0.00 0.490 0.00 1158.27 1.170 1159.440 11.7 7.91 0.970 1160.410 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 '119.15 0.00 0.12 0.23392 .013004 0.00 0.490 119.27 1158.30 1.231 1159.530 11.7 7.54 0.882 1160.412 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 05 0 23392 011860 0.00 0.490 0.00 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -7 AT CB -3 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 IFATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. D VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ 2L NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH OIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 2R rtrtrtrtretxfrtrrtrterrxxrtrtrtrtrrrerxfrrrfexxrtrtrttrrffxrtrtrtrrrfttxxxrtrtrtrttttetxxfrtrtrtrtrrrrtrrrrrttetxrtrtrtrtfrtrrfttfrtrtrtrrrrfrffttrtrtrrrttttttffrrr ' 119.32 1158.31 1.302 1159.612 11.7 7.18 0.801 1160.413 0.00 1.302 1.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 - i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 113 I REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -8 REF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 SO 124.381160.77 1 1165.97 ' 196.381161.25 1 .013 196.381161.25 1 CD 1 4 3.50 IrJ F, f II� LJ 1 1 1 u [J // 'TE: 10/11/2001 �ME: 9: 5 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 I I 1 1 T•ea 3o l s -=�) 11s SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) �ARD ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 3.50 I I 1 1 T•ea 3o l s -=�) 11s 1 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - IAGING LINE NO 2 IS - 1A DING LINE NO 3 IS - 1 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT N0. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -8 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 PAGE NO 3 ll6 ' F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 124.38 1160.77 1 1165.97 1 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 196.38 1161.25 1 0.013 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 196.38 1161.25 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC 1] 1 1 1 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P ' 124.38 1160.77 5.200 1165.970 72.00 0.00667 196.38 1161.25 5.641 1166.891 1 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 113.8 11.83 2.172 1168.142 0.00 3.203 3.50 0.00 0.00 0 0-00 .012794 0.92 3.500 0.00 113.8 11.83 2.172 1169.063 0.00 3.203 3.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 FA ;i WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A -8 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM 50 ... .......... SF AVE ------------------------ HF NORM DEPTH ---- .............. ......... :.. ' 124.38 1160.77 5.200 1165.970 72.00 0.00667 196.38 1161.25 5.641 1166.891 1 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 113.8 11.83 2.172 1168.142 0.00 3.203 3.50 0.00 0.00 0 0-00 .012794 0.92 3.500 0.00 113.8 11.83 2.172 1169.063 0.00 3.203 3.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 FA ;i I REDHAWK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15-100312 SO 102.151163.00 147.281164.28 147.281164.28 CD 1 4 1 I I 1 1 1 I [J 1 1 1 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -9 AT CB -1 RHE MAY 2001 1 1167.65 1 .013 2.00 //f DATE: 10/11/2001 E: 9: 4 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 tRD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(B) Y(9) Y(10) DE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 /90 ' F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 3 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - ' REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP DING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A-9 AT CB-1 tDING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 I 1 I gad F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 102.15 1163.00 1 1 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 147.28 1164.28 1 0.013 I I 0 I I W S ELEV 1167.65 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 147.28 1164.28 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC /Al. LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO FO515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1OO-YEAR LAT A -9 AT CB -1 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH �. /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 102.15 1163.00 4.650 1167.650 45.13 0.02836 147.28 1164.28 3.730 1168.010 1 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER `R 20.2 6.43 0.642 1168.292 0.00 1.614 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .007973 0.36 1.033 0.00 20.2 6.43 0.642 1168.652 0.00 1.614 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' FAT, LASS i 1 1 1 1 I,z 1%,i I. Z- (o .1642.) = 0.77 L WS EL : 0.77 + It "'c" _ 1168.78 /02k I 0 REDHAWK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15- 100312 SO ,102. 251164.30 104.831165.28 104.831165.28 CD 1 4 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A-10 AT CB-2 RHE MAY 2001 1 1 1 2.00 1168.25 DATE: 10/12/2001 E: 9:10 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ,ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP rD 1 4 2.00 1 1 1 1 i r r r r 42 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - �ADING LINE NO 2 IS - �ADING LINE NO 3 IS - t F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT A-10 AT CB-2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 /016 I F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 702.25 1164.30 1 1168.25 PAGE NO 2 NO 2 IS A REACH * ' 'LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 104.83 1165.28 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS ` U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 104.83 1165.28 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I L� I L i I L I 1 1 1 I TJ LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT A -10 AT CB -2 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH �. 102.25 1164.30 3.950 1168.250 2.58 0.37984 104.83 1165.28 2.976 1168.256 1 10.0 3.18 0.157 1168.407 0.00 .002266 0.01 10.0 3.18 0.157 1168.413 0.00 1�oss PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 1.132 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.370 0.00 1.132 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.Z V�'I = 1, 7- (ID .157) o, !a T r� ws E.- L- = o,i`l a- Il!o8.zbZ�k%'g,`15 M 1132.53 1132.09 60.00 45.00 1133.64 90.00 1136.71 90.00 1144.50 45.00 60.00 1146.32 60.00 1149.32 60.00 1153.33 60.00 1154.19 30.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 69"A 0 REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LINE B RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 50 989.451127.80 1 1017.511127.97 1 1039.901128.10 1 JX 1039.901128.10 1 4 12.3 1088.201128.39 1 1092.871128.42 1 R 1503.921130.89 1 1503.921130.89 1 4 42.3 1548.871131.16 1 1553.541131.18 1 R 2015.801133.96 1 2015.801133.96 1 4 42.6 2049.541134.16 1 R 2054.211134.19 1 2550.211136.66 1 2554.881136.69 1 2970.881139.19 1 R 2975.551139.21 1 3385.141141.67 1 3396.141142.74 2 3 37.1 R 3490.391143.31 2 3571.991143.80 2 3576.661143.83 2 4 22.8 R 4072.661146.81 2 4077.331146.83 2 4 22.6 4407.161148.81 2 4411.831148.84 2 R 4722.661150.70 2 1 4727.331150.73 2 4 22.1 5058.871152.72 2 JX 5072.871154.72 5 6 153.7 5 �5098.011156.03 i 5098.011156.03 5 CD 1 4 8.00 2 4 7.00 3 4 3.00 4 4 2.00 CD 5 4 5.00 6 4 4.50 1 1132.53 1132.09 60.00 45.00 1133.64 90.00 1136.71 90.00 1144.50 45.00 60.00 1146.32 60.00 1149.32 60.00 1153.33 60.00 1154.19 30.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 69"A I DATE: 10/21/2001 �ME: 21:30 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP D 1 4 8.00 D 2 4 7.00 CD 3 4 3.00 D 4 4 2.00 D 5 4 5.00 D 6 4 4.50 i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 !�D HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - IAGING LINE NO 2 IS - 1ADING LINE NO 3 IS - r F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LINE B RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 PAGE NO 3 lid 1 F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 989.45 1127.80 1 1132.53 �LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1017.51 1127.97 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1039.90 1128.10 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 CLEMENT ND 4 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 1039.90 1128.10 1 4 0 0.014 12.3 0.0 1132.09 0.00 60.00 0.00 E ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING LEMENT NO 5 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1088.20 1128.39 1 0.014 45.00 0.00 0.00 0 ,ELEMENT NO 6 IS A REACH * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 1092 87 1128 42 1 0.014 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 'ELEMENT NO 7 IS A REACH ' * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1503.92 1130.89 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 8 IS A JUNCTION ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT-2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 1503.92 1130.89 1 4 0 0.014 42.3 0.0 1133.64 0.00 90.00 0.00 THE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV - WARNING HE ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING ELEMENT NO 9 IS A REACH * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H ' 1548.87 1131.16 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 10 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 1553.54 1131.18 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 I -1 .3� I F 0 5 1 5 P IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 11 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 2015.80 1133.96 1 0.014 PAGE NO 3 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 12 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT -2 N 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 2015.80 1133.96 1 4 0 0.014 42.6 0.0 1136.71 0.00 90.00 0.00 E ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING E ABOVE ELEMENT CONTAINED AN INVERT ELEV WHICH WAS NOT GREATER THAN THE PREVIOUS INVERT ELEV -WARNING ELEMENT NO 13 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2049.54 1134.16 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 14 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2054.21 1134.19 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 LEMENT NO 15 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2550.21 1136.66 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 'ELEMENT NO 16 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2554.88 1136.69 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 ELEMENT NO 17 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 2970.88 1139.19 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 18 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H ' 2975.55 1139.21 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 NO 19 IS A REACH 'ELEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3385.14 1141.67 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ELEMENT NO 20 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT-2 N 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 3396.14 1142.74 2 3 0 0.014 37.1 0.0 1144.50 0.00 45.00 0.00 ELEMENT NO 21 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 3490.39 1143.31 2 0.014 60.00 0.00 0.00 0 I n I u 1339 iF 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 22 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 3571.99 1143.80 2 0.014 �LEMENT NO 23 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT -2 N 3576.66 1143.83 2 4 0 0.014 �LEMENT NO 24 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 4072.66 1146.81 2 0.014 CLEMENT NO 25 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT -2 N 4077.33 1146.83 2 4 0 0.014 'ELEMENT NO 26 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 4407.16 1148.81 2 0.014 ELEMENT NO 27 IS A REACH ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 4411.83 1148.84 2 0.014 'ELEMENT NO 28 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 4722.66 1150.70 2 0.014 ' ELEMENT NO 29 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT -1 LAT-2 N 4727.33 1150.73 2 4 0 0.014 ' ELEMENT NO 30 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 5058.87 1152.72 2 0.014 ' ELEMENT NO 31 IS A JUNCTION U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT LAT-1 LAT -2 N 5072.87 1154.72 5 6 0 0.014 PAGE NO 4 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 * 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 22.8 0.0 1146.32 0.00 60.00 0.00 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 03 04 INVERT-3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 22.6 0.0 1149.32 0.00 60.00 0.00 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 RADIUS ANGLE AND PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 RADIUS ANGLE AND PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT-4 PHI 3 PHI 4 22.1 0.0 1153.33 0.00 60.00 0.00 RADIUS ANGLE AND PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 03 04 INVERT -3 INVERT -4 PHI 3 PHI 4 153.7 0.0 1154.19 0.00 30.00 0.00 /37- F 0 5 1 5 P IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING PAGE NO 5 ELEMENT NO 32 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 5098.01 1156.03 5 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NO 33 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 5098.01 1156.03 5 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 " - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC 11 1 [1, /3.r LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LINE B RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ,TATION INVERT DEPTH U.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH CIA ID NO. PIER ' /ELEM 50 SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR txww+++ txwwwwrettfrtwww++ rtrtwwwwrfr++ xwww++ tffftxrtwwwww+ rrttww++ rrrrttww+ w++ rtttfffrttw+ rrtwrrttrtrt+++t wx + + +rttxxt + + + + + + +rx + + + + + + + +rttx ' 989.45 1127.80 6.702 1134.502 704.2 15.66 3.808 1138.310 0.00 6.702 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 28.06 0.00606 .006521 0.18 7.242 0.00 ' 1017.51 1127.97 6.896 1134.866 704.2 15.28 3.627 1138.493 0.00 6.702 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 22.39 0.00581 .006337 0.14 8.000 0.00 ' 1039.90 1128.10 6.973 1135.073 704.2 15.15 3.562 1138.635 0.00 6.702 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �NCT SIR 0.00000 (-pa- 16- 1 .006032 0.00 0.00 1039.90 1128.10 7.564 1135.664 691.9 14.06 3.071 1138.735 0.00 6.652 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 48.30 0.00600 .005772 0.28 7.041 0.00 '1088.20 1128.39 7.544 1135.934 691.9 14.09 3.081 1139.015 0.00 6.652 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.00642 .005770 0.03 6.705 0.00 1092.87 1128.42 7.539 1135.959 691.9 14.09 3.083 1139.042 0.00 6.652 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 411.05 0.00601 .005784 2.38 7.036 0.00 ' 1503.92 1130.89 7.345 1138.235 691.9 14.32 3.184 1141.419 0.00 6.652 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �UNCT SIR 0.00000 L- AT 's - Z .005841 0.00 0.00 1503.92 1130.89 8.298 1139.188 649.6 12.92 2.593 1141.781 0.00 6.469 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 44.95 0.00601 .005883 0.26 6.483 0.00 1548.87 1131.16 8.293 1139.453 649.6 12.92 2.593 1142.046 0.00 6.469 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 4.67 0.00428 .005883 0.03 8.000 0.00 '1553.54 1131.18 8.430 1139.610 649.6 12.92 2.593 1142.203 0.00 6.469 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 462.26 0.00601 .005883 2.72 6.479 0.00 ' 2015.80 1133.96 8.369 1142.329 649.6 12.92 2.593 1144.922 0.00 6.469 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 JUNCT SIR 0.00000 (�qT 13 -'� .005510 0.00 0.00 /36 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LINE B RBF .IN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH N.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR itff** iif!ll k4iiil lkff4 #4ttff # #44 *4tlfflk# *i * *rttt iffff!#** rtrtl ifff !! *rtttffffllkff4 *irtrtrtiflf *irtrt if!!i *rttlfllkkf *iiif!!!!f *trtrtt tf #f!#f ' 2015.80 1133.96 9.027 1142.987 607.0 12.08 2.264 1145.251 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 33.74 0.00593 .005137 0.17 6.109 0.00 ' 2049.54 1134.16 9.001 1143.161 607.0 12.08 2.264 1145.425 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.00642 .005137 0.02 5.901 0.00 ' 2054.21 1134.19 9.108 1143.298 607.0 12.08 2.264 1145.562 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 496.00 0.00498 .005137 2.55 6.676 0.00 2550.21 1136.66 9.186 1145.846 607.0 12.08 2.264 1148.110 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 4.67 0.00642 .005137 0.02 5.901 0.00 '2554.88 1136.69 9.293 1145.983 607.0 12.08 2.264 1148.247 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 416.00 0.00601 .005137 2.14 6.072 0.00 2970.88 1139.19 8.930 1148.120 607.0 12.08 2.264 1150.384 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.00428 .005137 0.02 8.000 0.00 ' 2975.55 1139.21 9.047 1148.257 607.0 12.08 2.264 1150.521 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 409.59 0.00601 .005137 2.10 6.074 0.00 ' 3385.14 1141.67 8.691 1150.361 607.0 12.08 2.264 1152.625 0.00 6.269 8.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �UNCT STR 0.09727 L AT 5 - LA .006603 0.07 0.00 3396.14 1142.74 6.747 1149.487 569.9 14.98 3.485 1152.972 0.00 6.155 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 67.67 0.00605 .008602 0.58 7.000 0.00 '3463.81 1143.15 7.000 1150.149 569.9 14.81 3.405 1153.554 0.00 6.155 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 26.58 0.00605 .009183 0.24 7.000 0.00 ' 3490.39 1143.31 7.085 1150.395 569.9 14.81 3.405 1153.800 0.00 6.155 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 81.60 0.00600 .009230 0.75 7.000 0.00 /3�1 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 3 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT N0. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LINE B RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR rrttxrtrrrttrtrtrrrfttxwww+ erffffwrrrffffwwrterfftrtrtffffttttrtrtrffxrtrt+ etfffrwwrtetxww +rrrffttfxwrtrrttxrrtfxxr rrftttxrrrfttreerttttttxrrff ' 3571.99 1143.80 7.348 1151.148 569.9 14.81 3.405 1154.553 0.00 6.155 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 JUNCT STR 0.00642 L AT B - 5 .008868 0.04 0.00 ' 3576.66 1143.83 7.826 1151.656 547.1 14.22 3.138 1154.794 0.00 6.061 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 496.00 0.00601 .008506 4.22 7.000 0.00 ' 4072.66 1146.81 9.065 1155.875 547.1 14.22 3.138 1159.013 0.00 6.061 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �UNCT STR 0.00428 L- AT 15 -(o .008162 0.04 0.00 4077.33 1146.83 9.526 1156.356 524.5 13.63 2.884 1159.240 0.00 5.960 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 329.83 0.00600 .007818 2.58 7.000 0.00 ' 4407.16 1148.81 10.124 1158.934 524.5 13.63 2.884 1161.818 0.00 5.960 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 4.67 0.00642 .007818 0.04 7.000 0.00 4411.83 1148.84 10.275 1159.115 524.5 13.63 2.884 1161.999 0.00 5.960 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 310.83 0.00598 .007818 2.43 7.000 0.00 4722.66 1150.70 10.845 1161.545 524.5 13.63 2.884 1164.429 0.00 5.960 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �UNCT STR 0.00642 L A-F 13 - % .007496 0.04 0.00 4727.33 1150.73 11.263 1161.993 502.4 13.05 2.646 1164.639 0.00 5.855 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 331.54 0.00600 .007173 2.38 7.000 0.00 5058.87 1152.72 11.651 1164.371 502.4 13.05 2.646 1167.017 0.00 5.855 7.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �IUNCT STR 0.14286 L A *7 6 - Qj .013981 0.20 0.00 '5072.87 1154.72 8.864 1163.584 348.7 17.76 4.897 1168.481 0.00 4.807 5.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 25.14 0.05211 .020790 0.52 2.883 0.00 ' 5098.01 1156.03 8.076 1164.106 348.7 17.76 4.897 1169.003 0.00 4.807 5.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' /3� 0 11 REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-1 AT CB -9 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 SO 104.561132.09 1 1135.64 159.061134.10 1 .013 159.061134.10 1 CD 1 4 2.00 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �Il L� 1 C 1 1 of DATE: 10/ 9/2001 �ME: 16:46 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 �ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - IADING LINE NO 2 IS - 1EADING LINE NO 3 IS - 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-1 AT CB -9 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE SEPT 2001 PAGE NO 3 /y4f F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 104.56 1132.09 1 1135.64 PAGE NO 2 1 11 1 1 lq$- NO 2 IS A REACH ' 'ELEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 159.06 1134.10 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 ' ELEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 159.06 1134.10 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING �0 " WARNING NO. 2 •• - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC 1 11 1 1 lq$- LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT N0. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -1 AT CB-9 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE SEPT 2001 (STATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH ,L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 1 104.56 1132.09 3.550 1135.640 45.69 0.03688 1 150.25 1133.78 2.000 1135.775 1 4.72 0.03688 154.97 1133.95 1.814 1135.763 2.39 0.03688 157.36 1134.04 1.706 1135.743 1.70 0.03688 1 159.06 1134.10 1.621 1135.721 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 12.3 3.91 0.238 1135.878 0.00 1.261 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .002928 0.13 0.730 0.00 12.3 3.91 0.238 1136.013 0.00 1.261 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .002743 0.01 0.730 0.00 12.3 4.11 0.262 1136.025 0.00 1.261 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .002675 0.01 0.730 0.00 12.3 4.31 0.288 1136.031 0.00 1.261 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .002891 0.00 0.730 0.00 12.3 4.51 0.316 1136.037 0.00 1.261 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 aOT l osS 1.2_ 6316) ,1_ w�:, = o.3% r 1135.77- ' 1 136.10 /�� 0 REDHAUK TRACT N0. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 104.001133.64 1 1139.18 152.001134.12 1 .013 152.001134.12 1 CD 1 4 2.00 1 I 1 I I L'J 1 1 I I 1 I ty# DATE: 9/24/2001 ME: 15:52 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 �ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(B) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 I 11 I 1 1 I 14 1 F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 3 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS iREDHAUK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP �AD ING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -2 �ADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 1 I t t rl i�6 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 104.00 1133.64 1 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 152.00 1134.12 1 0.013 W S ELEV 1139.18 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1ELEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 152.00 1134.12 1 0.00 0 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING ` WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC a a A I u I a a .I U -T�� 306.E 7=2 147 LICENSEE: R.B.F. & ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -2 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH N.S. O VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH �L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR �fffftttfrefttttfffffttf ffeerf »fffff rrt.. rrrrr .... ..........,.,.***.......... .______________________........ 104.00 1133.64 5.540 1139.180 42.3 13.46 2.814 1141.994 0.00 1.961 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 48.00 0.01000 .034963 1.68 2.000 0.00 j152.00 1134.12 6.738 1140.858 42.3 13.46 2.814 1143.672 0.00 1.961 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 D 11 /y$ I 0 REDHAYK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B-3 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 104.001136.71 1 1142.98 152.001137.19 1 .013 152.001137.19 1 CD 1 4 2.00 O 1 I I1 I I [1 IHQ DATE: 9/24/2001 ME: 15:52 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE 2L 2R INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y00) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP D 1 4 2.00 I '1 1 t 1 1 t r r 1 I I /00 F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 3 WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - MREDHAUK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP ADING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-3 ADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 FINE MAY 2001 r I I I I I I_1 I i, 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT 104.00 1136.71 1 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 152.00 1137.19 1 0.013 p I 1 LI I I W S ELEV 1142.98 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 152.00 1137.19 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV * DC / LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -3 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 104.00 1136.71 6.270 1142.980 48.00 0.01000 152.00 1137.19 7.492 1144.682 1 1 1 i i i 1 1 i i 1 1 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 42.6 13.56 2.854 1145.834 0.00 1.962 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .035460 1.70 2.000 0.00 42.6 13.56 2.854 1147.536 0.00 1.962 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �sl I 0 REDHANK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15- 100312 50 105.661144.50 153.661144.98 153.661144.98 CD 1 4 1 I I I 1 I I 11 1 I 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -4 RHE MAY 2001 1 1150.39 1 .013 3.00 �� I DATE: 9/24/2001 �ME: 15:52 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 3.00 1 r 1 1 r /g� HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - AGING LINE NO 2 IS - AGING LINE NO 3 IS - F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -4 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 /S6 I F 0 5 1 5 P IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 105.66 1144.50 1 1150.39 1 LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N 153.66 1144.98 1 0.013 PAGE NO 2 RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 153.66 1144.98 1 0.00 tEDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 " - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I 1 UIII I �J �I I 1.50 �CENSEE: R.B.F. & ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -4 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 �TATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM 50 SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH 105.66 1144.50 5.890 1150.390 48.00 0.01000 153.66 1144.98 5.559 1150.539 37.1 5.25 0.428 1150.818 0.00 1.981 .003094 0.15 1.600 37.1 5.25 0.428 1150.967 0.00 1.981 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 3.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 /509 I REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-5 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 104.041146.32 1 1151.63 136.041146.96 1 .013 136.041146.96 1 CD 1 4 2.00 1 u I L.J ' I J [J I 1 I 14 ITE: 9/2412001 �ME: 15:53 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CHN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 t i t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � 6� HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - FADING LINE NO 2 IS - 'EADING LINE NO 3 IS - F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -5 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 &i I F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET • * ' ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 104.04 1146.32 1 1151.63 �LEMENT NO 2 IS A REACH U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 136.04 1146.96 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 136.04 1146.96 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 " - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC P J 'J 7 r-' I L✓ 7 L✓' tI L✓ 10 LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -5 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 'TATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ' 104.04 1146.32 5.310 1151.630 32.00 0.02000 ' 136.04 1146.96 4.995 1151.955 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 22.8 7.26 0.818 1152.448 0.00 1.700 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .010158 0.33 1.250 0.00 22.8 7.26 0.818 1152.773 0.00 1.700 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 M 1 ' • 1as >_�. 1151.9 + o,9B c 1152.9`1 M REDHANK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-6 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 SO 104.041146.32 1 1156.33 142.051153.00 1 .013 142.051153.00 1 CO 1 4 2.00 u i� J DATE: 9/24/2001 �ME: 15:53 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 i 1 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - ADING LINE NO 2 IS - �ADING LINE NO 3 IS - 1 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -6 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 'btf F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV ' 104.04 1146.32 1 1156.33 NO 2 IS A REACH �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 142.05 1153.00 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 142.05 1153.00 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING N0. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I 1 .1 /0 ICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P ' 104.04 1146.32 10.010 1156.330 38.01 0.17574 ' 142.05 1153.00 3.754 1156.754 ' �1JT, LOSS 23.9 7.61 0.898 1157.228 0.00 1.732 .011161 0.42 23.9 7.61 0.898 1157.652 0.00 1.732 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.681 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 1156,75 +I-OS = 1157.83 jlof WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -6 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 �TATION INVERT DEPTH W. S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ' 104.04 1146.32 10.010 1156.330 38.01 0.17574 ' 142.05 1153.00 3.754 1156.754 ' �1JT, LOSS 23.9 7.61 0.898 1157.228 0.00 1.732 .011161 0.42 23.9 7.61 0.898 1157.652 0.00 1.732 PAGE 1 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER ZR 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.681 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 1156,75 +I-OS = 1157.83 jlof 0 REDHANK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15- 100312 50 105.201153.30 ' 135.911163.00 135.911163.00 CD 1 4 1 1 F1 I I 1 1 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B-7 RHE MAY 2001 1 1161.97 2.00 (p 4 1 DATE: 10/12/2001 �ME: 13:32 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 IARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y00) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 2.00 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ,1 176 1 F 0 5 1 5 P ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP REDHAWK TRACT �ADING LINE NO 2 IS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B -7 IADING LINE NO 3 IS - RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 -7�e ;v , ol�.45r -a PAGE NO 3 /9/ v F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 IWATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET * ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV ' 105.20 1153.30 1 1161.97 NO 2 IS A REACH �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 135.91 1163.00 1 0.014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS • ' U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 135.91 1163.00 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED-COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I 1 1 1 1 I 17) LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 1 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B-7 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH CIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM 50 SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR rxxw+ w+++ fttrxww+ www+ rrefrfwww+ fffrttxwww+ fttx+ w» frtttwwwww+ rrrtrrwf+ ffttrw++ wwwrwfffreffwwfrxxw+ rffwxwwwww +rrwwww +wrreffwf + +wwrff 1 105.20 1153.30 8.670 1161.970 27.9 8.88 1.224 1163.194 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 14.63 0.31586 .017640 0.26 0.660 0.00 ' 119.83 1157.92 4.314 1162.235 27.9 8.88 1.224 1163.459 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 DRAULIC JUMP 0.00 119.83 1157.92 0.903 1158.824 27.9 20.28 6.384 1165.208 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.03 0.31586 .098086 0.10 0.660 0.00 120.86 1158.25 0.915 1159.162 27.9 19.89 6.141 1165.303 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2.32 0.31586 .089772 0.21 0.660 0.00 1158.98 0.950 1159.928 27.9 18.97 5.586 1165.514 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 '123.18 1.99 0.31586 .079010 0.16 0.660 0.00 ' 125.17 1159.61 0.986 1160.593 27.9 18.08 5.077 1165.670 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.72 0.31586 .069546 0.12 0.660 0.00 ' 126.89 1160.15 1.023 1161.174 27.9 17.23 4.611 1165.785 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.49 0.31586 .061270 0.09 0.660 0.00 128.38 1160.62 1.063 1161.685 27.9 16.43 4.192 1165.877 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.30 0.31586 .054031 0.07 0.660 0.00 129.68 1161.03 1.104 1162.136 27.9 15.67 3.815 1165.951 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.13 0.31586 .047687 0.05 0.660 0.00 130.81 1161.39 1.148 1162.537 27.9 14.94 3.468 1166.005 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.00 0.98 0.31586 .042158 0.04 0.660 131.79 1161.70 1.195 1162.893 27.9 14.25 3.153 1166.046 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.85 0.31586 .037318 0.03 0.660 0.00 l�� LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE 2 WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT 8-7 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 gTATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR tf *iiff # #k *illffff # #k *iilf lk**iillf ff *iiifff ##k*iii!!llf fii if! #k *iilf!!!!ff # * *ffftf# # *iilftf# *Milt iff * # * * *kiii!!!f k*ii if ##i # #* *iii 132.64 1161.97 1.244 1163.212 27.9 13.58 2.865 1166.077 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.74 0.31586 .033076 0.02 0.660 0.00 ' 133.38 1162.20 1.296 1163.496 27.9 12.95 2.605 1166.101 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.63 0.31586 .029365 0.02 0.660 0.00 ' 134.01 1162.40 1.351 1163.752 27.9 12.35 2.369 1166.121 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0.54 0.31586 .026136 0.01 0.660 0.00 134.55 1162.57 1.411 1163.981 27.9 11.77 2.152 1166.133 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.45 0.31586 .023334 0.01 0.660 0.00 135.00 1162.71 1.475 1164.187 27.9 11.23 1.957 1166.144 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.36 0.31586 .020916 0.01 0.660 0.00 I135.36 1162.83 1.546 1164.373 27.9 10.70 1.778 1166.151 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.28 0.31586 .018863 0.01 0.660 0.00 135.64 1162.91 1.625 1164.540 27.9 10.20 1.617 1166.157 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.19 0.31586 .017157 0.00 0.660 0.00 0.00 135.83 1162.98 1.714 1164.690 27.9 9.73 1.471 1166.161 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 ' 0.08 0.31586 .015883 0.00 0.660 0.00 135.91 1163.00 1.826 1164.826 27.9 9.28 1.336 1166.162 0.00 1.826 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 17� F 0 REDHANK TRACT NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, RBF JN. 15- 100312 SO 107.001154.19 '145.001162.00 145.001162.00 CD 1 4 1 I I I I 23065 GARRETT GROUP CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -8 RHE MAY 2001 1 1164.35 1 .013 4.50 1?5 DATE: 9/24/2001 �ME: 15:54 F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - CHANNEL DEFINITION LISTING PAGE 1 ARD SECT CNN NO OF AVE PIER HEIGHT 1 BASE ZL ZR INV Y(1) Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(5) Y(b) Y(7) Y(8) Y(9) Y(10) ODE NO TYPE PIERS WIDTH DIAMETER WIDTH DROP �D 1 4 4.50 r r r r i r r r r r r r r r 1 HEADING LINE NO 1 IS - AGING LINE NO 2 IS - LADING LINE NO 3 IS - i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 F 0 5 1 5 P WATER SURFACE PROFILE - TITLE CARD LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B -8 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 PAGE NO 3 X77 F 0 5 1 5 P PAGE NO 2 ' WATER SURFACE PROFILE - ELEMENT CARD LISTING ELEMENT NO 1 IS A SYSTEM OUTLET U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV ' 107.00 1154.19 1 1164.35 NO 2 IS A REACH * ` �LEMENT U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT N RADIUS ANGLE ANG PT MAN H 145.00 1162.00 1 0.013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 �LEMENT NO 3 IS A SYSTEM HEADWORKS U/S DATA STATION INVERT SECT W S ELEV 145.00 1162.00 1 0.00 EDIT ERRORS ENCOUNTERED - COMPUTATION IS NOW BEGINNING WARNING NO. 2 ** - WATER SURFACE ELEVATION GIVEN IS LESS THAN OR EQUALS INVERT ELEVATION IN HDWKDS, W.S.ELEV = INV + DC I I I I 11 I � I u 171 �CENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P PAGE i WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100-YEAR LAT B-8 RBF JN. 15- 100312 RHE MAY 2001 ITATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH DIA ID NO. PIER /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ZR xxrtrtrtwr rrxrtrtrtwwtttxwrtrtrtrrttxwwwwrxrxrtrtrtrtwrttrtrtrtrrrtxxrtrtrrttttwwwrrttttwwwrrterrrwwteerrtwwwree rttwwwerrttwrrtttrtxwrrtttttrtrrrrttt ' 107.00 1154.19 10.160 1164.350 156.0 9.81 1.494 1165.844 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 20.82 0.20553 .006293 0.13 1.273 0.00 ' 127.82 1158.47 6.012 1164.481 156.0 9.81 1.494 1165.975 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 �YDRAULIC JUMP 0.00 127.82 1158.47 2.154 1160.623 156.0 20.74 6.681 1167.304 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 2.41 0.20553 .027799 0.07 1.273 0.00 130.23 1158.96 2.219 1161.184 156.0 19.96 6.189 1167.373 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 2.64 0.20553 .024807 0.07 1.273 0.00 ' 132.87 1159.51 2.304 1161.812 156.0 19.04 5.627 1167.439 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2.31 0.20553 .021854 0.05 1.273 0.00 135.18 1159.98 2.392 1162.374 156.0 18.15 5.115 1167.489 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.99 0.20553 .019270 0.04 1.273 0.00 137.17 1160.39 2.486 1162.877 156.0 17.30 4.650 1167.527 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.72 0.20553 .017014 0.03 1.273 0.00 ' 138.89 1160.74 2.585 1163.329 156.0 16.50 4.227 1167.556 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.47 0.20553 .015036 0.02 1.273 0.00 140.36 1161.05 2.689 1163.735 156.0 15.73 3.843 1167.578 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ' 1.25 0.20553 .013306 0.02 1.273 0.00 141.61 1161.30 2.799 1164.101 156.0 15.00 3.494 1167.595 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.03 0.20553 .011793 0.01 1.273 0.00 ' 142.64 1161.52 2.916 1164.431 156.0 14.30 3.176 1167.607 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.84 0.20553 .010471 0.01 1.273 0.00 Ae �/T LICENSEE: R.B.F. 8 ASSOC. - SAN DIEGO F0515P WATER SURFACE PROFILE LISTING ' REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 GARRETT GROUP RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 100 -YEAR LAT B-8 RBF JN. 15-100312 RHE MAY 2001 'STATION INVERT DEPTH W.S. 0 VEL VEL ENERGY SUPER CRITICAL ELEV OF FLOW ELEV HEAD GRD.EL. ELEV DEPTH 'L /ELEM SO SF AVE HF NORM DEPTH ' 143.48 1161.69 3.041 1164.729 0.65 0.20553 4.50 ' 144.13 1161.82 3.176 1164.997 .009322 0.01 ' 0.48 0.20553 1.273 144.61 1161.92 3.321 1165.240 ' 0.29 0.20553 2.625 1167.622 144.90 1161.98 3.480 1165.459 0.10 0.20553 0 0.00 145.00 1162.00 3.658 1165.658 1.273 0.00 PAGE 2 HGT/ BASE/ ZL NO AVBPR DIA ID NO. PIER tail 156.0 13.64 2.887 1167.616 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .009322 0.01 1.273 0.00 156.0 13.00 2.625 1167.622 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .008324 0.00 1.273 0.00 156.0 12.40 2.386 1167.626 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .007462 0.00 1.273 0.00 156.0 11.82 2.169 1167.628 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 .006726 0.00 1.273 0.00 156.0 11.27 1.971 1167.629 0.00 3.658 4.50 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 ENT. L_o5 S 1 1 1.5 h'f : 1.5(1.9'?1> = Z-•q (. I 1 ' `W S Et. • = t 165.(06 t L.9(o = t168. 6"2^ o 1 1 APPENDIX D WATER QUALITY BASIN OUTLET CALCULATIONS REDHAW K TRACT NO. 23065 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 October 22, 2001 Hydraulic Analysis D Garrett Group 1 g1 FBF . . CONSULTING PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION 800.479.380B • wWW-RBF.COM SOB MD 15 - loo 3 / -z- SHEET NO pp OF CALCULATED BY f-H E DATE CHECKED BY DATE SCALE oc�TL�T "�LO�.�J LOn1TILO� GA�LCJI.a71Dr� A. = 0.62 Ac, AZ = l,lot ac O.(oZ A Z G - 0.&G T = Z `i 0 Fs H = 1151,5 O,ql AL = 3 91 6,4 0 sr- o. 5 \0 5 3Cav GT C�. = D.yD& SF A -- o. -71 f} = 8 - % ItycN ' QSTAGE /DISCHARGE TABLE FOR WATER QUALITY BASIN OUTLET BASIN WATER BASIN RISER BOX WATER TAILWATER OUTLET CULV. oELEVATION,ft. OUTFLOW,cfs. ELEVATION,ft. ELEVATION,ft. CONTROL 1151.50 0.00 1151.04 1151.04 N/A ' 1151.60 2.15 1151.06 1151.04 INLET CONT 1151.70 6.09 1151.08 1151.04 INLET CONT 1151.80 11.19 1151.09 1151.04 INLET CONT ' 1151.90 17.23 1151.11 1151.04 INLET CONT 1152.00 24.08 1151.12 1151.04 INLET CONT 1152.10 31.66 1151.13 1151.04 INLET CONT ' 1152.20 39.89 1151.14 1151.04 INLET CONT 1152.30 48.74 1151.15 1151.04 INLET CONT 1152.40 58.16 1151.16 1151.04 INLET CONT 1152.50 68.11 1151.18 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1152.60 78.58 1151.23 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1152.70 89.54 1151.29 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1152.80 100.96 1151.36 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1152.90 112.83 1151.44 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.00 125.13 1151.53 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.10 137.85 1151.63 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1153.20 150.97 1151.75 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.30 164.49 1151.88 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.40 178.39 1152.03 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.50 192.65 1152.19 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1153.60 207.28 1152.38 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.70 222.26 1152.58 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1153.80 237.59 1152.80 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1153.90 253.25 1153.04 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.00 269.24 1153.30 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.10 285.56 1153.58 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.20 302.19 1153.88 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1154.30 319.13 1154.21 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.40 336.38 1154.40 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.50 353.93 1154.50 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1154.60 371.77 1154.60 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.70 389.90 1154.70 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.80 408.32 1154.80 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1154.90 427.02 1154.90 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.00 446.00 1155.00 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.10 465.25 1155.10 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.20 484.77 1155.20 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1155.30 504.55 1155.30 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.40 524.60 1155.40 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.50 544.90 1155.50 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1155.60 562.53 1155.60 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.70 569.35 1155.70 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1155.80 576.09 1155.80 1151.04 OUTLET CONT ' 1155.90 582.75 1155.90 1151.04 OUTLET CONT 1156.00 589.33 1156.00 1151.04 OUTLET CONT oOUTLET STRUCTURE GEOMETRY FOR WATER QUALITY BASIN OUTLET ' " STAGE 1 -- -> RISER PIPE DROP INLET op o P Two 5 4 GMP it-15 E-w-c- ' CREST ELEVATION = 1151.50 EFFECTIVE PERIMETER 21.98 ft. EFF. FLOW AREA = 38.47 sq.ft DISCHARGE COEFF. _ is; to 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t G) OUTFALL CULVERT FrgoK RISER To J01" oe. L1NE- A-1 STA. 23 UPSTREAM INVERT INVERT ELEVATION = 1144.00 DIAMETER = 6.00 ft. LENGTH = 10.45 ft. SLOPE = 0.0250 ft /ft. MANNING -S n = 0.0240 ENTRANCE CONDITION = SEH, K = 0.50 I`/ -/ ) OUTFALL CHANNEL CONSTANT TAILNATER ELEVATION = 1151.04 —'9 w5 E LINE- A -1 STA. 7- 3 +I7- .Z't- iw /c.oSSa -S� QT L90 FLoW 1� EA 14 R IsER = GlR = Z Z = 1'FO Cm. ♦ 1 ♦ Q = 140 c.FS WS E.L. _ 1153.1 Z O- StE NExT- flkc�E FOIL Loca'r' -rte of A1JAl i51 S . IV 1 1 i WAs�R- 0. 0PtLITY bASia OJTLEr S I p+.%C7'IiRE_ Loc-p�"il01Js Fotz ANALY,pIS 0 1153.26 MAX WS EL PER APWA STD PLAN N0. 380 -3 L =24 ", T =12" a o10 A5 I 1 1 Redha wk Tract 23065 -2 Geometry /Outlet Structure Design Summary 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 JN: 15- 100312 Garrett Group DA (Onsite /Offsite) ac. 151.50 212 B w Bottom Surface Area sq. ft. 30,796 minutes ac. 0.71 .� z to 1 ft. 4.0 Outlet Type V Ho ft. 24.75 NA olnvert tt. 0.00 ft. Maximum Height ft. 1000 Applied Geometry Actual ft. J H ft. 0.05 Storm Event 100Y -1H 100Y -1H 100Y -3H 100Y -6H 100Y -24H 100Y -24H Time Step minutes 5 5 5 5 5 5 Outlet Type Welr NA NA NA NA NA Diameter/Length ft. Effective Diameter ft. 44.00 . Discharge Coefficient - 2.60 - - - - - Tailwater ft. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Outlet Height ft. 0.00 - - - ' Storm Volume ac: tt. 14.93 14.93 24.12 30.78 53.57 53.57 Inflow cfs 322.4 322.4 245.3 227.4 105.5 105.5 Outflow cfs 278.9 278.9 232.0 217.4 104.1 104.1 8 Non- mitigated cfs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O Outflow +Non - mitigated cfs 278.9 278.9 232.0 217.4 104.1 104.1 Existing cfs 222.6 222.6 170.0 168.5 58.1 58.1 Maximum Stage 1.81 1.81 1.60 1.53 0.94 0.94 Maximum Surface Area ae. 1.42 1.42 1.39 1.38 1.31 1.31 sq. ft. 61,834 61,834 60,394 59,925 56,849 56,849 Maximum Storage Volume ac: ft. 2.36 2.36 2.07 1.97 1.17 1.17 c.y. 3,807 3,807 3,333 3,182 1,895 1,895 _7?e C;� 3 0 6�� -a )8b m m m m m m r w m m m" m m m m m m m Date: 05/16/01 File name: 100YIM RES Page 1 ........ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F L O O D R 0 U T I N G A N A L Y S I S ACCORDING TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTORL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WOD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1909 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (sea) Ver. 7.0 Release Date: 01/01/99 License ID 1261 Analysis prepared by. Robert Bein, William Frost 6 Associates 1025 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 ••••••••••••••......•••••• DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ............ "......•••••. A, RAW TRACT NO. 23065 -6 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA GARRETT GROUP ' 100 -YEAR 1 -HOUR HYDROGRAPH FOR AREA 'A' PROJECT CONDITIONS • RAF ON: 15- 100312 RHE FEBRUARY 2001 BASIN A ........................................... ............................... FILE NAME: 100Y1HA TAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 10:06 03/30 /2001 ...... ...................................... ................................ FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 0.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 1 _________________________ -11»SUBAREA RUNOFF (UNIT- HYDROORAPH ANALYSIS)-11< (UNIT- HYTROGRAPH ADDED TO STREAM 41) WATERSHED AREA = 151.500 ACRES SASEFLOW = 0.000 CFS /SQUARE -MILE 'USER ENTERED 'LAG' TIME = 0.221 HOURS CAUTION LAG TIME IS LESS THAN 0.50 HOURS. THE 5- MINUTE PERIOD UN MODEL (USED IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM) MAY BE TOO LARGE FOR PEAR FLOW ESTIMATES. VALLEY S -GRAPH SELECTED UNIFORM MEAN SOIL- LOSS(INCH /HOUR) - 0.200 LOW SOIL -LOSS RATE PERCENT(DECIMAL) = 0.500 USER - ENTERED RAINFALL = 1.40 INCHES RCFC&WCD 1 -Hour BLOM (5- Minute period) SELECTED (SLOPE OF INTENSITY- DURATION CURVE = 0.55) RCFC6WCD DEPTH -AREA AIJUSTMENT PACTOR(PLATE E -5 8) = 1.0000 UNIT HYDROGRAPH TIME UNIT - 5.000 MINUTES UNIT INTERVAL PERCENTAGE OF LAG -TIME - 37.707 UNIT HYDROGRAPH DETERMINATION INTERVAL 'S• GRAPH UNIT HYDROGRAPH NUMBER MEAN VALUES ORDINATES(QS) 1 3.927 71.945 2 19.644 207.960 Date 05/16/01 File have 1OOY11U RES Page 2 3 45 525 04 201 4 63.850 335 099 5 73.125 169 793 6 78.913 106.060 7 83 082 76.381 8 86.251 58.056 9 88.680 44 498 10 90.706 37 125 IS 92 358 30.265 12 93 748 25.181 13 94.922 21 501 11 95.978 19.354 15 96 753 14 188 16 97.485 13 411 17 90.071 10.735 18 98.351 5.132 19 98 621 4.960 20 90.892 4.956 21 99.163 4.960 22 99.433 4.956 23 99 704 4.956 24 99 974 4 956 25 100.000 0.175 m m � Date: 05/16/01 m m m r m m m i m m m m m m= m name 100Y1HA RES .............................................. UNIT UNIT .............................a. UNIT EFFECTIVE PERIOD RAINFALL SOIL -LOSS RAINFALL (NUMBER) (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) 1 0.0543 0.0167 0.0376 2 0.0578 0 0167 0.0611 3 0.0620 0.0167 0.0653 1 0 0696 0.0167 0.0527 5 0 0738 0.0167 0.0571 6 0.0855 0 0167 0.0688 7 0.1028 0.0167 0.0862 8 0.1161 0 0167 0.0977 9 0 1631 0.0167 0 1666 10 0 6621 0.0167 0.1256 11 0.0961 0.0167 0.0776 12 0.0609 0 0167 0.0662 13 0.0000 0.0000 o. ono 16 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 15 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12 0.0612 0.0167 0.0275 TOTAL STORM RATNFALL(INCHES( = 1.66 TOTAL SOIL- LOSS(INCHES) = 0.22 TOTAL EFFECTIVE RAINFALL(INCHES) = 1.23 TOTAL SOIL -LOSS VOLUME(ACRE -FEET) = 2.7356 TOTAL STORM RUNOFF VOLUME(ACRE -FEET) = 11 9319 3 Date 05/16/01 File n . 1OOY1HA.RES Page A 1 - H O U R S T 0 R M R U N O F F H Y D R O G R A P H HYDROGRAPH IN FIVE - MINUTE UNIT INTERVALS(CFS) (Note: Time indicated is at ENO of EaCh Unit Inte[Val6) TIME(HRS) VOLUME(AF) Q(CFS) 0. 100.0 200.0 300.0 600.0 0 083 0.0107 2.71 Q 0 167 0.1137 13.00 VQ 0.250 0.3607 32 9fi V Q 0.333 0.6781 68.99 .V 0 0 617 1.0980 60.98 V Q 0.500 1.5978 72.57 V 0 0.583 2 1881 85 71 V 0.. 0.667 2 8956 102.72 V 0 0.750 3.7695 126.89 V 0 0.833 5.0190 181.63 V 0 0.917 6.9069 273.83 V 0 1.000 9.1255 322.63 V 0 1.083 10.8091 266 66 Q V 1.167 11 8687 150.95 0 .V 1.250 12.5213 97.66 O. V 1 333 12.9900 69.22 0 V 1 617 13.3615 52.77 Q V 1 500 13.6668 61.13 0 V 1.583 13.8806 33.95 Q V 1.667 16.0729 27.91 0 V 1.750 14.2335 23.32 0 V . 1.833 16.3686 19.62 .0 V 1.917 16.6837 16.71 .O V . 2 000 16.5757 13.35 .0 V. 2.083 16.6561 11 38 .0 V 2.167 16.7153 8 89 0 V. 2.250 16.7568 6.03 Q V. 2.333 16.7925 5.19 Q V. 2.617 16.8252 6.76 0 V. 2.500 16.8555 4.60 0 V. 2.583 16.8829 3.98 0 V 2.667 11.9070 3.50 Q V. 2.750 16.9256 2.71 0 V. 2.833 16.9306 0.72 0 V. 2.917 16.9318 0.17 0 V. 3.000 14.9319 0.01 0 V. END OF FLOODSC% ROUTING ANALYSIS note: 05/16/01 File name: IOOY3HA.RES Page 1 F L 0 0 0 R O U T I N G A N A L Y S I S ACCORDING TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIgOD CON7ORL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFCLWCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY HANDAL (c) Copyright 1989 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (acs) Ver. 7.0 Palette Date: 01/01/99 License ID 1261 Analysis prepared by: Robert Bein, William F[Oat & A ... tiara. 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 • ................•.•...... DESCRIPTION OF STUDY .......................... • REDRAW TRACT NO. 23065 -6 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA GARRETT GROUP ` 100 -YEAR 3 -HOUR HYDROGRAPH FOR AREA 'A' PROJECT CONDITIONS RBF JN- 15- 100312 RHE FEBRUARY 2001 BASIN A ' .................. ...................... ...................... ............ FILE NAME 100Y3HA.DAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 10:06 03/30/2001 ............. u............................. .................................. FLOW PRE FROM NODE 0.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 1 ______ _____________ ____________ _ __ __ » »>SUBAREA RUNOFF (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ANALYSI5)< u« (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ADDED 10 STREAM 01) WATERSHED AREA = 151.500 ACRES BASEFLOW = 0.000 CFS /SQUARE -MILE 'USER ENTERED 'LAG' TIME = 0.221 HOURS CAUTION: LAG TIME IS LESS THAN 0.50 HOOPS THE 5- MINUTE PERIOD OR MODEL (USED IN THIS COMPUTER FROGMAN) MAY BE TOO LARGE FOR PEAK FLOW ESTIMATES VALLEY S -GRAPH SELECTED UNIFORM MEAN SOIL- LOSS(INCH /HOUR) = 0.200 LOW SOIL -LOSS RATE PERCENT(DECIMAL) = 0.500 USER - ENTERED RAINFALL = 2.50 INCHES RCFCLWCD 3 -Hour Storm (5- Minute period) SELECTED RCFC&WCD DEPTH -AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(PLATE E -5.0) = 0.9991 UNIT HYDROGRAPH TIME UNIT = 5.000 MINUTES ❑NIT INTERVAL PERCENTAGE OF LAG -TIME = 37.707 UNIT HYDROGRAPH DETERMINATION ___ ________________ _______ _____ _ __ - - -- - __ INTERVAL S. GRAPH UNIT HYDROGRAPH NUMBER WEAN VALUES ORDINATES(CPS) ______________________________________________ _____________ ___________ ______ 1 3.927 71 945 2 19.611 287.968 3 45.525 474.201 Date: 05116/01 File najRa. 1001`311A.PES Page 2 1 63 058 335.099 5 73.125 169.793 6 78.913 106.018 7 83 002 76.301 B 86 251 58 056 9 00.680 11 198 10 90.706 37.125 11 92.358 30.265 12 93,710 25 481 13 94.922 21.501 14 95 978 19.354 15 96.753 11.100 16 97.105 13 t4 - 17 98.071 10.735 10 98 351 5.132 19 98.621 4.960 20 98.892 4 956 21 99.163 4.960 22 99 433 1 956 23 99.704 1.956 24 99.974 A 956 25 100.000 0.475 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M = M r = ! Date: 05/16/01 File name 100Y3RA.RES Page 3 ............................................ UNIT UNIT ............................... UNIT EFFECTIVE PERIOD RAINFALL SOIL -LOSS RAINFALL (NUMBER) (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) 1 0.0325 0 0162 0.0162 2 0 0325 0.0162 0.0162 3 0 0275 0.0137 0 0137 1 0 0375 0.0167 0 0208 5 0.0375 0.0167 0.020E 6 0.0450 0.0167 0.0283 7 0.0375 0.0167 0.0208 0 0.0150 0 0167 0.0283 9 0 0650 0.0167 0.0203 10 0 0375 0.0167 0 0200 11 0.0400 0 0167 0 0233 12 0.0450 0.0167 0.0283 13 0.0550 0.0167 0.0383 14 0.0550 0.0167 0.0303 15 0 0550 0.0167 0 0383 16 0 0500 0 0167 0 0333 17 0.0650 0.0167 0.0483 10 0.0675 0.0167 0.0508 19 0.0600 0.0167 0.0433 20 0.0675 0 0167 0.0508 21 0.0825 0.0167 0 0658 22 0 0775 0.0167 0 0600 23 0 0725 0.0167 0.0558 24 0 0750 0.0167 0.0583 25 0.0775 0.0167 0.0608 26 0.1049 0 0167 0.0803 27 0.1249 0.0167 0.1003 28 0.0874 0 0167 0 0700 29 0 1699 0.0167 0.1532 30 0 1826 0.0167 0.1657 31 0.2049 0.0167 0.1802 32 0.104 0 0167 0 1307 33 0.0500 0.0167 0 0333 34 0.0450 0.0167 0 0283 35 0 0450 0.0167 0.0283 36 0 0150 0.0075 0.0075 TOTAL STORM RAINFALL(INCHES) - 2.50 TOTAL SOIL- LOSS(INCHES) = 0.59 TOTAL EFFECTIVE RAINFALLQNCHES) = 1.91 _____________________________________________ _____________________________ __ TOTAL SOIL -LOSS VOLRIE(ACRE- FEET) = 7.4115 TOTAL STORM RUNOFF VOLUME(ACRE -FEET) = 24.1197 _____________________________________________ ________________ _______________ �Vj Date- 05/16/01 File n : 10OY3HA RES Page 4 3 - H O U R S T O R M R U N O F F H Y D R O C R A P H ____ m_=_=_-__=== c=_________ ______________- _ --------- ______ HYDROGRAPH IN FIVE - MINUTR UNIT INTERVALS(CFS) (Note: Time indicated is at END Of EACH Unit Intervals) _____________________________________________ ___ ___________ _________________ TIME(NRS) VOLUME(AF) Q(CFS) 0 75.0 150 0 225.0 300.0 _____________________________________________ _________ _________________ _____ 0.083 0.0080 1.17 Q 0.167 0.0683 5 85 Q 0.250 0.1406 13.37 Vp 0.333 0.2685 18 61 V p 0 417 0.4216 22 22 V p 0 500 0.6075 26.99 .V Q 0.583 0.8265 31.80 .V 0 0.667 1.0718 35 62 V 0 0.750 1.3336 30.02 V 0 0 833 1.6145 40.79 v 0 0 917 1.9013 41.64 V p 1 000 2.1827 40.05 V p 1.081 2.079 42 87 Vp 1.167 2.8127 48 62 v Q 1.250 3 1943 55.40 V 0 1.333 3 6044 59.54 V,Q 1.417 4.0292 61.68 V 0 . 1.500 1.097 65.41 V0 . 1.583 4.9772 72.23 V0. 1.667 5.5069 76.92 VQ 1.750 6 0594 80.22 Q 1.833 6,6617 07.46 Q 1.917 7.3203 95.63 Q 2.000 8.0010 98 84 p 2.003 8.6856 99.40 QV 2.167 9 3969 103.28 Q v 2 250 10.1904 115.21 QV 2 333 11.1072 133.13 Qv . 2.417 12.1276 148.15 QV 2.500 13.2796 167 27 Q 2.583 14 6902 205 99 V 0 2.667 16.3536 240.36 v 0 2.750 18 0431 215.31 V. 0 2.833 19.054 207.97 Q V 2.917 20.5257 152 50 Q V 3.000 21.310 114.49 0 V 3.083 21 9330 89.86 .Q v 3.167 22.3961 67.25 0 V 3.250 22.7370 49 49 0 V 3 333 23 0007 38.29 0 V 3.417 23 2131 30.84 Q V . 3.500 23.3880 25.39 p V . 3 583 23.5315 20.84 p V. 3.60 23.6501 17.22 p V. 3.750 23.7470 14 18 .0 V. 3.833 23.8261 11.37 .Q V. 3.917 23.8090 9.15 .0 V. 4.000 23.9384 7.16 0 V 4.083 23.9785 5.82 p V. 4.167 24.0133 5 05 0 V. 4.250 24.0427 4.28 Q V. 4.333 24 0684 3.73 0 V. = m == m m m m i m= r= i m m= i= Date: 05/16101 File n : 100Y311A.RES Page 5 1.417 24.0888 2.96 0 V. 4.500 24.1035 2.14 Q V. 4 583 24 1119 1 22 0 V. 4 667 24 1157 0 54 Q V. 4.750 24 1180 0.33 0 v 4.833 24.1193 0.19 Q V. 4.917 24.1197 0.05 0 v 5 000 24 1197 0.00 0 v RNO OF FLOOOSCx ROUTING ANALYSIS m i m m m m m m= m= m m == m m m Date 05 /16 /O1 File nanei 10OH6HA.RES Page 1 ......................... .................. ............................... F L O O D R O U T I N G A N A L Y S I S ACCORDING TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTORL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL Icl Copyright 1909 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (nes) Vet 7.0 Release Date: 01/01/99 License IO 1264 AnalY6ia prepared by: Robert Bein. William F[O6t 6 Associates 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine. CA 92618 •••••........... I ......... DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ••'•'• ..................•• REDHAWK TRACT NO. 23065 -6 TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA GARRETT GROUP 100 -YEAR 6 -HOUR HYDROGRAPH FOR AREA 'A' PROJECT CONDITIONS REP JN: 15- 100312 RHE FEBRUARY 2001 BASIN A ................ ............................... I.......................... FILE NAME 10OY6HA OAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY' 1008 03/3012001 ... ..... -'s;.. .......................... ...........uu. I.......uuu.... FLOW PROCESS PROM NODE 0.00 TO NODE 1 00 IS CODE = 1 ___________________________________________ ______________________________- __ >> »SUBAREA RUNOFF (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ANALYSIS)« «< (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ADDED TO STREAM 41) WATERSHED AREA = 151.500 ACRES BASEFLOW = 0.000 CFS /SQUARE -MILE 'USER ENTERED 'LAG' TIME = 0.221 HOURS CAUTION: LAG TIME IS LESS THAN 0 50 HOURS. THE 5- MINUTE PERIOD UM MODEL (USED IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM) MAY BE TOO LARGE FOR PEAR FLOW ESTIMATES. VALLEY S -GRAPH SELECTED UNIFORM MEAN SOIL- LOSS(INCH /HOUR) = 0.200 LOW SOIL -[ASS RATE PERCENT(DECIMAL) = 0.500 USER - ENTERED RAINFALL = 3.50 INCHES RCFCAWCD 6 -Hour Storm (5- Minute period) SELECTED RCFCAWCD DEPTH -AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(PLATE E -5 8) = 0.9996 UNIT HYDROGRAPH TIME UNIT = 5.000 MINUTES UNIT INTERVAL PERCENTAGE OF LAG -TIME = 37 707 _ _____ UNIT MICROGRAPH DETERMINATION ___________________________ _ INTERVAL '5• GRAPH UNIT HTOROGRAPH NUMBER MEAN VALUES ORDINATES (CPS) 1 3.927 71.945 2 19.644 287.96E 3 45.525 474.201 Date: 05/16/01 File name 100H6RA.RES Page 2 6 63.050 335.099 5 73.125 169.793 6 78 913 106.060 7 83 082 76.301 0 06.251 50.056 9 88 680 66.498 10 90 706 37.125 11 92.358 30 265 12 93.748 25 401 13 91.922 21.501 14 95.978 19.354 15 96.753 14 100 16 91.485 13 414 17 98.071 10.735 18 98.351 5.132 19 90.621 4.960 20 98.892 1.956 21 99.163 4.960 22 99 433 4.956 23 99 704 4.956 24 99.974 4.956 25 100.000 0.05 m m m m m m m m= r == m m m m m m r Date 05/16101 Fvle nerve 100H6HA.RES Page 3 ............................................. MIT UNIT .............r................. UNIT EFFECTIVE PERIOD RAINFALL SOIL -LOSS RAINFALL (NOMBER) (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0 0175 0.0087 0.0087 2 0 0210 0 0105 0.0105 3 0.0210 0.0105 0 0105 4 0.0210 0.0105 0.0105 5 0.0210 0.0105 0.0105 6 0.0245 0.0122 0.0122 7 0.0245 0.0122 0.0122 8 0.0245 0.0122 0.0122 9 a 0245 010122 0.0122 30 0.0245 0.0122 0.0122 11 0.0245 0 0122 .0 0122 12 0.0280 0 0140 0.0140 13 0.0280 0 0140 0.0140 14 0 0280 0.0140 0.0140 15 0.0200 0.0140 0.0340 16 0.0200 0.0140 0.0140 17 0 0280 0 0140 0.0140 10 0.0280 0 0140 0.0140 19 0.0280 0.0140 0.0140 20 0 0280 0 0140 0 0140 21 010280 0.0140 0 0140 22 0.0200 0.0140 0 0140 23 0.0280 0.0140 0.0140 24 0.0315 0.0157 0.0157 25 0.0280 0 0140 0.0140 26 0.0315 0.0157 0.0157 27 0 0315 0.0157 0 0157 28 0 0315 0.0157 0 0157 29 0.0315 0.0157 0.0157 30 0.0315 0.0151 0.0157 31 0.0315 0.0157 0.0157 32 0.0315 0 0157 0.0157 33 0.0350 0.0167 0.0183 34 0 0350 0.0167 0.0183 35 0.0350 0.0167 0 0183 36 0.0350 0.0167 0.0183 37 0.0350 0.0167 0.0183 38 0.0385 0 0167 0.0218 39 0.0385 0.0167 0.0218 40 0.0385 0.0167 0.0218 61 0 0420 0 0167 0.0253 42 0 0455 0.0167 0 0200 43 0.0490 0.0167 0.0323 44 0.0490 0 0167 0.0323 45 0.0525 0.0167 0.0358 46 0 0525 0.0167 0.0358 47 0.0560 0.0167 0.0393 48 0.0560 0.0167 0.0393 49 0.0595 0 0167 0.0428 50 0.0630 0.0167 0.0463 51 0.0665 0.0167 0.0498 52 0.0700 0.0167 0.0533 53 0.0735 0.0167 0.0568 54 0.0735 0.0167 0.0568 55 0.0770 0.0167 0.0603 56 0.0805 0.0167 0.0638 57 0.0860 0.0167 0.0673 58 0.0840 0.0167 0.0673 \O Date: 05116/01 File name: 10016HA.RES Page 4 59 0 08]5 0.016] 0.0708 60 0 0910 0 016] 0.071] 61 0 1085 0 0167 0.0910 fit 0.1259 0 0167 0.1093 63 0.1366 0 0167 0 1198 64 0.1469 0.0167 0.1303 65 0.1644 0 0167 0.1478 66 0.1959 0 0167 0.1792 67 0.0665 0 0167 0.0498 68 0.0315 0.0157 0.0157 69 0.0210 0.0105 0.0105 70 0.0175 0.0087 0.0087 71 0 0105 0 0052 0.0052 " 72 0.0070 0 0035 0 0035 TOTAL STORK RAINPALL(INCHES) = 3.50 TOTAL SOIL- LO55(INCHES) = 1.06 TOTAL EFFECTIVE RAINFALL(INCHES) = 2.44 -`--------------"_----------"-_------------___-----------------°_.-------- TOTAL SOIL -LOSS VOLOHE(ACRE -FEET) = 13.3715 TOTAL STORM RUNOFF VOLIME(ACRE -FEET) ---------------------------------------------------------- = 30.7612 ------------ - - - - -- m m m m � = m Oats- 05/16/01 File name 6 - H O U R S T O R M R U N O F F H Y O R 0 G R A P H HYNROGRAPH IN FIVE-MINUTE UNIT INTERVALSICFS) (Note: Time indicated is at END of Each Unit intervals) TIME(HRS) 0.083 0 167 0.250 0.333 0.417 0.500 0.583 0.667 0 750 0 833 0.917 1.000 1.083 1.167 1.250 1.333 1 417 1 500 1 583 1 667 1.750 1.833 1.917 2.000 2.083 2 167 2 250 2.333 2.417 2.500 2.583 2 667 2.750 2.833 2.917 3.000 3.083 3.167 3.250 3 333 3 417 3.500 3.583 3.667 3.750 3 833 3.917 4.000 4.083 4.167 4.250 4.333 asaaa VOLUME (AF) Q(CFS) 0. 75 0 150.0 225.0 300.0 0 0043 0.63 Q 0 0269 3.27 Q 0.0015 7.92 VQ 0.1620 11.69 VQ 0.2568 13.76 VQ 0.3609 15.12 V Q 0.4743 16 47 V 0 0 5979 17 94 V 0 0.7289 19.02 V 0 0.8647 19.72 .VQ 1.0041 20 24 .VQ . 1.1472 20.77 .VQ 1.2960 21.61 .VO 1.4525 22 72 .V 0 1 6146 23.53 VQ 1.7800 24.03 VQ 1.9479 24.37 VQ 2.1174 24.61 VO 2.2882 24.80 VO 2.4600 24 95 0 2.6328 25 09 Q 2 8065 25.22 Q 2.9809 25.32 Q 3.1568 25.55 QV 3.3357 25.98 QV 3.5180 26.46 QV 3.7023 26 76 QV 3 0904 27 32 O V 4 0820 27.82 Q V 4.2754 20.07 O V 4.4698 28.24 Q V 4.6651 28.35 O V 4.8623 28 64 Q V 5.0652 29.45 0 V 5 2769 30.74 Q v 5 4946 31.65 0 V 5.7161 32.13 Q v 5 9412 32.68 0 v 6.1748 33.92 Q v . 6.4210 35 75 Q v . 6.6779 37.30 0 V . 6.9483 39.27 0 V. 7.2420 42.65 Q V. 7.5646 46.83 Q V. 7.9142 50.70 Q v 8.2871 54.14 Q v 8.6828 57 46 Q .V 9.1003 60.62 0 .v 9 5402 63.88 0 v 10.0034 67.26 Q v 10.4959 71.51 v 11.0232 76.57 O v m m m= m m m m Date: 05116/01 File name: 100146HA.RES Pave 6 4.617 11.5080 82 01 0 V 4.500 12.1901 87.43 .Q V 4.583 12 0253 92.23 Q v 4.667 13.4900 96.51 0 v 4.750 14.1881 101.36 Q v , 4 033 14.9223 106.60 0 V. 4.917 15.6892 111.36 0 v 5.000 16 4855 115.63 0 .V 5.083 17.3223 121 50 Q v ' 5.167 18.2317 132 05 Q v 5.250 19.2501 149.03 v 5.333 20 4210 160.85 0 v 5.417 21.7180 108.33 0 V.. 5 500 23.1645 210.03 0 v 5.503 2L7307 227 41 Q v 5.667 26.2075 214.43 0 v 5.750 27 3140 160.67 Q v 5.833 20 0709 109.90 Q v 5.917 28.6257 80.56 Q v 61000 29.0589 62 90 Q V 6.083 29.4026 49.91 0 v 6.167 29 6745 39.48 0 v 6.250 29.0899 31.27 Q v 6.333 30.0627 25 SO Q v 6 417 30.2045 20 50 0 V. 6 500 30.3211 16 94 0 v 6 583 30.4160 13.90 Q V. 6.667 30.4935 11.14 0 V. 6.750 30 5561 9.00 .0 V. 6.833 30.6056 7 19 0 V. 6 917 30.6439 5.56 0 v 7.000 30.6767 4.76 0 v 7.083 30.7052 4.15 0 V. 7.167 30.7294 3.51 0 v 7.250 30.7490 2 85 0 V. 7.333 30.7639 2 17 0 V. 7.417 30.7737 1.42 Q V. 7.500 30.7775 0 55 0 V. 7.503 30.7791 0.24 0 V. 7.667 30.7801 0.15 0 V. 7.750 30.7808 0.09 0 V. 7.833 30 7811 0.05 0 V. 7.917 30 7812 0.02 0 v 8.000 30.7812 0.00 0 v ENO OF PLOODSCE ROUTING ANALYSIS m= m= m r == m == m= m m m m m Date. 05/16/01 File name: 10OY24HA RES Page 1 ....,..............u.............•.. ........ ...............................0 F L O O D R 0 U T I N G A N A L Y S I S ACCORDING M RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTORL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (C) Copyright 1989 -99 Advanced Engineering Software (sea) Ver. 7 0 Release Date: O1 /Ol /99 License ID 1264 Analysis prepared by: Robert Min, William Frost 6 Associate. 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, OA 92618 ••••••••••••••......•••••• DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ......••••.. "......••.... • ReDRAWA TRACT NO. 23065 -6 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA GARRETT GROUP ' 100 -YEAR 24 -HOUR HYDROGRAPH FOR AREA 'A' PROJECT CONDITIONS • RBF .JN: 15- 100312 RNE FEBRUARY 2001 BASIN A .. ............ ............................................................ FILE NAME, 10OY24HA OAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY 10:11 03/30 /2001 u. .... ........................ ..............................ui.. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 0.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »>» SUBAREA RUNOFF (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ANALYSIS) -11 (UNIT- HYDROGRAPH ADDED TO STREAM II) WATERSHED AREA = 151.500 ACRES BASEFLOW = 0.000 CPS /SQUARE -MILE 'USER ENTERED 'LAG' TIME = 0 221 HOURS CAUTION: LAG TIME I5 LESS THAN 0 50 HOURS THE 5- MINUTE PERIOD UH MODEL (USED IN THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM) MAY BE TOO LARGE FOR PEAK FLOW ESTIMATES. VALLEY S -GRAPH SELECTED UNIFORM MEAN SOIL- LOSS (INCH/HOUR) = 0.200 LOW SOIL -LOSS RATE PERCENT(DECIMAL) = 0.500 MINIMUM SOIL -LOSS RATE(INCH /HOUR) = 0.100 USER - ENTERED RAINFALL = 6.75 INCHES RCFCAYCD 24 -Hour Storm (15- Minute period) SELECTED RCFC&WCD DEPTH -AREA A STKENT FACT'OR(PLATE R -5.8) = 0.9997 UNIT HYDROGRAPH TIME UNIT . 15.000 MINUTES UNIT INTERVAL PERCENTAGE OF LAG -TIME = 113.122 UNIT HYDROGRAPH DETERMINATION INTERVAL •S' GRAPH UNIT HYDROGMPH NUMBER MEAN VALUES ORDINATES (CPS) ----------- ---------- --- ------ ----- - - - --- _----__--------_-____-- 1 23.032 140.664 2 71.966 298.856 Date: 05116/01 File cave 100Y34HA.RES Page 2 3 06.006 85 738 6 92.271 38 271 5 95 086 22.070 6 97 969 12 731 7 90.892 5.639 8 99.682 3.603 9 99.793 1.890 10 99.968 0.969 11 100.000 0.316 m Dace: 05/16/01 Fvle name: 100Y21HA.RES Page 3 ............................................. UNIT UNIT ............................... UNIT EFFECTIVE PERIOD RAINFALL SOIL -LOSS RAINFALL INUHRERI (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) ------------------------------------------------------------------------"_-- 1 0.0135 0 0067 0.0067 2 0.0202 0 0101 0.0101 3 0.0202 0.0101 0 0101 4 0.0270 O.al35 0.0135 5 0 0202 a. olol 0.0101 6 010202 0.0101 0.0101 7 0 0202 0 0101 0 0101 8 0.0270 0.0135 0.0135 9 0.0270 0.0135 0.0135 10 0.0270 0.0135 0 0135 11 0 0337 0.0169 0.0169 12 0 0337 0 0169 0.0169 13 0.0337 0 0169 0 0169 It 0.0337 0.0169 0.0169 15 0.0337 0.0169 0.0169 16 a.0405 0.0202 0.0202 17 0 0405 0.0202 0.0202 18 0.0472 a.0236 0.0236 19 0 002 0 0236 0 0236 20 0.0540 0 0270 0.0270 21 0.0405 0.0202 0.0202 22 0.0422 0 0236 0.0236 23 0.0540 0 0270 0.0270 ' 26 0.0510 0.0270 0 0270 25 0 0607 0.0304 0 0304 26 0 0607 0.0304 0.0304 27 0.0675 0.0337 0.0337 28 0.0675 0.0337 0.0337 29 0.0675 0.0337 0.0337 30 0 0742 0 0371 0 0371 31 0.0810 010405 0 0405 32 0 0877 0 0439 0.0439 33 0 1012 0.0506 0.0506 34 0.1012 0.0506 0.0506 35 0.1080 0.0540 0.0540 36 0.1147 0.0562 0.0505 37 0 1282 0.0554 0 0728 38 0.1350 0 0546 0.0804 39 0.1417 0 0538 0.0879 40 0.1485 0.0531 0 0954 41 0 1012 0.0506 0.0506 42 0.1012 0.0506 0.0506 43 0 1350 0.0508 0.0842 44 0.1350 0 0500 0.0849 45 0.1202 0.0193 0.0789 46 0.1282 0.0486 0.0796 47 0.130 0.0479 0 0669 48 0.1215 0.001 0.0743 49 a 1607 0.0464 0.1223 50 0.1755 0 0457 0.1297 51 0.1889 0.0451 0.1439 52 0.1957 0.0444 0 1513 53 0.2291 0.007 0 1857 54 01294 0.0130 0.1864 55 0.1552 01004 0.1128 56 0.1552 0.0417 0.1135 57 0.1822 0.0411 0.1411 58 0.1755 010105 0.1350 1 �p Date. 05/16101 File name: 100Y24HA. RES Page 4 59 0.1755 0 0399 0.1356 60 0.1687 0.0393 0.1295 61 0.1620 0.0380 0.1233 62 0.1552 0.0381 0.1171 63 0.1202 0 0375 0 0907 64 0 1282 0.0369 0.0913 65 0 0270 0.0135 0.0135 66 0.0270 0.0135 0.0135 67 0.0202 0.0101 0.0101 60 0 0202 0.0101 0 0101 69 0.0337 0 0169 0.0169 70 0.0337 0.0169 0.0169 71 0.0337 0.0169 0 0169 72 0.0270 0 0135 0 0135 73 0 0270 0.0135 0.0135 74 0 0270 0.0135 0.0135 75 0.0202 0.0101 0 0101 76 0.0135 0 0067 0 0067 77 0 0202 0 0101 0.0101 78 0 0270 0.0135 0.0135 79 0 0202 0.0101 0.0101 80 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 81 0.0202 0.0101 0.0101 82 0.0202 0.0101 a.aial 83 0.0202 0.0101 0 0101 84 0 0135 0.0067 0.0067 85 0.0202 0.0101 0 0101 86 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 87 0.0202 0.0101 0.0101 00 0.0135 0 0067 0.0067 09 0 0202 0.0101 0 0101 90 0.0135 0.0067 0 0067 91 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 92 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 93 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 94 0.0135 0.0067 0 0067 95 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 96 0.0135 0.0067 0.0067 TOTAL STORK RAINFALL(INCHES) = 6.75 TOTAL SOIL- LOSS(INCHES) = 2.50 TOTAL EFFECTIVE RAINFALL(INCHES) a 4.25 ----------------------"_--_------------------------------------_------------ TOTAL SOIL -LOSS VOLUKE(ACRE -FEET) = 31.6020 TOTAL STORK RUNOFF VOLNNE(ACRE -FEET) • 53.5657 m m = == m m m Date: 05/16/01 File name: 100Y24HA RES 2 4 - H O U R S T O R M R U N 0 F F H Y D R 0 G R A P H --------------- HYDRCGRAPN IN FIVE - MINUTE UNIT INTERVALS(CFS) (Note: Time indicated is at END of Each Unit Intervals) ____________________ TIMEIHRS) VOLUME(AF) ______ ____________ __ 0 083 0.0065 0 167 0 0131 0.250 0.0196 0.333 0.0133 0.117 0.0670 0 500 0 0907 0.583 0.1253 0.667 0.1599 0.750 0.1916 0 833 0.2362 0 917 0 2779 1 000 0 3196 1.083 0 3668 1.167 0.4141 1.250 0.4613 1.333 0.5047 1 417 0 5481 1 500 0.5916 1.583 0 6344 1.667 0.6773 1.750 0.7201 1.833 0.7662 1.917 0.0122 2.000 0.8583 2.083 0.9112 2.167 0.9612 2 250 1.0172 2.333 1 0720 2.417 1.1269 2.500 1.1018 2 583 1.2108 2 667 1 2998 2.750 1.3580 2.033 1.4252 2.917 1.4917 3.000 1.5501 3.083 1.6268 3.167 1.6955 3.250 1.7642 3.333 1.8340 3.417 1.9037 3.500 1.9734 3.583 2 0437 3.667 2.1140 3.750 2.1843 3.033 2.2502 3.917 2.3321 4.000 2.4060 4.083 2.1870 4.167 2.5680 1.250 2.6490 4.333 2.7354 Q(CFS) 0. 50 0 __________ __________ 0.95 0 0.95 0 0.95 Q 3.44 Q 3.44 0 3.11 Q 5.03 VQ 5.03 VO 5.03 VQ 6.05 VQ 6 05 VO 6 05 VQ 6.86 VQ 6.86 vO 6.86 VO 6.30 VQ 6.30 VQ 6 30 VQ 6 22 VQ 6.22 VQ 6.22 VO 6.69 v0 6.69 VQ 6.69 VQ 7.69 VQ 7.69 VQ 7.69 VO 7.97 VQ 7.97 VQ 7.97 VO 8.57 VQ 8.57 VQ 8.57 Q 9.65 .Q 9.65 .0 9.65 .Q 9 98 .0 9.98 .0 9.98 .0 10.12 VO 10 12 .VQ 10.12 .VQ 10.21 .VQ 10.21 .VQ 10.21 .VQ 10 73 .VQ 10.73 .VQ 10.73 .VQ 11.76 .VO 11.76 .VQ 11.76 .VQ 12.54 . O 100.0 150 0 200.0 __________ __ _______________ m m= m m m m m Unte 05/16/01 File n 1GOY24M RES Page 6 1.417 2.0218 12 54 Q 1.500 2 9081 12 54 Q 4 583 3 0024 13.60 0 4.667 3.0966 13.68 0 4.750 3.1900 13.68 0 4.033 3.2909 14.52 0 4 917 3 3909 14.52 p 5.000 3.4909 14.52 Q 5.083 3.5926 14 76 Q 5.167 3.6942 11 76 Q 5 250 3 7458 I1.76 p 5.333 3.8895 13.60 Q 5.417 3.9831 13 60 0 5 500 4 0768 13.60 QV 5.583 1.1779 14.69 OV 5.667 1.2791 14.69 QV 5.750 1.3802 11 69 QV 5 833 4 4892 15.83 0 5.917 4.5982 15.83 0 6.000 4.7072 15.83 0 6.083 4.8217 16.63 0 6.167 4 9363 16.63 0 6 250 5 0508 16.63 Q 6.333 5.1732 17.78 0 6.417 5.2957 17.78 Q 6 500 5 4182 17 78 QV 6.583 5.5465 10.64 QV 6 667 5.6749 18.64 QV 6.750 5.8033 18.64 QV 6.833 5.9390 19.82 QV 6 917 6 0763 19.82 Qv 7.000 6 2128 19.82 OV 7.083 6.3520 20.21 0 7.167 6.4911 20.21 0 7.250 6.6303 20 21 Q 7 333 6.7740 20 87 W 7.417 6.9177 20.87 QV 7.500 7.0615 20.87 QV 7.583 7.2161 22.45 OV 7.667 7.3707 22.45 QV 7 750 7.5253 22.45 OV 7.833 7 6926 24.28 OV 7.917 7.0598 24.28 Qv 8.000 8.0270 24 28 QV 8 083 8 2108 26.69 QV 0.167 0.3946 26.69 QV 0.250 8.5701 26.69 QV 8.333 8.7796 29.21 QV 8.417 8.9807 29 21 QV 8.500 9.1019 29.21 OV 8.583 9.3921 30.52 QV 8.667 9.6023 30 52 QV 8.750 9 8124 30 52 Qv 0.833 10.0367 32.56 Qv 8.917 10.2610 32.56 OV 9.000 10.4852 32.56 Qv 9.083 10.7362 36.44 QV . 9.167 10 9872 36.44 QV . 9.250 11.2382 36.44 QV 9.333 11.5303 42 42 Q . 9.417 11.8224 12.42 0 . 9.500 12.1145 42.42 Ov. 9.583 - 12.4400 47 26 0. 9.667 12.7655 47.26 0. m Date: 05/16/01 Pile n : 100Y24EA. RES Page 7 9 750 13 0910 47 26 0 9.833 13 4407 51 94 0 9.917 13 8064 51 96 Q 10 000 14.1641 51.94 Q 10 083 14 5032 49.23 Qv 10.167 14 8422 49.23 Q v 10.250 15 1813 49 23 0 V 10.333 15.4373 37 17 Q .v 10.417 15.6932 37.17 0 .v 10.500 15 9492 37 17 Q .V 10.583 16 2150 3B 71 0 v 10.667 16 4824 30 71 0 . v 10.750 16.7490 30.71 Q v 10.833 17.0761 47.50 0. v 10 917 17.4032 47.50 Q. v 11.000 17.7304 47.50 0, v 11.083 18 0676 48 96 Q. v 11.167 18 4048 40.96 Q. v 11.250 10.7420 48.96 Q v 11 333 19.0736 48.14 Q. v 11.417 19 4051 48 14 Q. v 11.500 19 7367 48.14 Q. v 11.503 20 0578 46.62 Q. v 11.667 20 3788 46.62 Q. v 11.750 20.6999 46.62 0 v 11.833 21.0029 43.99 0 v 11.917 21 3050 43.99 Q v 12.000 21 6088 43.99 0 v 12.003 21.9661 51.88 0 v 12 167 22.3234 51.88 Q v 12.250 22.6808 51.88 Q v 12.333 23.1452 67.43 0 v 12.417 23 6096 67.43 0 v 12 500 24.0740 67.43 0 v 12.583 24.5960 75 80 Q v - 12.667 25.1180 75 80 Q v 12.750 25.6401 75.80 0 V. 12.833 26 2156 03.57 0 V. 12.917 26 7911 83.57 0 v 13.000 27.3667 83.57 0 v 13.083 28.0087 93 21 Q v 13.167 28.6506 93.21 Q v 13.250 29.2926 93.21 0 v 13.333 30 .0195 105-54 .QV 13 417 30.7463 105.54 .Qv 13 500 31.4731 105.54 0 v 13.583 32.1570 99.30 Q. v 13.667 32 0409 99.30 Q. v 13.750 33.5248 99.30 Q. v 13 833 34.0712 79.34 Q v 13.917 34.6176 79.34 0 v 14 000 35.1640 79.34 Q v 14.083 35.7025 78.19 0 v 14.167 36.2410 78 19 Q v 14 250 36.7795 78.19 0 v 14 333 37.3541 83.43 Q v 14.417 37.9287 83.43 Q v 14.500 38.5033 83.43 Q v 14.583 39.0731 82.74 Q V. 14.667 39.6429 82.74 Q V. 14 750 40.2127 82.74 0 v 14.833 40.7763 81.83 0 v 14.917 41.3399 81.83 Q v 15.000 41.9034 81.83 Q v Q Date: 05/16/01 File name 100Y24RA.RES Page 8 15.003 42.4491 79 23 0 .V 15 167 42.9947 79.23 0 v 15 250 43 5406 79.23 0 v 15.333 44.0639 76 02 0 v 15 417 44 5874 76.02 0 v 15 500 45.1109 76.02 0 v 15.583 45.5907 69 66 0 v 15.667 46.0705 69 66 Q v 15 750 46.5503 69.66 0 v 15.033 46.9701 60.96 0 v 15.917 47.3899 60 96 Q v 16.000 47.8097 60 96 Q v 16.003 68.1367 67.48 0 v 16.167 48.4637 47.40 0 v 16.250 48.7907 47 48 Q. v 16.333 48.9494 23.03 0 v 16.417 69.1080 23.03 0 v 16.500 49.2666 23.03 0 v 16.583 49 3713 15 19 Q v 16.667 49.4759 15.19 0 v 16.750 49.5806 15.19 Q v 16.033 49.6550 10.81 0 v 16.917 49 7295 10.01 0 v 17.000 49.8040 10.81 0 v 17.083 49.8700 9.58 .Q v 17.167 49.9359 9.58 .0 v 17 250 50.0019 9.58 .Q v 17.333 50 0732 10.36 Q v 17.417 50.1446 10.36 Q v 17.500 50.2160 10.36 0 v 17.503 50.2874 10.37 0 v 17.667 50.3588 10.37 0 v 17.750 50.4302 10.37 . 0 v 17.833 50.4970 9.81 .0 v 17.917 50.5653 9.81 .0 v 18.000 50.6328 9.81 .Q v 18.083 50.6932 8.77 .0 v 18.167 50.7537 8.77 .0 v 18.250 50.8141 8.77 .0 v 18 333 50.8725 8.48 .0 v 18 417 50.9309 8.48 .Q v 18.500 50.9893 8.40 Q v 18.583 51.0436 7.89 .0 v 18.667 51.0979 7.89 .0 v 10.750 51 1523 7.09 .0 v 18.833 51.1960 6.35 .0 v . 18.917 51.2397 6.35 .Q v 19.000 51.2835 6.35 .Q v 19 083 51.3213 5.50 .0 v . 19.167 51.3591 5.50 .0 v 19.250 51.3970 5.50 .0 v . 19.333 51.4421 6 55 .0 v 19.417 51.6872 6.55 .0 v 19.500 51.5323 6.55 .0 v . 19.583 51.5816 7.16 0 v 19.667 51.6308 7.16 Q v 19.750 51 6801 7.16 .0 v 19.833 51.7212 5.97 .0 v 19.917 51.7623 5.97 .0 v 20.000 51.8034 5.97 .0 v 20.083 51.8398 5.28 .0 v 20.167 51.0762 5.28 .0 v 20.250 51.9126 5.28 .0 v 20.333 51.9536 5.96 .0 v . Date: 05/16/01 05116/01 File name: S00Y24NA.RES page 9 20.611 51.9917 53.5650 5.96 .0 V . 20.500 52.0357 53.5652 5 96 .Q V 20 583 52.0116 916 53.5653 6 09 .0 v . 20 667 52.1196 000 53.5655 6.09 .0 v . 20.750 52.1615 083 53.5655 6.09 .0 V . 20.833 52.2004 53.5656 5.65 .Q V . 20.917 52.2393 250 53.5656 5.65 .0 v 21 000 52.2782 5 65 .0 V. 21.083 52.3136 5.11 .0 V. 21 167 52.3690 5.16 .Q V. 21.250 52.3861 5.16 .0 V. 21.333 52 6216 5.60 Q V. 21 417 52.6580 5 40 .0 V. 21.500 52.4960 5.40 .0 V. 21.583 52.5307 5.06 .0 v 21.667 52.5656 5.06 .0 v 21.750 52 6001 5.06 .0 V. 21.833 52 6368 5 36 .0 V. 21.917 52.6736 5.34 .0 V. 22.000 52.7104 5.36 0 v 22.083 52.7448 5.00 0 v 22.167 52 7792 5 00 0 V. 22.250 52 0136 5.00 Q V. 22.333 52.8503 5.32 .0 V. 22.617 52.8869 5.32 .0 v 22.500 52.9236 5.32 0 V. 22.583 52 9547 4 51 Q V. 22.667 52.9850 4 51 Q V. 22 750 53.0169 4 51 0 V. 22 833 53.0666 4.31 0 v 22.917 53.0763 6.31 O V. 23.000 53.1059 4.31 0 V. 23.083 53 1350 4 22 Q V. 23.166 53.1661 4.22 0 V. 23 250 53.1932 4.22 0 V. 23.333 53.2220 4.18 0 V. 23.416 53 2507 4 18 0 V. 23 500 53 2795 6.18 0 V. 23.583 53.3001 4.15 0 v 23.666 53.3367 4.15 Q V. 23.750 53.3652 4.35 0 V. 23.833 53 3937 4 14 Q V. 23.916 53.4222 4.14 0 V. 24.000 53.4507 4.14 Q v 24 083 53.4726 3.18 0 V. 24.166 53.4945 3.18 0 V. 24.250 53 5164 3.18 Q V. 24.333 53.5244 1.16 0 v 24.416 53.5323 1.16 Q - V. 24.500 53.5403 1.16 Q V. 24.583 53.5443 0.58 0 V. 24.666 53.5483 0.58 Q V. 24.750 53.5523 0.58 0 V. 24 833 53.5545 0.32 0 V. 24.916 53.5566 0.32 0 V. 25.000 53.5588 0.32 Q V. 25.083 53 5600 0.17 0 V. 25 166 53.5612 0.17 0 V. 25.250 53.5623 0.17 Q V. 25.333 53.5629 0.08 Q V. 25.416 53.5635 0.08 0 - v 25.500 53.5641 0.08 0 v 25.583 53.5644 0.05 Q V. 25.666 53.5647 0.05 0 V. Date 05116/01 File name: 100Y24NA. RES Page 10 25.750 53.5650 0.05 Q v 25.833 53.5652 0.02 Q V. 25 916 53.5653 0 02 0 v 26 000 53.5655 0 02 Q V. 26 083 53.5655 0.01 Q v 26.166 53.5656 0.01 0 V. 26 250 53.5656 0.01 0 V. END OF FLOOUSCx ROUTING ANALYSIS I ' PIPE CULVERT ANALYSIS COMPUTATION OF CULVERT PERFORMANCE CURVE ' May 13, 2001 Redhawk Tract No. 23065 JN 15- 100312 ' ---- _ - - - - -_ Lateral at Lot 625 to pick up of fsite- flows----- -- - - - - -- PROGRAM INPUT DATA: DESCRIPTION VALUE ' Culvert Diameter ( feet) .. ............................... FHNA Chart Number (1,2 or 3) ............................ 4.50 1 Scale Number on Chart (Type of Culvert Entrance) ........ 2 ' Manning's Roughness Coefficient (n- value) ............... Entrance Loss Coefficient of Culvert Opening............ 0.0140 0.50 Culvert Length ( feet) .... ............................... 50.0 Culvert Slope (feet per foot ) ........................... 0.1500 ' PROGRAM RESULTS: Flow Tailwater Headwater (ft) Normal Critical Depth at Outlet Rate Depth Inlet Outlet Depth Depth Outlet Velocity (cfs) (ft) Control Control (ft) (ft) (ft) 156.0 14.95 6.09 10.05 1.44 3.66 4.50 (fps) 9.81 ' PIPE CULVERT ANALYSIS COMPUTER PROGRAM Version 1.7 Copyright (01986 Dodson 8 Associates, Inc., 7015 W. Tidwell, #107, Houston, T% 77092 ' (713) 895 -8322. All Rights Reserved. 1 U 1 -f:- -,. Rao N, �ra \ � Za m 20'r; / I / ' t � evi,,r`� �60 4 i� fe rv� 1 3rd � ^��•'`�' / � / 'y i J r _ 17 v11(';� _ ;' ' \__ �. � � � 'f �. we „� • 1--: �- _ I REDHAXM(.._. � A _! Y�. � ,� , e.+ � 4 yi Or< , � z- , yi• r w.¢ yn uv r nm wr rl. •'1 �� �..,. VESTING TRACT N0. 23065 - TENTATIVE T I r � ,1 . a-4 ' f r.,. 'IW" a V� { � C. F Fr . 'I; .+y � +• M1n . . - • r Syr ' .qv .ibo 1sr .iy61 S51 �,a' ! y:. ^ .� >,Y \ ' it 1 1 % ' ,rf -'f. -1' PIIII I I'nl:y 4 \ 'i. 'y I[ 14Ae a•'''• Y-•a � V ♦ ,. fs /'I' �'�•!.. ,� JJ K � ul. JM. L �6 I �lil `1_ V, t'' . \�r� '.1..- ; I 9 Yd'Z -TMt.S \1111.. ��, >IlM � 1 3.�•.�� i`A �A Y�N�E. �.Rb.\ �x "'a rPr Wa¢°i¢) Y. _r 1 \' � I� „Ia / /r'�, -�.t y_; �i!a,:p 911..,4. ry4n•a,irI♦�p4. "��^' �1>3 tiS\ ,`Gp. : -�pJE RYAA \q+�. �♦�?' �� _ ..- yy (o� .,Aoi1 .. e• - .,y'� ,7yy A �`L , ri � 1,¢ I�. / Q Ji `\ °% n a� .ern rtw. ¢r '.� - .. �F4• ` \\. - 11. t -1 °1• y�,�n, \G��� i �/.r' �, \111 '�t.�49 Vio ni / @}° 'I i. �¢-. �W \. ,3.'.I "> iq 1V�� ' \�R�'. i , �3•oa�i. � 9ce -\ D'> .,;�. Ya++' ! 1"N _ \ I , \tpe�' ' ,ate. .� P'._.., �i G / i:_ '%, k.:ta ^ / "V .rc y' j 1 r..1 wl � o_, _y` � -�.•� . +,ti ,. a5y. 4, ! Yr � i .. -- "i u� � - :1 v e M ! $s \° 1.1. •- af•y,,ice .' a ,' s ��,: v t. �\ ru "�,a � o Nei \ $ 'b ¢ E�T \ f; �' i� •1�e r�° 1 ,1 /,° -$ f, �F� ( Xp5i elr I Ir' r to ATi'rapE' ,o% /�A a {, r • �4' kB- r_ r -gTR:� 1. _ �o-p- ' � Ili Y � 1 �t r ey 1� • _.0 iV•i . , h' a ` ... l �\ ., ). � s ' aoY. ` . _ � ,.. ..M1,s... v 9° yrs -<s �,.vo •- �' g56 x i!, ¢F nn n _ .. " I! I,4 �•,\ ;i t'. '?if e �iN � \'. ..0 - �) \'l z. - N o !._r� /d 'S�\ e ° O��\ %.� -t...s � � sSF 'xy� ua 'e n; s� Y,. ' � �� wr- /IF. � b H,+ zP _. ” AA c e I �'• • - , - w. .�i M1 \ss ill / a' .Q Sr\9 :6' ' I ( w "' `. 1. 6 � _ 1 m \ 2 1,1 e ,�- � -•W. � �' ?�/ y,. >wr ,' :' a m '• ��`. -�w'- �' r � `r + 1 I,tie Vu °4rr�\t 1 I w �, i! FNrq /\. C. -0. _ j .' ,o slyol • �/A �- 'h M QY I' + ,� I' d lI 71.7, •\l>`� \5 X11 \`� 4k •� M dam, i �,� °i. {; �I �'�� >. '� r t�31�` •/ a rs,� ` 5';J, n� /s.'a a �tv .! }h, , a � \ -S7" � a Z i N 1' � ) eai•, < '\ lr' 111 ,roe ,rya v. �. Iii � i P ,y,e d / � />i y �r ;` •t J �`u1 } ' a' > k1,r � � f[ i �\ e,� -E a y \ - ' � r o *^ � _ e r -r_ r ,a \, S p 0 .P , 5ti �. , % �' �. M/ �l' -Y ° may„ `" `. i Zn ii�M1F g` \(cl�l yv�° �°. a%. _ .. � ♦ i y ' �zYT •.-. d_� r y r 'S °' REVISED r , `.. ''✓ .. nntn Y .t /� _" P I I, � , , .G �r.. -¢'O 4 Y- ii ° la PARK s t ¢ -,'. '�` '' a °: �.•.. I `:. >$ >? \, ��1' -e aqs .b� '; � °.y I �• w >•, a -,II Bi `" • !!s . -l11 «s '. w- `:Cy & a, I cI I. �- � „1 t t /c?`� �/' i � 1 `•E_ ¢` 1 -i t Ira _,.r �° t 0 S. \ t� r.. r• J1 r iQ3 IOI ro. -� t s a A y �' `Ily N •.I /! , n'•a fJe ! / (t rir r° .�\>4 �4.ir ,, 1\I i ��'� h ✓:. -...i "k_ ^'.ro- y w¢r';e1'1 v i Ie� •.♦ A y ._ ZZ, - -y _ 5. \i, ' _vim '_ Q A 4 h q�. y, '•t __ _ r 6� �_ P— .' ` l 4 / � i ?'' �, � / �x r Y.- i ra{ '� Tai • �,. ^,.�4 O i � tVi; '.' �° iAf �r . .. 1 ea / 1 r i , � / ',1 9 O!r � I \ ,1 �, .� i - 6 Y p 1 -'.r - r . f / / W r..1 'a . : � . tl' / _ 4• -3r +c . I a — T'"vs s . n ` ° - I � is ! � ` 0 a a »W . . i- ab . k / 1 � R v r {\ \ ie :°. ' *'` 7-. 4 •i - , �-ZI A $ � �- �. T S PADE t6) _2 " A! C 1600NonmSequent'lal r t d' .6 �L�' ," I� �j.�y r w ' r -BI � - 6 � t 1>I � �y - �V A /�. � �� • r �..� - � � a y' � � � � T i � � :.°l d _ 0 0 y g � ^ `' z2s •.T � - i � � ' .- 1 s a, , A A � _, / v, I. I �. USA:917 , �I A - � { ��4 t. •�l � may- i �� b t �Rh '� • V, ly i / Ab � � I , �� 1tt � p � I x��-I y 4 { �p 1 r � Phasing •\ I I R B. °is: {4 Qe rir � �� � , "`�i � .i• Y a r p 69 I v� r �a = +j ,n M1 j y GENERAL NOTES `. m ri � "1 Oar Il�.:l ♦ I ryas _JJ 0 wy �l .. l 1. FINAL TRACT MAPS TO BE RECORDED NON SEQUENTIALLY I O THE APPROVED PHASING MAP PENDING CIRCULATION AN UTILITY NEEDS 2. EXISTING STING G ZONING'S -P 217 r _ .,,+ .° J,1 c?:., r, s, r 7, 4� .1 tt ),�ri / 3. EXISTING: USE: VACANT -� a/'. / a+ _S' k�� ..q 1- .r:'91 •�l 'v 4. THIS MAP CONTAINS ALL CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP. - _ �\ +. / \ r q' •o ,.4�. 'g ,�3�. '�%�i ' .4 ,9 ° - 'j p':Y' {^ ' >, s. I�.:.y ,. _m` -''' 5. THE SUBDIVIDER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FILE MULTIPLE ON \d /� i• (Al,� c: 9., __,,,, FINAL MAPS FOR THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. R °yi °4 I,NN., 6. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT. 7. ALL STREETS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED PER COUNTY I p > y "d r x� •G �..,..� - p OF RIVERSIDE REQUIREMENTS. O ' � '� � �� .i I °. r,1 qy �._ ��_ /�'}. -. �i 3S�dvA � 1 {�j • °� � •fi �fi �.' '; ��� - i.- r LEGALDESCRIPTION 04'4• ). •,> — r m1 �' ,',, r ,a+ti .n f/) t' T -'1 +'� �� ,.. �. 1 BEING A DIVISION OF THAT PORTION OF THE y ,�. '•r` \�' ♦ $I ,v'r"r RANCHO TEMECULA IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; / , R �• o w , "� 1 ? - 6 j STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS PER MAP RECORDED IN i:'r �� •.� �I BOOK 13 PAGE 601 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF f THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY �, v a >•f ...........� �.' a I�i'� ' $'P i `� �� - i 1 �� I . r n OF CALIFORNIA. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS �i 962-020-001 thru 003 962-020-005 thru 008. `ri y ^' 44 / + DEVELOPER /OWNER ' �� / y � !rrt� i� - _ m.+• - o THE GARRETT GROUP /REDHAWK COMMUNTIES ♦ v/,�A r� ."' '4 ls� / st - �tm t 43529 RIDGE PARK DRIVE ♦ �'• _ - yE, . lsi� . �{ T. I sroT = TEMECULA, CA 92590 r \ ,[.i •''� - m c°'°"° �' m 909 506 -6556 TEL z rn g ra I (909) 506 -4821 FAX REPRESENTATIVE df v r �if 34 - •.'�erlQy = -� -;.: s,� L h : / i L{ 'rro RBF CONSULTING ;y `; '� , r '�'. > � — �v \ �' v /t>r' -:Fr . �• ��- � �i\ ► `. `�` .•+ oirr « j , rc a. r. : �1 ; i s Y.� ' l '>IIi., ' I . < .� i ',. s ueo. o w . sno o: �i '� CONTACT. TRA. CEY T HIRDS 27555 YNEZ ROAD, STE. 400 TEMECULA, CA 92591 O °aa G (909) 676 -8042y - , (909) 676 -7240 r r O$ y g ' �� u e'o TemeCU °d Te P CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OF �, I,y\gh 'ice � "D" STREET AND SPARKS STREET `.t Stem .'A • is a ew3 3 3�x TO PROTECT EXISTING OAK TREES iL L ' ,•r » tV 313 I �— � s P°P k""' / N 4: v.Ar�c¢• s k a SCALE: I ",200' xu NOTES \ f < ; • r ` r Not to Scole \ r° `• n ^ /N(I ✓ET TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPOSED / ,� / �' \•,\:� '' °i,.!°v �.. - REDHAWK HIGH SCHOOL TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON PLANNING -�� ' VICINITY MAP, T. AREAS 12,15,16, AND .COMMERCIAL SITE /A. "IFCONSTRUCTED r>uriNrr+c a DESIGN ■CONSTRUCTION THE SCHOOL SITE REQUIRES THE REALIGNMENT OF PRIMROSE AVENUE, 66' WIDE AS SHOWN: �� y r y= �-,z _ E_� -- '� _. • 7 j �.A - t, - _ �,• ` `_�„ j . /. �, :. !S r r .�:...._ i 27555 YNEZ ROAD, SURE 400 Fbino�l of L.oT62G - PA2k ■ ■ ■ TEMECULA CALFORISA 92591 -4879 CONSULTING 9096768042 • FAX 9096767240 • wNp.Rl9Fcom - Contact: Tracey Thiros FEBRUARY, 2001 JN 15- 100312 �ej4g