Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR 23067-3, -4, -5, -6 Geotechnical Report of Lot Reapprovali0-21-03: it:<O=M: GENTEY -IOMEE INE PETRA 90927321/3 C a/ 6 OFFICES IN THE COUNTIES OF ORANGE a SAN DIEGO a RIVERSIDE a LOS ANGELES a SAN BERNARDINO RECEIVED County of Riversi e Btober 7, 2003 uilding & SafeV J.N. 141-99 OCT 2l. 2003 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 MURRIETA Corona, California 92880 Attention: Ms. Kim Moring Subject: Geotechnical Report of Lot Reapproval, Lots 22 through 24, 26, 39 and 41 through 44, Tract 23067-3, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Reference: Petra Geotechnical, Inc.; 1999a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28. At your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc., (Petra) has prepared this letter of reapproval for Lots 22 through 24, 26, 39 and 41 through 44 within Tract 23067-3 located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Petra provided the geotechnical observation and testing services for rough - grading operations. The rough grading of the subject lots was completed in September 1999 (see Reference). Minor regrading of some of the lots was done in October 2002, in conjunction with the extension of Butterfield Stage Road. The lots have remained in their present graded state since completion. A site reconnaissance was conducted in September 2003, to assess the current condition of the lots. The building pads on the subject lots have recently been scarified, moisture - conditioned, as necessary, and compacted. Field density tests indicated that fill was compacted to 90 percent or more relative compaction. Results of field density tests are presented in the attached Table II. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 41640 Corning Place . Suite 107 a Murneta a CA 92662 0 Tel: (909) 600-9271 n Fax (909) 600-9215 10-21-08:1 140FM: CENTEX HOMES INE :5052732:13 CENTEX HOMES October 7, 2003 TR 23067-3/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 It is our opinion that the subject lots are suitable for their intended use. Recommendations for building and slab design remain applicable, as stated in the referenced report . We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETR A Grdyson R. Walker, GG Principal Engineer RJF/GRW/keb a No. 871 1m m V. stn Attachment: Table I — Field Density Test Results Distribution: (6) Addressee # 5/ 5 20 1C -2'-C3; , 40PM:CENTEX HOMES INE TABLE Field Density Test Results ;909272Z,3 C B/ 5 10/15/02 14 Lot 22 FG 6.7 124.4 94 3 10/15/02 15 Lot 23 FG 6.8 115.3 90 6 10/15/02 16 Lot 24 FG 7.0 119.8 90 3 10/17/02 28 Lot 42 1239.5 11.4 109.1 85 6 10/17/02 29 Lot 42 1240.5 11.7 112.0 88 6 10/21/02 36 Lot 39 finish slope 1238.0 9.2 119.8 92 4 10/21/02 37 Lot 39 finish slope 1233.0 11.2 117.6 90 4 10/21/02 38 Lot 39 FG 8.9 120.1 92 4 10/21/02 39 Lot 42 FG 10.4 116.2 91 6 10/24/02 40 LOT 26 FG 7.8 119.0 92 4 10/06.!03 41 Lot 44 FG 2.7 117.3 90 8 10/06/03 42 Lot 42 FG 5.6 123.5 95 8 10/06/03 43 Lot 24 FG 3.5 121.3 94 8 10/06/03 44 Lot 23 FG 2.5 119.5 92 8 10/06/03 45 Lot 22 FG 2.9 120.8 93 8 10/06/03 46 Lot 39 FG 4.0 124.5 95 1 10/06/03 47 Lot 26 FG 3.4 123.0 94 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 2003 J.N. 141-99 TR 23067 -311 -ora 22.24, 26, 39 41.43 TABLE T-1 1 .C— 7-03: :21PM:CENTEX -TOMES INE :9092732113 C 3/ 5 wi-w-euua TUC uy;JC Hn riultritlH MA NU. J[dudbuUdzio r, uziuv PETRA OFFICES IN THE COUNTIES OF OPAN'GE • SAN DIEGO . RIVERSID' • LDS ANGELES • SAN DERNMDINO RECEIVED County of Riversid@ctobcr 7, 2003 Building & Safety T.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES OCT 0 7 2003 2250 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 92880 MURRIETA Attention: Ms. Kim Moring Subject: Geotechnical Report of Lot Reapproval, Tots 22 through 24, 26, 39 and 41 through 43, Tract 23067-3, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Reference: Pena Geoleclurical, Inc., 1999a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Arca, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28. At your request, Pctra Geotechnical, Tile., (Petra) has prepared this letter of reapproval for Lots 22 through 24, 26, 39 and 41 through 43 within Tract 23067-3 located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Petra provided the geotochnical observation and testing services for rough - grading operations. The rough grading of the subject lots was completed in September 1999 (sec Reference). Minor regrading of some of the lots was done in October 2002, in conjunction with the extension of Butterfield Stage Road. The lots have remained in their present graded state since completion. A site reconnaissance was conducted in September 2003, to assess the current condition of the lots. The building pads on the subject lots have recently been scarified, moisture - conditioned, as necessary, and compacted. Field density tests indicated that fill was compacted to 90 percent or more relative compaction. Results of field density tests are presented in the attached Tzble 11, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 41640 Corn in Place . SuiiC 107 . Murrieta . CA 92502 • Tet: (909) 600-8271 • Fax: (909) 600.9219 -T-�ect3D�0 7--. -y, -.5� -6 j :O- 7-03' :21=Mr.CENTEk -DME.3 INE uu]-u]-ZuW ]ue uy.Je HA AUKKIriH CENTEX IIOMES TR 23067-3/Temecula Area :9092732,:3 # 4' F PHA NU. y1CUdbUUyC1t) r, UJ/U9 October 7, 2003 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 It is our opinion that the subject lots are suitable for their intended use. Recotmnendations for building and slab design remain applicable, as statod in the referenced report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. 1f you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEO 2 .4. w No. 871 Gr yson R" Walker, G EXP. 3/9 07 Principal Engineer �--�— RJP/GRW/keb • ��'�CAL1F��` Attachment: Table I — Pield Density Test Results Distributions (6) Addressee \/ 10- 7-03: 21PM:CEN7EX HOMES INE :9092732112 # 5/ 5 UUI-UI-0003 IUC. Uj1JC 1111 HUKKIriti PHA NU. UlyUybMUZIl Y. U4/U4 TABLE Field Density Test Results 10/15/02 14 Lot 22 FG 6.7 124.4 94 10!15/02 15 Lot 23 FG 6.8 115.3 90 3 _ 6 10/15/02 16 Lot 24 FG 7.0 119.8 90 10(17/02 28 Lot 42 1239.5 11.4 109.1 85 3 6 10/17/02 29 Lot 42 1240.5 11.7 112.0 88 6 10/21/02 36 Lot 39 finish slope 1238.0 9.2 119.8 92 10/21/02 37 Lot 39 finish slope 1233.0 11.2 117.6 90 4 10/21/02 38 Lot 39 FG 8.9 120.1 92 4 4 10/21/02 39 Lot 42 FG 10.4 116.2 91 6 10/24/02 40 Lot 26 FG 7.8 119.0 92 10/06/03 41 Lot 44 FG 2.7 117.3 90 4 10106/03 42 Lot 42 FG 5.6 123.5 95 g 10/06/03 43 Lot 24 FG 3.5 121.3 94 8 8 10/06/03 44 Lo, 23 FG 2.5 119.5 92 8 10/06/03 45 Lot 22 FG 2.9 120.8 93 10/06/03 46 Lot 39 FG 4.0 124.5 95 8 10/06/03 47 Lot 26 rG 3.4 123.0 94 1 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 TR 23067-3tLora 22-24, 26, 39 41.43 OCTOBER 2003 TABLE 7-I 1 1C— 3-02. 13PM.CENTEX 4JmE5 IIJE :90G2732:'.2 C 3/ PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO HUN SAKE R &ASSOCIATES R V I N E, I N C. I N I.AN D E.MPIR F REGION �sT�11.1�' RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A Murrieta, CA 92562 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety OCT 0 6 2003 MURRIETA W.C. #0919-23067X Attn: District Grading Inspector Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGRo20243 Address 44665 & 44670 Longfellow Avenue Tract No. 23067-3 Lot(s) 26 and 39 As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan, which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region PRINCIPALS: PAUL MUDDLESTON /�,'jl- BRADLEY B. HAY PaY�I R. Huddleston, Jr. RCE 58020 2900 Adams Street Exp. Date: 06/30/06 Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (9091332-8269 F% v . hunsaker.com iC- 3-03. t'1SPM; CENTEX HOMES INE PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS: BRADLEY B. HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 2900 Adam, Street Suite A -t 5 Riverside, Caldorn;a 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www hunsaker co,. HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, 1 ,N C. INLAND EMPIRF REGION RIVERSIDE COUNTY -GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 39493 Los Alamos Road, Suite A Murrieta, CA 92562 :909273'_tt3 # 4i 4 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety OCT 0 6 2003 MURRIETA W.O. #0919-23067X Attn: District Grading Inspector Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. RGRQ90993 & B -.R9900 4 Address Longfellow Avenue Tract No. 23nR7-3 Lot(s) 2.2 through 24, Inclusive- and 42 through 44, Inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan, which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property comers for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region Pau16R. Huddleston, Jr. RCE 58020 G/�o Exp. Date: 06/30/06 DEC -12-2002 THU 02:28 PM PETRA TEMECULA FAX N0. P. 02 PETRA --- ••- "--- UII ,r„ Ti Iru. UGI IOUT SOUT.HE 'N CALIFOHNI4 ' IG' -' CP,NTEX flOMl?S 2280 wardlow Circle, Suite 150 C.Oi0V1(t, California 92S80 Att: ration: Ms. Kim N'Toring & Safety DEC 12 2002 MURRIETA December 12, 2002 J.N. 141-99 BSR 026236 $nt,jeri: Cculechnical Report of Lot lic-approval, Lot 31, Tract 23067-3, Temecula Arca of Riverside County, California Refcrca,cc: Petra Geolcclulicatl, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, lots 18 through 45, Tract -23067-3, 1'emccula Arca, Riverside County, C7alift5n11a, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. AL potty r,quest, Petra Geotechnical, hlc. (Petra) has prepared this letter for lot rc,pproval for Lot 31 in Iraet 2.3067-3 located in the Temecula arca of Riverside County, California. Petra provided the geotechnical observation and testing services Ibr roux -.h -grading oper-601 s. 'Tile roU211--grading of the subject lots was completed in October 1999 (sec Reforcncc). I,r,ts D through 24, 26, 31 through 35 and 42 lbrot!gh 44 were ro-graded in October 21002 as a p:ut of the crr.ding for the extension Of fiuttcrfield Stapc Road. Rc-grading 1Cd UA 3=,md rc-compictt11u the upper I foot of pad sub;;rada to repair SUr icial weathering. A report documenting the recent grading is forflnconiinl=,. On t47c bsis of our most recent gontccimieal observation, l of 31 is deemed suitable ft,r its intended use. Reconlrucndatious for building allcl slat' design remain applicable as staled in the referenced report and suhsequent correspondence. PETnA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. P,16!0 Onrnina PIdcO . :'jw 127 • "dW rlc [n • Gn 9?:G: • TVI: (905) C50.9;71 . Fax- (909) 600-9215 DEC -12-2002 THU 02:28 PM PETRA TEMECULA C:i,1V1'1?� 11O)IF.S TTL 23067-3, Lnt 31ffemeculn Arca FAX N0. P. 03 December 12, 2002 J.N. 144-99 Page 2 Wct appreciate this oppotlunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please Cal tact this office. Kee pcclfully submitted, i,v'm G Cpir:�j'son It. Wfllker ,lt liter AS.iod,'t0 Ul W: 871 (jRWAIcb H, No.81t�5-1) S, EXP. 1lislrihutiou: (4) Addressee (1) 12ivcrsidc Comtty - Grading Division Attention: Annita (fax only) it 00-20-02 04:12 PLNNNINC ENGINEERING ,yyW"NG MKRNMENT RELATIONS 15MNE RIMIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS: 9RADLEV a MAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 290o Adam r Elrod Su1R A-15 Rlr lde, California 93504 M) 3N.1,300 I'H (41M) 3N2-9269 f K ... I,unylKRr,Wm E 'Boyd From -9092732100 HUN SAUCER &.ASSOCLATES I R I N 4, 1 V C. IN LANN G EMPIRE REGION 9092702379 T-750 P 005/005 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 AUG 2.0 2002 MURRIE6A W.O. #0910-23067 Attn; District Grading Inspector Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade - WEBB= Tract .9'4097.2 Lot(6) 23 throl 193h 25 n L,• E E. g h 14.9 Inch lshfo� and 39 through 41 10MIUSIVA F-616 As ErTgineer for the project. I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code, Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or Construction), staking of property comers for proper building location and Inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Wo: This is a n)-Cerfftvbon of rough grade HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC.,; Inland Empire ReAn u ` 4!7f l2� � Pa R. Hud eston, Jr. c1vL R E 58020 or CP- EV, date: 06/30!06 697-8 2515 606 DOSSY V ZZZYNNP9 ES°Lo I3n.Ll CC . 09 -onY G— 4—C2;12:30PM;CENTEX HOMES INE JUR 03 02 10:05a PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVCRNMCNT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS: PRAM T:Y 8. HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 2900 Adams Street Suite A•15 Riverside, California 92504 19091352-7200 PH 19091352.8269 FX HUN SAKE R &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. INLAND EMPIRE REGION rr . - u _ _gW-Til RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector ;9092732113 >: 2/ 3 p.4 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety SEP 0 4 2002 MURROA W.O. #919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. Address Tract No. Lot(s) As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially In conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property comers for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen beans and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, Inland Empire Region PauYR. huddleston, Jr. RCE 58020 Exp. Date: 06130/02 i� COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT s;::= T. H. Ingram Director May 13, 2002 TO: CENTEX HOMES/ Attention Mr. Bob Dinsmore/ project manager for owner 2280 WARDLOW CIR , SPACE # 150 CORONA, CALIFORNIA 91720 RE: BGR990024 TR23067-5 Dear Mr. Bob Dinsmore: The county of Riverside received your soils engineer report for evaluation of existing bluff. Based on your soils engineer evaluation it appear that the site is stable at present time. The long term behavior of bluff and its affect on existing development in future need to be evaluated by your soil engineer for its potential safety hazard.. Should you have any question please do not hesitate to call me at (909) 600-6119. Sincerely, A Al _ Abdul S. $ehnawa , M.S. .E. Senior Civil Engineer cc: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MURRIETA Regional Office 039493 Los Alamos Rd. Murrieta RdeRiverside CA 925630 Tel: (909)6000 -6119• FAX600-6119 i� 1 PETRA COSTA MESA • LOS ANGELES . SAN DIEGO • MURRIETA 41640 Corning Place Suite 107 . Murrieta, California 92562 . (909) 600-9271 • FAX:(909) 600-9215 • petrate@ibm.net LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 2, 2002 JOB NUMBER: 141-99 COMPANY: CENTEX HOMES 2280 WARDLOW CIRCLE, SUITE 150 CORONA, CA 92880 ATTN: MR. LANCE CLEMENTS FROM: Steve Poole/keb COPIES: 3 DATED: APRIL 2, 2002 SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT - TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2002, BGR990024, TRACT 23067-5, TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TRANSMITTED VIA: ✓ UPS ADDITIONAL COPIES: (1) HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES, INC./ATTENTION: MR. PAUL HUDDLESTONE (UPS); and`(2) RIVERSIDE COUNTY-BUILDIF COMMENTS: c6perex HOMES &IV I I; £ N(% Ir+Ff IL 6011.i f>j (a�tJEC�- J JH( 17 LC", C_ w � �, 6 7 6'_�')-619 3 Department of Building and Safety COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 'O: Cff!✓%(X /l(1/,0[" Dist. .DDRESS: 0////10 - 0XL/l11)a1K Date 21y 1 =: CORRECTION ermit No..B61i4gooZq . NOTICE 7/C z 5067 — 1 �9 51Tf= VA i T 11F 7.X 2 3 0 67- S c✓/7 S P.� Flo rHeF/� IA/- 2; 9 ? = A H1921"'p0o/( Ge704,- V,Al u/A ( �KSrI`�f/Ei) � NO/I/// !�F S7akM �Jza1rJ ,R�/rZ_ ACC ESS fNS�MltlT . JyE PIWV17WE S/i>11f CONiNeT 7/ie Cnr/l, f4/n/irOy ASD Sa/Ls i,✓61,41F <1 >D :.Mii/Gt�/� 7iif i/�zNr;pot/S CD.VDi71eW 711147 LXISL IAI 711E Z. Inspector DO NOT REMOVE FROM JOBSITE 4.205(rev.1/83) DISTRIBUTION: WHITE,Job,CANARY•Inspector,PINK`Ottice vtp•DfM t.-.. .. '�. Ptq-' IL H H AOOL€rwJ Q15!Al S>rr,0 -firC L0r1cifr TO rrIr-t 2/2-6/02 i ` IGENTEX NoMi S Glvll. �N�+�NrefrlL 5o�1•S ��.! 4 Itj Eta Mr- /3oh /JiniSwl04"(z 3s2— f�26ti dtiq —6197 22$o wR/L0 LOw 15-0 C.o it -o N A , (A I7 Z u f5.?-,.dvl.R,b.'.+i1�!iN'�W1�ti•aei=�:i�'ra:. Department . of Budding and Safety LA LL�" PR -"L- H A �o of Tr P�/ PLS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE A TO. j 1, A'1X. Il(1/,%1L: �- `.' Dist. .-CF,t/Tf ADDRESS' �l//J/1C7`,NI�U/l/Nw{(_ - Date 2/j'//' -�. .v °.�3:. •.[:�:..fY-_TNv°r° �''.y •r,/..::. _i.41�•_:.��.1�'"f .. .'. '.1 �� - _ _ ^l•p•• __ _ :... CORRECTI�.... C ON ' NOTI E ,..L Permit No ?/. 1467 — S ='o� --. '•^c;- ..-. -. .,. •. .., pia '....:..hi-... .4`.E -�``�,'�x4^�r=��r" G 7- S ✓X s vXfFOA-wF/) n t/=s:2l9/OZ :_ `::/L NNZN�zpOdS L'i�rNrr� Al "IAC OK SEJlf/Ft)- ( " �i/O/111/''l�F,:570RM oy,41k/ 4A1f) T%/.' ; `PlkN1 f 77E�.'i = 5//N!L CO V1r17T 7//1 -Caw/ . _ -.. -.l ....,, ;.. ,. -_:'. ...:.. .. .::. .. „ -.,.•. `0�--� •Kr(ai1 EN6"In1r�;��:: y; :,AND �So��s rNGiNFr= k.,- _ _ �a:`�•'S; ,taw, _ ::::1.; ,:'.::: _ _.:x: -nom' �ryt/D/7MIAl %Uiat -y�" - - � _ � _ - - ,s., "'c. a.,..,..r .,i ;w�,:'r•;;a' f5.?-,.dvl.R,b.'.+i1�!iN'�W1�ti•aei=�:i�'ra:. It PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES RECEIVED August 17, 2001 County of Riverside J.N. 141-99 Building & Safety CENTEX HOMES AUG 9 9 2001 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Norco, California 91720 MURRIETA Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming Subject: Geotechnical Report of Lot Reapproval, Lots 32 through 35 of Tract 23067-3 and Lots 79 through 84 of Tract 23067-4, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California References: 1) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. 2) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area. Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. At your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is submitting this geotechnical letter of reapproval for Lots 32 through 35 of Tract 23067-3 and Lots 79 through 84 of Tract 23067-4 located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Petra provided the geotechnical observation and testing services for rough -grading operations and the grading prior to reapproval of the subject residential lots. The lots were initially rough -graded in 1999 and 2000, as documented in the above - referenced rough -grading reports. Since the time of rough grading, the lots were moisture -conditioned and mechanically compacted. All density tests met or exceeded 90 percent relative compaction and were close to optimum moisture. The density test results are attached as Table II. The lots are suitable for the construction of the proposed residences. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 27620 Commerce Center Drive . Suite 103 . Temecula • CA 92590 . Tel: (909) 699-6193 • Fax (909) 699-6197 . petrale@ibm.nel CENTER HOMES TRs 23067-3 & 23067-4/Temecula Area August 17, 2001 J.N. 504-96A Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. ICH OQAOV �CHq_lti\ a No 692 'O c *erheum. Poole W ExA. o Senior Associate En tl to, a GE 692 rte. �TECHN�' Attachments: Table I - Lab1'atbr�Maximum Dry Density Table II - Field Density Test Results Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Centex Homes - Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller it TABLE LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' Sample Number Soil Type Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry Density (pef) 3 Reddish -brown fine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 130.0 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 1 128.0 (1) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. AUGUST 2001 J.N. 141-99 TABLE II Field Density Test Results TEST .: TEST_:.; :- - TES.T.:.'. --,-.':. ELEV.: - -MOISTURE, DENSITY. COMP.,:::: SOIL DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (pcf) ("/o) TYPE 08/14/01 1 TR 23067-3/Lot 35 FG 6.6 122.6 94 4 08/14/01 2 TR 23067-3/Lot 34 FG 7.2 120.1 92 4 08/14/01 3 TR 23067-3/Lot 33 FG 7.5 120.4 93 4 08/14/01 4 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 FG 8.0 119.1 92 4 08/15/01 5 TR 23067-4/Lot 81 FG 5.3 117.6 92 6 08/15/01 6 TR 23067-4/Lot 80 FG 7.0 118.6 92 6 08/15/01 7 TR 23067-4/Lot 79 FG 6.4 119.7 94 6 08/15/01 8 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 FG 7.5 116.9 91 6 08/15/01 9 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 FG 8.2 118.9 93 6 08/15/01 10 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 FG 7.5 122.4 92 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TR 23067-3 Lots 32 - 35 AUGUST 2001 J.N. 141-99 TR 230676-4 Lots 79 - 84 TABLE T-11 1 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety CENTEX HOMES AUG 9 9 2001 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Norco, California 91720 MURRIETA Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming August 17, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Geotechnical Report of Lot Reapproval, Lots 32 through 35 of Tract 23067-3 and Lots 79 through 84 of _Tract 23067-4, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California References: 1) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. 2) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000, Geoteclmical Report of Rough Grading, Lots I through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. At your request, Petra Geoteclmical, Inc. (Petra) is submitting this geotechnical letter of reapproval for Lots 32 through 35 of Tract 23067-3 and Lots 79 through 84 of Tract 23067-4 located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Petra provided the geotechnical observation and testing services for rough -grading operations and the grading prior to reapproval of the subject residential lots. The lots were initially rough -graded in 1999 and 2000, as documented in the above - referenced rough -grading reports. Since the time of rough grading, the lots were moisture -conditioned and mechanically compacted. All density tests met or exceeded 90 percent relative compaction and were close to optimum moisture. The density test results are attached as Table 1I. The lots are suitable for the construction of the proposed residences. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 27620 Commerce Center Drive . Suite 103 . Temecula . CA 92590 . Tel (909) 699-6193 . Fax. (909) 699-6197 . petrate@ibm.net CENTEX HOMES TRs 23067-3 & 23067-4/Temecula Area August 17, 2001 J.N. 504-96A Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. gOr[S.ci�V, ! S phen M. Poole w ssz o z Senior Associate En t9 a b2 y GE 692 �r FOrFCr+Mc^`..o°� Attachments: Table I - Lab—o-m ,Iaxinmm Dry Density Table II - Field Density Test Results Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Centex Homes - Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller it TABLE LABORATORY MAXIDI al DRY DENSITY' Sample Number Soil Type - Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry. Density (pef) 3 Reddish -brown fine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 130.0 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 128.0 (1) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 AUGUST 2001 TABLE II Field Density Test Results TEST BATE: TEST NO. TEST LOCATION ELEY. at) : MOISTURE :` ' : (°10) DENSITY (pci);: 'COMP.. (°lo} .: SOIL : TYPE 08/14/01 1 TR 23067-3/Lot 35 FG 6.6 122.6 94 4 08/14/01 2 TR 23067-3/Lot 34 FG 7.2 120.1 92 4 08/14/01 3 TR 23067-3/Lot 33 FG 7.5 120.4 93 4 08/14/01 4 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 FG 8.0 119.1 92 4 08/15/01 5 TR 23067-4/Lot 81 FG 5.3 117.6 92 6 08/15/01 6 TR 23067-4/Lot 80 FG 7.0 118.6 92 6 08/15/01 7 TR 23067-4/Lot 79 FG 6.4 119.7 94 6 08/15/01 8 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 FG 7.5 116.9 91 6 08/15/01 9 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 FG 8.2 118.9 93 6 08/15/01 10 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 FG 7.5 122.4 92 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TR 23067-3 Lots 32 - 35 AUGUST 2001 I.N. 141-99 TR 230676-4 Lots 79 - 84 TABLE T-11 1 • Geotechnical • Geologic • Environmental 24890 Jefferson Ave. • Murrieta, California 92562 • (909) 677-9651 • FAX (909) 677-9301 RECEIVED June 6, 2001 County of Riverside Building & Safety W.O. 2565 -B -SC US Home Corporation JUN 21. 2001 8577 Haven Avenue, Suite 201 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 MURRIETA Attention: Mr. David Floyd Subject: Geotechnical Update of Lots 19 to 47 and 69 to 81, Tract 23066-5, Redhawk Project, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California References: 1. "Compaction Report of Grading, Lots 27 through 38, Tract 23066-5, Redhawk Area. Temecula Area, Riverside County, California," W.O. 2565 -B -SC, dated June 26, 2000, by GeoSoils, Inc. 2. "Compaction Report of Grading, Lots 1 through 26 and 39 through 96, Tract 23067- 51sicl, Redhawk Area, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California," W.O 2565 -B -SC, dated October 28, 1999, by GeoSoils, Inc. Dear Sir: As requested by the Riverside County Building and Safety, Grading Division, this letter is presented as a review of site conditions at the subject lots within Tract 23066-5 at the Redhawk Project, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California. Previous grading within this project began in June of 1999 and was completed in May 24, 2000. Additional grading to finish the tract occurred between April 24 and May 24, 2000. The tract was graded under the observation and testing services of GeoSoils, Inc. Observations of the subject lots were performed on June 4, 2001, by one of our staff members and included visual observations and selected moisture and density testing of the subject lots. The observations and testing indicated that the following conditions existed. Weeds and miscellaneous debris had been stripped from the previously graded pad areas. Field testing performed indicated that moisture contents and relative compaction at the surface of the pads are at the required specifications (i.e., optimum moisture content and 90 percent relative compaction). CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon our site reconnaissance, review of the referenced report, and our field testing, the subject lots have undergone little change with respect to geotechnical site conditions. It is therefore our opinion that the subject lots appear suitable for the proposed residential development. Unless specifically superseded herein, the soils engineering design criteria and recommendations contained in the referenced report remain pertinent and applicable. All footing excavations should be observed and approved by a representative of the geotechnical consultant following trenching and prior to placement of forms, reinforcement or concrete. The purpose of this observation is to verify that the foundation excavations extend into approved fill or bedrock and generally conform to our recommendations regarding footing width and depth. If loose or compressible materials are exposed within the footing excavation, a deeper footing or removal and recompaction of the subgrade materials would likely be recommended, as needed. Based upon the observations and testing performed by representatives of this office, it is our opinion that, to the best of our knowledge, the work within the area of our responsibilities is in accordance with the approved soils engineering reports and applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code. Further, these lots are suitable for construction at this time and are in general conformance with the minimum standards of compaction as required by the County of Riverside. Our findings have been made in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices, and no further warranty is implied or made. GeoSoils, Inc. assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing, or recommendations performed or provided by others. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. US Home W.O 2565 -13 -SC Tract 23066-5 June 6, 2001 File. e \wp7\murr\rc2500\2565b guo8 Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, GeoSoils, Inc. Paul L. McClay Engineering Ge PLM/JPF/ARK/ea Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Job Site US Home Tract 23066-5 File: e:\wp7\murr\rc2500\2565b.guo8 GeoSoils, Inc. Reviewed by:it J No. 476 Exp. 06-30-01 Geotechnical Engineer, GE 476 W.O. 2565 -B -SC June 6, 2001 Page 3 PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS - BRADLEY B HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 2900 Adams Street Swte A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www hunsakercom HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C I N ILAND EMPIRE REGION RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety JUN 21 2001 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 MURRIETA W.O. #1663-23066-5 Attn: District Grading Inspector Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR984043 Address Redhawk Tract No. 23066-5 Lot(s) 19 through 47, in .I Isiv -; and 69 through 81, inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region iu l R. uddleston, Jr.E 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety MAY 14 2001 MURRIETA May 9, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Response to Riverside County Department Building and Safety Correction Notice Dated May 2, 2001, Slope Repair, Lots 41 and 49 of Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is providing this response to Riverside County Department of Building and Safety Correction Notice dated May 2, 2001, for Lots 41 and 49 of Tract 23067-4 within the Redhawk development located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. This response addresses the erosional- and construction -related damage to the soils within the subject lots, A copy of the correction notice is attached for your convenience. The erosional- and construction -related damage has recently been repaired by scarifying, moisture conditioning to near -optimum moisture contact then recompacting the soils within the subject lots and slopes. The soils have been recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. The grading and recompaction methodology have followed and met the recommendations provided within the referenced reports (see References). PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tot (909) 699-6193 Fax. (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net Q' 9� M No. 1348 z (E1tP 0&0-1— We ' •ov CENTEX HOMES May 9, 2001 TR 23067-4, Lots 41 & 49/'Femecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Bergmann pal Geologist 1348 SMP/MB/keb Stephen M. Senior Ass( GE 692 Attachments: Department of Building and Safety Correction Notice References Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Centex Homes - Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller Q:' No. 692 vwi u� Pe-Q=GT � ; I 15-- DEf'A1:t1- PROdq ai7� .' 2:50 Department of Building and Safety COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO: CSR G i-fOrOE-s Dist. TQM . ADDRESS: 4�2-00 N Gf f VA< PA -99 Date Jr 02 O I CORRECTION NOTICE'�NE5PAY Permit No. EGJ� RDUG'f M -23©G7-4 • L T2(s_4_9 1 2 - 2-44:47-4A := RExa�� 'l.. i3. • ice: • �.�� `� 1 . /. IEvl6ws< I Al ME=N' Kol• �/1-1 %6104, REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. , 1989b, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 aid 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. 1999x, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated , J.N. 141-99, March 10, 1999. 1999b, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. , 1999c, Geoteclimcal Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. 1999d, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. , 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. , 2000b, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. , 2001, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 26 through 45, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 2, 2001. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 J.N. 141-99 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES April 27, 2001 J.N. 141-99 RECEIVED CENTEX HOMES County of Riverside 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Building & Safety Corona, California 91720 MAY 10 2001 Attention: Mr. Lance Clements MURRIETA Subject: Response to Riverside County Planning Department Geotechnical Report Review Sheet for Grading Plan Check No. BGR990024, Tract 23067, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is providing this response to Riverside County Planning Department's geotechnical review sheet dated April 19, 2001, for Tract 23067 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. This response addresses discrepancies as shown on Hunsaker and Associates' rough -grading plan as- builts for Tracts 23067-1, 23067-3, 23067-4, 23067-5 and 23067-6 dated March 30, 2001 (12 sheets). The attached Table I provides a summary of the specific comments regarding subdrain locations and elevations and provides geotechnical responses to each item. Our responses are based on our review of our field maps utilized during grading observation and testing services. A copy of the review sheet is attached for Your convenience. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula. CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net CENTEX HOMES TR 23067/Temecula Area April 27, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Stephen M. Poo) Senior Associate GE 692 Attachments: Table I - Response to Review Sheet Riverside County Review Sheet dated April 19, 2001 References Enclosure: Rough -Grading Plans, As-Builts - 12 sheets (Hunsaker only) Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Hunsaker and Associates Attention: Mr. Paul Huddleston TABLE I Response to Review Sheet Plan Sheet Number, - Task 4 A) Add two elevations: 1,168 and 1,163 to subdrains shown under Nighthawk Pass opposite lots 28 and 29, respectively B) Relocate subdrain at the rear of Lots 32 through 35, as shown on grading plan 5 A) Subdrain outlets into brow ditch on slope behind Lot 77 B) Omit subdrain under Lot 59 and add segments of subdrain under Lots 58, 59, 61, Abbey Road and Love Court, as shown on grading plan 6 A) Add subdrain segment east of Lot 46, as shown on grading plan 7 A) Subdrain outlet is a 40f -foot riser 8 A) Subdrain outlets into storm drain in Chaote Street 9 A) Omit and relocate subdrain as shown on grading plan B) Omit and relocate subdrain outlets, as shown. See grading plan 1 1 A) Add subdrain extending to outlet, as shown on grading plan - outlet elevation is 1,114.62 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. APRIL 2001 J.N. 141-99 PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C N LAND EMPIRE REGION Date: April 23, 2001 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety MAY 0 9 2001 MURRIETA W.O. #0919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Lydia Court Tract No. 23067-4 Lot(s) 37 through 46, inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region /gpFEss: NUODLFs c3 Q c No. 58020 PRINCIPALS aul R. Huddleston, Jr. *. BRADLEY B. HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON RICE 5802 06/30/02 sr9� CivIL p ofrcIt. 2900 Adams Street Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 F% www hunsakeccon, PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES April 20, 2001 J.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Lance Clements Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation of Subdrains within Lots 12 through 17 of Tract 23067-4 and Lots 58 through 66 of Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Pursuant to your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is pleased to provide this letter outlining the installation of subdrains within Lots 12 through 17 of Tract 23067-4 and Lots 58 through 66 of Tract 23067-5 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. The subdrains were installed by the grading contractor under the observation of Petra. The subdrains were properly installed and will properly drain to their outlet into Temecula Creek. Both subdrains under Lots 12 through 17 within Tract 23067-4 and under Lots 58 through 66 within Tract 23067-5 will drain into Temecula Creek. A minor sag was noted for the subdrain under Lot 17 of Tract 23067-4. The sag could be a result of the field surveyor not consistently measuring the flow line for the subdrain or it could really exist. Our field observations during installation did not note any sag in the subdrain. Even if the sag is correct, the subdrain has significant fall in elevation, over 50 feet from Lot 37 to Lot 17 and over 30 feet from Lot 38 to Lot 17. The minor rise in elevation for the subdrain within Lot 17 will not prevent the water within the subdrain from continuing to flow to the outlet at Temecula Creek. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 27620 Commerce Center or Ste 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tal: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net CENTEX HOMES TRs 23067-4 & -5/Temecula Area April 20, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 In summary, the subdrains that start at Lots 37 and 38 in Tract 23067-4, continuing beneath Lot 17 in Tract 23067-4, will drain properly and will outlet into Temecula Creek. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, Attachment: References Distribution: (2) Addressee Stephen M. Senior Assc GE 692 (2) Hunsaker and Associates Attention: Mr. Paul Huddleston (1) Riverside County - Engineering Department Attention: Mr. Abdul Behnawa h41 0 4 Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1999, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. , 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. , 2000b, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Tracts 23067-1 and 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 4, 2000. , 2001a, Response to Riverside County Planning Department Review of Precise Grading Plans, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated March 15, 2001. , 2001b, Response to Riverside County Building and Safety, Grading Division, Plan Check Corrections, GR990024, dated February 21, 2001, Tracts 23067-1, 23067-3 and 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated April 10, 2001 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. APRIL 2001 J.N. 141-99 dto PE, TRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety CENTEN HOMES APR 11 2001 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 MURRIET,A Attention: Mr. Bob Dinsmore April 10, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Response to Riverside County Building and Safety, Grading Division, Plan Check Corrections, GR 990024, dated February 21, 2001, Tracts 23067-1, 23067-3 and 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra is pleased to provide this response to Riverside County Building and Safety, Grading Division Plan Check Corrections sheet dated February 21. 2001, for Tracts 23067-1, 23067-3 and 23067-6 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Provided herein are the specific comments and a point - by -point response to each item. A copy of the review sheet is included at the rear of this report. • Comment No. 1 — "The as -built grading plans submitted shows sag on few of constructed subdrains at the following locations: "1. Sheet 4: Elevation 1187.75' toward 1188.88'. "2. Sheet 9: Elevation 1143.23' toward 1143.86'. "3. Sheet 11: Elevation 1120.79' toward 1120.97'. "The soils engineer need to comment on the existing of sags on the subdrains and evaluate their adverse effect on the long tern function of subdrains the way that are constructed." Response No. 1.1 — The subdrain has a significant fall in elevation, over 50 feet from Lot 37 to Lot 17 and over 30 feet from Lot 38 to Lot 17. The minor rise in elevation for the subdrain within Lot 17 will not prevent the water within the subdrain from continuing to flow to the outlet. PETRA. GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula. CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net CENTER HOMES April 10, 2001 TRs 23067-1, -3 & -6/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 Response No. 1.2 — The subdrain has a significant fall in elevation, over 60 feet over a distance of 300 feet at this location. An insignificant rise of 0.63 foot will not affect the water from continuing to (low to the outlet. Response No. 1.3 — The subdrain has a significant fall in elevation, over 10 feet over a distance of 200 feet at this location. An insignificant rise of 0.18 foot will not affect the water from continuing to flow to the outlet. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions. Please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA .692 0 Exp- o Stephen M. Poole 6 YJC�—`�� Senior Associate Engi ©Plq�TEO FAQ GE 692 E OF Cad j SMP/hls/keb Attachments: County of Riverside Building and Safety, Check Corrections References Distribution: (2) Addressee (3) Hunsaker and Associates, Inc. Attention: Ms. Laura Keehnal W PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS: BRADLEY HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 2900 Adams Street Swte A -I 5 Riverside, Cahforma 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909)352-8269 F% www, hunsaker com HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES 1 R V I N E, I N C N LAN D EMPIRE REGION Date: April 9, 2001 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety MAY 0 2 2001 MURRIETA W.O. #0919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Abbey Road Tract No. 23067-4 Lot(s) 35 and 36 As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES I Inland Vuddleston, ion L�ul RJr.CE 5 1 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 ;v✓'aR 0D(F5, Jam. T�Z No. 58020 'M n PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO PRINCIPALS: BRADLEY B. HAY PAUL HUDDLESTON 2900 Adams Street Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www. hunsakercom HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES R V I N E, I N C. N L A N D EMPIRE REG ION Date: April 9, 2001 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector W.O. #0919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Abbey Road Tract No. 23067-4 Lot(s) 18 through 34, inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Note: This is a re -certification of rough grade. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVI[NE-,-LNG:-._ Inland Empire Region i<`• ;; `=-m: ="':: ` aul R. Huddleston, Jr. pi0.:,80e1i RCE 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 2[E61r.'EP,IF sD1 MAY U 2 Zuul jU� COUNTY OF RIA.,4SIDE BUILDING ANL` SaFETY PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES NLANDD EMPIRE REGION 10MMLYAF 911PAIZII111 IRVINE RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT RIVERSIDE Department of Building and Safety SAN DIEGO 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Final Grading Reference: Log No. BGR000732 Address Abbey Road, Love Court Tract No. 23067-4 Lot (s) 1 through 3, inclusive; and 62 through 69, inclusive; Developer Centex Homes I hereby approve the final grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Codes. Final Grading has been completed in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: completion of all engineered drainage devices and retaining walls, setting of all monuments in accordance with the recorded tract map, location and inclination of all manufactured slopes, and construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER Inland Empi a Region IRVINE, INC. ES YaJDDLQ JP O? ZW a N0.58020 PRINCIPALS * F R - BRADLEY B HAV PAUL HUDDLESTON PAA R. Huddleston, Jr. LN clv%%- E 58020 OFC 2900 Adams S[reet Exp. Date: 06/30/02 SuiteA-15 R,wmde, Cahfo,n,a W.O. #919-23067 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 F % www hunsakercom PETRA t�(oR molal 0 7� COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES March 15, 2001 J.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Bob Dinsmore Subject: Response to Riverside County Planning Department Review of Precise Grading Plans, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Reference: Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is providing this response to a verbal question from Mr. Abdul Behnawa with Riverside County Planning Department to Hunsaker and Associates, Inc., the project civil engineering consultant, regarding their precise grading plans for Tract 23067-4 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. • PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center of. Ste 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax* (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net Comment— "The subdrains beneath Lot 37 and 38 through Lots 35 and 36 and continuing into Lot 17 have a slightly higher elevation (+1.17 feet) beneath Lot IT" Response — The subdrains have a significant fall in elevation, over 50 feet for the subdrain from Lot 37 to Lot 17 and over 30 feet for the subdrains from Lot 38 to Lot 17. the minor rise in elevation for the subdrain within Lot 17 will not prevent the water within the subdrain from continuing to flow to the outlet. F 0 IE 0 W r90 MAR 2 B ZUU1 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE . BUILDING AND SAFETY . ,, CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4/Temecula Area March 15, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, St phen M. Poole Senior Associate I GE 692 SMP/keb Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Hunsaker and Associates, Inc. Attention: Ms. Laura Keelmal Rto :%to PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming November 10, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Settlement Monitoring for Lot 18 in Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Pursuant to your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) has reviewed the survey data supplied by Mr. Gary Keller of Centex Homes. The settlement was initially surveyed on January 11, 2000. The survey monitoring was initially performed on a weekly basis, increasing to a biweekly basis in June 2000, and finally increasing to every 4 weeks in September 2000. The last survey readings were taken on September 19, 2000. A copy of the survey data is attached as Table I for your convenience. The purpose of the settlement monitoring was to monitor the settlement of the thicker compacted fills. As outlined in the referenced rough -grade reports for the subject lots (see References), it was recommended that construction be delayed in lot areas that were underlain with greater than approximately 50 feet of fill until such time that additional survey data indicates that settlement has stabilized and any future long-temT secondary settlement will be within acceptable limits. After reviewing the attached survey settlement data, it is recommended that additional monitoring is no longer required and that construction need not be delayed for the subject lots. The survey data indicates that both the magnitude and rate of settlement have decreased and are within acceptable limits. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 27620 Commerce Center or Ste 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm,net CENTEX HOMES TRs 23067-4, Lot 18/Temecula Area November 10, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PFTRA G170TFCHNICAI,_ TNC. Attachments: Table I - Survey Settlement Data References Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Centex Homes - Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller (2) Riverside County Planning - Grading Division Attention: Mr. Mack Hakakian TABLE I Survey Settlement Data DATE: Aill i/00 ill./two - 01725/00;" ; 02101100. . 02/08100:1 02115100. : 02129100: .03/07!00 0 114100`[ 0312t/00 03F28t00 [ 64164100 ;: ' -04/11/001 ' 64125100 : 05103700 - W09100, 051 'Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elei'a(lon Elevation' Elevation Elevation Elevation. Elevation EIcJa[iOn Eleva(i0n Elevation Elevation E1Pv$600' '. Elevation SW -1 1145 652 1145 651 1145 651 1145,647 1145 648 1145.648 1145.641 notshot 1145 645 notshot notshot 1145.622 potshot notshot notshot notshot SW -2 1145 877 1145.873 1145 873 1145.868 1145.867 1145 868 1145 858 notshot 1145 861 notshot notshot 1145.836 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -3 1148942 1 148.936 1148 930 1148931 1 148.933 1148.931 1148.922 not shot 1148 926 notshot not shot 1148 900 notshot notshot not shot notshot SW -4 1144 880 1144.875 1144 874 1144 868 1144.867 1144 867 1144.856 notshot 1144 859 notshot notshot 1144 835 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -5 1134.292 1134 291 1134.290 1134 285 1134 286 1134 289 1134 278 notshot 1134,272 notshot notshot 1134.257 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -6 1155.991 1155 986 1155 985 1155 974 1155 980 1155 972 1155 961 notshot 1155.961 notshot notshot 1155 940 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -7 1 195.076 1 195 051 1195030 1 195.021 1195.027 1195009 1 195.009 1 195 013 1195009 1194968 1194 947 1194 960 SW -8 1204.396 DATE 05/17/00 05/23100 W30/00 06/06100 06113/00 06/27/00 07/11/00 07!25100 08/08/oo' MUM= Elevation 'Elevation Elevation Elevation '. Elci•atiod .Eieve[ign : EteJatton :Elevation. Elevation' Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation" " Elevation SW -1 notshot notshot notshot 1145 626 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -2 notshot notshot notshot 1145.842 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot 514-3 notshot notshot notshot 1148 904 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW4 notshot notshot notshot 1144 835 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -5 notshot notshot notshot 1134 259 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -6 notshot notshot notshot 1155 933 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot not shat notshot SW -7 1194 986 1 194 987 1194 990 1194 984 1195.010 1194 992 1104 992 1194.986 1194 985 1194 990 1195 007 SW -8 1204 417 1204.415 1204 416 1204 402 1204.415 1204 537 1204 534 1204 521 1204.515 1204 520 1204.528 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 2000 J.N. 141-99 Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Map Nos. 230674, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. , 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Rough -Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 Through 23076-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated March 10, 1999. , 1999b, Settlement of Clay Layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 9, 1999. 1999d, Removal of Clay Layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. 1999d, Settlement of Silty Clay layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 5, 1999. , 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. , 2000b, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 2000 J.N. 141-99 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming October 23, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Settlement Monitoring for Lots 17 in Tract 23067-4 and Lots 52 through 63 in Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Pursuant to your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) has reviewed the survey data supplied by Mr. Gary Keller of Centex Homes. The settlement was initially surveyed on January 11, 2000. The survey monitoring was initially perfonned on a weekly basis, increasing to a biweekly basis in June 2000, and finally increasing to every 4 weeks in September 2000. The last survey readings were taken on September 19, , 2000. A copy of the survey data is attached as Table I for your convenience. The purpose of the settlement monitoring was to monitor the settlement of the thicker compacted fills. As outlined in the referenced rough -grade reports for the subject lots (see References), it was recommended that construction be delayed in lot areas that were underlain with greater than approximately 50 feet of fill until such time that additional survey data indicates that settlement has stabilized and any future long-term secondary settlement will be within acceptable limits. After reviewing the attached survey settlement data, it is recommended that additional monitoring is no longer required and that construction need not be delayed for the subject lots. The survey data indicates that both the magnitude and rate of settlement have decreased and are within acceptable limits. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net CENTEN HOMES October 23, 2000 TRs 23067-4 & 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Attachments: l able 1 - Jurvey Mttlement uata References Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Centex Homes Attention: Mr. Gary Keller Stephen M. Senior Asso GE 692 REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Map Nos. 230674, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989 , 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Rough -Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 Through 23076-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated March 10, 1999. 1999b, Settlement of Clay Layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 9, 1999. , 1999d, Removal of Clay Layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, Califomia, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. 11 1999d, Settlement of Silty Clay layer, Tract 23067-6, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County California, J N. 141-99, dated October 5, 1999. , 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots I through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. , 2000b, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside Comity, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 17, 2000. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE Survey Settlement Data DATE 01/11/00 01/18/00 01125/00 02/01/00 021000 02115/00 '02/29100 03/07/00 03714/00 03121/00 " 03/28100 .04104/00 04111[00 04125!00. 05103/00 ' 05109100 - &%afion Elevation Ele\'a0.31 Elcvatiom Flevation Elevation Flcvation Elevation Elevatioii F,levatign F,lenation 6th-ation Elevation Elcvaljgn ElevBtign'" Flevatimt SW -1 1145 652 1145 651 1145.651 1145 647 1145 648 1145 648 1145 641 notshot 1145 645 notshot notshot 1145 622 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -2 1145 877 1145 873 1145.873 1145 868 1145 867 1145.868 1145 858 notshot 1145 861 notshot notshot 1145 836 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -3 1148 942 1148 936 1148 930 1148.931 1148 933 1148 931 1148 922 notshot 1148.926 notshot notshot 1148.900 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -4 1144 880 1144 875 1144 874 1144 868 1144 867 1 144 867 1144 856 notshot 1144 859 notshot notshot 1144 835 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -5 1134 292 1134 291 1134.290 1134 285 1134 286 1134 289 1134 278 notshot 1134 272 notshot notshot 1134 257 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -6 1155 991 1155 986 1155 985 1155 974 1155 980 1195 972 1155 961 notshot 1155 961 notshot notshot 1155 940 notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -7 1195 076 1195 051 1195,030 1195.021 1195 027 1195 009 1195 009 1195 013 1195.009 1194 968 1194 947 1194 960 SW -8 1204 396 DATE 05/17100 05123100-- 05130/00 -06106/00 06113100.: 06/27/00 07/11100 07/25/00 08108/00' 08/2/00 09119/00- Elevation F-levatinn Elevation Elevation Flevation Elevation F-Icvation . haevatton Elevation Elevafion Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation Elevation " Elevation SW -1 notshot notshot notshot 1145 626 notshot not shot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -2 notshot notshot notshot 1145.842 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -3 not shot not shot not shot 1148 904 not shot not shot not shot 1101 shot not shot not shot not shot SW -4 notshot notshot notshot 1144.835 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot S\V-5 notshot notshot notshot 1134.259 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -6 notshot notshot notshot 1155 933 notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot notshot SW -7 1 194 986 1194.987 1194,990 1 194 984 1195 010 1194 992 1194 993 1194,986 1194.985 1194 990 1 195 007 SW -8 1204 417 1204 415 1204 416 1204.402 1204 415 1204-537 1204.534 1204 521 1204 515 1204 520 1204 528 t PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 2000 J.N. 141-99 PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO BRADLEY B. HAY 2900 Adams Street Swte A-15 Riverside, Caldorma 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www.h.nsaker.com HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES R V I N E, I N C N LAND EMPIRE REGION Date: September 7, 2000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector W.O. #0919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Abbey Road, Lydia Court, Leona Court, Love Court Tract No. 23067-4 Lot(s) 1 through 25, inclusive; and 46 through 94, inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region PI R. Hriddleston, Jr. R E 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 —�2e---tJe5- clv;SEP 12 2000 � a SOF CF����' COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BUILDING AND SAFETY PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO BRADLEY B HAY 2900 Adams Street Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 F% www. hunsaker.com HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. I NLAND EMPIRE REGION Date: August 2, 2000 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety AUG 15 2000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector MURRIETA W.O. #919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address 33926 Channel Street Tract No. 23067-5 Lot(s) 57 As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES I Inland Empire Region 4 zlzz. PI R. Huddleston, Jr. CE 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 r(`F No. 58010 ^j , PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E. I N C. N LAN D EMPIRE REGION Date: August 2, 2000 IRVINE RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT LASVEGAS Department of Building and Safety RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety AUG 15 2000 MURRIETA. W.O. #919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Abbey Road, Lydia Court, Leona Court, Love Court Tract No. 23067-4 Lot(s) 1 through 25, inclusive; 46 through 59, inclusive; 61; 62; 69; 71; 72; 76 through 82, inclusive; 84; and 86 As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region OL. c/(Jv BRADLEY B. HAY G � a No. 58010 =^ aul R. Huddleston, Jr. EV•,✓�- 2900 Adams Street RCE 58020 srq c)vtt- Suite A-15 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 OF CAUF� Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX wv✓va. hunsakereom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Permit No BGR990024 DATA SHEET Page: 2 07/21/00 08:26 Data: Comments Continued... ------------------------------------- RDELPINO 05/09/00 Lots 1 -8,14,16 -cracks observed at pads surface. Soil eng. RDELPINO 05/09/00 shall comment and recommend remedial measures prior to RG RDELPINO 05/09/00 approval(no re-insp. req'd) ... Subdrain certification for RDELPINO 05/09/00 affected lots 52,54-65 & so on ... please -include in the RDELPINO 05/09/00 engineer certification extension of interceptor drain from RDELPINO 05/09/00 lot 44 to 46. DDS. RDELPINO 05/16/00 5/15/00. Geotech & Office plans (appr 1/3/00) to MH; site RDELPINO 05/16/00 visit by DDS to review cracks on pads. RDELPINO 06/06/00 6/2/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-4, Lots 1-25,50-69 Approved. DDS. RDELPINO 06/08/00 6/8/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-4, Lots 70-80,83,86-94 Approved; RDELPINO 06/08/00 Subdrain cert. req'd for Lots 81,87-89 per DDS. RDELPINO 07/03/00 6/13/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-5, Lots 1-8,14,16. See corr RDELPINO 07/03/00 dated 5/8/00.DDS. RDELPINO 07/03/00 7/3/00. Compaction Report (dated 6/15/00) for TR 23067-5, RDELPINO 07/03/00 Lots 1-66 recd; to MH. MHAKAKIA 07/10/00 RECEIVED & REVIEWED GRADING REPORT, NOT APPROVED, WROTE MHAKAKIA 07/10/00 CORRECTIONS & FAXED TO PETRA & MR. FLEMING ON 7/7/00. RDELPINO 07/11/00 7/11/00. Soil Eng. response (dated 7/6/00) to 6/13 & 5/8 RDELPINO 07/11/00 field corr notice re TR 23067-5,lots 1-8,14,16 rec'd;to MH. RDELPINO 07/11/00 7/11/00. RCE RG cert. for TR 23067-5, lots 1-56 ree d. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 RECEIVED RESPONSE TO GRADING REPORT CORRECTION & RESPONSE MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 FOR SURFACE GROUND CRACKS (FOUND DURING GRADING MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 INSPECTIONS) FROM PETRA GEOTECHNICAL. REPORTS ARE ADEQUATE MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 IN RESPONDING TO SURFACE CRACKING). REPORTS DATED 6/15/00 & MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 7/17/00 BY PETRA ARE ACCEPTED & THE FOLLOWINGS ARE CLEARED: MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23067-5 ......... LOTS 1-51......__._.CLEARED. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23067-5 ......... LOTS 64-66 ........ CLEARED'. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23076-5 ......... LOTS 52-63 ........ HOLD. NO BUILDING MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 PERMITS. (THESE LOTS ARE BEING MONITORED FOR SETTLEMENT, MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 NEED APPROVAL FROM PETRA FOR CONSTRUCTION RELEASE. Permit No BGR990024 DATA SHEET Page: 2 07/26/00 14:41 ---------------------- Data: Comments Continued... ------------------------------------- RDELPINO 05/09/00 Lots 1 -8,14,16 -cracks observed at pads surface. Soil eng. RDELPINO 05/09/00 shall comment and recommend remedial measures prior to RG RDELPINO 05/09/00 approval(no re-insp. req'd) ... Subdrain certification for RDELPINO 05/09/00 affected lots 52,54-65 & so on... please include in the RDELPINO 05/09/00 engineer certification extension of interceptor drain from RDELPINO 05/09/00 lot 44 to 46. DDS. RDELPINO 05/16/00 5/15/00. Geotech & Office plans (appr 1/3/00) to MH; site RDELPINO 05/16/00 visit by DDS to review cracks on pads. RDELPINO 06/06/00 6/2/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-4, Lots 1-25,50-69 Approved. DDS. RDELPINO 06/08/00 6/8/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-4, Lots 70-80,83,86-94 Approved; RDELPINO 06/08/00 Subdrain cert. req'd for Lots 81,87-89 per DDS. RDELPINO 07/03/00 6/13/00. RG INSP. TR 23067-5, Lots 1-8,14,16. See corr RDELPINO 07/03/00 dated 5/8/00.DDS. RDELPINO 07/03/00 7/3/00. Compaction Report (dated 6/15/00) for TR 23067-5, RDELPINO 07/03/00 Lots 1-66 rec'd; to MH. MHAKAKIA 07/10/00 RECEIVED & REVIEWED GRADING REPORT, NOT APPROVED, WROTE MHAKAKIA 07/10/00 CORRECTIONS & FAXED TO PETRA & MR. FLEMING ON 7/7/00. RDELPINO 07/11/00 7/11/00. Soil Eng. response (dated 7/6/00) to 6/13 & 5/8 RDELPINO 07/11/00 field corr notice re TR 23067-5,lots 1-8,14,16 rec'd;to MH. RDELPINO 07/11/00 7/11/00. RCE RG cert. for TR 23067-5, lots 1-56 recd. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 RECEIVED RESPONSE TO GRADING REPORT CORRECTION & RESPONSE MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 FOR SURFACE GROUND CRACKS (FOUND DURING GRADING MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 INSPECTIONS) FROM PETRA GEOTECHNICAL. REPORTS ARE ADEQUATE MHAKAKIA '07/21/00 IN RESPONDING TO SURFACE CRACKING). REPORTS DATED 6/15/00 & MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 7/17/00 BY PETRA ARE ACCEPTED & THE FOLLOWINGS ARE CLEARED: MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23067-5 ......... LOTS 1-51 ........ CLEARED. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23067-5 ......... LOTS 64-66 ........ CLEARED. MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 TRACT 23076-5 ......... LOTS 52-63 ........ HOLD. NO BUILDING MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 PERMITS. (THESE LOTS ARE BEING MONITORED FOR SETTLEMENT, MHAKAKIA 07/21/00 NEED APPROVAL FROM PETRA FOR CONSTRUCTION RELEASE. RDELPINO 07/21/00 7/21/00. Compaction Report (dated 7/17/00) for TR 23067-4, RDELPINO 07/21/00 lots 1-25,46-94 ree d; to MH for review. MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 RECEIVED GRADING REPORT FOR 23067-4,LOTS 1-25, 46-94,BY MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 PETRA DATED 7/17/00. RESULTS ARE THE FOLLOWINGS: MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 TRACT 23067-4 ......... LOTS 1-16 .... CLEARED. MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 TRACT 23067-4 ......... LOTS 46-94 .... CLEARED. MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 TRACT 23067-4 ......... LOTS 17&18 .... HOLD NO BUILDING MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 PERMIT(THESE LOTS ARE BEING MONITORED FOR SETTLEMENT, NEED MHAKAKIA 07/26/00 APPROVAL FROM PETRA FOR CONSTRUCTION RELEASE. TO THE APPLICANT: The following list of corrections need your attention and follow-up. Please revise / make changes / provide additional data on the report and resubmit these for recheck including a correction response. Indicate on the corrected report where the corrections are made and clearly distinguish all revisions using clouds, revision triangles, footnotes etc. so a recheck can be accomplished in a timely manner. BUILDING AND SAFETY, GRADING DIVISION SOILS REPORT CHECK CORRECTIONS Date: July 7, 2000 Site: Tract 23067-5 BGR: 990024 BY: Mack Hakakian We have received the following report titled: PHONE: (909)955-2823 " GEOTECHNCIAL REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING, LOTS 1 THROUGH 66, TRACT 23067-5, REDHAWK DEVELOPMENT, TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA", prepared by Petra Geotechnical, Inc., date June 15, 2000, Job Number 141-99. In review of the above referenced report the following items need your follow up and response: Recommendation Note: The exhibits provided in the grading report have been clustered with relatively large size numbers (density test numbers) that have made the exhibits eligible. Please use care in selecting lettering size that reduces clustering and swarming data presented. Reminder Note: Please be advised that lots 52-63 are currently being monitored for settlement (per grading report, page 7). No building permits will be issued on these lots until such time that the geotechnical consultant provides written certification that all settlements have occurred, completed and the lots are released for construction. I- The keyways location, depths and dimensions for fill slopes are not being shown on the exhibit Plates. Please show keyways. 2- Sub -drains were being proposed (in the approved preliminary geotechnical investigation report, Plate 6) in the canyons around lots 32, 33 & 43, 44. The grading report does not show such subdrains being installed in these vicinities. Please provide explanation as to the reasoning for subdrains not being installed. — Tiea o� 7-3 3- In regards to the subdrains, please identify and label starting points, discharging points and connecting points (for continuing drains across this phase and connecting to other drains of other phases). 4- Item 5 of the conditions for approving grading report (by County Geologist, Mr. Steve A. Kupferman, dated 6/8/99, a copy attached for your reference and record) requires that the geotechnical consultant to confirm internal friction angle and cohesion values for fill slopes during grading and document such in the grading report. Please provide explanation with supporting data regarding this condition. 5- Lots 1-8, 14 & 16 were observed to exhibit some surface cracks during rough grading inspection on 5/8/00. A correction notice was written and required the geotechnical consultant of record to provide explanations regarding this findings. Please address such surface cracks. 6- Depths and elevations of removals have not been documented on the exhibit Plate 2 & 4 for lots 19 through 48. Please provide some elevations indicating depths of removals. Please provide response to the above for review and approval. 6GfZ 9(J00a4 CSF) SAWPETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES RECEIVED July 6, 2000 County of Riverside J.N. 141-99 Building & Safety CENTEX HOMES JUL 11 2000 22280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, Califomia 91720 MURRIETA Attention: Mr. Mike Aller Subject: Geotechnical Report of Final Grading, Lots 1 through 8,14 and 16, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Reference: Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. Pursuant to your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) has observed and evaluated the finish grade for Lots 1 through 8, 14 and 16 of Tract 23067-5 located in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. As indicated on the correction notices from the County of Riverside Department of Building and Safety dated May 8 and June 13, 2000, cracks were observed prior to grading of the subject lots. The correction notice dated June 13, 2000, is attached for your convenience. During finish grading, the lots were moisture -conditioned, compacted to the minimum relative compaction and then cut to final grade. Earthwork and grading operations were performed for the subject lots in accordance with the recommendations presented in the above -referenced report and the grading code of the County of Riverside. The compacted earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the planned construction. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in the above - referenced rough -grading report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@lbm.net CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-5 Lots 1 - 8/Temecula Area July 6, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Attachment: County of Riverside/Building & Safety Correction Notice Distribution: (2) Addressee (4) Centex Homes - Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller It PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LASVEGAS RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO BRADLEY B HAY 2900 Adams Street Swte A-15 Riverside, Caldorma 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www. hunsaker com HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E. I N C. I N LAN D EMPIRE REGION Date: July 6, 2000 RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety JUL 11 2000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector MURRIETA W.O. #919-23067 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Nighthawk Pass, Channel Street Short Court, Katie Court Tract No. 23067-5 Lot(s) 1 through 56, inclusive; and 58 through 66, inclusive As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOC inland Empire Region P I R. Huddleston, Jr. CE 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 ri e-' wJ'r No.58020 a Department of Building and Safety COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE c,ORRECTION NOTICE-Nssa&j Permit No. Sap, 99 p029 R0064 jWp5 TjCf,3 IM'=I- -�'3CY67-t5- Ci DO NOT REMOVE FROM JOBMTE 284.205 (rev. 1183) DISTRIBUTION: WHITE -Job, CANARY -Inspector, PINK -Office 7i2 02 906 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. TRANSPORTATIONAND ■ LAND MANAGEMENTAGENCY BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT ��°``, T. H. Ingram Director November 24, 1999 R E C E I V E D County of Riverside HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Building & Safety ATTENTION: PAUL R. HUDDLESTON JR, P.E. DEC 2 9 1999 2900 ADAMS STREET, SUITE A-15 RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 MURRIVA RE: BGR990024 TRACT 23067-3 - Dear Paul: The Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading lots 18-45, Tract 23067-3, October28,1999, shows that an internal backdrain was installed in the buttress fill in the slope for lots 32 and 37 and subdrains were installed in the primary drainage course through the center of tract 23067-3. An as -built grading plan prepared by the civil engineer showing original ground surface el14 evations, as -graded ground surface elevations, lot drainage patterns, and the locations and elevations of surface drainage facilities and of the outlets of subsurface drains shall be submitted for review. Should you have any question, I can be reached at (909) 600-6119. Sincerely, 4.1,-ij 11}- 8 e .s Abdul S. Behnawa, , P.E. Civil Engineer MURRIETA Regional Office 039493 Los Alam�sARd�90t �rlogt�lROORiverside CA 925639 Tel: (909)6001-61190 P �C 9 6 U x+4 ) PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LAS VEGAS RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO BRADLEY B. HAY 2900 Adams Street Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX www. hunsakeccom HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. I N LAND EMPIRE REGION Date: November 4, 1999 RIVERSIDE COUNTY - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector RECEI ED County of Ry erside BulldinC& Safety NOV 2 2 1999 MURRIETA W.O. #919-23067-3 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024 Address Longfellow Avenue Tract No. 23067-3 Lot(s) 1 through 61, inclusive; As Engineer for the project, I hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved giadir-g pian which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices ;graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners foL proper building location and inclination of all slopes, construction of earthen, berms and positive building pad drainage. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVIi IE, INC. Inland Empire Region FES �JDDlfgl C, a No. SBO, aul R. Hudd!eston, Jr. EV (YTl/4OlT//�— RCE 58020 Exp. Data: 06/30/02 srq,� crvtii _ COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY DATE: 11-30-99 TO: Abdul Behnawa, Associate Civil Engineer Building & Safety, Murrieta District FROM: Mack Hakakian, Assistant Engineer Building and Safety RE: Compaction Report for Tract 23067-3, Lots 18-45 Report By: Petra Geotechnical, J.N:141-99, dated 10/28/99 Log # BGR 990024 The above referenced report was reviewed and found to be in conformance with Riverside County Grading Ordinance. Respectfully Yours Mack Hakakian wp\myfi les\src990024 NOV-24-1999 WED 12:51 PM PETRA TEMECULA FAX NO. 9096996193 P. 02 CI,WrB:C IiOMisS October' 28, 1999 'I'R 23067-3, RedhawklTemecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 3 Gro urult uter Localized area,., of seepage at or near the bedrocklalhtviunl contact were noted during *rading. Additional ,cepage was encountered on the initial cut slope and in the burtress backcut for the "Ortll-facillg slope above Lotti 32 through 36. 1_;lnitin;; No fault vera encountered burin.17 grading operations on the site. STtMNIARY Of- YA[tTHWORK OBSERVATIONS ANI) DE,N-9—FI TIP:STINC Site (IearinJ,� :111r1 (inrbbinm Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. (_r mId Prem ion All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils were retllOVed to underlying bedrock. The rel"Ovals varied from approximately 5 to 35t feet hclow ori;inal grades. Prior to placing fill, the exposed boltom Surfaces were scari13ct1 to depths Of 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve at or slightly above optifralnl moisture conditions, then =01111Iaeted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Tac -of fill -slope keys were placed at the base of all fill slopes. Fill keys were ,:xeavaretl a minimum of 2 feet into competent bedrock matct'ials wi111 a minimum Slope of 2 percent to the lieel of the key. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING GOVERNMENT RELATIONS IRVINE LASVEGAS RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO BRADLEY B HAY 2900 Adams Street Suite A-15 Riverside, California 92504 (909) 352-7200 PH (909) 352-8269 FX v .hunsakercom HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES I R V I N E, I N C. I N LAN D EMPIRE REGION Date: September 10, 1999 _ RECEIVED County of Riverside Building & Safety SFP 2 In 1999 MURRIETA RIVERSIDE COUNT`f - GRADING DEPARTMENT Department of Building and Safety 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: District Grading Inspector W.C. #919-23067-3 Subj: Civil Engineer's Certification of Rough Grade Reference: Grading Permit No. BGR990024. Address Longfellow Avenue Tract No. 23067-3 Lot(s) 1 through 17, inclusive: and 46 through 61, inclusive As Engineer for the project, ! hereby certify the rough grading for the referenced project in accordance with my responsibilities under the Riverside County Grading and Excavation Code. Rough Grading has been completed substantially in conformance with the approved grading plan which includes: line and grade for all engineered drainage devices (graded and ready for paving or construction), staking of property corners for proper building location and inclination. of all slopes, construction of earthen berms and positive building pad drainage. Rough grading is for Lots 1. through 17, inclusive, and Lots 46 through 61, inclusive. Please be advised that the rough grading of these lots will not adversely affect the remaining lots located within the tract. HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. Inland Empire Region Jau;'4dles/1zon, Jr. RCE 58020 Exp. Date: 06/30/02 TRACT NOS. 23067-3, 23067-4, 23067-5 & 23067-6 )I Centex Homes HYDROLOGY STUDY W.O. t706-23067-3 Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. 1285 Columbia Avenue Suite A -I Riverside, Ca. 92507 (909) 369-7200 (909) 369-3110 fax FRCF E S S NDD(oSp� F1i1 / \ 1 nl� —'' NO 5'"8020 SIA v I EXP 6/30 /02 I��^, Paul R. ddleston Jr. R.C.E. 58020 Exp. 6/30/02 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station 3.000 ' **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of natural channel elevation = 1266.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1235.000(Ft.) Nkl' ngth of natural channel = 520.000(Ft.) E, mated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 32.215 FS) Natu a1 valley channel type used L.A. ORunty flood control district formula for channel elocity: Veloci y(ft/s) = (7 + 8(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^ .5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 8.34(Ft/s) Correction o map slope used on extremely rugged hannels with drops and wa erfalls (Plate D-6.2) _ Normal hannel slope = 0.0596 Corrected/adju ted channel slope = 0.0596 Travel time = 1.04 min. TC = 13.2 min. Adding area flow channel UNDEVELOPED (poor co er) subarea Runoff Coefficient = .853 Decimal fraction soil roup A = 0 00 Decimal fraction soil g cup B = .000 Decimal fraction soil gr up C 0.000 Decimal fraction soil gro p D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2. 89(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 24 32(C S) for 9.700(Ac.) Total runoff = 43. 80(CFS) Total area = 16.900(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Poi /Station .000 to Point/Station 10.000 ' **** PIPEFLOW T VEL TIME (Program stimated size) **** Upstream poin /station elevation = 11,31 .000(Ft.) Downstream int/station elevation = 104.000(Ft.) , Pipe en = 670.00(Ft.) Manning' N = 0.013 No. of pi es = 1 Required pipe flow = 43.980 (CFS) Nearest omputed pine diameter = 18. \,,n ' Calcul ed individual pipe flow = 43. Norma(flow depth in pipe = 13.97(In.) Flowp width inside pipe = 15.01(In.) Cri ical depth could not be calculated. ' Pi e flow velocity = 29.90(Ft/s) avel time through pipe = 0.37 min. ime of concentration (TC) = 13.58 min , +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 10.000 t 10.000 ' **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS "" The following data inside Main Stream is listed: ' In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 16.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 43.980(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.58 min. ' Rainfall intensity = 2.944(In/Hr) +++++++++++++++++++i-+++F+F+++!-Fii-Fi-+IF+I�i i++II++F+F++.+1+,-4-,-F+I�- .h� Process from Point/Station 2.000 `o Point/Station 3.C-0 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FL0W '1DDITION " *` Top of natural channel elevation = 12d5.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1235.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 520.0001?' -.1 Estimated mean flow rate at, midpoint of :hannel == 32.21S(CFS) Natural valley channel tai?:e used L.A. County flood control. dJ.strict !01-1!1n for ci:anl:e7. v:aiocir.y: Velocity(ft/s) - (7 + P,(,('engl.ish t:ni':"-352)(c1ope^G.5 Velocity using mean channe: Correction to map slur: c.se,a cc-: IIJ drops and waterfa)Is fP!- -.. -6.,.. .. Normal channa! :•1:,;e - ..,.,:,: Corrected/adjusted chaijn.,! Travel time = 1.04 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.853 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction suil group 8 = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AAC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.989(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 24.732(CFS) for 9.700(Ac.) Total runoff = 43.980(CFS) Tota). area = 16.900(Ac ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.F+++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 3.000 to Point/Station 10.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated sJ—,r) " .. Upstream point/station elevation = 1235.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1104.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 670.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 43.980(CE'S) Nearest computed pipe diameter. = 18.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow - -'3,980(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 13.97(Ln.) Flow top width inside pipe = 15.01(11..) Critical depth could not be cal.c;ulated. Pipe flow velocity = 29.90(F't/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.37 min. Time of concentrat.ien ('1'C) - 13.S }+++++++++FF+++++++FF+++i+Fi++F}F F FFF 1 I+I-I+I+11-41+ 1- I F I IFI I I F F F f l+1111 Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 10.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ***' The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 16.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 43.980(CF'S) Time of concentration = 13.58 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.944(In/11r) 1 Program,is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 ++T+++++++++.......... L ............................................... Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 6.000 INITIAL AREA EVALUATION *"*' Initial area flow distance = 850.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1256.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1208.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 48.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.05647 s(percent)= 5.65 ' TO = k(0.480)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 12.666 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.058(In/Hr) for a 100.74 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.809 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 ' Pervious area fraction = 0.800; Impervious fraction = 0.200 Initial subarea runoff = 11.129(CFS) Total initial stream area = 4.500(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.800 ++++T+'F++T+++++i-+} T ............................................... 11 ' Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 6.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 4.500(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 11.129(CFS) Time of concentration = 12.67 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.058(In/Hr) +++++++++l+l+'F+T... T} 1....T.... ....+T++++............i..... }}}1.+T• 1 Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 6.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 850.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1234.900(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1206.500(Ft. Difference in elevation = 28.400(Ft.) Slope = 0.03341 s(percent)= 3.34 TO = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.430 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.236(In/Hr) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.846 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 6.294(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.300(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 3 4++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 6.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS "*' Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 2.300(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 6.294(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.43 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.236(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC No. (CFS) (min) 1 11.129 12.67 2 6.294 11.43 Largest stream flow has longer Qp = 11.129 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 6.294 * 0.945 = Qp = 17.077 Rainfall Intensity (In/Hr) 3.058 3.236 time of concentration 5.948 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 11.129 6.294 Area of streams before confluence: 4.500 2.300 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 17.077(CFS) Time of concentration = 12.666 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 6.800(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++t++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++_++ Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 10.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS "** The following data inside In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 6 Runoff from this stream = Time of concentration = Rainfall intensity = Summary of stream data: Main Stream is listed: .800(Ac.) 17.077(CFS) 12.67 min. 3.058(In/Hr) Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 43.980 13.58 2.944 2 17.077 12.67 3.058 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 43.980 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 17.077 * 0.963 = 16.437 Qp = 60.417 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 43.980 17.077 Area of streams before confluence: 16.900 6.800 5 ' 5 ' Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 60.417(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.577 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 23.700(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++T+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++11.+���� ' Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 30.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** ' Upstream point/station elevation = 1204.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1197.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 210.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 60.417(CFS) ' Nearest computed pipe diameter 30.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 60.417(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 20.44(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 27.96(In.) ' Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 16.98(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.21 min. ' Time of concentration (TC) = 13.78 min. +=++++++++++++++++++++++++-+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=++++++-+=+ t Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 30.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS ***" ' The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 23.700(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 60.417(CFS) ' Time of concentration = 13.78 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.919(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 29.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 990.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1245.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1198.800(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 46.700(Ft.) Slope = 0.04717 s(percent)= 4.72 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.339 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.250(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.846 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 7.148(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ to 6 Process from Point/Station 29.0011 to Point/Station 29.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS "*** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number Stream flow area = 2.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 7.148(CFF') Time of concentration = 11.34 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.250(In/Hr) Process from Point/Station 12.000 to Point/Station 29.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 550.O00(Ft.) _ Top (of initial area) elevation = 1206.800(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1198.800(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 8.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.01455 s(percent)= 1.45 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.341 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.250(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.846 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 6.597(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.400(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 29.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 2.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 6.597(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.34 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.250(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 7.148 11.34 3.250 2 6.597 11.34 3.250 Largest stream flow has longer or shorter time of concentration Qp = 7.148 + sum of Qa Tb/Ta 6.597 * 1.000 = 6.596 QP = 13.744 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 7.148 6.597 Area of streams before confluence: 2.600 2.400 Results of confluence: �d ^ /C G( I Total flow rate = 13.744(CFS) t Time of concentration = 11.339 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 5.000(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 25.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** ' Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 5.000(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 13.744(CFS) ' Time of concentration = 11.34 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.250(In/Hr) Process from Point/Station 21.000 to Point/Station 22.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ***- Initial area flow distance = 860.000(Ft.) Too (of initial area) elevation = 1393.000(Ft.) ' Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1303.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 90.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.10465 s(percent)= 10.47 TC = k(0.530)*((length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 ' Initial area time of concentration = 12.420 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.091(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea ' Runoff Coefficient = 0.854 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(A1MC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 21.660(CFS) ' Total initial stream area = 8.200(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 '++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-+ Process from Point/Station 22.000 to Point/Station 23.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION *�** Top of natural channel elevation = 1303.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1248.000(Ft.) ' Length of natural channel = 660.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 44.377(CFS) Natural mountain channel type used ' L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity = 5.48(q^.33)(slope^.492) Velocity using mean channel flow = 5.64(Ft/s) ' Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0833 ' Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0833 Travel time = 1.95 min. TC = 14.37 min. ' Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea 7 N 8 Runoff Coefficient = 0.851 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Imp,.:rv-pus fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.853(In/Hi:) S.:r a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 41.755(CFS) for 17.200(Ac.) Total runoff = 63.415(CFS) T'otai area = 25.400(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-++ Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 24.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOP? ADDITION **** Top of natural channel elevation = 1248.000(Ft.) End `of natural channel elevation = 121U.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 660.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 73.402(CFS) Natural mountain channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity = 5.48(q^.33)(slope^.492) Velocity using mean channel flow = 5.55(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0576 Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0576 Travel time = 1.98 min. TC = 16.35 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.847 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.658(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 18.017(CFS) for 8.000(Ac.) Total runoff = 81.432(CFS) Total area = 33.400(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.Ff+++++++.++++ Process from Point/Station 24.000 to Point/Station 29.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) " " Upstream point/station elevation = 1210.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1198.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 620.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 81.432(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 36.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 81.432(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 26.16(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 32.09(In.) Critical Depth = 33.38(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 14.81(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.70 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.05 min. 0 E ++T++++++-++T+++++++T.+++++++++++++Y+++TT++++++'I'++++++++++++++•l+++T 1+ Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 29.000 * " * CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 33.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 81.432(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.05 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.597(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 13.744 11.34 3.250 2 81.432 17.05 2.597 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration ' Qn = 81.432 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 13.744 * 0.799 = 10.983 ' Qo = 92.415 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: ' 13.744 81.432 Area of streams before confluence: 5.000 33.400 ' Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 92.415(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.049 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 38.400(Ac.) ' Process from Point/Station 29.000 to Point/Station 30.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1198.000(Ft.) ' Downstream point/station elevation = 1197.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 92.415(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 36.00(In.) ' Calculated individual pipe flow = 92.415(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 28.88(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 28.69(In.) ' Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 15.21(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.05 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.10 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 30.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is lis ' In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 38.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 92.415(CFS) ' Time of concentration = 17.10 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.593(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: to [If Stream Flow rate TC No. (CFS) (min) 1 60.417 13.78 2 92.415 17.10 Largest stream flow has longer time of Qp = 92.415 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 60.417 * 0.888 = 53.654 QP = 146.069 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 60.417 92.415 Area of streams before confluence: 1 23.700 38.400 Rainfall Intensity (In/Hr) 2.919 2.593 concentration Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 146.069(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.104 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 62.100(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++Y++++++++++++'+++++++++++++++{'�++++++.T+.-.. Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1197.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation - 11,93.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 110.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 146.069(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 39.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 146.069(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 29.72(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 33.22(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 21.56(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.09 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.19 min. Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 62.100(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 146.069(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.19 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.585(In/Hr) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++t++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 31.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 660.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1220.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1.194.500(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 25.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.03864 s(percent)= 3.86 It TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 10.034 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.476(In/Hr) for a 100.0 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.849 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group E = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious Initial subarea runoff = 4.722(CFS) Total initial stream area 1.600(Ac Pervious area fraction = 0.500 year storm fraction = 0.500 Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number Stream flow area = 1.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream 4.722(CFS) Time of concentration 10.03 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.416(In/Hr) Process from Point/Station 32.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 700.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1206.800(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1194.000(Ft. Difference in elevation = 12.800(Ft.) Slope = 0.01829 s(percent)= 1.83 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.931 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.160(In/Hr) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.845 Decimal fraction soil group P. = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group 8 = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 ' Initial subarea runoff = 5.605(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.100(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 40.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 3 Stream flow area = 2.100(Ac.) Runoff from this stream 5.605(CFS) Time of concentration 11.93 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.160(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity lA DEJ No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 146.069 17.19 2.585 2 4.722 10.03 3.476 3 5.605 11.93 3.160 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 146.069 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 4.722 * 0.744 = 3.512 Qb Ia/Ib 5.605 * 0.818 = 4.585 Qp = 154.166 Total of 3 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 146.069 4.722 5.605 Area of streams before confluence: 62.100 1.600 2.100 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 154.166(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.189 min. Effective stream area after confluence 65.800(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++�++++++++++++++++++++++++t+++--� Process from Point/Station 40.000 to Point/Station 70.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1193.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1150.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 410.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 154.166(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 33.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 154.166(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 24.47(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 28.90(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 32.63(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.21 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.40 min. Process from Point/Station 70.000 to Point/Station 70.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 65.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 154.166(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.40 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.568(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r++++++ Process from Point/Station 41.000 to Point/Station 42.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 610.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1204.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1190.900(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 13.600(Ft.) 15 )3 Slope = 0.02230 s(percent)= 2.23 ' TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 10.853 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.329(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm ' SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.847 Decimal fraction soil group F. = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 ' P4rvious area fraction. = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 3.948(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.400(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++1+++++++++++rt+++++++f=+++r+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r+++=---+- Process from Point/Station 42.000 to Point/Station 45.000 t**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Too of street segment elevation = 1190.900(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1183.500(Ft.) ' Length of street segment = 580.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft.) Distance from crown to cressfall grade break = 20.000(Ft.) ' Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.083 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 Street flow is on [1] side(s) of the street ' Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) ' Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown = 0.0150 ' Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 6.486(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.408(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.090(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 14.043(Ft.) ' Flow velocity = 3.09(Ft/s) Travel time = 3.13 min. TC = 13.98 min. Adding area flow to street SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) t Runoff Coefficient = 0.840 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 ' Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Rainfall intensity = 2.897(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 4.380(CFS) for 1.800(Ac.) Total runoff = 8.328(CFS) Total area = 3.200(Ac.) ' Street flow at end of street = 8.328(CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 8.328(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.437(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.282(Ft/s) ' Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 15.527(Ft.) Process from Point/Station 45.000 to Point/Station 45.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** l* 14 Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number Stream flow area = 3.200(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 8.328(C'0 Time of concentration = 13.98 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.897(In/Hr.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r+r==r Process from Point/Station 43.000 to Point/Station 44.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **'`* Initial area flow distance = 540.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1202.700(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1190.900(Ft. Difference in elevation = 11.800(Ft.) Slope = 0.02185 s(percent)= 2.19 TC = k(0.300)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 7.983 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.942(In/Hr) for a 100 COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.891 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Initial subarea runoff = 2.458(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.700(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<++ Process from Point/Station 44.000 to Point/Station 45.000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of street segment elevation = 1190.900(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1183.500(Ft.) Length of street segment = 600.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft.) Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 20. Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 Street flow is on (1) side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown. = 0.0150 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = Depth of flow = 0.359(Ft.), Average velocity = 2 Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 11.639(Ft.) Flow velocity = 2.73(Ft/s) Travel time = 3.67 min. TC = 11.65 min. Adding area flow to street APARTMENT subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.878 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 000(Ft 4.039(CFS) 726(Ft/s) I Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.200; Impervious fraction = 0.800 Rainfall intensity = 3.202(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 2.530(CFS) for 0.900(Ac.) Total runoff = 4.989(CFS) Total area = 1.600(Ac.) Street flow at end of street = 4.989(CFS) Half street flow at endvof street = 4.989(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.381(Ft.), Average velocity = 2.866(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 12.705(Ft.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 45.000 to Point/Station 45.000 ***" CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 1.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 4.989(CFS) Time of concentration. = 11.65 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.202(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 8.328 13.98 2.897 2 4.989 11.65 3.202 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 8.328 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 4.989 * 0.905 = 4.513 Qp = 12.841 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 8.328 4.989 Area of streams before confluence: 3.200 1.600 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 12.841(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.981 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 4.800(Ac.) +++++'}++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=+ Process from Point/Station 45.000 to Point/Station 50.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1183.500(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1175.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 12.841(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 12.841(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.70(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 10.72(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 21.09(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.04 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 14.02 min. W 16 m +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++t+++++,.+++++++++++++++++++++++ +,+ Process from Point/Station 50.000 to Point/Station. 50.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 4.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 12.841(CF3) Time of concentration = 14.02 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.892(In/Hr) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.+++f+++++++F+++++++i+++++++F+++++4 Process from Point/Station 46.000 to Point/Station 47.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION *'** Initial area flow distance = 940.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1386.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1286.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 100.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.10638 s(percent)= 10.64 TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(e1evation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 12.828 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.037(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.854 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 17.111(CFS) Total initial stream area = 6.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<+++++-T Process from Point/Station 47.000 to Point/Station 48.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of natural channel elevation = 1286.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1264.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 400.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 35.000(CFS) Natural valley channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity(ft/s) _ (7 + 8(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^0.5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 8.20(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0550 Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0550 Travel time = 0.81 min. TC = 13.64 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.852 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 t1 17 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.936(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 34.528(CFS) for 13.800(Ac.) Total runoff = 51.639(CFS) Total area = 20.400(.Ac.) Process from Point/Station 48.000 to Point/Station 49.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of natural channel elevation = 1264.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1224.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 1050.000(Ft.) -- Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 89.356(CFS) Natural valley channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity(ft/s) _ (7 + 8(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^0.5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 8.96(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0381 Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0381 Travel time = 1.95 min. TO = 15.59 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.849 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index{ for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.728(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 68.988(CFS) for 29.800(Ac.) Total runoff = 120.627(CFS) Total area = 50.200(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++TT++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-�- Process from Point/Station 49.000 to Point/Station 49.100 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** ' Top of natural channel elevation = 1224.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1185.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 1020.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 148.261(CFS) Natural valley channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity(ft/s) _ (7 + 6(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^0.5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 10.46(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0382 Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0382 Travel time = 1.63 min. TO = 17.22 min. is Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.846 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 2.583(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 50.259(CFS) for 23.000(Ac.) Total runoff = 170.887(CFS) Tota] area = 73.200(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 49.100 to Point/Station 50.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1185.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1175.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 170.887(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 30.00(In.) Calculated individual pine flow = 170.887(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 22.92(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 25.47(ln.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 42.45(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.02 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.24 min. +++++++++++++++}+++++T+++++++T+++++T++++++++++++++++++++++++++++1++-+- Process from Point/Station 50.000 to Point/Station 50.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **" Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 73.200(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 170.887(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.24 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.581(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 12.841 14.02 2 170.887 17.24 Largest stream flow has longer Qp = 170.887 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 12.841 * 0.893 = Qp = 162.348 2.692 2.581 time of concentration 11.461 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 12.841 170.887 Area of streams before confluence: 4.800 73.200 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 182.348(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.240 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 78.000(Ac.) E +++++++++++++++++++++++T+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-++ Process from Point/Station 50.000 to Point/Station 60.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1175.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1157.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 620.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 182.348(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 42.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 182.348(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 37.69(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 25.50(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 20.05(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.52 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.76 min. +++++++++L+++++++++Y+TTT+111++,++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.+++++.++ Process from Point/Station 60.000 to Point/Station 60.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 78.000(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 182.348(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.76 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.540(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 51.000 to Point/Station. 60.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 140.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1175.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1159.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 16.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.11786 s(percent)= 11.79 ' TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 5.868 min. Rainfall intensity = 4.670(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea ' Runoff Coefficient = 0.869 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 0.812(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.200(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 Process from Point/Station 60.000 to Point/Station 60.000 CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 ' Stream flow area = 0.200(A.c.) Runoff from this stream = 0.812(CFS) Time of concentration = 5.87 min. 20 Rainfall intensity = Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate No. (CFS) 4.610(In/9r) TC Rainfall Intensity (min) (In/Hr) 1 le2.348 17.76 2.540 2 0.812 5.87 4.670 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 162.348 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 0.812 0.544 = 0.442 Qp = 182.790 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: M 182.348 0.812 Area of streams before confluence: 78.000 0.200 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 182.790(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.155 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 78.200(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 60.000 to Point/Station 70.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1157.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1150.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 70.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow - 182.790(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 36.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 182.790(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 25.88(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 32.37(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 33.59(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.03 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.79 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r<++ Process from Point/Station 70.000 to Point/Station 70.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 78.200(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 182.790(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.79 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.537(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 154.166 17.40 2.568 2 182.790 17.79 2.537 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 182.790 + sum of d'� 2) Qb Ia/Ib ' 154.166 * 0.988 = 152.290 Qp = 335.080 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: ' Flow rates before confluence point: 154.166 182.790 Area of streams before confluence: 65.800 78.200 Results of confluence: ' Total flow rate = 335.080(CFS) Time of concentration. = 17.790 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 144.00-0(Ac.) 1+++++++++++++++++++++-+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.----++ Process from Point/Station 70.000 to Point/Station 80.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) ++++ Upstream point/station elevation = 1150.000(Ft.) ' Downstream point/station elevation = 1135.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 230.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 335.080(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 48.00(In.) t Calculated individual pipe flow = 335.080(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 36.05(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 41.51(In.) ' Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 33.09(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.12 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 17.91 min. 1 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 80.000 to Point/Station 80.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 ' Stream flow area = 144.000(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 335.080(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.91 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.528(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 71.000 to Point/Station 80.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 920.000(Ft.) ' Top (of initial area) elevation = 1180.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1135.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 45.000(Ft.) ' Slope = 0.04891 s(percent)= 4.89 TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 14.856 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.801(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm ' UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.850 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 01 22 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; ImFerv.i,:us fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 5.715(CE'S) Total initial stream area = 2.400(A -c.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 Process from Point/Station 80.000 to Point/Station 80.200 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR'STREAMS ** " Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number Stream flow area = 2.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 5.715(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.86 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.801(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 335.060 17.91 2.528 2 5.715 14.66 2.801 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 335.080 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 5.715 0.902 = 5.357 Qp = 340.237 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 335.080 5.715 Area of streams before confluence: 144.000 2.400 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 340.237(CFS) Time of concentration = 17.906 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 146.400(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 81.000 to Point/Station 82.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 250.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1158.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1125.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 33.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.13400 s(percent)= 13.40 TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 7.212 min. Rainfall intensity = 4.169(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.866 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 1.083(CF5) Total initial stream area = 0.300(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 �it°1;2 3 a!o 7- 3, 1 End of computations, total study area = 146.70 (Ac.) ' The following figures may be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area. Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.936 ' Area averaged RI index number = 87.1 23 ' Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software,(c) 1989 - 1997 Version 5.0 ' --- -- Rational Hydrology Study Date: 12/18/98 File:23067B.out ------------------------------- T.T.23067-3,9,5,6 100 -YR HYDROLOGY STUDY ' AREA 'B' FILE: 23067B.RRV --.---------------------------------------------------------------------- ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** 1 English (in -lb) Units used in input data file t ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hunsaker & Associates, Inc., Irvine, CA - SIN 647 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rational Method Hydrology Program based on t Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition = 2 Standard intensity -duration curves data (Plate D-9.1) For the [ Murrieta,Tmc,Rnch Callorco ] area used. 10 year storm 10 minute intensity = 2.360(In/Hr) 10 year storm 60 minute intensity = 0.880(In/Hr) 100 year storm 10 minute intensity = 3.980(In/Hr) 100 year storm 60 minute intensity = 1.300(In/Hr) Storm event year = 100.0 Calculated rainfall intensity data: 1 hour intensity = 1.300(In/Hr) Slope of intensity duration. curve = 0.5500 +++++++++++++I+++T+++T+++T+++++++L++++++++T+++++++++++++++++++++++IT++ Process from Point/Station 101.000 to Point/Station 102.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 660.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1367.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1300.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 67.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.10152 s(percent)= 10.15 TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.241 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.266(In/Hr) for a 100.0 UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.857 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction Initial subarea runoff = 18.467(CFS) Total initial stream area = 6.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 year storm 25 2 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++111_1 Process from Point/Station 102.000 to Point/Station 103.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **'* Top of natural channel elevation = 1300.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1228.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 840.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 39.732(CFS) Natural valley channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity(ft/s) _ (7 + 8(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^0.5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 10.61(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0857 Corrected/adjusted channel slope - 0.0657 Travel time = 1.32 min. TC = 12.56 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.854 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 3.072(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 39.891(CFS) for 15.200(Ac.) Total runoff = 58.358(CFS) Total area = 21.800(A.c.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i"++++++ F++++++ Process from Point/Station 103.000 to Point/Station 104.000 **** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of natural channel elevation = 1228.000(Ft.) End of natural channel elevation = 1217.000(Ft.) Length of natural channel = 130.000(Ft.) Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel = 65.854(CFS) Natural valley channel type used L.A. County flood control district formula for channel velocity: Velocity(ft/s) _ (7 + 8(q(English Units)^.352)(slope^0.5) Velocity using mean channel flow = 12.20(Ft/s) Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2) Normal channel slope = 0.0846 Corrected/adjusted channel slope = 0.0846 Travel time = 0.18 min. TC = 12.74 min. Adding area flow to channel UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.854 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 3 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 ' Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Rainfall intensity = 3.049(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 14.518(CFS) for 5.600(A.c.) ' Total runoff = 72.936(CFS) Total area = 27.400(A.c .....++++++.. ... i. }+++++++++i'i'i'+++++.... .... } } } } i. } } } .I..I'... } } }++++++-= } Process from Point/Station 104.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** t Upstream point/station elevation = 1217.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1214.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 530.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 72.936(CFS) ' Nearest computed pipe diameter 42.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 72.936(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 33.09(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 34.34(In.) ' Critical Depth = 32.09(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 8.96(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.99 min. ' Time of concentration (TC) = 13.72 min. '{'+'F'F'F........ .....+++++1---.......................................... ' Process from Point/Station 110.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** ' The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 27.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 72.936(CFS) ' Time of concentration = 13.72 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.926(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 Process from Point/Station 105.000 to Point/Station 110.000 ' **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 820.000(Ft.) ' Too (of initial area) elevation = 1247.400(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1218.400(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 29.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.03537 s(percent)= 3.54 ' TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.140 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.282(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) ' Runoff Coefficient = 0.846 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 ' Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 ' Initial subarea runoff = 8.611(CFS) Total initial stream area = 3.100(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 a Process from Point/Station 110.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: Stream flow area = 3 Runoff from this stream = Time of concentration = Rainfall intensity = 2 in normal ;,t ream number 100(Ac.) 8.611(CFS) 11.14 min. 3.282(In/Hr) +++++++++++++i'+++++++++++++++'f'+++++++++++'i"f'++++++++++++++++++++'}'+++T'+ Process from Point/Station 106.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 430.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1233.200(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1218.400(Ft. Difference in elevation = 14.800(Ft.) Slope = 0.03442 s(percent)= 3.44 TC = k(0.390)*[(length"3)/(elevation change)] -0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 8.652 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.772(In/Fir) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.853 Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 4.180(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.300(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++T++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++1'TT+"+ Process from Point/Station 110.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: Stream flow area = 1 Runoff from this stream = Time of concentration = Rainfall intensity = Summary of stream data: 2 in normal stream number 300(Ac.) 4.180(CFS) 8.65 min. .772(In/Hr) Stream Flow rate TC No. (CFS) (min) 1 8.611 11.14 2 4.180 8.65 Largest stream flow has longer time Qp = 8.611 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 4.180 * 0.870 = 3. Qp = 12.248 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 8:611 4.180 Area of streams before confluence: 3.100 1.300 Results of confluence: Rainfall Intensity (In/Hr) 3.262 3.772 of concentration 638 0 5 Total flow rate = 12.248(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.140 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 4.400(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++.++'F++++++.T+++TT+++++++.+T+++F++}+++++++T++++++++.T+ Process from Point/Station 110.000 to Point/Station 110.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MP.IN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 4.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 12.248(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.14 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.282(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TO No. (CFS) (min) 1 72.936 13.72 2 12.248 11.14 Largest stream flow has longer Qp = 72.9366 + sur.: of Qb Ia/Ib 12.248 * 0.892 = Qo = 83.857 Rainfall Intensity (In/Hr) 2.926 3.282 time of concentration 10.921 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 72.936 12.248 Area of streams before confluence: 27.400 4.400 ' Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 83.857(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.723 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 31.800(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 110.000 to Point/Station 120.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) *�** Upstream point/station elevation = 1214.000(Ft.) ' Downstream point/station elevation = 1213.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 70.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 83.857(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 36.00(In.) 1 Calculated individual pipe flow = 83.857(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 31.59(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 23.60(In.) ' Critical Depth = 33.64(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 12.76(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.09 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 13.81 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 120.000 to Point/Station 120.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** P Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 31.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 83.857(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.61 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.916(In/Hr) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++_-+ Process from Point/Station 111.000 to Point/Station. 112.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 430.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1348.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation =- 1240.000(Ft. Difference in elevation = 108.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.25233 s(percent)= 25.23 TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 7.894 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.967(In/Hr) for a 100 UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.664 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 5.484(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-++++++F++++=+ Process from Point/Station 112.000 to Point/Station 120.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1240.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1213.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 220.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 5.484(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 9.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 5.484(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 6.97(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 7.52(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 14.92(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.25 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 8.14 min. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 120.000 to Point/Station 120.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 1.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 5.484(CFS) Time of concentration = 8.14 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.900(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 013 7 1 83.857 13.81 2.916 2 5.484 8.14 3.900 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 83.857 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 5.484 * 0.748 = 4.100 Qp = 87.957 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 83.857 5.484 Area of streams before confluence: 31.800 1.600 Results of confluence: ` Total flow rate = 87.957(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.815 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 33.400(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++i.+++++++++r++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.+ Process from Point/Station. 120.000 to Point/Station 130.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1213.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1191.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 520.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 87.957(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 33.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 87.957(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 25.64(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 27.47(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 17.77(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.49 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 14.30 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 130.000 to Point/Station 130.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number ' Stream flow area = 33.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 87.957(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.30 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.861(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 121.000 to Point/Station 122.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 670.000(Ft.) ' Top (of initial area) elevation = 1348.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1210.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 138.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.20672 s(percent)= 20.67 ' TC = k(0.530)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 9.809 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.520(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.860/ Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 a � � % _ �i 411-�10 / 31 8 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 89.00 Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Imperviou3 fraction = 0.000 Initial subarea runoff = 8.473(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.900(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 122.000 to Point/Station 130.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1210.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1197.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 160.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 8.473(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 8.473(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 8.38(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 11.02(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 14.47(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.18 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 9.99 min. +++++++++++++++++++++++-F+++++.+++++++F++F+++++f+f+++F l-++++r+ii++-!, -r Process from Point/Station 130.000 to Point/Station 130.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS *"+ Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal scream number 2 Stream flow area = 2.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 8.473(CFS) Time of concentration = 9.99 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.484(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC No. (CFS) (min) 1 87.957 14.30 2 8.473 9.99 Largest stream flow has longer Qp = 87.957 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 8.473 * 0.821 = Qp = 94.914 Rainfall Intensity (In/Hr) 2.861 3.484 time of concentration 6.957 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 87.957 8.473 Area of streams before confluence: 33.400 2.800 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 94.914(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.303 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 36.200(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 130.000 to Point/Station 160.000 5} W **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1191.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1195.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 120.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 94.914(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 39.00(In.) Calculated individual oioe flow = 94.914(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 28.69(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 34.40(In.) Critical Depth = 35.74(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 14.52(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.14 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 14.44 min. Process from Point/Station 131.000 to Point/Station 132.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 790.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1358.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1243.000(Ft. Difference in elevation = 115.000(Ft.) Slope = 0.14557 s(percent)= 14.56 TC = k(0.530)*[(lenath^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.239 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.266(In/Hr) for a 100 UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea Runoff Coefficient = 0.857 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil arouo B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil arcuo D = 1.000 RI index for soil(A.MC 2) = 89.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 1.000; Impervious fraction = 0.000 ' Initial subarea runoff = 10.074(CFS) Total initial stream area = 3.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 1.000 Process from Point/Station 132.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1243.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1195.500(Ft.) Pipe length = 600.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 10.074(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 15.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 10.074(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 7.98(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 14.97(In.) Critical Depth = 14.23(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 15.19(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.66 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 11.90 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 150.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: E In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 3.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 10.074(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.90 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.165(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i+++�+++++++++++++t+++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 141.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION *'** Initial area flow distance = 920.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1228.800(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1196.400(Ft. Difference in elevation = 32.400(Ft.) Slope = 0.03522 s(percent)= 3.52 TCA= k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.674 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.199(In/Hr) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.845 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil grouc D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 12.975(CFS) Total initial stream area = 4.600(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 150.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 4.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 12.975(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.67 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.199(In/Hr) Process from Point/Station 142.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 740.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1218.900(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1196.400(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 22.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.03041 s(percent)= 3.04 TC = k(0.390)*[(1ength^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.020 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.302(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.847 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 14 Initial subarea runoff = 7.827(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.800(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 +++++++++++++++++++++++TT+T+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++T+ Process from Point/Station 150.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 2.800(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 7.827(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.02 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.302(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 12.975 11.67 3.199 2 7.827 11.02 3.302 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 12.975 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 7.827 * 0.9669 = 7.582 Qp = 20.557 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 12.975 7.827 Area of streams before confluence: 4.800 2.800 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 20.557(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.674 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 7.600(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 150.000 to Point/Station 150.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is liste ' In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 7.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 20.557(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.67 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.199(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 10.074 11.90 3.165 2 20.557 11.67 3.199 Largest stream flow has longer or shorter time Qp = 20.557 + sum of Qa Tb/Ta 10.074 * 0.981 = 9.886 Qp = 30.443 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: of concentration )2 Flow rates before confluence point: 10.074 20.557 Area of streams before confluence: 3.600 7.600 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 30.443(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.674 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 11.200(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 150.000 to Point/Station 160.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1195.500(Ft.) DgVnstream point/station elevation = 1195.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 30.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 30.443(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 24.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 30.443(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 20.72(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 16.49(In.) Critical Depth = 22.43(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 10.55(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.05 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 11.72 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-+ Process from Point/Station 160.000 to Point/Station 160.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 11.200(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 30.443(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.72 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.191(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 160.000 to Point/Station 160.000 **** USER DEFINED FLOW INFORMATION AT A POINT **** Rainfall intensity = 2.846(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.839 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 User specified values are as follows: TC = 14.44 min. Rain intensity = 2.85(In/Hr) Total area = 36.20(Ac.) Total runoff = 94.91(CFS) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.++++++T+++ Process from Point/Station 160.000 to Point/Station 160.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **`* Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 2 I rn 13 Stream flow area = 36.200(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 94.914(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.44 min. Rainfall intensity - 2.846(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 30.443 11.72 3.191 2 94.914 14.44 2.846 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration QP = 94.914 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 30.443 0.692 = 27.143 QP = 122.057 Total of 2 streams to conflu=ence: Flow rates before confluence point: 30.443 94.914 Area of streams before confluence: 11.200 36.200 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 122.057(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.440 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 47.400(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++.+++++T.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++T1+�+++�T Process from Point/Station 160.000 to Point/Station, 170.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** - Upstream point/station elevation = 1195.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1193.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 130.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 122.057(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 42.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 122.057(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 33.66(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 33.52(In.) Critical Depth = 39.15(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 14.78(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.15 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 14.59 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 170.000 to Point/Station 170.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 47.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 122.057(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.59 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.830(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 161.000 to Point/Station 170.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 850.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1218.900(Ft.) 14 Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1194.500(Ft Difference in elevation = 24.400(Ft.) Slope = 0.02871 s(percent)= 2.87 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.783 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.182(In/Hr) for a 100. SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.845 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm e Prvious area fraction = 0 500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 6.184(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.300(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ., +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++_..-+ Process from Point/Station 170.000 to Point/Station 170.00 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream Stream flow area = 2.300(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 6.184(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.78 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.182(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=+ Process from Point/Station 162.000 to Point/Station 170.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 750.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1220.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1194.400(Ft. Difference in elevation = 26.100(Ft.) Slope = 0.03480 s(percent)= 3.48 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 10.784 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.341(In/Hr) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.847 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 5.378(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.900(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 170.000 to Point/Station 170.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 3 Stream flow area = 1.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 5.378(CFS) Time of concentration = 10.78 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.341(In/Hr) 15 Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TO Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 122.057 14.59 2.830 2 6.184 11.78 3.182 3 5.378 10.78 3.341 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration QP = 122.057 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 6.184 * 0.889 = 5.499 Qb Ia/Ib 5.378 * 0.847 = 4.555 Qp = 132.111 Total of 3 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 122.057 6.184 5.378 Area of streams before confluence: 47.400 2.300 1.900 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 132.111(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.587 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 51.600(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++=++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 170.000 to Point/Station 180.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1193.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1192.000(Ft.) Pipe lencth = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Recuired pipe flow = 132.111(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 42.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 132.111(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 32.02(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 35.76(In.) Critical Depth = 39.83(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 16.80(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.05 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 14.64 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++T+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++•+ Process from Point/Station 180.000 to Point/Station 180.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is li ' In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 51.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 132.111(CFS) t Time of concentration = 14.64 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.824(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No ted: 2 Process from Point/Station 171.000 to Point/Station 173.000 t **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** -7;e Ago& ;7 -3' � �J —,5� —� Initial area flow distance = 590.000(Ft.) 34._ IE Top (of initial area) elevation = 1202.700(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1194.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 8.100(Ft.) Slope = 0.01475 s(percent)= 1.47 TC = k(0.300)*((length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 8.948 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.702(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year. storm COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.690 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Initial subarea runoff = 2.967(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.900(Ac.) Perrvious area fraction = 0.100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++h++++++++?--+i Process from Point/Station 173.000 to Point/Station 173.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area = 0.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 2.967(CFS) Time of concentration = 8.95 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.702(In/Hr) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++rr+ Process from Point/Station 172.000 to Point/Station 173.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 660.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1204.500(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1194.000(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 10.500(Ft.) Slope = 0.01591 s(percent)= 1.59 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 11.983 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.153(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.844 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 5.059(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.900(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 +++++++++++i-++++t.....+++++++++++++++++t++i.'F++++++.F.f...f+++++++++T'F'+++++ Process from Point/Station 173.000 to Point/Station 173.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **"* Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 1.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 5.059(CFS) Time of concentration = 11.98 min. #10 17 Rainfall intensity = 3.153(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 2.967 6.95 3.702 2 5.059 11.98 3.153 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 5.059 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 2.967 0.852 = 2.527 Qp = 7.585 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence _point: 2.967 5.059 Area of streams before con.fiuence: 0.900 1.900 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 7.585(CFS) Time of concentration. = 11.983 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 2.800(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 173.000 to Point/Station 180.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1193.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1192.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 7.585(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 15.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 7.585(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 10.43(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 13.81(In.) Critical Depth = 13.13(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 8.32(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.10 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 12.08 min. +'F'I'....++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++....+++'F-F+++T++++++++ Process from Point/Station 180.000 to Point/Station 180.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 2 Runoff from this stream = Time of concentration = Rainfall intensity = Summary of stream data: Stream is listed: .800(Ac.) 7.585(CPS) 12.08 min. 3.139(In/Hr) Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 132.111 14.64 2.824 2 7.585 12.08 3.139 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 132.111 + sum of 4 18 Qb Ia/Ib 7.585 0.900 = 6.826 Qp = 138.937 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 132.111 7.585 Area of streams before confluence: 51.600 2.800 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 138.937(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.636 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 54.400(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-F++++++++++++++++-+++++++++.+++ 4 Process from Point/Station 180.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** e g In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 54.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 138.937(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.64 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.824(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 Thfollowin data inside Main Stream is listed: Process from Point/Station 174.000 to Point/Station 175.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 500.00O(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1247.300(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1230.000(Ft. Difference in elevation = 17.300(Ft.) Slope = 0.03460 s(percent)= 3.46 TC = k(0.390)*((length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 9.180 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.651(In/Hr) for a 100 SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.851 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 0 year storm Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 4.661(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.500(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r+++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 175.000 to Point/Station. 179.000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of street segment elevation = 1230.000(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1194.100(Ft.) Length of street segment = 1100.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6.0(In. Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft u�t- n Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 20.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break N A M = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 Street flow is on (1) side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slone from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown = 0.0150 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 6.525(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.359(Ft.), Average velocity = 4.428(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 11.606(Ft.) Flow velocity = 4.43(Ft/s) Travel time = 4.14 min. TO = 13.32 min. Adding area flow to street COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.888 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil croup D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Rainfall intensity = 2.975(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year stcrm Subarea runoff = 3.171(CFS) for 1.200(Ac.) Total runoff = 7.832(CFS) Total area = 2.700(Ac.) ' Street flow at end of street = 7.832(CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 7.832(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.377(Ft.), Average velocity = 4.623(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 12.520(Ft.) ' Process from Point/Station 179.000 to Point/Station 179.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 ' Stream flow area = 2.700(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 7.832(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.32 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.975(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 176.000 to Point/Station 177.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** t Initial area flow distance = 530.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1230.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1208.200(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 21.800(Ft.) ' Slope = 0.04113 s(percent)= 4.11 TC = k(0.300)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 6.982 min. ' Rainfall intensity = 4.244(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.891 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 Y -S 20 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Initial subarea runoff = 1.891(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.500(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.100 ................................... �++t ....++++++++++++++++++...... Process from Point/Station 177.000 to Point/Station 179.000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION "'- Top of street segment elevation = 1208.200(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1194.100(Ft.) Length of street segment = 520.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter f.iowline 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft.j Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 20.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 Street flow is on [1] side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown = 0.0150 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 2.648(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.269(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.360(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 8.133(Ft.) Flow velocity = 3.36(Ft/s) Travel time = 2.58 min. TC = 9.56 min. Adding area flow to street COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.890 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Rainfall intensity = 3.570(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 1.271(CFS) for 0.400(Ac.) Total runoff = 3.162(CFS) Total area = 0.900(Ac. Street flow at end of street = 3.162(CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 3.162(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.303(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.493(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 8.824(Ft.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++t++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 179.000 to Point/Station 179.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 0.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 3.162(CFS) Time of concentration = 9.56 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.570(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Eainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) ,qq 2) 1 7.832 13.32 2.975 2 3.162 9.56 3.570 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration QP = 7.832 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 3.162 0.833 = 2.635 QP = 10.467 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 7.832 3.162 Area of streams before confluence: 2.700 0.900 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 10.467(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.320 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 3.600(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++••TT+++++++++Y+++++++++++++++++++++++++++.+A+++-- Process from Point/Station 179.000 to Point/Station 180.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) *'** Upstream point/staticn elevation = 1193.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1192.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 10.467(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 18.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 10.467(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 11.14(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 17.48(In.) Critical Depth = 14.92(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 9.11(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.09 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 13.41 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 180.000 to Point/Station 180.000 *** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** ' The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 3.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 10.467(CFS) ' Time of concentration = 13.41 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.964(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: ' Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 138.937 14.64 2.824 2 10.467 13.41 2.964 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration QP = 138.937 + sum of (lb Ia/Ib 10.467 * 0.953 = 9.976 QP = 148.913 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: .jY.5 22 Flow rates before confluence point: 138.937 10.467 Area of streams before confluence: 54.400 3.600 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 148.913(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.636 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 58.000(Ac.) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++;-F+++++++++++++++- +++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 180.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1192.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1.161.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 550.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 148.913(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 36.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 148.913(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 27.75(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 30.26(Ir..) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 25.47(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.36 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 15.00 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 190.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal -stream number 1 Stream flow area = 58.000(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 148.913(CFS) Time of concentration = 15.00 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.787(In/Hr) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++T+ Process from Point/Station 181.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 560.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1194.100(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1161.800(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 32.300(Ft.) Slope = 0.05768 s(percent)= 5.77 TC = k(0.300)*[(length^3)/(elevation change))^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 6.671 min. Rainfall intensity = 4.351(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.892 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Initial subarea runoff = 1.552(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.400(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.100 M 23 +++'f'f'.+++....+++++i'+T.+'f+T+TY'}....+'f'+.++'F+++++++++++++++++++++111.F+�1T Process from Point/Station 190.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 0.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 1.552(CFS) Time of concentration = 6.67 min. Rainfall intensity = 4.351(In/Hr) Process from Point/Station 182.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow dis-ante = 550.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1194.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1162.100(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 31.900(Ft.) Slope = 0.05800 s(percent)= 5.80 TC = k(0.300)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 6.616 min. _ Rainfall intensity = 4.371(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm COMMERCIAL subarea type Runoff Coefficient = 0.892 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 _ Pervious area fraction = 0.100; Impervious fraction = 0.900 Initial subarea runoff = 1.949(CFS) Total initial stream area = 0.500(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.100 ++++++++++++++++++<+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++r+ Process from Point/Station 190.000 to Point/Station 190.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **"* Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 3 Stream flow area = 0.500(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 1.949(CFS) Time of concentration = 6.62 min. Rainfall intensity = 4.371(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 148.913 15.00 2.787 2 1.552 6.67 4.351 3 1.949 6.62 4.371 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 148.913 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 1.552 * 0.641 = 0.994 Qb Ia/Ib 1.949 * 0.638 = 1.243 QP = 151.149 T� �30�7-3, III 24 Total of 3 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 148.913 1.552 1.949 Area of streams before confluence: 58.000 0.400 0.500 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 151.149(CFS) Time of concentration = 14.996 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 58.900(Ac.) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++r+++++++++++I++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 190.000 to Point/Statior. 200.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1161.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1160.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 151.149(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 42.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 151.149(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 37.50(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 25.98(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 16.67(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.05 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 15.05 min. ++++++++++++++++++++T'T+++++++;++++++++++++++++++++++++I+++++T}1�11��} Process from Point/Station 200.000 to Point/Station 200.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MP.IN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is liste In Main Stream number: 1 Stream flow area = 58.900(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 151.149(CFS) Time of concentration = 15.05 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.782(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No. 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 191.000 to Point/Station 192.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** Initial area flow distance = 650.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1193.300(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1168.500(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 24.800(Ft.) Slope = 0.03815 s(percent)= 3.82 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 9.998 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.483(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.649 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Initial subarea runoff = 7.689(CFS) Total initial stream area = 2.600(Ac.) M 25 Pervious area fraction = 0.500 '...."F++++T+f'+++++++i'i++++11+T++++++++++++++++i'++....++++++++++'Ft Process from Point/Station 192.000 to Point/Station 199.000 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of street segment elevation = 1168.500(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1161.500(Ft.) ' Length of street segment = 490.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft.) ' Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 20.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 -- Street Street flow is on [1) side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) ' Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown = 0.0150 ' Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 13.604(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.495(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.860(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 18.434(Ft.) t Flow velocity = 3.86(Ft/s) Travel time = 2.12 min. TO = 12.11 min. Adding area flow to street ' SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.844 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 ' Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Rainfall intensity = 3.134(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 10.582(CFS) for 4.000(Ac.) Total runoff = 18.272(CFS) Total area = 6.600(Ac. ' Street flow at end of street = 18.272(CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 18.272(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.548(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.952(Ft/s) ' Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb Distance that curb overflow reaches into property = 2.40(Ft.) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 21.070(Ft.) Process from Point/Station 199.000 to Point/Station 199.000 t**** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 1 ' Stream flow area = 6.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 18.272(CFS) Time of concentration = 12.11 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.134(In/Hr) t ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' Process from Point/Station 193.000 to Point/Station 194.000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** EVA 26 P ea fraction = 0 500• Impervious fraction = 0.500 eryo us ar Initial subarea runoff = 5.637(CFS) Total initial stream area = 1.900(Ac.) Pervious area fraction = 0.500 Initial area flow distance = 630.000(Ft.) Top (of initial area) elevation = 1195.000(Ft.) Bottom (of initial area) elevation = 1171.800(Ft.) Difference in elevation = 23.200(Ft.) Slope = 0.03683 s(percent)= 3.68 TC = k(0.390)*[(length^3)/(elevation change)]^0.2 Initial area time of concentration = 9.944 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.494(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.849 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for soil(AMC 2) = 75.00 i ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 194.000 to Point/Station 199.000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** Top of street segment elevation = 1171.800(Ft.) End of street segment elevation = 1161.400(Ft.) Length of street segment = 680.000(Ft.) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6.0(In.) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 22.000(Ft.) Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 20.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) = 0.020 Street flow is on [1] side(s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 11.000(Ft.) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0.020 Gutter width = 2.000(Ft.) Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.) Manning's N in gutter = 0.0150 Manning's N from gutter to grade break = 0.0150 Manning's N from grade break to crown = 0.0150 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 8.752(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.432(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.558(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel: Halfstreet flow width = 15.274(Ft.) Flow velocity = 3.56(Ft/s) Travel time = 3.19 min. TC = 13.13 min. Adding area flow to street SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot) Runoff Coefficient = 0.842 Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000 Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000 RI index for scil(AMC 2) = 75.00 Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction = 0.500 Rainfall intensity = 2.998(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Subarea runoff = 5.301(CFS) for 2.100(Ac.) Total runoff = 10.938(CFS) Total area = 4.000(Ac.) Street flow at end of street = 10.938(CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 10.938(CFS) Depth of flow = 0.460(Ft.), Average velocity = 3.756(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 16.691(Ft.) 60 27 Process from Point/Station 199.000 to Point/Station 199.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS **** Along Main Stream number: 2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area = 4.000(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 10.938(CFS) Time of concentration = 13.13 min. Rainfall intensity = 2.998(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (INEW 1 18.272 12.11 3.134 2 10.938 13.13 2.998 Largest stream flow has longer or shorter time of concentration Qp = 18.272 + sum of Qa Tb/Ta 10.938 * 0.923 = 10.092 Qp = 28.364 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 18.272 10.938 Area of streams before confluence: 6.600 4.000 Results of confluence: Total flow rate = 28.364(CFS) Time of concentration = 12.114 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 10.600(Ac.) +++++++++++++++-F++++-+++++=r+++++++++++++++++r++++rr++++++++++.+T+r=.+ Process from Point/Station 199.000 to Point/Station 200.000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** Upstream point/station elevation = 1161.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation = 1160.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 28.364(CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter=_ 24.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow 28.364(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 17.58(In.) Flow top width inside pipe = 21.25(In.) ' Critical Depth = 22.03(In.) Pipe flow velocity = 11.50(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0.07 min. ' Time of concentration (TC) = 12.19 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 200.000 to Point/Station 200.000 **** CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS **** The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: 2 Stream flow area = 10.600(Ac.) Runoff from this stream = 28.364(CFS) Time of concentration = 12.19 min. Rainfall intensity = 3.124(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: 51 28 Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 151.149 15.05 2.782 2 28.364 12.19 3.124 Largest stream flow has longer time of concentration Qp = 151.149 + sum of Qb Ia/Ib 28.364 * 0.891 = 25.259 Qp = 176.408 Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: _ 151.149 28.364 Area of streams before confluence: 58.900 10.600 Results of confluence Total flow rate = 176.408(CFS) Time of concentration = 15.046 min. Effective stream area afte- confluence = 69.500(Ac.) End of computations, total study area = 105.70 (Ac.) The following figures may be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area. Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) = 0.653 Area averaged RI index number = 79.7 M. ' Hunsaker & Associates, Irvine Designer: Y. GREIS Date: 12/29/98 Catch Basin Summary Table ' I Catch Basin Length Q in Street Q Pick-up Q Carry-over Number (feet) (c.f.s.) (c.f.s.) (c.f.s.) 1A 14 1.0.9 8.0 2.9 TO CB #1 ' 1 14 2.9 2.9 0.0 2A 28 18.3 15.1 3.2 TO CB #2 2 14 3.2 3.2 0.0 ' 3 14 1.9 1.9 0.0 4 14 1.6 1.6 -0.0 5 14 5.1 5.1 0.0 1 6 7 3.0 3.0 0.0 7 21 7.8 7.8 0.0 8 14 3.2 3.2 0.0 ' 9 21 5.4 5.4 0.0 10 21 6.2 6.2 0.0 ' 11 21 20.6 20.6 0.0 12 14 12.2 12.2 0.0 13 21 6.2 6.2 0.0 ' 14 21 4.7 4.1 0.6 TO CB #13 15 14 13.7 13.7 0.0 16A 21 6.2 6.2 0.0 ' 16 21 6.3 6.3 0.0 17A 21 11.1 4.9 4.1 TO CB #16A 17 7 NUISANCE NUISANCE 0.0 ' 18 1 _ 14 12.8 12.8 0.0 1 x+++x**xx**x*xx++rr+++xxxxx+++**++++rr+x++xxxxxxrrx+x+x+++++rrr+++++rrrrrr+r HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE (C) Copyright 1982-96 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 6.1 Release Date: 01/01/96 License ID 1239 Analysis prepared by: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Irvine, Inc. Planning * Engineering * Surveying Three Hughes * Irvine, California 92718 * (714)583-1010 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 13:29 12/29/1998 x+++x+++xx**+*x*+*++xx+++* DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #lA * x »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION<<<< ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 10.90 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .47 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 14.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 24.0 USE 141 >>>>CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 8.0 CARRYOVER 2.9 CFS TO CB #1 el ++++*xxxx+x+++xxx+xxx++x+x DESCRIPTION OF STUDY **+++x+xx+++++++++++++xx+x * TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #1 ' + x xxx+++++++x+xxxx++++++++++++xxx++++++++++++++++xx+++xx+xxx++++++++++++++++ +++++++++xx+xxx++++++++++++xxx++++++xx+++xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx++++++++++x+++xx+ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 2.90 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .33 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 9.27 >>>>CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 9.3 USE 14 >>>>CALCULATED ---------------------------------------------=------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ESTIMATED INPERCEPTION(CFS) = 2.9 72e02c5d&-9-.3, 'y, -.s "L 55 ++xxx+++++x+++xx++++++++x+ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ****************++++++++++ * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #2A + + xx++++xxxxxx+xxxxx+x+xxxx+xx++++++++xx+xxx+x++++++x+x+xxxx+++++x++++++++++ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 18.30 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .47 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 28.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 40.3 - USE 281 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 15.1 CARRYOVER 3.2 CFS TO CB #2 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY rxr+xxxxxr++rrr+rrr+r....r r REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" + CB #2 ' r + r+rrxxxxrxx++rr.rxxxrrx++x++...xrrr+rrrrr++r.rrr.x..+r++rxrrrrrrr.r+.x...x rrr+xxrrxx.rrrrrrrrr+x..r+..r..rr+xrxxxxxx+xxxrxr..++...r+rrxrxrxrxxx+x.xxrx »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION<<<< ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 3.20 (CARRYOVER FROM CB #2A) GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .35 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEE^_) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 9.61 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 9.6 USE 141 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INiERCEPTION(CFS) = 3.2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY x++*+++++#++++#x+++#k4{rkk * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #3 kfik4kk*##4#{i4{{iiiik*i#f iffffif+ii*tifiitit**4#****f4**+##{#{#**k#ik{iff{* »» FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 1.90 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .24 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 8.50 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 8.5 " USE 14 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED IN+—_'ERCEPTION(CFS) = 1.9 x+xxx+xxx+x++xx+++++++++++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ++x+xxxxxx+++x+xxxx+xx++++ + REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" x CB #4 ' + x +xxxxxxxxx+xxxxxxxx++++++++xxx:xxx+xxxxxxxx+xxxxxxx++++++++++++xx+++xxxxxx ++++++++++++++x+xxx+xxxxxx+x+xxx+++++xxxxxxxx+xx++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 1.60 GUTTER FLO'WDEPTH(FEET) _ .23 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 7.48 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 7.5 - USE 141 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED !NTERCEPTION(CFS) = 1.6 69 xxxxxxxxx+x+++++++xxxxx+++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY *x++x+x+xx+x+xx++x+xxxxx+x * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" ' * CB #5 ' + - x xxxxxxxxxxxxx+xx+xxxxxxx++x++++++xxxx++++++x+xxxxxxx++++xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx++x++++++++xxxx++++++x++xxxx+++++xxxxx++xx+x+x++x++x++++x+++++ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ----- ------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 5.10 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .44 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEE^_) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 12.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 12.1 - USE 141 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED IVTERCEPTION(CFS) = 5.1 ++++xxxxxxxxxxxxx+x+++++x+ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ++++++++x++++++xxxxxxx+++x * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE 'A" * CB #6 + + +xx++x+x+xxxxxxxx+++++++x+++++xxxx+x++xx+x++++++++++++++xxx+++xx++++xx+xxx »»SUMP TYPE BASIN INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. BASIN INFLOW(CFS) = 3.00 BASIN OPENING(FEET) _ .54 DEPTH OF WATER(FEET) _ .54 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED SUMP BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 2.44 USE 71 RA DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #7 x + »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 7.80 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .45 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 17.99 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 18.0 - USE 21' »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 7.8 WN ++}xx*+}+++++xx**xxx++++++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ***+++++++x+}x+++++}x+++++ * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #8 + x +x*}x****}+}++**************+*************x++++++*+++++xxxxx+++xxxx+++++++ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« -------=-------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 3.20 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .35 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 9.61 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 9.6 . USE 141 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 3.2 7-�02906 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #9 + + +x++«+=+++x+++«xwwwx++++r++«xxxxxxxxx=+r++=r+=xxxxx+++r+++x+xxxx+++x++r+r+=r »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 5.40 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .37 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 15.30 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 15.3 USE 211 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 5.4 MIA xxxxx++xxxxxxxxxxx+++++x++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY +++x+++++x+++++++x++++xxxx x REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" + x CB #10 xx+xxxxx+xxxxxxxxxxxx++xxxxxxxx+++xx+++++++++++x++++++x+x+++xx+++xxxx+++xx +xxxxx++xxx++x+x+++++++++++++xxxxxxx+xxx+xxxxxxx+xx++++xxx+++++++++++++++xxx »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 6.20 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .38 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 17.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 17.1 - USE 21, »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 6.2 rM xx++xxx+x+xxx++xxx++++xxxx DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ******xxxxxx++++++++xx+xxx * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #11 x x x++xxx++++++xxxxxxxxx+xxxxxxxxxxxxx+++xx+++xxxx+xxxxxx+xxxxxxxxxx+xx+x++++ xxxxxxxx++x+xxxxxxx++++x+xxxxxx++xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx+x+xxxxxxxxxx++++++++ »»SUMP TYPE BASIN INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. BASIN INFLOW(CFS) = 20.60 BASIN OPENING(FEET) _ .54 DEPTH OF WATER(FEET) _ .54 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED SUMP BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 16.74 USE 211 ME #+*+xx***##xxx****x**#4*++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY x44i#++#444xi#**4i*+xx**4# * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "A" * CB #12 4 4 »»SUMP TYPE BASIN INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the B-areau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. BASIN INFLOW(CFS) = 12.20 BASIN OPENING(FEET) _ .54 DEPTH OF WATER(FEET) _ .54 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED SUMP BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 9.91 USE 141 +xxxxx+rr++xxxrxrxr++++r++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY +rx+++xxxxxxxxx+x+r+x+xxxx r REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "B" r + CB #13 r + x ++xxxxxxxrxxxrrxxxxxxxx+rrrrxrrxxxxxxx++rrr++xrxxxrxr+xrrxrrxxxxxxx+rxrrrx xxxx+xrr++rxxxx+xr++rr++rrxxx++r+xrr++xrr+r+rxrx+++xxxxxxxx++++++r+++r++rr+x »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 6.20 (5.6 CFS + 0.6 CARRYOVER FROM CB #14) GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .34 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 19.21 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 19.2 - USE 21, »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 6.2 ++++x++r+++++++r+r++++x+xx DESCRIPTION OF STUDY xrx+++xx+xxx+x+x+++r+r++xx * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "B" * CB #14 x + xxxx+++r+rx+x+xx+x+++x+xxx++xxxxxx+++r+++r++xrxrx++x+x+++x+++++++++++++xxx ++++xxxxx+xxx++++++++++++++++++++++xxxxxxxxrx+++++++r++++++++x+xxxxx++++++++ »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 4.70 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .20 (MAXIMUM THAT CAN BE CARRIED IN GUTTER) BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 21.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 25.5 USE 211 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 4.1 CARRYOVER 0.6 CFS TO CB #13 (THE CARRYOVER WILL GO ACROSS THE STREET BECAUSE OF WARPED STREET SECTION) xxxxxxxxxxxxrx++xx+x++xxx+ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY r+++++++rrxrxxrxxxx+rxxxxx * TRACT 23067 LINE "B" * CB #15 x x +++++x+++++rxxxxxxxxxxxxxx+++xxxxx+x++xx+++rxxxxxxxxrxrx++r++xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx+++x+++++xxxxx+xxx+xxxxx+++rr+xxxxx+++++rrxx+++++xr+++x+xxx+xxxxx+xxx+xx+ »»SUMP TYPE BASIN INPUT INFORMATION«« -----=-------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. BASIN INFLOW(CFS) = 13.70 BASIN OPENING(FEET) _ .54 DEPTH OF WATER(FEET) _ .54 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED SUMP BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 11.13 USE 14 1 x****x*****x*{**+}x*tr++++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY +rr+i{{{#kkk{{++trtrt trrrr * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "B" * CB #16A +#4+i#rrrr#*x++*#rttttrx*****xx*xkriirx+rx*xxx*xxr*txxixtii*+*tr**#rtirrrx »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 6.20 (CARRYOVER FROM CB #17A) GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .33 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 19.83 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 19.8 USE 211 >>>>CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 6.2 ++++++++++++++++++x+++++++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY + REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "B" + + CB #16 + • x »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 6.30 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) _ .34 BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) _ .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 19.52 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 19.5 USE 211 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 6.3 xxxxxxxxxxxx+xx+++++++++++ DESCRIPTION OF STUDY xxxx+++++++++x++xx+++++xxx * REDHAWK TRACT 23067 LINE "B" * CB 417A x x xxxxxx+++++xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx++++++++++++++xxxxxx+++++++xxxxxxx+xxxx++x++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++xx++xxxxx+++++++xxxxxx++++xxx++++++++++++++x »»FLOWBY CATCH BASIN INLET CAPACITY INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the Bureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. STREETFLOW(CFS) = 11.10 GUTTER FLOWDEPTH(FEET) = .20 (MAXIMUM THAT CAN BE CARRIED IN GUTTER) BASIN LOCAL DEPRESSION(FEET) = .33 FLOWBY BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 21.00 »»CALCULATED BASIN WIDTH FOR TOTAL INTERCEPTION = 60.2 USE 211 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED INTERCEPTION(CFS) = 4.9 CARRYOVER 6.2 CFS TO CB #16A (THE CARRYOVER WILL GO ACROSS THE STREET BECAUSE OF WARPED STREET SECTION) �3 ++xx++xxx+xxx++xx+x++xxxxx DESCRIPTION OF STUDY xxxxx++x+xx++++x+xx+x++xxx * TRACT 23067 LINE "B" * CB #18 xxx+xxxxxxx+++++++++xxxx+xx++xxx++xx+xxx+x++xxxxxx++++++++++x+++++++xxxxxx xxxx+xxxx+x+++++++++++++++xx+xxxxxxxxxxxxx+xxx+xxx+xx+x++++++x+++++++xxxx+xx »» SUMP TYPE BASIN INPUT INFORMATION«« ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Curb Inlet Capacities are approximated based on the $ureau of Public Roads nomograph plots for flowby basins and sump basins. BASIN INFLOW(CFS) = 12.80 BASIN OPENING(FEET) _ .54 DEPTH OF WATER(FEET) _ .54 »»CALCULATED ESTIMATED SUMP BASIN WIDTH(FEET) = 10.40 USE 14 1 71 -40 0 ❑" !J t. ROUGH GRADING r•`.^;'.GEOTECHNICALREPORT',OF 1'THROUGH,'25AND 46.THROUGH 94' ' ::",'•,;;,r.;r;' TRACT'23067,Q,,REDHAWKDEVELOPMENT TEMECULA'ABEAyRIVERSIDE'COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r R Et',E IN ED ` 0 O of R(ve.rside Bulldlhg'& Safefii' " =;A 2;1'°20 0 €iMURRIEW CENTEX'HOMES -.. • •t ?7 : 2280;'Wardlow''Circ`le, Suite150 Corona) 6hiornia 91726 ''t ,� 'sj.f �Cn,�'f .. _ elf•.• .. JI /uly'17, 2000'. 7{N,,141-99. ,rli`,: .` ,•fry '1 :���•` 'y Jy J Ty 1 1 J I It PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES July 17, 2000 ' J.N. 141-99 ' CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 ' Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California ' This report presents a summary of the observation and testing services provided by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) during rough -grading operations to develop Lots 1 ' through 25 and 46 through 94 of Tract 23067-4 in the Redhawk development in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Conclusions and recommendations ' pertaining to the suitability of the grading for the proposed residential construction are provided herein, as well as foundation -design recommendations based on the as -graded ' soil and geologic conditions. ' The purpose of grading was to develop 74 near -level lots for construction of single- family residences, as well as adjacent slopes and streets. Grading of Tract 23067-4 ' began in October 1999, and was completed in May 2000. ' REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ' Removal and recompaction of low-density surface soils, processing of the exposed bottom surfaces or placement of compacted fill under the purview of this report have ' been completed under the observation and with selective testing by Petra. Earthwork and grading operations were performed in accordance with the recommendations PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC presented in the grading -plan review report (see References) and the grading code of 27620 Commerce Center Or Ste 103 Temecula, CA 92590 ' Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@Ibm.net ' CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 2 the County of Riverside, California. The completed earthwork has been reviewed and ' is considered adequate for the construction now planned. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. 1 ' ENGINEERING GEOLOGY General ' Geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading were frequently observed tand mapped by Petra's geologic staff. Geologic Units Geologic conditions observed onsite were generally as anticipated and described in the supplemental subsurface investigation and geotechnical review report for the site by Petra (see References). Removal bottoms were geologically mapped by a Petra ' geologist. Prior to grading, the site consisted of well-rounded hills underlain by Pauba Formation sandstone with intervening alluvial -filled valleys and colluvial -mantled ' hillsides. Additionally, there were minor areas of existing artificial -fill materials associated with the onsite roadways. All unsuitable soils were removed to expose ' competent bedrock of the Pauba Formation. ' The underlying Pauba Formation generally consists of sandy silts and sands which are predominantly fine- to coarse-grained, very well -indurated to cemented, laminated and ' moist and dense. Geologic structure/bedding was poorly developed to massive. Silt lenses within the Pauba Formation, where mapped, exposed flat -lying to near - horizontal bedding. 5 1 ' CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 3 Groundwater Localized areas of seepage at or near the alluvium/bedrock contact were noted ' primarily in the canyon areas during grading. However, seepage was also observed in local areas above siltstone lenses exposed near the top of the cut slope above Lots ' 74 through 81. Faultine ' A northeast- and north -south -trending, high -angle fault was mapped during grading ' operations north and east of the site in Tract 23067-5. This fault did not displace Holocene soils and is not considered active. No faulting was mapped in Tract 230674 ' during grading of the site. ' SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING ' Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. ' Ground Preparation All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils, including ' alluvium and colluvium, were removed to underlying bedrock or to groundwater. The removals varied from approximately,5 to 40± feet below original grades. Removal of unsuitable soils along the toes of the north- to northwest -facing fill slopes below Lots 36 through 45 and 49 through 66 were extended beyond the toes of the slopes to a ihorizontal distance that was at least equal to the vertical depth of removal. Prior to placing fill, exposed bottom surfaces in removal areas were scarified to depths of 6 to 1 ' CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 4 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve slightly above optimum moisture conditions ' and then recompacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Toe -of -fill -slope keys were provided at the base of all fill slopes constructed on existing ground surfaces sloping at 5:1 [horizontal:vertical (h:v)] or greater. The fill keys were excavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet into competent bedrock materials with a minimum slope of 2 percent to the heel of the key. Oversize Rock Oversize rock was not encountered during the rough -grading operations for Tract 23067-4. Cut/Fill Transition Lots Cut/fill transitions were eliminated from Lots 10, 11, 25, 46, 49 through 55, 57, 61 ' through 64, 67 through 72, 75 through 79 and 81 through 87 by overexcavating the cut portions and replacing the excavated bedrock materials with compacted fill. ' Overexcavation of the cut portions extended to depths of approximately 3 to 15 feet below finish grades. ' Cut Lots ' Cut lots excavated to grade were mapped by a Petra geologist. Lots 21 and 23 through 25 exposed competent Pauba Formation bedrock and were determined to be adequate to provide uniform support for the proposed residences and improvements. Lots 2, 10 and 46 exposed saturated siltstone at design cut grade and were overexcavated to ' depths of 3 to 5 feet below finish grade and capped with compacted fill to provide uniform foundation support for the proposed residences. ...5 1 CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 5 Fill Placement and Testing ' Fill materials consist of onsite soils. All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered as necessary to achieve ' near -optimum moisture conditions, then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent by rolling with a D8 or D9 bulldozer, 834 rubber -tired ' bulldozer or loaded scrapers. The maximum vertical depth of fill placed within the ' subject lots as a result of grading is approximately 71± feet. Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM ' Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). Occasional field density tests were also performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556 (sandcone). Test ' results are presented on Table I (attached) and test locations are shown on the enclosed irough -grading plans (Plates 1 and 2). Field density tests were taken at vertical intervals of approximately 1 to 2 feet and the ' compacted fills were tested at the time of placement to verify that the specified moisture content and minimum required relative compaction of 90 percent had been ' achieved. At least one in-place density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed and/or for each 2 feet in vertical height of compacted fill. The actual number of tests taken per day varied with the project conditions, such as the number of earthmovers (scrapers) and availability of support equipment. When field density tests produced results less than the required minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The ' substandard area was then reworked, moisture -conditioned, if necessary, recompacted and retested until a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent was achieved. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was the basis for determining which t maximum dry density value, summarized in a following section, was applicable for a given density test. One -point checks were performed to supplement visual ' classification. 1 n CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 6 Fill Slope Construction ' All fill slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v). Maximum fill -slope ' height is approximately 20± feet located on Lot 25. Final surface compaction on the fill slopes was achieved by overfilling and backrolling the slopes during construction ' and then trimming to the compacted inner core or by backrolling the slopes with a sheepsfoot roller. ' Direct shear testing of soil samples of representative fill materials utilized to construct ' fill slopes were periodically performed for internal friction angle and cohesion values to confirm design criteria. Shear -test plots are presented in Appendix A. ' Cut Slopes ' All cut slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter. Maximum cut -slope height is approximately 83± feet located on Lot 79. Due to favorable ' geologic conditions exposed on cut slopes, no buttress fills or stabilization fills were considered necessary. ' Seepage and/or saturated sandy bedrock materials were locally observed above ' siltstone lenses exposed near the top of the cut slope above Lots 74 through 81. Due to this condition, two subdrains were designed and constructed to intercept future ' potential seepage that may originate from the cut slope. These drains daylight on the eastern side of the cut slope in the concrete terrace drain. Subdrains Following clean -outs to competent bedrock, subdrains were installed in the primary drainage courses. The subdrains were designed to mitigate the potential build-up of ' hydrostatic pressures below compacted fills due to infiltration of surfaces waters and migration of offsite -water sources. The approximate location of the subdrains are ' shown on the accompanying maps (Plates l and 2). FA CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 7 Settlement Monuments At the completion of rough -grading, a deep settlement monument (SM -8) was constructed on Lot 17 to monitor post -grading settlement of the compacted fill. This monument was initially surveyed on May 9, 2000, and has been re -surveyed on a regular basis (I- and 2 -week intervals) to the present. Settlement -monitoring data has also been compiled to date from SM -1 through SM -7 located in adjacent tracts. Review of the data indicates that the deep -fill area has settled up to approximately I inch with settlement continuing at a steady rate. Therefore, it is recommended that construction be delayed on lot areas that are underlain with greater than 50 feet of fill until such time additional survey data indicate that the settlement has stabilized and any future long-term secondary settlement will be within acceptable limits. On the basis of this discussion, it is recommended that construction be temporarily delayed on Lots 17 and 18. Lot Summary A summary of the maximum depths of fill placed on each lot is provided in Table II. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil types observed during grading were determined in our laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix A. Expansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of soil existing at or near finish -pad grade within the subject lots. These tests were performed in ot El CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 8 accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analyses Water-soluble sulfate contents were also determined for representative samples of soil existing at or near pad grade of the subject lots in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. These tests resulted in negligible sulfate contents of less than 0.1 percent. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. POST -GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Landscaping and Maintenance of Graded Slopes Cut and fill slopes within Tract 23067-4 under the purview of this report are considered grossly and surficially stable. However, the fill slopes are comprised of granular soils and, unless mitigation measures are taken, the slopes will be subject to a low to moderate degree of surficial erosion, raveling and possible slumping during periods of heavy rainfall. Therefore, all graded slopes should be landscaped with a deep-rooted (4 to 5 feet deep), drought -resistant, woody -plant species. To provide temporary slope protection while the woody materials mature, the slopes should be planted with a herbaceous -plant species that will mature in one season or provided with some other protection, such as jute matting or polymer covering. The temporary protection should be maintained until the woody material -has fully matured. A landscape architect should be consulted to determine the most suitable plant materials and irrigation requirements. To mitigate future surficial erosion and slumping, a permanent slope -maintenance program should be initiated. Proper slope maintenance must include regular care of drainage- and erosion -control provisions, rodent control, prompt repair of leaking irrigation systems and replacement of dying- or dead -plant materials. The irrigation W CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 9 system should be designed and maintained to provide a constant moisture content in the soils. Overwatering, as well as overdrying, of the soils can lead to surficial erosion and slumping. Homeowners should be advised of the potential problems that can develop when drainage on the pads and slopes is altered in any way. Drainage can be altered due to the placement of fill and construction of garden walls, retaining walls, walkways, patios, swimming pools and planters. Pad Drainage Drainage on the lots should be designed to carry surface water away from all graded slopes and structures. Pad drainage should be designed for a minimum gradient of I percent with drainage directed to the adjacent streets. After dwellings are constructed, positive drainage away from the structures and slopes should be provided on the lots by means of earth swales, sloped concrete flatwork and area drains. Utility Trenches All utility -trench backfill within street right-of-ways, utility easements, under sidewalks, driveways and building -floor slabs and within or in proximity to slopes, should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by a Petra representative to verify adequate compaction. Excavations for trenches that exceed 4 feet in depth should be laid-back at a maximum gradient of 1:1 (h:v). For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfills should be placed in lifts no greater than 2 feet in thickness and then mechanically compacted with a hydra -hammer, pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than 8 inches and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. it A0 CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 10 As an alternative for shallow trenches (18 inches or less in depth) where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under building -floor slabs, imported clean sand having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of Petra to verify an adequate degree of compaction and that the trench backfill will not be subject to adverse settlement. To avoid point -loads and subsequent distress to asbestos, clay, cement or plastic pipe, imported sand bedding should be placed at least 1 foot above all pipe in areas where excavated trench materials may contain oversize rock. Sand -bedding materials should thoroughly be jetted prior to placement of backfill. FOUNDATION -DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our observations during grading and field and laboratory testing, the preliminary foundation -design recommendations presented in our geotechnical investigation report (see References) are considered applicable for the subject lots. The recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. Allowable -Bearing Values An allowable -bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of 24 -inch -square pad footings and 12 -inch -wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade in compacted fill materials. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional I foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable -bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third for short -duration wind and seismic forces. to l! CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 11 Settlement Based on the above bearing values and depth of fill, a total settlement of footings is expected to be less than 1 inch and differential settlement less than one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 25 to 50± feet for the fills less than 50 feet thick. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during or shortly following the completion of construction as the loads are applied. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure increasing at the rate of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot, may be used to determine lateral bearing for building footings constructed on level ground. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 times the dead -load forces may also be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Expansive Soil Conditions Laboratory test data indicate the foundation soils underlying the subject lots exhibit VERY LOW to LOW expansion potential, as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Standard 18-2. Minimum design recommendations for footings and residential - floor slabs for each of the above conditions are presented in the following sections based on a lot -by -lot evaluation. However, additional slab thickness, footing size and/or reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations, as determined by the project architect and/or structural engineer. A summary of the expansion test results and associated lots is provided in Appendix A. Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or less) Lots 1 through 10, 15 through 17, 49 through 69 and 73 through 94 have a very low expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. . U CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 12 • Footings - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 184-C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. • Building -Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Presaturation of the subgrade soils below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and /3 CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 13 garage -floor slabs should be pre -watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Lots 11 through 14, 18 through 25, 46 through 48 and 70 through 72 have a low expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. • Footines - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, near the bottoms of the footings. • Buildin-Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. iy CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area July 17, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Page 14 - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage - floor slabs should be prewatered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade soils. Post -Tensioned Slabs Post -tensioned -slab systems may be used for the subject site. The following recommendations are for soils with Very Low and Low expansion potential. The actual design of the post -tensioned -slabs should be performed by the project structural engineer based on a 20 -foot -unsupported length at the corners. However, the onsite soils have been evaluated and the following soil parameters for construction of post - tensioned slab -on -ground in general conformance with design specifications of the 1997 Uniform Building Code are being provided for use in the design of the slab systems. ' VERY LOW AND LOW Thomwaite Index -20 Average Edge Moisture Variation Distance, cm: Center Lift 4.6 feet Edge Lift 2.2 feet Soil Information: Plastic Limit (PL) 20 Plasticity Index (PI) 15 Percent Clay 30 Activity Ratio (A) 0.50 Cation Exchange Activity (CEA) 079 Clay Type 14 Montmorillonite J5 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area July 17, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Page 15 cr = YERY.LOW AND LOW Approximate Depth of Constant Soil Suction 7.0 feet Approximate Soil Suction, pF 3.6 Approximate Moisture Velocity 0.7 inch/month Anticipated Swell. y,,,: Center Lift 1.4 inches Edge Lift 0.4 inches (see below) Soluble Sulfates Laboratory test data indicate soils within the subject lots contain a negligible soluble - sulfate content. As such, concrete in contact with soil may utilize Type I Portland cement. ' Structural Setbacks Footing setbacks of residential structures from property lines and from the tops and ' toes of the engineered fill slopes should conform to the minimum setback requirements of 1997 UBC Figure 18-I-1, Chapter 18. Structural setbacks of retaining walls, ' swimming pools and spas proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes should be analyzed separately. Footing Observations ' All building footing trenches should be observed by a Petra representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent and uniform bearing soils and to depths conforming to 1997 UBC Figure 18-I-1, Chapter 18. The foundation excavations ' should be observed prior to the placement forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or ' moisture -softened soil and/or any construction debris, should be removed prior to placing concrete. ' Excavated soils derived from footing and utility -trench excavations should not be ' placed in slab -on -grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. /(o CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 16 RETAINING -WALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Allowable -Bearing Capacity and Lateral Rest Footings for retaining walls may be designed using the allowable -bearing capacity and lateral -resistance values recommended for building footings; however, when calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings are not covered with concrete flatwork. Active and At -Rest Earth Pressures An active lateral -earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having a density of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should be used for design of cantilevered walls retaining a drained, level backfill. Where the wall backfill slopes upward, at 2:1 (h:v), the above values should be increased to 63 pcf. The above values are for onsite soils which exhibit very low and low expansive potentials and are placed behind the walls a minimum horizontal distance equal to one-half the wall height. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. For design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, an at -rest earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having density of 60 pcf should tentatively be used for walls supporting a level backfill. This value should be increased to 95 pcf for an ascending 2:1 (h:v) backfill. Drainage Perforated pipe -and -gravel subdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Perforated pipe should consist of 4 -inch - minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR -35 with the perforations laid - down. The pipe should be encased in a 1 -foot -wide column of 0.75- to 1.5 -inch, open - graded gravel extending above the wall footing to a minimum height of 1.5 feet above the footing or to a height equal to one-third the wall height, whichever is greater. The Ito CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 17 gravel should be completely wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafr 140N or equivalent. Solid outlet pipes should be connected to the subdrains and routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. Weepholes, if used, should be 3 -inch -minimum diameter and provided at maximum intervals of 6 feet along the walls. Open, vertical masonry joints should be provided at 32 -inch -minimum intervals. One -cubic -foot of gravel should be placed behind the weepholes or open -masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Waterproofing The portions of retaining walls supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Retaining -Wall Backfill All retaining -wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8 -inch -maximum horizontal lifts, water or air-dried as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions and compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Flooding or jetting of backfill materials should be avoided. A Petra representative should verify adequate compaction of all backfill. MASONRY GARDEN WALLS Footings for free-standing masonry -block garden walls should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to mitigate the potential for unsightly cracking, positive separations should also be provided in the garden walls at a maximum horizontal spacing of 20 feet, and at corners. These separations should be provided in the blocks only and not extend through the footing. The footing should CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 18 be placed monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as an effective "grade beam" below the wall. In areas where garden walls may be proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes, the footings should be deepened such that a minimum horizontal clearance of 7 feet is maintained between the outside bottom edges of the footings and the face of the slope. POST- GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Petra should be notified at the appropriate times in order that we may provide the following observation and testing services during the various phases of post -grading construction. ' Building Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and ' competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be ' excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. • Retainine-Wall Construction ' - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. ' - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. ' - Observe and verify proper installation of subdrainage systems prior to placing wall backfill. Observe and test placement of all wall backfill to verify adequate compaction t cg CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 19 • Masonry Garden Walls - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches following removal of any slough and/or saturated soils and re -excavate to proper depth. • Exterior Concrete-Flatwork Construction - Observe and test subgrade soils below all concrete-flatwork areas to verify adequate compaction and moisture content. • Utility -Trench Backfill - Observe and test placement of all utility -trench backfill to verify adequate compaction. • Re -Grading - Observe and test placement of any fill to be placed above or beyond the finish grades shown on the grading plans. It M CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-4 Lots 1-25 & 46-94/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 20 This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Please call if you have any questions pertaining to this report. Respectfully submitted, �ETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. )al Geologist 348 Sftphen M. Senior Ass( GE 692 m Attachments: Table I Field Density Test Results Table 11- Lot Summary References Plates 1 and 2 - Geotechnical Maps (in pocket) Plates 3 and 4 - Density Test Location Maps (in pocket) Appendix A - Laboratory Test Criteria/Laboratory Test Data Distribution: (6) Addressee (4) Centex Homes — Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller L. it o2/ ' .TEST ' FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS ::;TEST„, . ' .':.. TEST EL.EV._ :'MOLSTURE `,;D„ENSLTY: COit2P.S[ DATE ,' ...NO::'.:.:.,,: ''.,. 'LOCATION _ ::' i�) `.:.(:°T)..:....., (pef)i:.,.:. 09/16/99 804 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1203.0 10.5 119.0 91 2 ' 10/15/99 1499 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1205.0 11.0 126.0 94 20 11/04/99 2000 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1215.0 12.0 115.0 89 8 11/04/99 2001 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1216.0 9.5 114.0 88 8 ' 11/04/99 2002 TR 23067-4/L.ot 81 1215.0 9.0 113.0 89 8 11/04/99 2003 TR 23067-4/1-ot 81 1216.0 9.0 115.0 89 8 11/04/99 2004 RT No. 2000 -- 9.0 122.5 94 8 11/04/99 1 2005 RT No. 2001 9.0 121.0 93 8 11/04/99 2006 RT No. 2002 9.5 120.0 93 8 11/04/99 2007 RT No. 2003 -- 9.5 119.0 92 8 ' 12/22/99 3172 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 slope 1129.0 10.5 112.0 87 6 12/22/99 3174 RT No. 3172 -- 12.0 118.0 90 7 12/27/99 3258 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1143.0 8.0 119.0 91 7 12/27/99 3259 TR 23067-4/Ni0thawk Pass 1144.0 10.5 118.0 90 7 12/27/99 3262 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1139.0 9.5 123.5 93 3 12/27/99 3263 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1140.0 9.5 121.5 92 3 ' 12/29/99 3350 TR 23067-4/L.ot 69 1175.0 12.5 118.5 91 4 12/29/99 3351 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1176.0 12.5 119.0 91 7 3352 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1152.0 11.0 119.0 91 7 '12/29/99 12/29/99 3353 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1153.0 12.5 117.0 90 4 12/29/99 3354 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1159.0 10.0 124.5 94 3 3355 TR 23067-4/L.ot 2 1160.0 10.5 126.0 95 3 '12/29/99 12/29/99 3362 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1180.0 14.0 115.5 90 6 12/29/99 3363 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1181.0 13.0 116.5 90 4 12/29/99 3364 TR 23067-4/Lot1 1156.0 12.5 117.0 90 4 ' 12/29/99 3365 TR 23067-4/Lot 1 1157.0 9.5 120.0 90 3 12/29/99 3372 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1175.0 10.5 114.0 88 4 12/29/99 3373 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1176.0 9.0 118.5 90 7 ' 12/29/99 3374 RT No. 3372 11.5 114.5 88 4 12/29/99 3375 TR 23067-4/Lott 1162.0 12.0 119.5 91 4 3376 TR 23067-4/Lot 1 1163.0 14.0 112.0 86 4 '12/29/99 12/29/99 3377 RT No. 3374 8.0 116.5 89 7 12/29/99 3378 RT No.3377 12.0 112.5 86 7 12/29/99 3379 RT No. 3376 -- 13.0 115.0 88 7 12/29/99 3380 TR 23067-4/Lot 1 1164.0 9.0 123.0 92 3 12/30/99 3391' TR 23067-4/Lot 18 slope 1146.0 7.5 116.0 88 7 3392 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 slope 1147.0 10.0 118.0 90 7 t12/30/99 12/30/99 3405 RT No. 3391 12.0 119.5 91 7 12/30/99 3406 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1138.0 10.0 111.0 86 8 3415 RT No. 3406 -- 7.0 122.0 91 3 '12/30/99 12/30/99 3416 TR 23067-4/L.ot 19 slope 1140.0 9.0 123.5 93 3 01/03/00 3425 TR 23066-4/Nighthawk Pass_ 1145.0 9.5 116.0 90 8 01/03/00 3426 TR 23066-4/Nighthawk Pass 1146.0 10.0 121.5 91 3 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 1 ,13 ' TEST FIFI D DENSITY TEST RESULTS ;SOIL:. °... , TEST TEST ..' ::: °.:'.;:':.:::ECFV::':. M©LSTURE';.,DENSITY __COMP: '_ : ' DATE .. " NO: - - . LOCATION::- ::: ;: O i / } .:.: " : (Pet3 `(%) TYPE:: - 3467 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1143.0 12.0 117.0 90 4 '01/03/00 01/03/00 3468 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1144.0 13.0 118.0 91 4 01/04/00 3475 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1145.0 11.5 122.0 92 3 01/04/00 3476 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1146.0 14.0 118.0 91 4 01/04/00 3483 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1149.0 9.0 124.5 94 3 01/04/00 3484 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1150.0 10.0 122.0 91 3 01/04/00 3485 RT No. 3376 12.0 118.0 90 2 ' 01/04/00 3488 RT No. 3378 -- 7.5 126.5 95 3 01/04/00 3489 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1178.0 6.5 125.0 93 3 3490 RT No. 3379 -- 7.5 123.0 92 3 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3491 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1164.0 7.5 124.0 93 3 01/04/00 3494 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1168.0 10.0 125.0 94 3 3495 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1167.0 10.5 121.0 90 3 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3496 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1168.0 11.5 121.0 91 3 01/05/00 3515 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1206.0 8.5 129.0 96 3 3516 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1207.0 9.5 128.0 96 3 '01/05/00 01/05/00 3517 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1208.0 9.0 128.0 96 3 01/05/00 3518 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1176.0 10.0 123.5 93 3 3519 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1177.0 10.0 124.0 93 3 '01/05/00 01/05/00 3520 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1178.0 8.5 121.0 90 3 01/05/00 3521 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1170.0 13.0 118.5 90 26 01/05/00 3522 TR 23067-4/Lot 3 1171.0 12.5 118.5 90 26 01/05/00 3523 TR 23067-4/Lot 3 1172.0 11.0 119.5 91 26 01/05/00 3528 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1149.0 10.5 120.0 90 3 3529 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1151.0 8.0 123.0 92 3 '01/05/00 01/05/00 3530 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1146.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 01/05/00 3531 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1147.0 9.5 116.5 91 6 3532 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1150.0 9.5 118.0 91 4 '01/05/00 01/05/00 3533 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1 151.0 9.5 123.0 93 3 01/05/00 3534 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1155.0 12.0 119.5 92 4 01/05/00 3535 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1156.0 11.5 121.0 91 3 01/06/00 3550 TR 23067-4/Channel St 1152.0 9.0 120.5 91 3 01/06/00 3551 TR 23067-4/Channel St 1153.0 11.5 118.0 91 4 3552 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1155.0 10.5 119.5 92 4 '01/06/00 01/06/00 3553 TR 23067-4/L.ot 21 1156.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 01/06/00 3591 TR 23067-4/L.ot5 1175.0 9.0 127.5 95 3 01/06/00 3592 TR 23067-4/Lot5 1176.0 7.0 128.5 96 3 01/06/00 3593 TR 23067-4/Lot 5 1177.0 8.5 119.5 91 24 01/06/00 3594 TR 23067-4/1-ove Ct 1180.0 8.5 122.5 92 3 3595 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1 l8 LO 9.0 117.5 90 24 t01/06/00 01/06/00 3596 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1182.0 7.0 119.0 91 24 01/06/00 3597 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1204.0 9.5 122.5 92 3 t01/06/00 3598 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1205.0 9.0 129.0 96 3 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 23067-4 Page T -I 2 a y TEST .: DATE ' ,;TEST.. NO: ..'... TEST ::.'.:.:.. I:OCATIOI�I,.:. ..:. ELEV.... (ft) MOISTURE .. M DENSTEY (pef) ' : I+LIiVIP::'::°SOIL, (%) TYPE. . 01/06/00 3599 TR 23067-4/Love Ct 1206.0 8.5 129.5 97 3 O1/06/00 3600 TR 23067-4/1-ot 2 1169.0 10.0 124.5 93 3 01/06/00 3601 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1170.0 10.0 125.5 94 3 01/06/00 3602 TR 23067-4/1-ot 2 1171.0 9.5 125.5 94 3 O1/07/00 3619 TR 23067-4/1-ot 18 1151.0 13.5 120.5 91 3 01/07/00 3620 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1152.0 9.5 112.0 88 6 01/07/00 3625 RT No. 3620 -- 9.0 116.5 91 6 01/10/00 3671 TR 23067-4/1.ot 19 1149.0 13.5 117.0 91 6 01/10/00 3672 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1150.0 14.0 116.5 91 6 01/10/00 3673 TR 23067-4/1.ot 20 1155.0 11.5 121.5 91 3 O1/10/00 3674 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1156.0 12.5 118.5 91 4 01/11/00 3699 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 slope 1152.0 11.5 121.0 91 3 01/11/00 3700 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 slope 1153.0 9.5 121.5 91 3 O1/11/00 3724 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1148.0 13.5 113.5 91 17 O1/11/00 3725 TR 23067-4/1.ot 17 1149.0 17.0 110.0 91 13 01/11/00 3726 TR 23067-4/L.ot 19 1150.0 10.5 121.0 91 3 01/11/00 3727 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1151.0 12.0 116.0 90 6 O1/I1/00 3728 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1154.0 15.5 114.0 91 17 01/11/00 3729 TR 23067-4/1-ot 21 1155.0 14.0 113.0 91 17 O1/11/00 3730 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1152.0 20.0 104.5 87 13 01/11/00 3731 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1153.0 15.5 110.5 92 13 01/11/00 3732 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1146.0 14.5 111.0 92 13 01/11/00 3733 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1147.0 9.5 107.0 89 13 01/11/00 3736 RT No. 3730 -- 16.0 109.0 90 13 01/12/00 3737 RT No. 3733 -- 15.5 109.0 90 13 01/12/00 3744 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1155.0 14.0 118.0 90 10 01/12/00 3745 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1156.0 12.5 113.0 92 29 01/12/00 3773 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1163.0 12.0 108.0 91 27 01/12/00 3774 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1164.0 12.0 107.0 90 27 01/12/00 3775 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1158.0 13.5 107.5 91 27 01/12/00 3776 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1159.0 11.5 108.0 91 27 01/13/00 3791 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 slope 1160.0 13.5 112.5 91 29 01/13/00 3792 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 slope 1161.0 13.0 115.0 93 29 01/13/00 3802 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1160.0 11.0 114.0 92 29 01/13/00 3803 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1161.0 16.5 103.0 90 28 01/14/00 3848 TR 23067-4/L.ot 20 1154.0 12.5 112.0 91 29 01/14/00 3849 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1155.0 12.0 112.5 91 29 01/14/00 3874 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1157.0 15.0 109.0 92 27 01/14/00 3875 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1158.0 15.5 106.5 90 27 01/17/00 3878 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1162.0 11.0 112.5 91 29 01/17/00 3879 TR 23067-4/L.ot 16 1163.0 13.0 112.5 91 28 01/17/00 3880 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1156.0 17.0 107.5 91 26 01/17/00 3881 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1157.0 19.0 100.5 92 6 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T-13 as TEST . ..:TEST DATE :;: 1 iO(°lo) .i ..:.. `..: `'. `:'_; TEST.:' .;:., ..i:`:: ::::: E:llh'v.' TYPE .: 01/18/00 3928 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1161.0 12.0 109.0 88 29 01/18/00 3929 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1162.0 12.0 108.0 88 29 01/18/00 3930 TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd 1160.0 11.0 104.5 85 27 01/18/00 3931 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1160.0 16.0 107.5 91 27 01/18/00 3932 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1161.0 14.0 101.5 88 28 01/18/00 3933 RT No. 3932 -- 12.0 107.5 87 29 01/20/00 4014 RT No. 3928 14.5 109.5 88 29 O1/20/00 4015 RT No. 3929 14.0 100.0 85 27 01/20/00 4016 RT No. 3930 10.5 109.5 88 29 01/20/00 4017 RT No. 3933 -- 13.5 114.0 89 6 01/26/00 4123 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1157.0 12.3 119.2 91 10 01/26/00 4124 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1158.0 8.7 121.8 93 10 01/26/00 4125 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1161.0 11.9 113.7 92 29 01/26/00 4126 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1163.0 10.8 116.0 91 6 01/26/00 4127 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1165.0 1 L 1 116.1 91 6 01/26/00 4128 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1166.0 12.9 112.1 91 29 01/26/00 4162 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1163.0 11.5 122.6 91 20 01/26/00 4163 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1164.0 11.4 124.8 93 20 01/26/00 4164 Abbey Road 1161.0 12.6 115.8 90 6 01/26/00 4165 Abbey Road 1162.0 14.3 117.3 90 4 01/28/00 4218 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1166.0 14.4 115.2 90 6 01/28/00 4219 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1167.0 12.0 119.8 91 10 01/28/00 4224 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 18 1162.0 10.7 122.6 92 3 01/28/00 4225 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 18 1164.0 10.5 122.3 92 3 01/28/00 4230 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1165.0 10.4 123.0 92 3 01/28/00 4231 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1166.0 11.0 120.5 90 3 01/31/00 4247 TR 23067-4/L.ot 16 1168.0 17.0 114.3 92 29 01/31/00 4248 TR 23067-4/Channel St 1168.0 16.5 115.2 93 29 01/31/00 4249 TR 23067-4/L.ot 21 1167.0 10.1 116.6 91 29 01/31/00 4250 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1168.0 10.7 121.4 91 3 01/31/00 4254 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1170.0 11.4 111.4 90 29 01/31/00 4257 Abbey Road/TR 23067-4 1167.0 10.4 115:8 90 6 02/01/00 4312 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1168.0 12.6 115.3 90 6 02/01/00 4313 TR 23067-4[Lot 15 1169.0 10.9 119.6 91 20 02/01/00 4314 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1173.0 12.8 117.4 90 20 02/01/00 4315 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1174.0 10.0 120.3 92 20 02/01/00 4316 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1175.0 9.6 123.4 92 30 02/01/00 4317 TR 23067-4/L.ot 21 1176.0 10.3 121.0 92 20 02/02/00 4326 TR 23067-4/Lot 91 1184.0 13.6 102.3 86 27 02/02/00 4327 TR 23067-4/Lot 91 1185.0 18.2 101.6 86 27 02/02/00 4328 RT No. 4326 -- 11.8 112.3 95 27 02/02/00 4329 RT No. 4327 -- 13.4 108.2 91 27 02/02/00 4332 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1174.0 14.0 116.4 93 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. I4I-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 4 a?& TEST TEST: TEST DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (401 (pef) TYPE 02/02/00 4333 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1175.0 12.6 119.6 91 10 '02/02/00 4334 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1160.0 9.4 l 1 L4 90 29 02/02/00 4335 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1161.0 13.0 108.6 92 27 02/02/00 4336 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1169.0 13.0 107.4 91 27 '02/02/00 4337 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1171.0 16.2 97.7 91 30 02/03/00 4338 TR 23067-4 1176.0 14.7 101.5 86 27 4339 TR 23067-4 1177.0 9.4 94.8 87 7 '02/03/00 02/03/00 4340 RT No. 4338 10.7 110.4 93 27 02/03/00 4341 RT No. 4339 -- 14.2 110.6 93 27 4342 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1178.0 13.4 117.8 90 24 '02/03/00 02/03/00 4343 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1179.0 8.9 125.3 96 24 02/03/00 4344 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1180.0 9.4 106.5 90 27 02/03/00 4345 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1184.0 14.8 107.2 90 27 ' 02/03/00 4346 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1185.0 13.1 107.6 91 27 02/03/00 4347 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1186.0 12.2 109.6 92 27 02/03/00 4351 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1188.0 12.8 107.7 91 27 ' 02/03/00 4352 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1189.0 15.2 110.5 93 27 02/03/00 4353 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1190.0 13.0 119.0 91 27 4354 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1187.0 12.9 108.7 92 27 '02/03/00 02/03/00 4355 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1188.0 12.8 109.9 93 27 02/03/00 4356 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1189.0 13.1 106.2 90 27 4359 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1178.0 17.0 107.2 91 29 '02/03/00 02/03/00 4360 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1179.0 15.6 111.4 90 27 02/03/00 4361 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1164.0 17.7 103.2 90 28 02/03/00 4362 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1165.0 16.2 102.6 90 28 02/07/00 4374 TR 23067-4/Lot 92 1182.0 15.7 107.8 91 27 02/07/00 4375 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1183.0 15.6 107.3 90 27 02/07/00 4379 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1168.0 14.8 115.0 90 6 02/07/00 4380 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1169.0 14.2 1 l 1.6 90 29 02/07/00 4381 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1177.0 12.4 110.3 93 27 4382 TR 23067-4/L.ot 20 1178.0 14.6 106.9 91 27 '02/07/00 02/07/00 4386 TR 23067-4/L.ot 15 1174.0 14.7 106.9 91 27 02/07/00 4387 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1175.0 15.7 113.6 92 29 02/07/00 4388 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1169.0 9.6 114.1 92 29 ' 02/07/00 4389 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1170.0 10.9 115.6 90 6 02/07/00 4390 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1175.0 19.7 103.6 91 28 02/07/00 4391 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1176.0 13.0 118.3 92 27 ' 02/07/00 4391A RT No. 4391 15.3 112.2 95 27 02/07/00 4392 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1186.0 15.7 107.3 90 27 4393 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1187.0 15.2 107.8 91 17 '02/07/00 02/07/00 4394 TR 23067-4/Lot 94 1180.0 15.7 115.1 92 3 02/08/00 4398 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1170.0 14.1 113.8 92 6 ' 02/08/00 4399 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1171.0 11.2 116.5 91 6 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I S 077 ' FIELD DENSITY TEST T RESULTS TEST:`':.`.;TESfi,.., :.:: TEST.:..: '; .=:::: °:.:ELTV.,:::: MOISTURE ; DENSITY €§01 DATE ' 02/08/00 4400 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1179.0 10.3 116.7 91 4 02/08/00 4401 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 19 1180.0 11.2 118.6 91 27 ' 02/08/00 4404 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1175.0 10.1 109.5 86 29 02/08/00 4405 TR 23067-4/L.ot 16 1176.0 9.3 109.5 89 29 02/08/00 4406 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1180.0 10.7 108.7 92 29 ' 02/08/00 4407 TR 23067-4/Lot 91 1183.5 11.9 109.2 92 17 02/08/00 4408 TR 23067-4/L.ot 3 1179.0 11.8 114.9 92 17 t 02/08/00 4409 TR 23067-4/Lot2 1181.0 13.0 112.4 90 17 02/08/00 4410 TR 23067-4/L.ot 73 1182.0 11.9 114.2 91 17 02/08/00 4411 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1183.0 11.5 114.9 92 29 '02/08/00 4412 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1178.0 13.0 108.9 92 29 02/08/00 4413 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1184.0 15.2 106.6 90 29 02/08/00 4414 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1183.0 13.9 108.3 91 29 '02/08/00 4415 TR 23067-4/L.ot 88 1182.0 12.1 104.6 88 17 02/08/00 4416 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1184.0 12.9 113.8 91 17 02/08/00 4418 TR 23067-4/Lot 87 1182.0 13.5 112.1 91 17 '02/08/00 4419 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1184.0 15.5 108.7 87 29 02/08/00 4420 RT No. 4415 14.3 106.4 90 17 02/08/00 4421 RT No. 4419 -- 13.4 112.6 90 29 ' 02/09/00 4424 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1185.0 14.8 113.8 92 6 02/09/00 4425 TR 23067-4/L.ot 19 1186.0 11.9 117.9 92 6 02/09/00 4430 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1160.0 9.8 115.0 90 6 '02/09/00 4431 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1161.0 9.6 115.0 90 6 02/09/00 4433 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1187.0 11.0 119.7 92 8 02/09/00 4434 TR 23067-4/Lot 76 1181.0 10.5 120.0 93 8 02/09/00 4435 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1182.0 12.7 112.3 90 17 02/09/00 4436 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1186.0 11.3 115.8 93 17 02/09/00 4437 TR 23067-4/Lot 85 1188.0 11.3 115.3 92 17 ' 02/09/00 4438 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1188.0 12.1 115.6 92 17 02/09/00 4440 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1188.0 9.9 117.2 90 8 4441 Abbey Road/TR 23067-4 1185.0 14.0 108.2 91 27 '02/09/00 02/09/00 4442 TR 23067-4/Lot 92 1190.0 14.5 108.2 91 27 02/09/00 4445 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1194.0 11.0 119.7 90 9 02/09/00 4446 Abbey Road/TR 23067-4 1158.0 12.4 115.6 90 6 02/09/00 t 4447 Abbey Road/TR 23067-4 1159.0 11.7 116.2 91 6 02/10/00 4451 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1167.0 12.8 110.8 90 29 4452 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1161.0 11.5 117.5 90 10 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4453 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1163.0 12.4 112.1 91 29 02/10/00 4454 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1164.0 9.5 23.4 93 10 4455 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1165.0 9.0 123.2 93 10 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4456 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1166.0 8.1 115.6 92 19 02/10/00 4457 RT No. 4456 -- 8.7 113.8 91 19 ' 02/10/00 4458 TR 23067-4/Lot 11 1165.0 10.9 114.3 91 19 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY2000 ' J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 - yi _s' _� PageT1 6 pwi 02/10/00 4459 TEST.. EIEW -: MQ STURE DENSITY.: CE7O1tM '':S.M `, DATE :- .. NO.. LOCATION:..... . :: ..:.: (fl). ' ...:: (%).. (pct .. ("la) 91 23 02/10/00 4461 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1167.0 02/10/00 4459 TR 23067-4/Lot 11 1166.0 11.3 115.8 89 23 02/10/00 4460 RT No. 4459 11.5 118.4 91 23 02/10/00 4461 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1167.0 12.1 1 1 1.6 90 29 4464 TR 23067-6/Nighthawk Pass 1193.0 12.1 111.9 90 19 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4465 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk 1183.0 9.7 123.5 92 3 02/10/00 4466 TR 23067-4/L.ot 83 1190.0 12.6 113.4 91 19 4467 TR 23067-4/Chante 1184.5 11.6 113.6 91 8 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4468 TR 23067-4/L.ot 82 1194.0 9.1 118.2 91 8 02/10/00 4469 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 1196.0 9.4 117.6 91 8 02/10/00 4470 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk 1198.0 11.0 111.9 90 8 02/10/00 4471 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk 1199.0 10.0 117.4 91 4 02/10/00 4472 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1168.0 10.2 116.3 90 4 4473 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1169.0 12.8 117.2 90 4 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4474 TR 23067-4/Channel 1168.0 10.6 120.3 92 24 02/10/00 4475 TR 23067-4/Channel 1169.0 11.7 116.9 90 4 4476 RT No. 4404 -- 8.1 183.0 92 8 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4477 RT No. 4405 7.8 116.1 90 8 02/11/00 4493 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1175.0 11.2 111.2 90 29 4494 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1176.0 9.6 119.4 92 4 '02/11/00 02/11/00 4495 TR 23067-4/L.ot 14 1174.0 11.6 117.2 90 4 02/11/00 4496 TR 23067-4/Lot 14 1175.0 12.8 116.8 90 4 4498 TR 23067-4/L.ot 87 1190.0 11.6 113.2 91 29 '02/11/00 02/11/00 4499 TR 23067-4/L.ot 92 1191.0 13.0 112.1 90 29 02/11/00 4500 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1194.0 12.4 112.0 90 29 4501 TR 23067-4/L.ot 91 1191.0 10.0 118.9 91 4 '02/11/00 02/11/00 4502 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1189.0 11.3 117.7 90 4 02/11/00 4503 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1190.0 11.4 117.5 90 4 02/11/00 4504 TR 23067-4/Nighthawk Pass 1193.0 11.3 113.8 91 17 03/03/00 4511 TR 23067-4/slope 1186.0 14.2 118.1 92 6 03/03/00 4512 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1187.0 14.6 115.6 90 6 4513 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1188.0 14.3 112.1 91 29 '03/03/00 03/03/00 4519 TR 23607-4/L.ot 82 1192.0 12.5 119.1 91 10 03/03/00 4520 TR 23607-4/Lot 82 1193.0 11.6 119.1 91 10 4521 TR 23607-4/L.ot 83 1194.0 16.4 108.3 88 29 '03/03/00 03/03/00 4522 TR 23607-4/L.ot 83 1195.0 13.6 1 1 1.4 90 29 03/03/00 4523 RT No. 4521 -- 11.1 117.2 92 6 03/04/00 4524 TR 23067-4/L.ot 94 1190.0 11.7 115.0 90 6 03/04/00 4525 TR 23067-4/Lot 94 1191.0 11.5 117.8 90 10 03/04/00 4526 TR 23067-4/L.ot 90 1197.0 10.5 120.8 91 3 4527 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1198.0 11.4 114.7 90 6 '03/04/00 03/04/00 4528 TR 23067-4/L.ot 86 1197.0 12.6 113.6 89 6 03/04/00 4529 TR 23067-4/Lot 86 1198.0 11.9 120.5 91 3 ' 03/04/00 4530 RT No. 4528 -- 11.2 120.2 90 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 7 d9 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 8 .40 FIELD DENSITY TABLE JEST RE .TS S14,15 TEST TEST`: TEST ELEV.. ;MOISTURE ... DENSITY,,::: Cow.: ; SCSI] ' BATE NO. LOCATION ,....'.. ":. (ft) .,. „.::(.4oj:.'::r":..".:;..;(pati: `:::..:.i;.:(�a� :.::. ::TYR 03/04/00 4531 TR 23067-4/L.ot 93 1197.0 8.9 117.3 90 4 03/04/00 4532 TR 23067-4/Lot 91 1198.0 10.9 118.1 91 4 03/04/00 4533 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1200.0 15.7 111.7 90 29 03/04/00 4534 TR 23067-4/Lot 88 1201.0 15.4 104.5 91 28 03/04/00 4535 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1200.0 13.2 102.9 90 28 03/04/00 4536 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1201.0 13.6 109.2 93 27 03/13/00 4537 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 92 1200.0 11.2 120.1 92 4 03/13/00 4538 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 91 1201.0 11.7 120.0 92 4 03/13/00 4539 TR 23067-4/L.ot 85 1203.0 8.3 116.4 91 6 03/13/00 4540 TR 23067-4/Lot 85 1204.0 11.9 112.7 91 29 ' 03/13/00 4541 TR 23067-4/Lot 94 1193.0 7.4 114.6 88 4 03/13/00 4542 TR 23067-4/Lot 94 1194.0 13.0 116.5 90 4 03/13/00 4543 RT No. 4541 -- 7.3 117.9 91 4 1 03/13/00 4544 TR 23067-4/L.ot 89 1198.0 8.7 115.6 90 6 03/13/00 4545 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1199.0 8.9 109.3 85 6 03/13/00 4546 RT No. 4545 -- 7.6 111.6 93 13 03/13/00 4547 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1204.0 13.2 115.9 90 6 03/13/00 4548 TR 23067-4/L.ot 82 1205.0 12.7 118.9 93 6 03/14/00 4549 TR 23067-4/Lot 93 1197.0 11.9 120.0 92 10 03/14/00 4550 TR 23067-4/L.ot 93 1198.0 11.2 119.4 91 10 03/14/00 4551 TR 23067-4/Lot 87 1202.0 13.1 120.0 92 10 03/14/00 4552 TR 23067-4/L.ot 86 1203.0 11.2 122.1 93 10 ' 03/14/00 4553 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1205.0 13.4 116.0 91 6 03/14/00 4554 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1206.0 14.6 111.6 87 6 03/14/00 4555 RT No. 4554 -- 11.1 116.6 91 6 03/14/00 4556 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 1208.0 8.7 114.2 87 10 03/14/00 4557 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 1209.0 12.1 119.7 91 10 03/14/00 4558 RT No. 4556 -- 7.3 123.5 93 3 ' 03/14/00 4559 TR 23067-4/Lot 88 1204.0 11.9 117.5 90 4 03/14/00 4560 TR 23067-4/Lot 88 1205.0 11.3 120.7 92 10 03/14/00 4561 TR 23067-4/Lot 92 1200.0 12.3 117.0 90 4 03/14/00 4562 TR 23067-4/Lot 91 1201.0 11.1 122.9 92 3 03/14/00 4565 TR 23067-4/L.ot 85 1211.0 9.3 112.2 86 4 03/14/00 4566 TR 23067-4/Lot 85 1212.0 8.7 118.5 91 4 ' 03/14/00 4567 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1213.0 9.7 116.3 89 4 03/14/00 4568 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1214.0 8.5 114.7 88 4 03/14/00 4569 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 1215.0 12.2 110.7 82 4 ' 03/14/00 4570 RT No. 4567 10.3 119.9 92 4 03/14/00 4571 RT No. 4568 9.7 121.0 93 4 03/14/00 4572 RT No. 4569=- 9.7 118.4 91 4 ' 03/14/00 4573 RT No. 4565 11.0 121.6 94 4 03/14/00 4574 TR 23067-4/Lot 87 1208.0 11.3 116.5 90 4 ' 03/14/00 4575 TR 23067-4/Lot 88 1207.0 11.6 117.4 90 4 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 8 .40 TEST ;,:;`;::::TEST* DATES' `:: NO: :,.::..':: `. TEST :.' € €::..°€:..; LOCATION .EIEi':['€:MOISTUR)°:_llENSITY (f>) (%} :.:: (pcf) COME:: 0103 a"S©IL?,: "PYPE .; 03/15/00 4576 TR 23067-4/1.ot 94 1196.0 17.9 107.5 91 27 03/15/00 4577 TR 23067-4/Lot 94 1197.0 7.9 117.1 90 4 03/15/00 4578 TR 23067-4/1.ot 90 1202.0 13.8 115.7 90 6 03/15/00 4579 TR 23067-4/Lot90 1203.0 12.4 118.2 91 4 03/15/00 4580 TR 23067-4/1-ot 86 1206.0 11.2 120.0 92 4 03/15/00 4581 TR 23067-4/1-ot 86 1207.0 11.8 120.1 92 4 03/15/00 4582 TR 23067-4/Lot 82 1215.0 12.6 115.1 90 6 03/15/00 4583 TR 23067-4/1.ot 82 1217.0 9.5 117.0 90 4 03/15/00 4584 TR 23067-4/1-ot 74 1192.0 16.2 114.1 89 6 03/15/00 4585 TR 23067-4/1.ot 74 1193.0 12.7 114.4 89 6 03/15/00 4586 RTNo.4584 -- 14.2 113.6 88 6 03/15/00 4587 RT No. 4585 -- 12.8 94.2 80 27 03/15/00 4588 TR 23067-4/1.ot 73 1193.0 13.7 115.2 90 6 03/15/00 4589 TR 23067-4/1.ot 73 1194.0 12.3 116.8 90 4 03/15/00 4590 TR 23067-4/Lot 75 1195.0 13.1 112.7 88 6 03/15/00 4591 TR 23067-4/1.ot 75 1204.0 10.9 117.5 90 4 03/15/00 4592 TR 23067-4/Lot 76 1207.0 19.6 103.7 88 27 03/15/00 4593 RT No. 4590 -- 12.4 116.5 91 6 03/16/00 4594 TR 23067-4/1-ot 76 1196.0 12.4 119.5 91 10 03/16/00 4595 TR 23067-4/1-ot 76 1197.0 12.2 119.5 91 10 03/16/00 4596 RT No. 4586 -- 7.9 117.9 90 10 03/16/00 4597 RT No. 4587 13.5 110.5 94 27 03/16/00 4598 RT No. 4592 -- 10.7 116.0 91 6 03/16/00 4599 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1200.0 11.2 122.9 94 10 03/16/00 4600 TR 23067-4/1.ot 77 1201.0 12.1 115.6 90 6 03/16/00 4601 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 15 1176.0 14.9 113.9 92 29 03/16/00 4602 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 15 1177.0 13.7 117.1 90 4 03/16/00 4603 TR 23067-4/1-ot 14 1175.0 13.9 113.7 92 29 03/16/00 4604 TR 23067-4/1.ot 14 1176.0 14.0 113.2 92 29 03/16/00 4605 TR 23067-4/1-ot 75 1197.0 12.1 119.6 92 1 03/16/00 4606 TR 23067-4/1.ot 75 1198.0 11.4 120.4 92 1 03/16/00 4607 TR 23067-4/L.ot 74 1196.0 15.3 113.7 92 29 03/16/00 4608 TR 23067-4/Lot 74 1197.0 12.3 116.5 91 6 03/16/00 4609 TR 23067-4/Lot 78 1204.0 12.0 113.4 92 29 03/16/00 4610 TR 23067-4/Lot 78 1205.0 11.9 119.5 91 10 03/16/00 4611 TR 23067-4/1-ot 69 1189.0 16.6 112.1 91 29 03/16/00 4612 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1190.0 20.1 98.9 92 30 03/16/00 4613 TR 23067-4/1-ot 79 1215.0 14.0 116.3 91 6 03/16/00 4614 TR 23067-4/1-ot 79 1216.0 12.6 118.8 91 10 03/16/00 4615 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1209.0 14.2 116.3 91 6 03/16/00 4616 TR 23067-4/Lot 76 1208.0 12.7 120.4 92 10 03/17/00 4617 TR 23067-4/1-ot 75 1205.0 11.7 I 1 1.7 87 6 03/17/00 4618 TR 23067-4/1-ot 75 1206.0 14.6 110.6 89 29 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T-19 3/ TEST .:. DATE .:.. TEST NO.. TEST: - _ .. -: '%E?CATIOLY EIEV. MOISTURE^ DENSITY- COMP SOIL TYPE: 03/17/00 4619 TR 23067-4/Lot 75 1207.0 12.1 118.1 90 10 03/17/00 4620 TR 23067-4/L.ot 78 1211.0 9.0 116.1 91 6 03/17/00 4621 TR 23067-4/L.ot 78 1212.0 15.8 110.2 89 29 03/17/00 4622 TR 23067-4/L.ot 72 1196.0 9.7 115.8 90 6 03/17/00 4623 TR 23067-4/L.ot 72 1197.0 11.5 116.5 91 6 03/17/00 4624 TR 23067-4/Lot 74 1200.0 12.4 115.0 90 6 03/17/00 4625 TR 23067-4/L.ot 74 1201.0 11.7 116.6 91 6 03/17/00 4626 RT No. 4617 -- 12.8 120.7 92 10 03/17/00 4627 RT No. 4618 -- 11.9 116.7 91 6 03/17/00 4628 TR 23067-4/Lot 76 1208.0 9.8 118.0 90 10 03/17/00 4629 TR 23067-4/L.ot 76 1209.0 10.1 114.7 90 6 03/17/00 4630 RT No. 4621 -- 13.0 119.4 90 9 03/17/00 4631 TR 23067-4/Lot 78 1213.0 16.0 114.2 92 17 03/17/00 4632 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1210.0 9.4 119.1 90 9 03/17/00 4633 TR 23067-4/L.ot 77 1211.0 17.1 109.2 88 17 03/17/00 4634 TR 23067-4/Lot 79 1215.0 13.6 118.1 90 10 03/17/00 4635 TR 23067-4/L.ot 79 1216.0 12.7 118.1 90 10 03/17/00 4636 TR 23067-4/Lot 73 1199.0 9.3 117.5 90 10 03/17/00 4637 TR 23067-4/Lot 73 1200.0 8.9 112.6 90 17 03/17/00 4638 TR 23067-4/L.ot 1 1185.0 12.4 119.9 92 10 03/17/00 4639 TR 23067-4/L.ot 2 1186.0 16.8 110.4 88 17 03/18/00 4640 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 73 1206.0 13.1 115.9 91 6 03/18/00 4641 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 73 1207.0 12.2 119.9 92 10 03/18/00 4642 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 72 1208.0 10.6 117.3 90 10 03/18/00 4643 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1200.0 10.5 114.5 92 17 03/18/00 4644 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1201.0 10.9 120.4 92 10 03/18/00 4645 RT No. 4633 -- 17.6 114.3 92 17 03/18/00 4646 TR 23067-4/Lot 77 1211.0 11.7 119.2 91 10 03/20/00 4647 RT No. 4639 -- 9.4 112.1 90 17 03/20/00 4648 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1188.0 14.0 117.5 90 10 03/20/00 4649 TR 23067-4/L.ot 3 1190.0 14.9 111.2 90 29 03/20/00 4650 TR 23067-4/L.ot 3 1189.0 14.7 113.6 92 29 03/20/00 4651 TR 23067-4/L.ot 1 1191.0 14.5 114.4 92 17 03/20/00 4652 TR 23067-4/L.ot l 1192.0 11.8 120.3 94 10 03/20/00 4653 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1191.0 12.0 113.1 91 17 03/20/00 4654 TR 23067-4/Lot 2 1192.0 14.8 1 1 1.6 90 17 03/20/00 4655 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 2 1190.0 14.9 114.6 92 17 03/20/00 4656 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 2 1191.0 13.4 118.3 90 10 03/20/00 4657 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1204.0 11.9 121.8 93 10 03/20/00 4658 TR 23067-4/L.ot 19 1205.0 9.0 119.8 91 10 03/20/00 4659 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1198.0 10.7 122.4 93 10 03/20/00 4660 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1199.0 9.1 116.6 91 6 03/20/00 4661 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1189.0 12.5 113.3 91 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141.99 Tract 230674 Page T-1 10 3A TEST . TEST ' TEST ELEV: MOISTUP.E. DENSITY 91 17 iDATE - .. NO. LOCATION r .:: (Li) ...., ". � %) ..(pet)....:w... (%). `'TYPE. '.. 03/20/00 4664 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1194.0 12.7 115.0 90 03/20/00 4662 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1190.0 12.7 113.8 91 17 i03/20/00 4663 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1193.0 12.8 117.9 90 10 03/20/00 4664 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1194.0 12.7 115.0 90 6 03/20/00 4665 TR 23067-4/Lot 1 1195.0 15.9 108.1 92 27 '03/20/00 4666 TR 23067-4/Lot 1 1196.0 15.6 107.0 91 27 03/21/00 4667 TR 23067-4/Lot 4 1186.0 9.2 110.8 90 29 03/21/00 4668 TR 23067-4/Lot 4 1187.0 13.7 110.6 90 29 03/21/00 4669 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1176.0 9.4 119.2 91 10 03/21/00 4670 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1177.0 8.5 117.5 90 10 03/21/00 4671 TR 23067-4/Lot 60 1183.0 12.2 120.0 92 10 i03/21/00 4673 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1180.0 11.2 117.6 90 4 03/21/00 4674 TR 23067-4/Lot 7 1182.0 13.0 118.7 91 4 4675 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1179.0 13.2 119.9 92 4 i03/21/00 03/21/00 4676 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1180.0 10.9 117.4 90 4 03/21/00 4677 TR 23067-4/L.ot 61 1181.0 10.0 122.4 92 3 4678 TR 23067-4/Lot 4 1188.0 11.5 121.2 91 3 i03/21/00 03/21/00 4679 TR 23067-4/Lot4 1189.0 14.9 116.5 91 6 03/21/00 4682 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1184.0 17.9 107.6 91 27 4683 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1185.0 12.2 116.1 91 6 i03/21/00 03/21/00 4684 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 21 1184.0 11.6 121.2 91 3 03/21/00 4685 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 21 1185.0 12.9 118.4 91 4 4686 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1185.0 9.9 118.6 91 4 i03/21/00 03/21/00 4687 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1186.0 10.5 116.6 90 4 03/21/00 4688 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1183.0 10.4 126.0 94 20 4689 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1185.0 6.5 125.1 93 20 i03/21/00 03/22/00 4698 TR 23067-4 1190.0 6.4 112.4 88 6 03/22/00 4699 TR 23067-4/Love Court 1190.0 12.1 108.9 92 27 4700 TR 23067-4/Love Court 1191.0 12.9 116.8 91 6 i03/22/00 03/22/00 4701 TR 23067-4/Lot7 1183.0 10.4 121.0 91 3 03/22/00 4702 TR 23067-4/Lot7 1184.0 10.8 118.6 91 10 4703 TR 23067-4/L.ot 59 1188.0 9.5 125.0 94 3 i03/22/00 03/22/00 4704 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1190.0 12.9 119.4 90 3 03/27/00 4715 TR 23067-4/Lot 81 1216.0 11.2 122.0 92 3 4716 TR 23067-4/Lot 81 1217.0 11.6 117.3 90 4 i03/27/00 03/27/00 4717 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1197.0 8.8 120.0 90 3 03/27/00 4718 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1198.0 10.4 118.0 91 4 4719 TR 23067-4/L.ot 6 1188.0 13.9 115.1 90 6 i03/27/00 03/27/00 4720 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1189.0 11.9 117.1 90 4 03/27/00 4721 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1189.0 12.2 118.5 91 4 4722 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1190.0 11.1 122.9 92 3 i03/27/00 03/27/00 4723 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1178.0 13.4 115.8 87 3 03/27/00 4724 RT No. 4723 -- 11.7 123.0 92 3 i03/23/00 4742 TR 23067-4/Channel Street 1189.0 10.4 124.1 93 3 i PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 11 33 BATE TEST LOCATION ELEV. 1431J1>'lYiKE DENSITY.: { UMV.:..:"' W. . 03/23/00 4743 TR 23067-4/Channel Street 1190.0 11.7 121.6 91 3 03/23/00 4746 TR 23067-4/Lydia Street 1180.0 11.2 115.4 90 6 03/23/00 4747 TR 23067-4/Lydia Street 1181.0 11.6 112.4 90 17 03/23/00 4748 TR 23067-4/Lot 14 1188.0 12.0 117.6 92 6 03/22/00 4751 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1173.0 11.5 123.9 93 3 03/22/00 4752 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1174.0 9.8 115.8 90 6 03/23/00 4766 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1178.0 11.4 125.5 94 3 03/23/00 4767 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1179.0 12.1 120.3 90 3 03/23/00 4768 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 15 1181.0 5.6 120.2 90 3 03/23/00 4769 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 15 1182.0 9.6 117.2 92 6 03/24/00 4776 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 20 1188.0 12.0 113.4 91 17 03/24/00 4777 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 20 1189.0 9.6 115.9 91 6 03/24/00 4778 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1173.0 14.2 113.0 91 17 03/24/00 4779 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1174.0 5.6 112.8 87 4 03/24/00 4780 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1167.0 12.0 117.7 91 4 03/24/00 4781 RT No.4779 -- 12.9 120.0 90 4 03/25/00 4798 TR 23067-4/L.ot 82 1218.5 9.3 118.8 93 6 03/25/00 4799 TR 23067-4/Lot 83 1218.5 8.3 115.5 90 6 03/25/00 4800 TR 23067-4/Lot 84 1217.0 8.1 123.1 93 3 03/25/00 4801 TR 23067-4/L.ot4 1197.0 14.4 114.9 90 22 03/25/00 4802 TR 23067-4/Lot4 1188.0 14.6 114.4 90 22 03/25/00 4803 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1194.0 14.0 115.5 91 22 03/25/00 4804 TR 23067-4/L.ot 69 1195.0 14.5 115.3 91 22 03/25/00 4805 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1194.0 15.1 112.3 90 19 03/25/00 4806 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1193.0 14.4 113.6 91 19 03/25/00 4807 TR 23067-4/Lot 85 1218.0 7.6 116.7 90 4 03/25/00 4808 TR 23067-4/Lot 86 1213.0 7.9 116.9 90 4 03/25/00 4809 TR 23067-4/Lot 87 1211.0 10.9 120.0 90 3 03/25/00 4810 TR 23067-4/Lot 88 1209.0 9.6 123.9 93 3 03/25/00 4811 TR 23067-4/Lot 89 1207.0 9.0 118.2 91 4 03/25/00 4812 TR 23067-4/Lot 90 1205.0 9.7 126.0 95 3 03/25/00 4813 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1194.0 8.6 115.8 91 22 03/25/00 4814 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1193.0 18.6 111.3 90 29 03/25/00 4815 TR 23067-4/Lot7 1194.0 15.1 117.1 92 22 03/25/00 4816 TR 23067-4/Lot7 1195.0 14.9 113.4 92 29 03/25/00 4817 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1201.0 10.4 114.6 90 6 03/25/00 4818 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1202.0 9.5 118.5 93 6 03/25/00 4819 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1193.0 12.1 117.0 91 6 03/25/00 4820 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1194.0 11.6 116.5 91 6 03/25/00 4821 TR 23067-4/Lot 6 1192.0 11.9 116.6 91 6 03/25/00 4822 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1193.0 13.4 107.0 91 21 03/27/00 4833 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1198.0 11.8 116.6 94 29 03/27/00 4834 TR 23067-4/Lot 70 1197.5 11.9 115.4 93 29 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 12 3� TEST TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY. CO14IP. DATE NO.. LOCATION . ....::: (Lt).. --(%) (pcpj...:: 03/27/00 4835 TR 23067-4/Lot 68 1204.0 7.3 122.5 91 20 03/27/00 4836 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1200.0 8.6 119.8 89 20 03/27/00 4837 TR 23067-4/L.ot 72 1199.0 7.5 125.9 94 20 03/27/00 4838 TR 23067-4/L.ot 71 1197.5 8.2 123.1 92 20 03/27/00 4839 TR 23067-4/L.ot 68 1206.5 10.4 123.9 92 20 03/27/00 4840 RT No. 4836 1200.0 9.6 121.3 90 20 03/27/00 4842 TR 23067-4/Lot2 1192.0 12.0 115.0 90 6 03/27/00 4843 TR 23067-4/Lot4 1197.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 03/27/00 4844 TR 23067-4/Lot3 1193.0 9.6 127.1 96 3 03/27/00 4845 TR 23067-4/Love Court 1205.0 14.2 112.2 90 13 03/27/00 4846 TR 23067-4/Love Court 1206.0 13.3 113.0 91 17 03/27/00 4847 TR 23067-4/Lot 68 1206.0 14.8 111.6 90 17 03/27/00 4848 TR 23067-4/Lot 68 1207.0 15.1 112.3 90 17 03/27/00 4851 TR 23067-4/L.ot 1 1191.0 7.8 116.6 91 6 03/27/00 4852 TR 23067-4/Lot 69 1203.0 12.0 119.1 91 25 03/27/00 4853 TR 23067-4/L.ot 68 1208.0 13.0 117.6 90 25 03/27/00 4854 TR 23067-4/L.ot 69 1204.5 9.7 119.4 91 25 03/27/00 4855 TR 23067-4/Lot 68 1209.0 13.5 113.1 92 29 03/28/00 4856 TR 23067-4/Lot 66 1213.0 11.7 117.7 90 25 03/28/00 4857 TR 23067-4/Lot 67 1211.0 12.8 117.7 90 25 03/28/00 4858 TR 23067-4/Lot 66 1214.5 9.6 121.2 93 25 03/28/00 4859 TR 23067-4/L.ot 67 1213.0 10.5 124.4 92 20 03/28/00 4860 TR 23067-4/Lot 68 1210.5 10.2 122.3 91 20 03/28/00 4861 TR 23067-4/Lot 66 1216.0 13.1 119.0 91 25 03/28/00 4862 TR 23067-4/Lot 67 1214.0 13.1 117.6 90 25 03/28/00 4887 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1179.0 10.7 115.9 90 6 03/28/00 4888 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1180.0 11.9 116.6 90 4 03/28/00 4889 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1187.0 11.1 118.2 91 4 03/28/00 4890 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1188.0 12.7 119.7 92 4 03/29/00 4902 TR 23067-4/L.ot 60 1200.0 9.0 124.0 95 10 03/29/00 4903 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1201.0 9.2 122.4 93 10 03/29/00 4904 TR 23067-4/L.ot 7 1195.0 7.9 119.4 91 10 03/29/00 4905 TR 23067-4/Lot 7 1195.0 8.3 121.5 93 10 03/29/00 4906 TR 23067-4/Lot 5 1196.0 8.2 122.3 93 10 03/29/00 4907 TR 23067-4/Lot 6 1196.0 10.2 123.9 95 10 03/29/00 4908 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1197.0 8.8 121.3 93 10 03/29/00 4909 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1198.0 8.0 124.0 95 10 03/29/00 4910 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1202.5 11.4 124.1 92 20 03/29/00 4911 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1204.0 12.8 122.3 94 25 03/29/00 4912 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1180.0 15.3 107.8 91 29 03/29/00 4913 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1181.0 14.3 122.8 91 17 03/29/00 4916 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1216.0 12.7 110.8 90 29 03/30/00 4917 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1190.0 12.9 114.7 92 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 13 .�S ' FTFLD DENSITY TEST RESULTS T TEST TEST, .: TEST ELEV. MOLSTIJRE DENSITY COMP. NO. LOCATION 'DATE 03/30/00 4918 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1191.0 14.1 114.5 92 17 '03/30/00 4920 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1186.0 16.8 115.5 93 17 03/30/00 4923 TR 23067-4/L.ot 23 1180.0 12.9 114.7 90 6 03/30/00 4924 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1181.0 12.8 117.9 91 4 '03/30/00 4925 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1190.0 11.5 120.5 93 4 03/30/00 4926 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1191.0 13.9 113.0 91 17 03/30/00 4927 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1186.0 14.6 114.0 92 17 '03/30/00 4928 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1187.0 10.9 116.6 90 4 03/31/00 4935 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1193.0 8.6 109.2 88 29 03/31/00 4936 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1194.0 11.2 111.2 90 29 '03/31/00 4937 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1192.0 16.0 110.9 89 29 03/31/00 4938 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1191.0 14.8 110.4 89 29 4939 TR 23067-4/Lydia Court 1195.0 13.2 115.2 93 17 '03/31/00 03/31/00 4940 TR 23067-4/Lydia Court 1196.0 12.8 114.9 92 17 03/31/00 4941 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1187.0 9.9 120.1 92 4 4942 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1188.0 15.2 112.9 91 17 '03/31/00 03/31/00 4943 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1182.0 11.1 112.4 90 17 03/31/00 4944 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1183.0 10.8 112.9 91 17 4947 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1192.0 13.5 113.9 91 17 '03/31/00 03/31/00 4948 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1193.0 13.2 114.8 92 17 03/31/00 4949 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1191.0 17.6 102.2 90 11 4950 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1192.0 17.9 106.8 91 27 t03/31/00 04/04/00 4953 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1181.0 12.4 117.6 91 23 04/04/00 4954 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1182.0 11.6 117.2 92 6 4955 TR 23067-4/L.ot 22 1189.0 7.5 120.0 91 9 t04/04/00 04/04/00 4956 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1190.0 10.1 117.5 92 6 04/04/00 4957 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1191.0 9.7 118.4 91 25 4958 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 1192.0 10.5 117.2 92 6 '04/04/00 04/05/00 4959 RT No. 4935 11.9 114.7 93 29 04/05/00 4960 RT No. 4937 11.7 116.6 94 29 4961 RT No. 4938 -- 11.9 111.9 91 29 '04/05/00 04/05/00 4967 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1195.0 10.7 123.6 92 20 04/05/00 4968 TR 23067-4/L.ot 16 1195.0 11.4 120.3 93 25 4969 TR 23067-4/Lydia Ct Sta 1+60 1193.0 11.2 122.4 94 25 '04/05/00 04/05/00 4977 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1219.0 13.1 118.9 92 23 04/05/00 4978 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 65 1219.0 12.3 112.7 91 29 4989 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1201.0 9.1 116.1 91 22 '04/06/00 04/06/00 4990 TR 23067-4/Lot 7 1202.0 9.2 116.2 91 22 04/06/00 4991 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1207.0 8.8 115.5 91 22 4992 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1208.0 10.0 117.8 93 31 '04/06/00 04/06/00 4993 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 65 1221.0 14.9 111.2 90 29 04/06/00 4994 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1223.0 12.2 114.4 93 29 ' 04/07/00 4995 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1226.0 11.0 113.8 91 17 7"x;?3 0 07- 3, -y, -S, - G PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 ' I.N. 141-99 Tract 23067-4 Page T-1 14 3� . 'fEST.. DATE . TES1 NO. :. LOCATION.:.:'. ::.:.« ._ ; (ft):: .'M:-_.. (.°✓al 04/07/00 4996 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1228.0 12.0 112.6 90 17 04/07/00 4997 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1230.0 15.6 110.7 90 29 04/07/00 4998 TR 23067-4/Leona Court 1210.0 7.0 115.0 90 6 04/07/00 4999 TR 23067-4/Leona Court 1211.0 8.4 113.3 90 31 04/07/00 5000 TR 23067-4/Leona Court 1214.0 11.1 120.3 90 3 04/07/00 5001 TR 23067-4/Leona Court 1215.0 11.3 120.2 90 3 04/07/00 5008 TR 23067-4/1-ot 7 1205.0 13.9 113.7 90 31 04/07/00 5009 TR 23067-4/Lot 8 1206.0 12.0 114.2 91 31 04/07/00 5010 TR 23067-4/1-ot3 1199.0 6.7 116.4 91 6 04/07/00 5011 TR 23067-4/1-ot 4 1200.0 16.8 105.7 90 27 04/07/00 5012 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 65 1237.0 11.3 113.8 90 31 04/07/00 5013 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 65 1239.0 16.9 110.4 94 27 04/07/00 5014 TR 23067-4/Lot7 1209.0 13.8 108.7 92 27 04/07/00 5015 TR 23067-4/Lot 8 1210.0 12.1 108.7 92 27 04/07/00 5016 TR 23067-4/Lot5 1200.0 11.3 113.8 90 31 04/07/00 5017 TR 23067-4/1-ot 5 1201.0 16.9 110.4 94 27 04/07/00 5018 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 66 1240.0 11.5 112.0 90 17 04/07/00 5019 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1212.0 13.3 119.0 92 23 04/07/00 5020 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1213.0 12.4 118.8 92 23 04/07/00 5021 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1213.0 11.8 115.0 91 22 04/07/00 5022 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1215.0 13.8 114.8 90 22 04/07/00 5023 TR 23067-4/1-ot 59 1214.0 12.5 117.9 91 23 04/07/00 5024 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1216.0 13.1 118.5 91 24 04/07/00 5025 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 15 1241.0 11.9 121.1 92 3 04/10/00 5026 TR 23067-4/1-ot 65 slope 1242.0 11.3 120.4 91 3 04/10/00 5027 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1200.0 11.0 121.5 91 3 04/10/00 5028 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1201.0 11.7 119.2 89 3 04/10/00 5029 TR 23067-4/Lot60 1199.0 8.1 118.4 92 23 04/10/00 5030 TR 23067-4/Lot 60 1200.0 11.5 116.3 90 23 04/10/00 5031 TR 23067-4/Lot 54 1213.0 9.7 117.1 91 23 04/10/00 5032 RT No. 5028 -- 10.3 120.8 91 3 04/10/00 5033 TR 23067-4/1-ot 61 1202.0 11.6 117.2 91 23 04/10/00 5038 TR 23067-4/1.ot 6 1203.0 11.6 114.9 90 22 04/10/00 5039 TR 23067-4/Lot6 1204.0 11.7 116.2 91 22 04/10/00 5040 TR 23067-4/Lot8 1209.0 12.3 118.8 94 22 04/10/00 5041 TR 23067-4/1-ot8 1208.0 11.0 117.1 92 22 04/11/00 5042 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1202.0 12.4 115.0 92 17 04/11/00 5043 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1203.0 13.6 112.7 91 17 04/11/00 5044 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1204.0 10.5 119.9 90 3 04/11/00 5045 TR 23067-4/1-ot 61 1203.0 11.1 121.4 91 3 04/11/00 5046 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1213.0 12.2 114.4 90 22 04/11/00 5047 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1212.0 12.6 115.2 91 22 04/11/00 5048 TR 23067-4/1.ot 64 1214.0 10.7 117.3 91 23 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 15 12 ' FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST:;'. -TEST;.. TEST ELEV... MOISTURE DENSITY: COMP.: tS LOCATION::. _ :. 04/11/00 5049 TR 23067-4/L.ot 64 1215.0 11.1 116.5 90 23 '04/11/00 5050 TR 23067-4/Lot 64 1213.0 11.6 118.6 92 23 04/11/00 5051 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1213.0 16.0 110.9 86 23 04/11/00 5052 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1217.0 12.9 113.8 91 19 ' 04/11/00 5053 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1218.0 13.7 114.5 92 19 04/11/00 5054 TR 23067-4/Lot 60 1215.0 11.0 117.9 91 23 04/11/00 5055 TR 23067-4/Lot 60 1216.0 15.4 111.2 86 23 04/11/00 5056 TR 23067-4/L.ot 55 1217.0 12.5 116.3 92 22 04/11/00 5057 TR 23067-4/Lot 55 1218.0 13.2 115.1 92 23 04/12/00 5064 RT No. 5051 -- 11.7 114.0 92 23 '04/12/00 5065 RT No. 5055 -- 10.8 116.2 90 23 04/12/00 5066 TR 23067-4/Lot 54 1217.0 13.5 117.6 90 24 04/12/00 5067 TR 23067-4/Lot 62 1214.0 13.6 115.1 92 19 ' 04/12/00 5068 TR 23067-4/Lot 62 1213.0 15.1 114.4 90 22 04/12/00 5069 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1210.0 9.8 118.5 92 23 04/12/00 5070 TR 23067-4/Lot 63 1211.0 11.2 117.7 91 23 04/12/00 t 5071 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1216.0 10.1 118.0 90 25 04/12/00 5072 TR 23067-4/Lot 61 1217.0 11.6 118.8 91 25 04/13/00 5080 TR 23067-4/Lot 13 1203.3 9.4 120.3 92 24 ' 04/13/00 5081 TR 23067-4/Lot 12 1204.1 8.7 127.2 95 20 04/13/00 5082 TR 23067-4/Lot 11 1204.5 8.8 127.2 95 20 04/13/00 5083 TR 23067-4/L.ot 10 1204.5 9.0 126.0 94 20 04/13/00 5084 TR 23067-4/L.ot 9 1204.4 7.5 123.3 92 20 04/13/00 5085 TR 23067-4/Lot 8 1203.8 8.5 131.4 98 20 04/13/00 5086 TR 23067-4/L.ot 7 1202.8 9.8 131.5 98 20 04/13/00 t 5087 TR 23067-4/L.ot 57 1220.0 14.8 112.2 90 19 04/13/00 5088 TR 23067-4/Lot 57 1219.0 11.1 119.1 92 23 04/13/00 5089 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1219.0 7.0 122.1 91 20 04/13/00 5090 TR 23067-4/Lot 59 1219.0 10.9 116.4 90 23 04/13/00 5091 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1220.0 -11.6 117.5 91 -23 5092 TR 23067-4/L.ot 56 1221.0 9.0 118.0 91 23 '04/13/00 04/13/00 5100 TR 23067-4/L.ot 57 1223.0 12.3 120.8 94 23 04/14/00 5101 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1195.0 9.7 118.6 90 2 04/14/00 5102 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1194.0 10.1 119.9 90 3 ' 04/14/00 5103 TR 23067-4/L.ot 21 1191.0 8.8 121.4 91 3 04/14/00 5104 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1192.0 11.2 120.1 90 3 04/14/00 5105 TR 23067-4/L.ot 34 1196.0 10.9 122.5 92 3 t 04/14/00 5111 TR 23067-4/Lot 58 1222.0 7.9 122.0 92 3 04/14/00 5112 TR 23067-4/L.ot 58 1221.0 8.9 120.4 91 3 5113 TR 23067-4/L.ot 57 1227.0 13.2 115.8 91 22 '04/14/00 04/14/00 5114 TR 23067-4/Lot 57 1223.0 12.6 114.5 90 22 04/14/00 5115 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 1224.0 11.0 117.6 90 25 ' 04/14/00 5116 TR 23067-4/L.ot 56 1225.0 12.1 118.1 90 25 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141.99 Tract 230674 Page T-1 16 19 .3F FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST _ . °TEST ... TEST:, [i:_:: >`: :`::..:.; : ELEV: ,; . MOISTURE: %%D,ENSITY. :EOMP:.;: DATE `' .' NO:. - - .: LOCATIOM .. 04/14/00 5117 TR 23067-4/Lot 54 1224.0 11.8 116.3 90 22 04/14/00 5118 TR 23067-4/Lot54 1225.0 12.5 117.2 91 23 04/17/00 5119 TR 23067-4/l.ot 24 1190.0 13.0 118.9 91 25 04/17/00 5120 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1189.0 11.3 116.5 92 23 04/17/00 5121 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1190.0 12.4 114.8 90 23 04/17/00 5122 TR 23067-4/L.ot 19 1194.0 14.6 112.8 91 17 04/17/00 5123 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1195.0 13.7 113.1 91 17 04/17/00 5124 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1193.0 10.2 120.7 92 25 04/17/00 5125 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1194.0 7.8 118.9 91 25 04/20/00 5126 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 1199.0 10.1 116.8 91 22 04/20/00 5127 TR 23067-4/L.ot 21 1198.0 11.4 121.6 91 3 04/20/00 5128 TR 23067-4/L.ot 23 1194.0 10.3 119.9 90 3 04/20/00 5129 TR 23067-4/L.ot 23 1196.0 12.8 117.5 90 24 04/20/00 5130 TR 23067-4/L.ot 22 1198.0 11.2 118.4 91 24 04/20/00 5131 TR 23067-4/L.ot 22 1197.0 13.7 116.7 89 3 04/20/00 5132 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1192.0 14.8 115.4 87 3 04/20/00 5133 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1191.0 12.9 117.6 90 3 04/20/00 5134 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 1198.0 13.5 118.0 90 3 04/20/00 5135 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1190.0 13.6 116.2 90 22 04/20/00 5136 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1189.0 10.9 117.5 91 22 04/20/00 5139 RT No. 5131 -- 12.9 119.9 90 3 04/20/00 5140 RT No. 5132 -- 11.3 120.1 90 3 04/20/00 5142 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1200.0 11.7 1 1 1.3 90 29 04/20/00 5143 TR 23067-4/L.ot 22 1201.0 11.6 112.2 91 29 04/20/00 5144 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1200.0 12.5 113.6 91 17 04/20/00 5155 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 1199.0 13.1 114.4 92 17 04/20/00 5156 RT No. 5137 -- 12.2 117.8 90 24 04/21/00 5170 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1195.0 10.4 122.0 93 1 04/21/00 5171 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1196.0 11.2 119.9 92 1 04/21/00 5172 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1200.0 12.6 114.3 92 17 04/22/00 5173 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1201.0 12.5 112.8 91 17 04/22/00 5174 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1197.0 11.5 110.5 89 29 04/22/00 5175 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1198.0 10.9 1 1 1.1 89 29 04/22/00 5176 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1200.0 11.8 112.6 90 17 04/22/00 5177 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1201.0 12.4 114.0 92 17 04/22/00 5178 RT No. 5174 -- 12.7 113.5 92 29 04/22/00 5179 RT No. 5175 -- 13.9 112.1 91 29 04/24/00 5207 TR 23067-4/L.ot 7 1209.0 11.1 122.4 92 3 04/24/00 5208 TR 23067-4/Lot 7 1208.0 10.3 121.7 92 3 04/24/00 5209 TR 23067-4/Lot 9 1209.0 13.4 115.5 91 22 04/24/00 5210 TR 23067-4/Lot 9 1210.0 12.8 114.6 90 22 04/25/00 5211 TR 23067-4/Lot 50 1203.0 9.8 .114.4 90 22 04/25/00 5212 TR 23067-4/Lot 50 1204.0 11.0 115.1 91 22 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141.99 Tract 230674 Page T-1 17 .3F 40 FIELD DENSITY TEST RFMILTS TEST: TEST , . ::: .;.`l`, TEST EI EY:.. , i.:..... MO... ISTURE . DENSITY COMP::, ;,:SOIL::'_:: _ BATE NO. LQCATi©N..:.::,_:.:::•:.:.([tEi3w:.`m.::'-f°�2-.��:�:',.7'YPI�----- _.. 04/25/00 5213 TR 23067-4/Lot 13 1204.0 8.7 117.8 90 24 04/25/00 5214 TR 23067-4/Lot 13 1205.0 9.1 118.3 91 24 04/25/00 5215 TR 23067-4/L.ot 10 1212.0 10.4 114.5 90 22 04/25/00 5216 TR 23067-4/L.ot 10 1211.0 11.7 115.8 91 22 04/25/00 5217 TR 23067-4/L.ot 8 1211.0 12.4 112.9 91 17 04/25/00 5218 TR 23067-4/Lot8 1210.0 13.0 112.5 90 17 04/25/00 5219 TR 23067-4/L.ot 9 1211.0 11.3 114.8 90 22 04/25/00 5220 TR 23067-4/L.ot 9 1212.0 12.1 115.5 91 22 04/25/00 5221 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1179.0 9.9 119.2 94 22 04/25/00 5222 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1178.0 8.3 118.7 91 4 04/25/00 5223 TR 23067-4/L.ot 25 key 1182.0 10.0 117.4 90 4 04/25/00 5224 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 key 1183.0 9.7 113.5 91 17 04/25/00 5225 TR 23067-4/L.ot 24 key 1179.0 8.5 1 1 1.9 89 17 04/25/00 5226 TR 23067-4/L.ot 24 key 1180.0 10.6 112.6 90 17 04/26/00 5227 TR 23067-4/L.ot 9 1214.0 11.8 113.1 91 17 04/26/00 5228 TR 23067-4/L.ot 9 1215.0 14.2 114.5 92 17 04/26/00 5229 TR 23067-4/Lot 10 1214.0 10.9 116.3 92 22 04/26/00 5230 TR 23067-4/Lot 10 1215.0 13.6 115.4 93 17 04/26/00 5231 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1197.0 16.8 110.2 89 17 04/26/00 5232 TR 23067-4/L.ot 17 1198.0 14.4 112.6 90 17 04/26/00 5233 TR 23067-4/Lot 14 1200.0 10.7 111.5 90 17 04/26/00 5234 TR 23067-4/L.ot 14 1201.0 11.5 115.9 91 22 04/26/00 5235 RT No. 5225 -- 10.9 112.2 90 17 04/26/00 5236 TR 23067-4/L.ot 12 1211.0 10.4 121.4 94 32 04/26/00 5237 TR 23067-4/Lot 12 1212.0 9.8 117.3 91 32 04/26/00 5238 TR 23067-4/L.ot 11 1215.0 11.3 116.8 91 32 04/26/00 5239 TR 23067-4/L.ot 11 1216.0 8.7 117.6 90 25 04/26/00 5240 TR 23067-4/Lot 10 1215.0 10.1 115.7 90 32 04/26/00 5241 TR 23067-4/Lot 10 1200.0 11.0 112.8 91 19 04/26/00 5242 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1201.0 12.6 112.1 90 19 04/26/00 5243 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 1198.0 9.3 115.7 90 6 04/27/00 5244 RT No. 5231 FG 14.5 113.8 91 17 04/27/00 5245 TR 23067-4/Lot 67 FG 11.4 1 16. l 90 6 04/27/00 5246 TR 23067-4/L.ot 68 FG 11.2 118.9 92 6 04/27/00 5247 TR 23067-4/L.ot 69 FG 10.9 118.8 92 6 04/27/00 5248 TR 23067-4/Lot 70 FG 10.3 116.5 91 6 04/27/00 5249 TR 23067-4/L.ot 71 FG 9.3 122.8 95 6 04/27/00 5255 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1200.0 11.0 118.9 93 32 04/27/00 5256 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 1201.0 12.0 117.7 92 32 04/27/00 5257 TR 23067-4/Lot 13 1210.0 11.7 112.2 90 19 04/27/00 5258 TR 23067-4/Lot 13 1209.0 9.9 118.0 92 32 04/27/00 5259 TR 23067-4/L.ot 11 1217.0 14.1 117.0 91 32 04/27/00 5260 TR 23067-4/L.ot 11 1218.0 114.3 90 22 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JULY 2000 I.N. 141.99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 18 40 TEST TEST TESL' 1 DATE NO. Lf?CATII©N.::.:.::,.:.....�:�;. 04/28/00 5267 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 @ Nighthawk 1185.0 12.1 115.8 90 32 04/28/00 5268 TR 23067-4/L.ot 25 @ Nighthawk 1186.0 13.0 117.1 91 32 04/28/00 5269 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 slope 1182.0 11.4 116.8 92 22 04/28/00 5270 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1183.0 10.5 114.9 90 22 '04/28/00 5271 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1180.0 8.9 119.9 90 3 04/28/00 5272 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1181.0 9.7 121.6 91 3 5273 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1192.0 13.5 111.4 90 29 '04/28/00 04/28/00 5274 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 1193.0 12.4 113.5 92 29 04/28/00 5275 TR 23067-4/Lot 12 1215.0 10.0 118.3 92 32 04/28/00 5276 TR 23067-4/L.ot 12 1216.0 11.1 115.9 90 32 04/28/00 5277 TR 23067-4/Lot 14 1208.0 9.7 114.5 90 22 05/01/00 5278 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1209.0 10.5 119.8 90 3 05/02/00 5290 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1183.0 11.4 119.5 93 32 05/02/00 5291 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1184.0 12.6 117.8 92 32 05/02/00 5292 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1187.0 10.1 122.7 92 3 05/02/00 5293 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1188.0 9.9 120.2 90 3 05/02/00 5294 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1190.0 12.4 116.8 91 23 05/02/00 5295 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1191.0 11.7 117.0 91 23 5303 TR 23067-4/Lot24 1191.0 9.8 120.1 92 25 '05/03/00 05/03/00 5304 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1192.0 8.8 117.8 90 25 05/03/00 5305 TR 23067-4/1.ot 23 1196.0 9.1 116.9 91 23 5306 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1197.0 10.3 116.2 90 23 '05/03/00 05/03/00 5307 TR 23067-4/L.ot 25 1198.0 9.9 123.5 93 3 05/03/00 5308 TR 23067-4/1-ot 25 1199.0 11.4 117.9 90 25 5211D TR 23067-4/1.ot 25 1196.0 11.4 116.3 91 32 '05/04/00 05/04/00 5212D TR 23067-4/1.ot 25 1197.0 10.9 115.8 90 32 05/04/00 5213D TR 23067-4/1-ot 25 1198.0 11.0 117.7 90 25 05/04/00 5214D TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1199.0 10.5 118.6 91 25 05/05/00 5221D TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1199.0 12.0 119.3 93 32 05/05/00 5222D TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1200.0 11.7 118.9 92 32 05/08/00 5225D TR 23067-4/1.ot 24 1200.0 11.0 119.6 93 32 05/08/00 5226D TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1201.0 13.1 114.4 90 22 05/08/00 5227D TR 23067-4/Lot 57 FG 10.0 115.1 91 22 5228D TR 23067-4/Lot 58 FG 8.9 116.7 92 22 '05/08/00 05/08/00 5229D TR 23067-4/L.ot 59 FG 9.7 116.2 90 8 05/08/00 5230D TR 23067-4/L.ot 60 FG 11.0 117.5 91 8 05/08/00 5231D TR 23067-4/Lot 61 FG 10.3 115.9 91 22 05/08/00 5232D TR 23067-4/1-ot 62 FG 9.8 122.5 92 3 05/08/00 5233D TR 23067-4/1-ot 63 FG 11.7 112.3 90 17 5234D TR 23067-4/L.ot 23 1201.0 12.1 114.7 90 22 t05/09/00 05/09/00 5235D TR 23067-4/1.ot 23 1200.0 12.4 116.0 91 22 05/09/00 5238D TR 23067-4/1.ot 25 1202.0 10.5 119.7 92 25 05/09/00 5239D TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1203.0 7.9 118.6 91 25 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T -I 19 41/ ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T-120 Vol FIELD DENSITY T ST RESULTS TEST . TEST :>..:._ ..:.:':.` . TEST... :'.;' ...... ,. `:::E,I EV:;. MOLSTUitE DENSITY COMP.,::.`;SOIL . : ' DATE:.: NEi. LQCitTI©1V' _.: (fi) `:' : j 1) - A jl��i- j9n) :TPl - 05/09/00 5242D TR 23067-4/LotI FG 7.8 125.9 95 3 05/09/00 5243D TR 23067-4/Lot 2 FG 10.1 121.7 92 3 05/09/00 5244D TR 23067-4/L.ot 3 FG 8.5 117.6 90 25 05/09/00 5245D TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 FG 11.2 116.8 91 23 ' 05/09/00 5246D TR 23067-4/Lot 5 FG 7.9 120.5 93 25 05/09/00 5247D TR 23067-4/L.ot 6 FG 13.1 115.9 90 32 05/09/00 5248D TR 23067-4/Lot 7 FG 10.8 116.3 91 32 ' 05/09/00 5249D TR 23067-4/L.ot 8 FG 7.3 126.5 95 3 05/09/00 5250D TR 23067-4/Lot 9 FG 8.4 120.2 90 3 05/09/00 5251D TR 23067-4/1-ot 10 FG 5.9 121.4 91 3 05/09/00 5252D TR 23067-4/Lot 1 I FG 8.6 118.8 91 25 05/09/00 5253D TR 23067-4/Lot 12 FG 9.1 117.0 91 23 05/09/00 5254D TR 23067-4/Lot 13 FG 10.8 116.9 91 32 ' 05/09/00 5255D TR 23067-4/Lot 14 FG 8.3 119.5 92 25 05/10/00 5260D TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd Lot 44 1190.0 9.7 120.8 93 25 05/10/00 5261D TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd Lot 16 1195.0 11.8 117.9 92 32 05/10/00 5262D TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd Lot 16 1196.0 12.0 116.2 90 32 05/10/00 5263D TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd Lot 14 1201.0 9.0 119.7 90 25 05/10/00 5264D TR 23067-4/Abbey Rd Lot 14 1202.0 8.8 120.1 92 25 ' 05/15/00 5311 TR 23067-4/Lot 17 FG 9.8 117.3 91 32 05/15/00 5312 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 FG 10.7 113.6 91 19 05/15/00 5313 TR 23067-4/Lot 15 FG 9.5 119.5 92 24 05/15/00 5314 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 FG 8.8 124.5 94 3 05/15/00 5315 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 FG 9.1 121.4 91 3 05/15/00 5316 TR 23067-4/Lot 22 FG 9.2 116.6 91 32 05/15/00 5317 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 FG 10.7 114.4 90 22 05/16/00 5318 TR 23067-4/L.ot 46 1218.0 12.1 116.0 91 22 05/16/00 5319 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1219.0 18.9 115.2 91 22 05/16/00 5320 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1201.0 11.6 114.8 90 25 05/16/00 5321 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1202.0 10.3 117.5 90 25 05/16/00 5324 TR 23067-4/1-ot 46 1210.0 12.3 113.7 91 19 05/16/00 5325 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1209.0 11.9 114.0 92 32 05/17/00 5330 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1212.0 8.8 121.5 91 3 05/17/00 5331 TR 23067-4/Lot 46 1213.0 9.7 119.9 90 22 ' 05/19/00 5361 TR 23067-4/L.ot 25 1175.0 12.0 115.7 90 32 05/19/00 5362 TR 23067-4/Lot 25 1176.0 10.3 116.2 90 32 05/19/00 5363 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1180.0 8.7 120.0 90 3 ' 05/19/00 5364 TR 23067-4/Lot 24 1179.0 10.5 112.8 91 19 05/19/00 5365 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1181.0 9.6 114.4 90 22 05/19/00 5366 TR 23067-4/Lot 23 1182.0 11.0 115.3 91 22 05/24/00 5386 TR 23067-4/1-ot l8 FG 8.6 118.2 93 22 05/24/00 5387 TR 23067-4/Lot 19 FG 7.9 119.1 91 25 ' 05/24/00 5388 TR 23067-4/Lot 20 FG 8.5 120.4 92 25 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T-120 Vol )5/24/00 5389 TR 23067-4/1.ot 21 FG 9.1 116.7 92 22 )5/24/00 5397 TR 23067-4/Lot 38 1213.0 12.5 113.8 91 19 )5/25/00 5398 TR 23067-4/Lot 18 slope 1197.0 8.9 116.3 90 32 )5/25/00 5399 TR 23067-4/1-ot 20 slope 1194.0 8.6 116.7 91 32 )5/25/00 5400 TR 23067-4/Lot 21 slope 1197.0 7.1 118.8 92 32 )5/25/00 5403 TR 23067-4/1.ot 66 FG 7.1 119.8 92 25 )5/25/00 5404 TR 23067-4/Lot 64 FG 8.3 124.7 96 25 )5/25/00 5405 TR 23067-4/1.ot 52 FG 7.5 121.6 91 3 )5/25/00 5406 TR 23067-4/Lot 53 FG 9.4 114.5 90 22 )5/25/00 5407 TR 23067-4/Lot 54 FG 7.3 118.8 91 25 )5/25/00 5408 TR 23067-4/Lot 55 FG 10.7 116.0 90 32 )5/25/00 5409 TR 23067-4/Lot 56 FG 9.2 118.9 93 32 )5/25/00 5410 TR 23067-4/1.ot 25 1202.0 7.2 130.1 97 33 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Tract 230674 Page T-121 V3 TABLE II Lot Summary r: ,i•.�«x��,•'�c,�i+.Q oVNumbers �r�ra- ""?;Cut; Fill;:Transitiou Mgr, •;�Y: :.?: i+3' � ''3"�§j=--'^w1;.-§+ «V':.".:.�:w"c;Yu�r':aL. ._''! F. .7 <Mauimiun'DeptYi of -Fill .','ra`:",-.'E.r�:.: :..:*':„ t+\. ,'5�.:.✓.:: it: �.�`•`-,: i�:v. (ft �„ �-rV�fi.. �"�• 1 Fill 45 2 Fill 35 3 Fill 35 4 Fill 35 5 Fill 38 6 Fill 30 7 Fill 30 8 Fill 28 9 Fill 20 10 Fill 15 11 Fill 5 12 Fill 8 13 Fill 10 14 Fill 21 15 Fill 25 16 Fill 31 17 Fill 71 18 Fill 67 19 Fill 45 20 Fill 39 21 Fill 34 22 Fill 44 23 Fill 35 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 415 Lot Summary (Continued) Po�<T:ot}Number<�; �"``Cut�Fill T'r`ansition ...-.:t�';�:�.`• .. i,':I �n :%i �rv`�.. Y -v Y. Y.^J.^Wvrew..n .,&�1Vlax�mum3Deptli of;+Fill��;t� F' i�4.v,;, {�5ry��caYY tl'Tu. f•: %� y°4 yT,! Q 24 Fill 20 25 Fill 15 46 Fill 10 47 Cut NA 48 Cut NA 49 Fill 10 50 Fill 10 51 Fill 3 52 Fill 3 53 Fill 4 54 Fill 5 55 Fill 5 56 Fill 20 57 Fill 12 58 Fill 36 59 Fill 34 60 Fill 25 61 Fill 15 62 Fill 10 63 Fill 10 64 Fill 5 65 Cut NA 66 Fill 10 67 Fill 5 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 JULY 2000 VIP Lot Summary (Continued) Lot N 'mbei y r�6�:��'�''+N-�� °Cl tvFiH As,M,1 UZI tq^ ,{ft f,K•'�Y; :+�.�':� ; �••�i r51r5dCsi mu D ptt of Fill- S;� i t ' _� .(•�'%�:.41� 68 Fill 11 69 Fill 15 70 Fill 3 71 Fill 3 72 Fill 7 73 Fill 10 74 Fill 12 75 Fill 5 76 Fill 5 77 Fill 7 78 Fill 7 79 Fill 3 80 Cut NA 81 Fill 3 82 Fill 15 83 Fill 15 84 Fill 12 85 Fill 10 86 Fill 15 87 Fill 15 88 Fill 30 89 Fill 43 90 Fill 28 91 Fill 25 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 117 Lot Summary (Continued) ` of+Num erg G t Fill�Msi§ MaximuD th_ foMill w (ft).,�� 92 Fill 23 93 Fill 20 94 Fill 18 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 wk REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. ., 1989b, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated , J.N. 141-99, March 10, 1999. , 1999b, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. , 1999c, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. , 1999d, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. , 2000, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Se 1 ' APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST CRITERIA Laboratory Maximum Dry Density ' Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected sample of soil in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are given on Plates A-1 and A-2. ' Expansion Potential Expansion index tests were performed on selected samples of soil accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) ' Standard Test No. 18-2. Expansion potential classifications were determined from UBC Table 18-1-B on the basis of the expansion index values. Test results and expansion potentials are presented on Plates A-3 to A-4. ' Soluble -Sulfate Analysis ' Chemical analyses were performed on selected samples of soil to determine soluble sulfate contents. These tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Test results are included on Plates A-5 and A-6. Direct Shear The Coulomb shear strength parameters, angle of internal friction and cohesion, were determined for undisturbed ' samples, and for samples remolded to 90 percent of maximum dry density. These tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D3080-72. Three specimens were prepared for each test. The test specimens were artificially saturated, and then sheared under varied normal loads at a maximum constant rate of strain of 0.05 inch per ' minute. Results are graphically presented on Plates A-7 and A-8. ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 s.1 LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' Nuinber.' SoiLType:; y-:;'7it:_ . , _;,: - O hmiim Moisture (%) Maaimtiin Dry Density (ct) I Yellow -tan SAND with trace Clay 9.0 130.5 2 Dark brown tine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 130.5 3 Reddish -brown tine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 130.0 5 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 118.5 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 128.0 7 Brown Silty SAND 10.0 131.0 8 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.0 129.0 9 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 8.5 132.0 10 Light brown Silty SAND 12.0 113.5 11 Dark brown Silty SAND 9.5 131.0 12 Yellow-brown SAND 16.5 105.5 13 Light brown coarse SAND 13.5 120.5 14 Black Clayey SILT 16.5 112.5 15 Black SILT with trace Clay and Sand 16.0 110.5 16 Yellow-brown Silty fine SAND 12.5 123.0 17 Yellow-brown Silty tine SAND 12.0 124.5 18 Yellow-brown Silty fine SAND 14.5 115.5 19 Dark brown Silty SAND 11.5 124.5 20 Brown Silty SAND 8.0 134.5 21 Brown Silty to Clayey SAND 9.0 132.5 22 Light brown fine SAND 10.0 127.0 23 Red brown Clayey tine SAND 10.5 129.0 24 Greenish Silty tine SAND 10.0 130.5 25 Red brown Clayey SAND 9.5 130.5 26 Light brown tine to coarse SAND 12.0 123.5 27 Light grev/light brown Silty fine SAND 14.5 118.0 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-1 J4 LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (Continued) 1 (1) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JULY 2000 J. N. 141-99 Plate A-2 '511 1 0 ti p mum ufft*tv' ,Nu 0ypea Dry Density, 28 Red brown Silty fine SAND 13.0------- - ---A14.5 - 29 Brown fine SAND with Silt 12.0 123.5 30 Yellow brown to tan Silty fine SAND 16.5 107.0 31 Light brown fine to coarse SAND 13.5 116.0 32 Red brown Silty medium to coarse SAND .1 10.0 128.5 11 1 i0ht hmwn qiltvq AND I Q n –M-0- 1 (1) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JULY 2000 J. N. 141-99 Plate A-2 '511 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA 2 Number x .72 Expapson;i 7 -Expansion Potential', I through 4 8 Very Low 5 through 7 5 Very Low 8 through 10 4 Very Low 11 through 14 27 Low 15 through 17 11 Very Low 18 through 20 32 Low 21 through 23 41 Low 24 and 25 37 Low 46 32 Low 47 and 48 30 Low 49 and 50 5 Very Low 51 through 53 2 Very Low 54 through 57 6 Very Low 58 through 60 16 Very Low 61 through 63 18 Very Low 64 and 65 0 Very Low 66 through 69 12 Very Low 70 and 71 42 Low 72 and 73 43 Low 74 and 75 15 Very Low 76 through 78 0 Very Low 79 through 81 8 Very Low 82 through 84 0 Very Low 85 through 87 16 Very Low 88 and 89 3 Very Low PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Plate A-3 .55 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA (Continued) (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD 18-2 (3) PER UBC TABLE 18-1-8 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Plate A-4 �, :'Expansion Ntiniial'4 90 through 92 1 Very Low 93 and 94 3 Very Low (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD 18-2 (3) PER UBC TABLE 18-1-8 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Plate A-4 �, SOLUBLE UL A 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Plate A-5 .57 nient % I through 4 0.0018 5 through 7 0.0018 8 through 10 0.0009 11 through 14 0.0036 15 through 17 0.0018 18 through 20 0.0018 21 through 23 0.0108 24 and 25 0,0054 46 0.0027 47 and 48 0.0036 49 and 50 0.0081 51 through 53 0.0018 54 through 57 0.0054 58 through 60 0.0009 61 through 63 0.0018 64 and 65 0.0009 66 through 69 0.0048 70 and 71 0.0059 72 and 73 0.0013 74 and 75 0.0156 76 through 78 0.0018 79 through 8l 0.0055 82 through 84 0.024 85 through 87 0.0048 88 and 89 0.006 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JULY 2000 I.N. 141-99 Plate A-5 .57 SOLUBLE SULFATES (Continued) ' (4) PER CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD NO. 417 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-6 m SWfate Confent (%a) .: 90 through 92 0.0216 93 and 94 0.0072 ' (4) PER CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD NO. 417 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JULY 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-6 m 3500- DESCRIPTION FRICTION ANGLE COHESION (PSF) • SLOPE 2 ® 0.0 Silty SAND (SM) 30 100 3000 2500 — 2000 i 1500 1000 500 NORMAL STRESS - pounds per square foot SAMPLE LOCATION DESCRIPTION FRICTION ANGLE COHESION (PSF) • SLOPE 2 ® 0.0 Silty SAND (SM) 30 100 NOTES: Samples remolded to 90 % of maximum dry Density Samples were presoaked 24 hours minimum prior to shearing J.N. 141-99 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA July, 2000 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. REMOLDED TEST SAMPLES PLATE B-8 39 NORMAL STRESS - pounds per square foot SAMPLE LOCATION DESCRIPTION FRICTION ANGLE COHESION (PSF) • SLOPE 1 ® 0.0 Fine- to Coarse -Grained SAND 32 150 NOTES: Samples remolded to 90 % of maximum dry Density Samples were presoaked 24 hours minimum prior to shearing J.N. 141-99 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA July, 2000 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. REMOLDED TEST SAMPLES PLATE B-7 7t .23 0 (o 7-3., - 4, -S, -1 G 0 a] 7 I It PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES May 2, 2001 J.N. 141-99 ' CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 ' Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming t Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 26 through 45, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California ' This report presents a summary of the observation and testing services provided by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) during rough -grading operations to develop Lots 26 through 45 of Tract 23067-4 in the Redhawk development in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the ' suitability of the grading for the proposed residential construction are provided herein, as well as foundation -design recommendations based on the as -graded soil ' and geologic conditions. tThe purpose of the initial grading (Petra, 2000) grading was to develop 94 near -leve l lots for construction of single-family residences, as well as adjacent slopes and ' streets. Grading of Tract 23067-4 began in October 1999, and was completed in May 2000, for Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94. 1 Lots 26 through 45 of Tract 23067-4 were incomplete at the time of our rough - grading report (Petra, 2000) and have now been completed. Grading of the subject lots began in October 1999, and was completed in April 2001. i PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 7620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula. CA 92590 ' Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax. (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm net 01 I [1 11 1 1 CI I CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 2 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Removal and recompaction of low-density surface soils, processing of the exposed bottom surfaces or placement of compacted fill under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation and with selective testing by Petra. Earthwork and grading operations were performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the grading -plan review report (see References) and the grading code of the County of Riverside, California. The completed earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now planned. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY General Geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading were frequently observed and mapped by Petra's geologic staff. Geologic Units Geologic conditions observed onsite were generally as anticipated and described in the supplemental subsurface investigation and geotechnical review report for the site by Petra (see References). Removal bottoms were geologically mapped by a Petra geologist. Prior to grading, the site consisted of well-rounded hills underlain by Pauba Formation sandstone with intervening alluvial -filled valleys and colluvial - mantled hillsides. Additionally, there were minor areas of existing artificial -fill materials associated with the onsite roadways. All unsuitable soils were removed to expose competent bedrock of the Pauba Formation. W FJ I CJ L 1 1 1 1 1 1 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 3 The underlying Pauba Formation generally consists of sandstone and sandy siltstone which are predominantly fine- to coarse-grained, very well -indurated to cemented, laminated and moist and dense. Geologic structure/bedding was poorly developed to massive. Localized silt lenses within the Pauba Formation, where mapped, exposed flat -lying to near -horizontal bedding. Groundwater Minor seepage was encountered locally at or near the alluvial/bedrock contact. Faulting A northeast- and north -south -trending, high -angle fault was mapped during grading operations north and east of the site in Tract 23067-5. This fault did not displace Holocene soils and is not considered active. No faulting was mapped in Tract 23067-4 during grading of the site. SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. Ground Preparation All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils, including alluvium and colluvium, were removed to underlying bedrock. The removals varied from approximately 5 to 40± feet below original grades. Prior to placing fill, exposed bottom surfaces in removal areas were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, W 0 I 1 1 I� 1 CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 4 watered as necessary to achieve slightly above optimum moisture conditions and then recompacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Toe -of -fill -slope keys were provided at the base of all fill slopes constructed on existing ground surfaces sloping at 5:1 [horizontal: vertical (h:v)] or greater. The fill keys were excavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet into competent bedrock materials with a minimum slope of 2 percent to the heel of the key. Oversize Rock Oversize rock was not encountered during the rough -grading operations for Tract 23067-4. Cut/Fill Transition Lots Cut/till transitions were eliminated from Lots 26 through 33 and 41 through 45 by overexcavating the cut portions and replacing the excavated bedrock materials with compacted fill. Overexcavation of the cut portions extended to depths of approximately 3 to 15 feet below finish grades. Fill Placement and Testing Fill materials consist of onsite soils. All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions, then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent by rolling with a D8 or D9 bulldozer, 834 rubber -tired bulldozer or loaded scrapers. The maximum vertical depth of fill placed within the subject lots as a result of grading is approximately 59± feet. Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). Occasional field density tests were also perforated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556 (sandcone). s u 1 11 1 1 LJ 1 [1 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 5 Test results are presented on Table I (attached) and test locations are shown on the enclosed density test location map (Plate 1). Field density tests were taken at vertical intervals of approximately 1 to 2 feet and the compacted fills were tested at the time of placement to verify that the specified moisture content and minimum required relative compaction of 90 percent had been achieved. At least one in-place density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic ya rds of fill placed and/or for each 2 feet in vertical height of compacted fill. The actual number of tests taken per day varied with the project conditions, such as the number of earthmovers (scrapers) and availability of support equipment. When field density tests produced results less than the required minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The substandard area was then reworked, moisture -conditioned, if necessary, recompacted and retested until a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent was achieved. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was the basis for determining which maximum dry density value, summarized in a following section, was applicable for a given density test. One -point checks were performed to supplement visual classification. Fill Slope Construction All fill slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v). Maximum fill - slope height is approximately 28± feet located on Lot 27. Final surface compaction on the fill slopes was achieved by overfilling and back -rolling the slopes during construction and then trinttning to the compacted inner core or by backrolling the slopes with a sheepsfoot roller. 1 it rI L, I 1 1 [1 1 11 CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 6 Cut Slopes All cut slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter. Maximum cut -slope height is approximately 45± feet located south of Lot 45. Due to massive or favorable geologic conditions exposed on cut slopes, no buttress fills or stabilization fills were considered necessary. Subdrains Following clean -outs to competent bedrock, canyon subdrains were installed in the primary drainage courses. The subdrains were designed to mitigate the potential build-up of hydrostatic pressures below compacted fills due to infiltration of surfaces waters and migration of offsite -water sources. The approximate location of the subdrains are shown on the accompanying maps (Plate 1). Lot Summary A sununary of the maximum depths of fill placed on each lot is provided in Table II . LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil types observed during grading were determined in our laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix A. Expansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of soil existing at or near finish -pad grade within the subject lots. These tests were performed in it I 1 1 11 1 I I I CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'emecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 7 accordance with ASTM Test Method D4829-95. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analyses Water-soluble sulfate contents were also determined for representative samples of soil existing at or near pad grade of the subject lots in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. These tests resulted in negligible sulfate contents of less than 0.1 percent. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. POST -GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Landscaping and Maintenance of Graded Slopes Cut and till slopes within the subject area of Tract 23067-4 under the purview of this report are considered grossly and surficially stable. However, the fill slopes are comprised of granular soils and, unless mitigation measures are taken, the slopes will be subject to a low to moderate degree of surficial erosion, raveling and possible slumping during periods of heavy rainfall. Therefore, all graded slopes should be landscaped with a deep-rooted (4 to 5 feet deep), drought -resistant, woody -plant species. To provide temporary slope protection while the woody materials mature, the slopes should be planted with a herbaceous -plant species that will mature in one season or provided with some other protection, such as jute matting or polymer covering. The temporary protection should be maintained until the woody material has fully matured. A landscape architect should be consulted to determine the most suitable plant materials and irrigation requirements. To mitigate future surficial erosion and slumping, a permanent slope -maintenance program should be initiated. Proper slope maintenance must include regular care of drainage- and erosion -control provisions, rodent control, prompt repair of leaking It A I 1 I 11 I I I I 1 I CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 7.N. 141-99 Page 8 irrigation systems and replacement of dying- or dead -plant materials. The irrigation system should be designed and maintained to provide a constant moisture content in the soils. Overwatering, as well as overdrying, of the soils can lead to surficial erosion and slumping. Homeowners should be advised of the potential problems that can develop when drainage on the pads and slopes is altered in any way. Drainage can be altered due to the placement of fill and construction of garden walls, retaining walls, walkways, patios, swimming pools and planters. Pad Drainage Drainage on the lots should be designed to carry surface water away from all graded slopes and structures. Pad drainage should be designed for a minimum gradient of 1 percent with drainage directed to the adjacent streets. After dwellings are constructed, positive drainage away from the structures and slopes should be provided on the lots by means of earth swales, sloped concrete tlatwork and area drains. Utility Trenches All utility -trench backfill within street right-of-ways, utility easements, under sidewalks, driveways and building -floor slabs and within or in proximity to slopes, should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by a Petra representative to verify adequate compaction. Excavations for trenches that exceed 4 feet in depth should be laid-back at a maximum gradient of 1:1 (h:v). For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfills should be placed in lifts no greater than 2 feet in thickness and then mechanically compacted with a hydra -hammer, I I 1 I 1 I I CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 9 pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than 8 inches and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. As an alternative for shallow trenches (18 inches or less in depth) where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under building -floor slabs, imported clean sand having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of Petra to verify an adequate degree of compaction and that the trench backfill will not be subject to adverse settlement. To avoid point -loads and subsequent distress to asbestos, clay, cement or plastic pipe, imported sand bedding should be placed at least 1 foot above all pipe in areas where excavated trench materials may contain oversize rock. Sand -bedding materials should thoroughly be jetted prior to placement of backfill. FOUNDATION -DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our observations during grading and field and laboratory testing, the preliminary foundation -design recommendations presented in our geotechnical investigation report (see References) are considered applicable for the subject lots. The recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. Allowable -Bearing Values An allowable -bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot (pso may be used for design of 24 -inch -square pad footings and 12 -inch -wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade in compacted it !U I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 [1 I [1 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'entecula Area May 2, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 10 fill materials. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1 foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable -bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Settlement Based on the above bearing values and depth of fill, a total settlement of footings is expected to be less than 1 inch and differential settlement less than one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during or shortly following the completion of construction as the loads are applied. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure increasing at the rate of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot, may be used to determine lateral bearing for building footings constructed on level ground. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 times the dead -load forces may also be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Expansive Soil Conditions Laboratory test data indicate the foundation soils underlying the subject lots exhibit VERY LOW to LOW expansion potential, as classified in accordance with 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. Minimum design recommendations for footings and residential -floor slabs for each of the above conditions are presented in the following sections based on a lot -by -lot evaluation. However, additional slab thickness, footing size and/or reinforcement may be necessary for structural 1 I I C 1 CENTEX HONIES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'emecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page i l considerations, as determined by the project architect and/or structural engineer. A summary of the expansion test results and associated lots is provided in Appendix A. Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or less) Lots 30 through 32 and 37 through 45 have a VERY LOW expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. • Footings Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 -inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two- story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. ' Building -Floor Slabs ' Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (60-W2.9xW2.9); ' or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. ' Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen ' or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. I I 1 [1 [1 I CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 12 - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - The subgrade soils below all living -area and garage -floor slabs should be pre - watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Results of our laboratory tests indicate onsite soils exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Table 18-I-13. Lots 26 through 29 and 33 through 36 have it LOW expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. The 1997 UBC specifies that slab -on -ground foundations (floor slabs) on soils with an expansion index greater than 20 require special design considerations in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815. The design procedures outlined in 1997 UBC Section 1815 are based on a plasticity index of the different soil layers existing within the upper 15 feet of the building site. We have assumed an effective plasticity index of 15 in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815.4.2. The design and construction recommendations that follow are based on the above soil conditions and may be considered for minimizing the effects of slightly (LOW) expansive soils. These recommendations have been based on the previous experience of Petra on projects with similar soil conditions. Although construction performed in accordance with these recommendations has been found to minimize post - construction movement and/or cracking, they generally do not positively mitigate all potential effects of expansive soil action. The owner, architect, design civil engineer, structural engineer and contractors must be made aware of the expansive- it �/l 073 D lP %.�.00 13 I [] I CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 13 soil conditions which exist at the site. Furthermore, it is recommended that additional slab thicknesses, footing sizes and/or reinforcement more stringent than recommended below be provided as required or specified by the project architect or structural engineer. • Footings - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18-1-C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 -inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two- story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, near the bottoms of the footings. • Building -Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways. Ail slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand he placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a ' similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation t iy ' CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 ' TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 14 ' maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. ' Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage - floor slabs should be prewatered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture ' should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade soils. ' Post -Tensioned Slabs ' Post -tensioned -slab systems may be used for the subject site. The following recommendations are for soils with Very Low and Low expansion potential. The ' actual design of the post -tensioned -slabs should be performed by the project structural engineer based on a 20 -foot -unsupported length at the corners. However, the onsite soils have been evaluated and the following soil parameters for construction of post -tensioned slab -on -ground in general conformance with design ' specifications of the 1997 UBC are being provided for use in the design of the slab systems. J 1 1 [1 /,S I 1 11 1 [1 [1 CENTEX HOIVIES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area Design Specifications for Post -Tensioning Institute May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 15 IsOnsion Irides- - - - Vtry Low .. and Uw Or to so) Assumed percent clay 30 Clay type hlmumonllonite Appro.vunale depth of constant suction (feet) 7.0 Approximate soil suction (pF) 3.6 Approximate velonn• or moisture flow (inches/month) 0.7 Thornwane Index ?0 Average edge Moisture variation depth. q„ (feet) center lift 4.6 Edge lilt 21 Anticipated swell. y (orches) Center lilt IA Edge lift 0.4 Soluble Sulfates Laboratory test data indicate soils within the subject lots contain a negligible soluble - sulfate content. As such, concrete in contact with soil may utilize Type I Portland cement. Structural Setbacks Footing setbacks of residential structures from property lines and from the tops and toes of the engineered fill slopes should conform to the minimum setback requirements of 1997 UBC Figure 18-1-1, Chapter 18. Structural setbacks of retaining walls, swimming pools and spas proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes should be analyzed separately. Footing Observations All building footing trenches should be observed by a Petra representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent and uniform bearing soils and to It FT I I 1 1 1 11 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'emecula Area May 2, 2001 J. N. 141-99 Page 16 depths conforming to 1997 U13C Figure 18-1-1, Chapter 18. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the placement forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture -softened soil and/or any construction debris, should be removed prior to placing concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility -trench excavations should not be placed in slab -on -grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry clensity. RETAINING-NVALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Allowable -Bearing Capacity and Lateral Rest Footings for retaining walls may be designed using the allowable -bearing capacity and lateral -resistance values recommended for building footings; however, when calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings are not covered with concrete flatwork. Active and At -Rest Earth Pressures An active lateral -earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having a density of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should he used for design of cantilevered walls retaining a drained, level backfill. Where the wall backfill slopes upward, at 2:1 (h:v), the above values should be increased to 63 pcf. The above values are for onsite soils which exhibit very low and low expansive potentials and are placed behind the walls a minimum horizontal distance equal to one-half the wall height. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. i7 r C-1 1 1 1 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'emecula Area May 2, 2001 J.N. 141-99 Page 17 For design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, an at -rest earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having density of 60 pcf should tentatively be used for walls supporting a level backfill. This value should be increased to 95 pcf for an ascending 2:1 (It:v) backfill. Drainage Perforated pipe -and -gravel subdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Perforated pipe should consist of 4 - inch -minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR -35 with the perforations laid -down. The pipe should be encased in a 1 -foot -wide column of 0.75- to 1.5 - inch, open -graded gravel extending above the wall footing to a minimum height of 1.5 feet above the footing or to a height equal to one-third the wall height, whichever is greater. The gravel should be completely wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafl 140N or equivalent. Solid outlet pipes should be connected to the subdrains and routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. Weepholes, if used, should be 3 -inch -minimum diameter and provided at maximum intervals of 6 feet along the walls. Open, vertical masonry joints should be provided at 32 -inch -minimum intervals One -cubic -foot of gravel should be placed behind the weepholes or open -masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Waterproofing The portions of retaining walls supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. M I I 1 1 I I 1 CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 18 Retaining -Wall Backfill All retaining -wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8-inch-maxinmm horizontal lifts, water or air-dried as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions and compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Flooding or jetting of backfill materials should be avoided. A Petra representative should verify adequate compaction of all backfill. MASONRY GARDEN WALLS Footings for free-standing masonry garden walls should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to mitigate the potential for unsightly cracking, positive separations should also be provided in the garden walls at a maximum horizontal spacing of 20 feet, and at corners. These separations should be provided in the blocks only and not extend through the footing. The footing should be placed monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as an effective "grade beam" below the wall. In areas where garden walls may be proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes, the footings should be deepened such that a minimum horizontal clearance of 7 feet is maintained between the outside bottom edges of the footings and the face of the slope. POST- GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Petra should be notified at the appropriate times in order that we may provide the following observation and testing services during the various phases of post -grading construction. I it �Q I ' CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 ' TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/1'emecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 19 ' Building Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. ' Retaining -Wall Construction ' - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. ' - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. ' - Observe and verify proper installation of subdrainage systems prior to placing wall backfill. - Observe and test placement of all wall backfill to verify adequate compaction. ' Masonry Garden W\ Ills - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and 1 competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches following removal of any slough and/or ' saturated soils and re -excavate to proper depth. ' Exterior Conciete-Flatwork Construction Observe and test subgrade soils below all concrete- Flatwork areas to verify ' adequate compaction and moisture content. • Utility -Trench Backtill ' Observe and test placement of all utility -trench backfill to verify adequate compaction. FM CENTEX HOMES May 2, 2001 TR 23067-4 Lots 26 - 45/Temecula Area J. N. 141-99 Page 20 • Re -Grading Observe and test placement of any fill to be placed above or beyond the finish grades shown on the grading plans. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Please call if you have any questions pertaining to this report. Respectfully submitted. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5E F? 4 i 1348 Bergmann S{ephen M. P G z �� ipal Geologist Senior Associat EXP. 1348 GE 692 P/MB/keb Attachments: Table I Field Density Test Results Table It - Lot Summary References Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (in pocket) Plate 2 - Density Test Location Map (in pocket) Appendix A - Laboratory Test Criteria/ Laboratory Test Data Distribution: (6) Addressee (4) Centcx Homes — Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller T�-S3dlo7-3, ato 0?/ I I 1 I I I TABLE 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS It PETRA .4A [1 11 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TEST TEST TEST, FLEV. MOISTURE DENSITY 'COMP. SOIL ' DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (pcf) - (%) TYPE, 02/03/00 4361 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 164.0 17.7 103.2 90 28 ' 02/03/00 4362 fR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 165.0 16.2 102.6 90 28 02/07/00 4388 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 169.0 9.6 114.1 92 29 4389 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 170.0 10.9 1 15.6 90 6 '02/07/00 02/09/00 4426 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1 150.0 11.6 116.4 91 6 02/09/00 4427 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1 151.0 11.1 1 15 6 90 6 '02/09/00 4428 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1154.0 10.4 116.1 91 6 02/09/00 4429 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1155.0 13.6 112.4 91 29 02/10/00 4448 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 159.0 13 0 1 16 3 91 6 ' 02/10/00 4449 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 160.0 11.4 1 18.8 91 7 02/10/00 4450 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 161.0 12.1 1 18.9 91 7 4454 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1164.0 9.5 23.4 93 10 '02/10/00 02/10/00 4455 IR 23067-4/Lot 36 1165.0 9.0 123.2 93 10 02/10/00 4456 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1 166.0 8 1. 115.6 92 10 1 02/10/00 4457 'IR 23067-4/Lot 36 1165.0 8.7 113.8 91 19 02/10/00 4472 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1 168.0 10.2 116.3) 90 8 02/10/00 4473 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1 169.0 12.8 1 17.2 90 8 02/1 1/00 4487 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 169.0 11.7 1 129 91 17 02/1 1/00 4488 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 170.0 10.9 1 17.7 91 4 02/11/00 4489 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1169.0 10.7 116 3 91 6 02/11/00 4490 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1171.0 11.2 1127 91 4 02/11/00 4491 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1172.0 10.3 116.3 91 6 ' 02/11/00 4492 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1173.0 9.8 112.7 87 4 02/11/00 4497 RT No. 4492 -- 10.6 117.6 90 4 03/21/00 4672 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1170.0 9.0 120.1 90 3 03/27/00 4725 TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1184.0 11.9 121.1 90 3 03/22/00 4726 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1 185.0 12.1 121.5 91 3 4739 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 36 1179.0 12.8 118.9 91 10 '03/23/00 03/23/00 4740 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 36 1180.0 13.8 115.1 90 6 03/23/00 4741 IR 23067-4/Lot 35 1181.0 11.5 121.7 92 3 ' 03/23/00 4744 1R 23067-4/Lot 28 1165.0 8.7 110.3 90 6 03/23/00 4745 TR 23067-4/Lot 28 1 166.0 9.2 121.7 92 3 '03/23/00 03/23/00 4746 4747 TR 23067-4/Lyclia Ct TR 23067-4/Lydia Ct 1 180.0 1 181.0 11.2 11.6 115.4 112.4 90 90 6 17 03/23/00 4749 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 27 1 167.0 8.2 121.6 91 3 4750 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 27 1 168.0 10.8 114.7 90 6 '03/23/00 03/23/00 4764 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1 175.0 10.4 117.9 92 6 03/23/00 4765 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1 176.0 10.7 119.2 93 6 ' 03/23/00 4772 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1 169.0 6.7 127.1 96 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 ' I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -1 1 t-1 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults J3 TEST .:' TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP.. _ SOrL ' DATE NO. _ LOCATION (ft) - (°!°).. : (Pct)- ('%a)' -TYPE . J3 03/23/00 4773 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1170.0 9.8 121.3 91 3 ' 03/23/00 4774 TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1 171.0 12.7 114.6 90 6 03/23/00 4775 TR 23067-4/Lot 28 1 172.0 10.0 115.6 90 6 03/24/00 4778 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 173 0 14.2 113.0 91 17 03/24/00 4779 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 174.0 5.6 112.8 87 4 03/24/00 4780 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1 167.0 12.0 117.7 91 4 '03/24/00 4781 RT No. 4779 -- 12.9 120.0 90 4 03/24/00 4782 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1175.0 13.6 113.7 91 17 03/24/00 4783 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1 176.0 10.1 116.9 91 6 03/24/00 4784 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1 170.0 11.2 1 18.6 92 6 03/24/00 4785 TR 23067-4/1-ot 39 1 171.0 11.1 1 14.9 92 17 4885 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1172.0 13.5 118.3 91 4 '03/28/00 03/28/00 4886 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1173.0 11.1 117.1 90 4 03/29/00 4914 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1 173.0 12.3 1 18.1 90 10 03/29/00 4915 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1 174.0 9.2 1 18.5 90 10 03/30/00 4919 TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1185.0 15.5 112.7 91 17 4920 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1186.0 16.8 I 15.5 93 17 '03/30/00 03/30/00 4921 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1180.0 11.4 119.7 90 3 03/30/00 4922 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1181.0 9.6 122.6 92 3 4928 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1187.0 10.9 116.6 90 4 '03/30/00 03/30/00 4931 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 1 1870 12.5 119-2 93 6 03/30/00 4932 TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1 188.5 12.0 119.4 93 6 ' 03/30/00 4933 TR 23067-4/Lot 16 1 191.0 10.0 123.7 92 20 03/30/00 4934 TR 23067-4/1-ot 16 1 1925 10.0 122.9 91 20 '03/31/00 03/31/00 4939 4940 TR 23067-4/Lydia Court TR 23067-4/1-ydia Court 1195.0 1 196.0 13.2 12.8 115.2 114.9 93 92 17 17 03/31/00 4945 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1 183.0 12.3 117.0 91 6 /00 4946 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1184.0 10.2 121.4 93 26 '03/31 03/31/00 4951 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 27 1182.0 9.4 119.5 93 6 03/31/00 4952 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 27 1 187.0 12.2 115.4 93 17 ' 04/04/00 4953 TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 181.0 12.4 117.6 91 23 04/04/00 4954 TR 23067-4/Abbey Roacl 1 182.0 1 L6 117.2 92 6 '04/05/00 04/05/00 4969 4970 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct Sta TR 23067-4/1,ot 36 1 193.0 1194.0 11.2 10.5 122.4 124.7 94 93 25 20 04/12/00 5058 TR 23067-5/1-ot 35 1 196.0 14.5 112.8 90 19 04/12/00 5059 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1 195.0 7.7 117.6 90 25 04/12/00 5060 TR 230675/1-ot 32 1190.0 11.2 116.9 91 23 04/12/00 5061 TR 23067-5/Lot 32 1 191.0 10.0 116.2 90 23 ' 04/12/00 5062 TR 23067-5/1-ot 31 1 193.0 11.4 115.7 93 19 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -12 J3 I [1 1 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TEST DATE TEST NO. TEST LOCATION' ELEV., (ft) MOISTURE ("/a) DENSITY Qwf) COMP. ("/a) SOIL TYPE 04/12/00 5063 TR 23067-5/Lot 31 1 194.0 12.3 112.6 90 19 04/13/00 5093 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1 195.0 10.1 119.6 92 24 04/13/00 5094 TR 23067-4/1-ot 33 1 190.0 8.8 118.0 90 24 04/13/00 5095 TR 23067-4/1-ot 31 1190.0 9.9 119.1 91 24 04/13/00 5096 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1183.0 11.7 120.4 92 24 04/13/00 5097 fR 23067-4/Lot 27 1184.0 15.6 116.3 89 24 04/13/00 5098 TR 23067-4/1.ot 34 1 196.0 85 119.9 90 3 04/13/00 5099 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 197.0 10.4 121.7 92 3 04/14/00 5105 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 196.0 10.9 122.5 92 3 04/14/00 5106 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 197.0 12.0 1 19.7 92 2 04/14/00 5107 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 34 1189.0 10.6 117.8 90 2 04/14/00 5108 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 34 1190.0 10.1 118.3 91 2 04/14/00 5109 TR 23067-4/slope Lot 29 1 190.0 13.1 1 17.5 91 23 04/14/00 5110 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1191.0 12.8 116.6 90 23 04/20/00 5135 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1190.0 13.6 116.2 90 22 04/20/00 5136 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1 189.0 10.9 1 17.5 91 22 04/20/00 5137 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1 188.0 13.4 1 16 8 89 24 04/20/00 5138 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1 187.0 11.7 1 17.9 90 24 04/20/00 5141 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1 195.0 10.0 1 18.3 92 22 04/20/00 5156 RT No. 5137 -- 12.2 117.8 90 24 04/21/00 5157 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1 1980 14.1 1 13.9 91 17 04/21/00 5158 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1 197.0 123 1 18.0 90 24 04/21/00 5159 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 1 194.0 11.0 1 19.7 92 24 04/21/00 5160 TR 23067-4/1-ot 34 1 195.0 104 121.1 91 3 04/21/00 5161 "IR 23067-4/Lot 37 1 190.0 11.0 116.3 90 23 04/21/00 5162 TR 23067-4/Lot 37 1180.0 13.5 111.8 91 29 04/21/00 5163 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1196.0 11.1 119 1 91 1 04/21/00 5164 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1 197.0 9.9 120.5 92 1 04/21/00 5165 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1 186.0 12.5 114.4 90 22 04/21/00 5166 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1187.0 13.6 114.6 90 22 04/21/00 5167 RT No. 5097 -- 16.1 112.2 88 22 04/21/00 5168 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1 189.0 13.5 113.8 89 22 04/22/00 5169 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1 193.0 10.0 124.1 93 3 04/22/00 5180 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1 190.0 11-5 1 12.8 90 17 04/22/00 5181 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1 191.0 13.0 1 14.3 92 17 04/22/00 5182 TR 23067-4/Lot 38 1193.0 11.6 117.7 91 23 04/22/00 5183 "IR 23067-4/Lot 38 1194.0 12.2 116.5 90 23 04/22/00 5184 TR 23067-4/Lot 29 1 193.0 10.1 1 182 91 1 04/22/00 5185 TR 23067-4/Lot 31 192.0 11.7 117.8 90 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -I 3 JU I TABLE I ' Field Density Test Restults TEST` " TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP.:' SOIL` DATE NO. LOCATION (fp ("/") (pcn ("/„),, TYPE 5189 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct 1188.0 12.4 118.3 92 23 '04/22/00 04/22/00 5190 TR 23067-4/Ly(Iia Ct 1200.0 11.0 117.8 91 23 04/22/00 5191 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1198.0 10.1 1219 90 20 04/22/00 5192 TR 23067-4/1-ot 32 1199.0 11.4 122.4 92 3 04/22/00 5193 TR 23067-4/1-ot 35 1200.0 12.5 112.1 90 17 04/24/00 5194 TR 23067-4/1-ot 35 1199.0 11.8 113.5 91 17 04/24/00 5195 TR 23067-4/1,ot 33 1198.0 10.4 124.7 94 3 04/24/00 5196 TR 23067-4/1-ot 33 199.0 11.3 122.6 94 24 04/24/00 5197 TR 23067-4/1,ot 33 1195.0 15.6 112.2 90 17 1 04/24/00 5198 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1 196.0 10.8 116.4 90 23 04/24/00 5199 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 1 191 0 11.7 1 14.9 90 22 04/24/00 5200 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 1 192 0 13.0 1 15.5 91 22 04/24/00 5201 RT No. 5167 12.4 117.5 90 24 04/24/00 5202 RT No. 5168 11.9 1 18.0 90 24 ' 04/24/00 5203 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 1 193.0 12.5 1 13.=4 89 22 04/24/00 5204 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 1 194.0 13.1 116.8 91 23 04/24/00 04/24/00 5205 5206 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 TR 23067-4/Lot 38 1 197.0 1 198.0 10.4 11.6 1 16.2 1 17.1 90 91 8 8 05/02/00 5300 RT No. 5203 -- 13.6 1 14.8 90 22 05/03/00 5309 TR 23067-4/1,ot 28 1 190.0 12.0 1 14.3 88 25 05/03/00 5310 RT No. 5309 11.6 1 18 2 91 25 05/04/00 5215D TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1 187.0 11.5 1 17.4 91 23 ' 05/04/00 5216D TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1 185.0 10.8 1 16.9 91 23 05/05/00 5217D TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1 189.0 12.3 119.0 92 23 '05/05/00 05/05/00 5218D 5219D TR 23067-4/Lot 28 TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 1 190.0 1 199.0 10.0 12.6 1 17.5 118.1 90 90 24 24 05/05/00 5220D TR 23067-4/Lot 26 1 198.0 13.2 1 13.4 91 19 05/08/00 5223D TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1 198.0 11.2 1 17.5 90 34 05/08/00 5224D TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1 197.0 12.3 1 18.2 91 24 05/09/00 5236D TR 23067-4/1,ot 26 1200.0 1 1.9 1 18.0 93 22 05/09/00 5237D TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 1201.0 12.3 1 16.9 91 32 05/09/00 5240D TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1 190.0 11.6 1 17.4 91 23 05/09/00 5241D TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1191.0 12.2 116.2 90 23 05/09/00 5256D TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1 194.0 6.8 1 13.7 88 32 05/09/00 5257D TR 23067-4/1,ot 27 1 193.0 9.0 112.6 88 32 05/09/00 5258D RT No. 52561) -- 11.5 1 19.3 93 32 05/09/00 5259D RT No. 52571) 10.0 1 16.1 90 32 05/10/00 5260D "rR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1 190.0 9.7 120.8 93 25 05/10/00 5265D TR 23067-4/Abbey Road 1 190.0 12.4 114.3 90 22 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY2001 J.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -I 4 1.S I TABLE I Field Density Test Restults ' TEST DATE .: TEST - NO. TEST LOCATION ELEV. (fl) MOISTURE.DENSITY (%) (I)CO COMP. ',.",;:SOIL (%) TYPE '05/10/00 5267D TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1195.0 I I .l 119.3 93 32 W, 05/10/00 5266D TR 23067-4/i\bbcv Road 1191.0 11.5 115.5 91 22 '05/10/00 5267D TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1195.0 I I .l 119.3 93 32 05/10/00 5268D TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 1 1940 10.8 117.4 91 32 05/1 1/00 5269D TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1195.0 7.9 119.9 90 3 05/11/00 5270D TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1196.0 9.1 120.2 90 3 05/11/00 5271D TR 23067-4/1,ot 37 1200.0 10.7 117.7 93 22 '05/11/00 5272D TR 23067-4/Lot 37 1 199.0 11.2 1 16.0 91 22 05/11/00 5273D TR 23067-4/Lydia Ct 1 195.0 10.6 1 18.3 92 32 5274D TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 1 194.0 10.9 1 12.5 90 19 '05/11/00 05/12/00 5275D TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 1 196.0 11.5 1 16.2 93 17 05/12/00 5276D TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 1 195.0 12.4 1 12.7 91 19 5277D TR 23067-4/1-ot 35 1 199.0 12.1 1 12.2 90 19 '05/12/00 05/12/00 5278D TR 23067-4/1-ot 35 1200.0 7.9 1 17.5 90 25 05/15/00 5281 D TR 23067-4/1,ot 27 1201.0 9.7 1 14.8 90 22 05/15/00 5282D TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1202.0 10.1 1 15.6 91 22 05/15/00 5283D TR 23067-4/1,ot =14 1 195 0 11.5 1 17.2 91 23 05/15/00 5284D TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1194.0 12 3 1 18.8 92 23 05/15/00 5285D TR 23067-4/Lot 26 1202.0 1 17.9 90 25 05/16/00 5320 "IR 23067-4/1-vclia Ct 1201.0 11.6 1 14.8 90 25 5321 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct 1202.0 10.3 1 17.5 90 25 '05/16/00 05/16/00 5322 TR 23067-4/1-ot 3,7 1202.0 10.7 1 17.9 90 25 05/16/00 5323 TR 23067-4/Lot 37 203.0 9.6 1 18.3 91 19 ' 05/16/00 5326 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1205.0 10.0 1 15.9 90 32 05/16/00 5327 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1204.0 8.6 1 12.4 87 32 5328 TR 23067-4/1,ot 44 1199.0 10.1 1 15.6 90 32 '05/16/00 05/16/00 5329 RT No. 5327 11.2 116.5 91 3 05/17/00 5332 TR 23067-4/Lvclia Ct 1201 0 1 1 3 1 15.1 91 22 05/17/00 5333 'IR 23067-4/1-yclia Ct 1202 0 12.4 1 145 90 32 05/17/00 5334 TR 23067-4/1-ot 41 12100 9.9 1 19.0 93 32 05/17/00 5335 TR 23067-4/1-ot 41 1211 0 8.9 115.8 90 32 ' 05/18/00 5345 IR 23067-4/1,ydia Ct 1216.0 9.7 1175 90 25 05/18/00 5346 TR 23067-4/1-vclia Ct 1215.0 9.9 116.3 91 32 '05/18/00 05/18/00 5349 5350 "IR 23067-4/Lot 35 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1204.0 1205.0 10.1 8.6 118.2 117.7 91 90 25 25 05/18/00 5351 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1203.0 7.9 120.9 91 25 05/18/00 5352 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 1204.0 9.0 119.9 90 25 05/18/00 5353 TR 23067-4/1-ot 41 1205.0 11.5 1 14.4 90 22 05/18/00 5354 TR 23067-4/Lot 41 1206.0 10.8 116.5 92 22 05/18/00 5355 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1206.0 10.1 119.9 92 25 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 ' I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -I 5 W, 11 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults a7 TEST TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP. SOIL '05/18/00 DATE -: .NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (pcf) (%) TYPE 05/18/00 5358 TR 23067-4/1,yclia Ct 1203.0 12.7 1 16.6 90 a7 5356 TR 23067-4/1-ot 32 1207.0 10.2 117.8 90 25 '05/18/00 05/18/00 5357 TR 23067-4/Lyclia Ct 1202.0 13.4 1 16.2 90 23 05/18/00 5358 TR 23067-4/1,yclia Ct 1203.0 12.7 1 16.6 90 23 5359 TR 23067-4/1,ot 28 1232.0 11 0 1 17.5 91 23 '05/18/00 05/19/00 5360 TR 23067-4/Lot 28 1228.0 1 1 2 1 18.1 92 32 05/22/00 5369 TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 1202.0 11.5 1 15.7 90 32 05/22/00 5370 TR 23067-4/Lot 26 1203.0 10.6 1 16.9 91 32 05/22/00 5371 TR 23067-4/Lot 30 1 199.0 11.1 1 17.7 92 32 5372 TR 23067-4/1-ot 30 1198.0 9.7 1 18.9 92 23 '05/22/00 05/22/00 5373 TR 23067-4/Lot 28 1 196.0 113 1 16.1 90 23 05/22/00 5374 TR 23 0 6 7-4 /1-ot 28 1197.0 12.4 1 17.2 91 23 05/22/00 5375 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1 197 0 13.8 1 11.0 89 19 05/22/00 5376 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1 1980 12.9 1 13.7 91 19 05/22/00 5377 RT No. 5375 -- 13.5 1 12.4 90 19 05/23/00 5378 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1 196.0 8.8 1 17.5 90 25 05/23/00 5379 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1 195 0 9.5 1 17.7 90 25 05/23/00 05/23/00 5380 5381 TR 23067-4/1-ot 39 TR 23067-4/1-ot 39 12060 1207.0 12.6 11.2 1 16.8 1 17.4 91 91 32 32 05/23/00 5382 TR 23067-4/1-ot 41 1209 0 8.5 123.3 93 3 05/23/00 5383 TR 23067-4/1,ot 41 1210 0 9.1 121.7 92 3 05/23/00 5384 TR 23067-4/1-ot 37 121 1.0 10.8 1 15.1 91 22 05/24/00 5390 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 12100 11.6 1 17.0 91 32 ' 05/24/00 5391 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1209 0 10.7 1 163 91 32 05/24/00 5392 TR 23067-4/1-yclia Ct 1213.0 11.4 1 14.5 90 22 5393 TR 23067-4/Lyclia Ct 1214.0 10.0 1 15.1 91 22 '05/24/00 05/24/00 5394 TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1200.0 8.1 1 18.9 91 25 05/24/00 5395 TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1201.0 93 1 17.6 90 25 '05/24/00 5396 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 1212.0 12.0 1 12.1 90 19 05/24/00 5397 TR 23067-4/Lot 38 1213.0 12.5 1 13.8 91 19 05/25/00 5401 TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 1200.0 8.9 1 19.7 92 25 ' 05/25/00 5402 TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 1201.0 9.4 120.5 92 25 11/16/00 5411 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1208.0 9.3 1 18.8 91 4 5412 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1210.0 10.6 1 17.5 90 4 '11/16/00 11/17/00 5413 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1209.0 8.6 1 18.2 91 4 11/17/00 5414 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 12020 9.7 1 14.1 88 4 11/17/00 5415 R"f No. 5414 -- 10.2 1 17.8 91 4 11/20/00 5416 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1212.0 22 124.5 93 20 11/20/00 5417 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1214.0 10.0 122.1 91 20 ' 11/21/00 5418 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 12010 9.8 1 17.1 92 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 I.N. 141.99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -I 6 a7 I 1 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TEST ,..__:_TEST °.__ - TEST- ELEV. -.:- MOISTURE DENSITY, _COMP.- : = -SOIL 1 DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) �,yo�_ (PeO 92 TYPE::: 1 1/22/00 5421 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1207.0 10.3 119.4 95 11/21/00 5419 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1210.0 10.0 117.1 90 4 1 1/22/00 5420 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1206.0 94 119.1 92 4 1 1/22/00 5421 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1207.0 10.3 119.4 95 4 5422 TR 23067-4/1,ot 27 slope 1209.0 8.4 123.2 92 4 '11/28/00 11/28/00 5423 TR 23067-4/Lot 30 1208.0 9.1 101.4 81 4 11/29/00 5424 RTNo 5423 -- 8.7 118.1 91 4 1 1/29/00 5425 TR 23067-4/Lot 28 slope 1206.0 10.2 112.3) 90 19 11/29/00 5426 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1208 0 9.3 112.4 90 19 11/29/00 5427 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 slope 1212 0 11.6 1 1 TO 90 4 11/29/00 5428 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 slope 1209.0 11.2 121.0 91 3 11/29/00 5429 TR 23067-4/Lot 43 1208.0 10.6 120.2 91 20 1 1/29/00 5430 TR 23067-4/Lot 30 slope 1212.0 9.8 122.3 91 20 11/29/00 5431 TR 23067-4/1-ot 31 121 SO 8.7 122.9 91 20 11/30/00 5432 TR 23067-4/1.yclia Ct/Sta 40 1213.0 13.2 120.8 91 3 I 1/30/00 5433 TR 23067-4/L'ot 41 1213.0 10.6 121.3 91 3 11/30/00 5434 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1219.0 9.3 117.6 90 4 11/30/00 11/30/00 5435 5436 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1214.0 1215.0 10.7 7.9 123.6 117 2 92 90 20 4 12/01/00 5437 TR 23067-4/1-ot 32 slope 1217.0 8.6 124.8 93 20 5438 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1215.0 9.4 1232 92 20 t12/01/00 12/01/00 5439 TR 23067-4/1,ot 37 12140 8.7 122.5 91 20 12/20/00 5440 CR 23067-4/Lot 45 1212.0 10.8 115.0 91 1-1 ' 12/20/00 5441 TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 1214.0 13.0 114.4 90 1-1 12/21/00 5442 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 12160 12.4 114.2 90 1-1 '12/21/00 12/21/00 5443 5444 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 TR 23067-4/1,ot 40 1215.0 1218 0 10.9 11.4 114.4 114.5 90 91 1-1 1-1 12/22/00 5445 TR 23067-4/Lvclia Ct Stn 6+38 1215 0 10.4 1222 91 20 12/22/00 5446 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1217 0 8.2 121.8 91 20 12/26/00 5447 TR 23067-4/Lot 35 1216.0 9.2 121.0 92 1-2 12/26/00 5448 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct Sta 5+00 12160 8.7 119.0 91 1-2 12/26/00 5449 TR 23067-4/Lot 31 1216.0 8.5 118.3 90 1-2 12/27/00 5450 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 12190 9.7 118.5 91 1-2 5451 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1214.0 10.2 117.9 90 1-2 '12/27/00 12/27/00 5452 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 121 TO 9.8 117.9 90 1-2 12/27/00 5453 TR 23067-4/Lot 43 1218 0 10.4 119.0 91 1-2 12/28/00 5454 TR 23067-4/Lydia Ct Lot 39 12200 9.6 121.3 93 1-2 12/28/00 5455 TR 23067-4/Lvdm CI Lot 39 1218.0 10.7 118.2 90 1-2 12/29/00 5456 TR 23067-4/Lot 38 1218.0 10.8 119.5 91 1-3 12/29/00 5457 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1218.0 10.3 120.8 92 1-3 PETRACEOTECHNICAL,INC. MAY 2001 J.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Please 4 TABLE -1 7 �4!;J / �I TABLE I a9 Field Density Test Restults TEST . '' TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP. SOIL ' DATE .' "`NO, LOCATION (1'Q ("l") - (Def) . ('Y0) TYPE 5458 TR067-4/Lot 27 1228 0 9.9 120.0 91 1-3 '12/29/00 12/29/00 5459 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1221.0 10.2 119A 91 1-3 01/02/01 5460 TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1220.0 10.7 118.3 90 1-2 01/02/01 5461 TR 23067-4/Lot 30 1220.0 8.9 121.6 93 1-3 01/02/01 5462 TR 23067-4/Abbcy Rd Lot 20 1194.0 10.1 117.0 92 1-1 01/03/01 5463 TR 23067-4/Abbcv Rd Stat 21+SO 1190.0 9.1 123..5 93 1-4 ' 01/03/01 5464 TR 23067-4/1-ot 32 1199.0 9.7 116.1 92 1-1 01/03/01 5465 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 1203.0 10.6 114.6 91 1-1 5466 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1205.0 8.8 121.5 93 1-2 '01/03/01 01/03/01 5467 TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 1203.0 9.6 120.1 92 1-2 01/03/01 5468 TR 23067-4/1.ot 45 1223 0 8.6 120.1 91 1-3 01/04/01 5469 TR 23067-4/Lot ,45 1218 0 9.4 119.6 91 1-3 01/04/01 5470 TR 23067-4/1.ot 39 1222 0 9.0 119.7 90 1-3 01/04/01 5471 TR 23067-4/Lot 32 1221 0 8.7 120.2 92 1-2 ' 01/04/01 5472 TR 23067-4/Lot 42 1220.0 9.1 121.4 91 1-4 01/04/01 5473 TR 23067-4/Lot 27 1220.0 8.4 123.8 93 1-4 '01/24/01 01/24/01 5474 5475 South of Lydia Cit South of Lydia Ci t 1217.0 1219.0 9.9 10.2 1 152 115.6 91 91 I-1 1-1 01/24/01 5476 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 12200 10.6 115 7 92 1-1 01/24/01 5477 TR 23067-4/1-ot 36 ]')190 9 4 115.0 91 1-1 0 1/24/0 1 5478 TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1220 0 10.2 115.5 91 1-1 01/31/01 5479 TR 23067-4/1-ot 37 1219.0 9.7 121.2 93 7 ' 01/31/01 5480 TR 23067-4/1-ol 3S 1218 0 10.6 120.1 92 7 01/31/01 5481 TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1224.0 10.5 118.3 91 7 '02/01/01 02/01/01 5482 5483 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 1229 0 12220 11.4 9.19 118.8 1 16.7 91 90 7 7 02/01/01 5484 TR 23067-4/Lot 41 1226.0 10.2 118.6 91 7 t 02/01/01 5485 TR 23067-4/1,ot 40 1222.0 11.3 117.5 90 7 02/01/01 5486 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1220.0 12.1 1 19.6 92 7 03/15/01 5487 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 1231.0 13.3 1 183 91 7 ' 03/15/01 5488 TR 23067-4/Lot 41 1227.0 13.0 1 19 5 90 5 03/15/01 5489 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1225.0 12.4 1 18.9 92 7 5490 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1227.0 11.7 118.1 91 7 '03/15/01 03/16/01 5491 TR 23067-4/1,ot 45 1229.0 12.1 118.1 91 7 03/16/01 5492 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1231.0 10.8 118.1 91 7 ' 03/16/01 5493 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 1232.0 11.1 117.2 90 7 03/20/01 5494 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1217.0 12.9 117.7 91 7 03/20/01 5495 TR 23067-4/1,ot 39 1219.0 13.0 117.6 91 7 ' 03/20/01 5496 TR 23067-4/1-ot 37 1218 0 11.0 120.2 92 7 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 ' I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -I 8 a9 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TEST TEST TEST ELEV.--_MOISTUHE.:DENSI'f.Y:_ COMP. ':: -SOIL DATE'' NO. EOCA'EION,.' (lt) ("/a) (Pel) '.::. NO TYPE ■ '03/20/01 03/20/01 5497 5498 TR 23067-4/Lot 37 'IR 23067-4/1-ot 41 1220.0 1219.0 12.3 11.5 119.6 117.1 92 90 7 7 03/20/01 5499 TR 23067-4/Lot 47 1220 0 11.7 119.7 90 4 5500 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct 1214.0 9.2 114.1 90 1 '03/20/01 03/20/01 5501 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct 1217.0 10.2 120.5 91 4 03/21/01 5502 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 1232.0 9.0 121.5 93 7 ' 03/21/01 5503 TR 23067-4/Lot 44 1232.0 9.2 121.1 93 7 03/21/01 5504 TR 23067-4/Lot 4 1 1214.0 9.6 1 17.5 90 7 03/21/01 5505 TR 23067-4/1-ot 39 1219.0 8.7 1 16 7 90 7 03/21/01 5506 "IR 23067-4/Lydia Ct 1222.0 10.3 1 19.9 92 7 03/21/01 5507 TR 23067-4/1-ot 17 1206.0 11.2 1183 91 7 03/21/01 5508 TR 23067-4/1-ot 28 1206.0 9.2 119.3 92 7 03/21/01 5509 TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 1205.0 9.9 1 19.6 92 7 03/21/01 5510 TR 23067-4/Sle 21+50 Abby Rd 1 192.0 10.3 117.3 90 7 03/21/01 5511 TR 23067-4/Sta 20+20 Abby Rd 1191.0 25 117.0 90 7 03/21/01 5512 TR 23067-4/1-ydia Ct 12120 11.0 120.1 92 7 5513 TR 23067-4/1-ot 37 slope 1220.0 10.1 118 6 91 7 '03/30/01 03/30/01 5514 TR 23067-4/1-ot 35 slope 1215.0 10.5 121 2 93 7 03/3 0/0 1 5515 "IR 23067-4/Lot 32 slope 1215.0 12.0 120.1 91 7 '03/30/01 5516 "FR 23067-4/Lot 30 slope 1220.0 9.0 125.7 96 7 03/30/01 5517 "IR 23067-4/1-ot 27 slope 1220.0 12.6 118.5 90 7 5518 Tlt 23067-4/1-ot 45 slope 12210 11,5 117,1 90 7 '03/30/01 03/30/01 5519 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 slope 1230.0 15.2 123.0 87 7 04/03/01 5520 RT No. 5519 1230.0 13.0 117.4 90 7 5521 TR 23067-4/1-ot 27 FG 8.7 1 18.6 91 7 '04/04/01 04/04/01 5522 'IR 23067-4/1-ot 28 17G 8.9 119.5 92 7 04/04/01 5523 TR 23067-4/1-ot 29 FG 10.0 1 18.5 91 7 '04/04/01 5524 TR 23067-4/1,ot 30 FG 9.9 1 18.1 91 7 04/04/01 5525 IR 23067-4/1-ot 3I FG 9.2 1 17 9 91 7 5526 TR 23067-4/1,ot 45 easement 1237.0 8.8 1 19.1 92 7 '04/05/01 04/05/01 5527 TR 23067-4/1-ot 45 1232.0 9.5 117.5 90 7 04/05/01 5528 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 1229.0 9.0 1 17.4 90 7 04/05/01 5529 TR 23067-4/1_ot 40 1222.0 8.4 120.2 93 7 04/05/01 5530 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 1221.0 11-8 122.0 92 4 04/05/01 5531 TR 23067-4/Lot 30 @ Abbey Rd 1199.0 11.6 121.8 92 4 ' 04/05/01 5532 TR 23067-4/Abbe+ Rd 1 197.0 8.9 122.7 92 4 04/09/01 5533 TR 23067-4/Abbev Rd 1200.0 8.6 119.8 91 8 5534 TR 23067-4/1-ot 33 a Abbey Rd 1 198 0 9.0 119.1 90 8 '04/09/01 04/09/01 5535 TR 23067-4/1-ot 26 a Abbey Rd 1202.0 8.3 118.9 90 8 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 MAY 2001 TABLE -1 9 30 ' TABLE I Field Density Test Restults 04/12/01 TEST TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP.. ... SOIL TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (I)Cf) (%,) TYPE 9.8 1 17.9 91 7 04/12/01 5539 TR 23067-4/1-ot 33 ((�D Abbey Rd 1198.0 9.4 04/12/01 5536 TR 23067-4/Lot 41 1227.0 9.0 1 18.0 91 7 04/12/01 5537 TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 1232.0 10.2 1 18.1 91 7 04/12/01 5538 'FR 23067-4/1-ot 30 a Abbey Rd 1201.0 9.8 1 17.9 91 7 04/12/01 5539 TR 23067-4/1-ot 33 ((�D Abbey Rd 1198.0 9.4 1 17 7 91 7 04/12/01 5540 rR 23067-4/1-ot 32 FG 8.8 1 19.2 90 8 04/13/01 5541 TR 23067-4/Lot 33 PG 9.4 1 19.9 91 8 04/13/01 5542 TR 23067-4/Lot 34 FG 8.4 119.4 91 8 04/13/01 5543 TIZ 23067-4/Lot 35 FG 7.9 122.3 93 8 04/13/01 5544 TR 23067-4/Lot 36 FG 8.0 119.4 91 8 04/13/01 5545 TR 23067-4/S of Lydia Ct 1222.0 12.3 114.4 91 9 04/13/01 5546 TR 23067-4/S of Lydia Ct 1224.0 13.1 1 14 0 91 9 04/16/01 5547 TR 23067-4/S of Lvdia Ct 1226.0 11.7 114.1 91 9 04/16/01 5548 TR 23067-4/S of Lvdia Ct 1228.0 12.8 1 14.4 91 9 04/17/01 5549 TR 23067-4/S of Lydia Ct 1230.0 12.1 113.5 90 9 04/17/01 5550 TR 23067-4/Lot 45 FG 11.8 1 13.4 90 9 04/17/01 5551 TR 23067-4/1-ot 44 FG 12.6 1 139 91 9 04/17/01 5552 fR 23067-4/1-ot 41 1229.0 12.9 1 13.8 91 9 04/17/01 5553 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 1224.0 11.7 1 13.4 90 9 04/17/01 5554 TR 23067-4/Lot 40 1226.0 13.2 1 13 3 90 9 04/17/01 5555 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 1223 0 12.1 1 13 6 91 9 04/17/01 5556 TR 23067-4/1-ot 3�) 1225.0 11.6 113.7 91 9 04/17/01 5557 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 1221.0 10.4 1 13.4 90 9 04/17/01 5558 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 1223.0 9.2 1 14.2 91 9 04/17/01 5559 TR 23067-4/Lot ,7 1220.0 10.6 113.9 91 9 04/17/01 5560 TR 23067-4/1-ot 37 1222.0 11.2 113 6 91 9 04/18/01 5561 TR 23067-4/1-ot 43 FG 9.6 113.2 90 9 04/18/01 5562 TR 23067-4/Lot 42 FG 10.3 1118 91 9 04/18/01 5563 TR 23067-4/1-ot 41 FG 10.6 1 13.7 91 9 04/18/01 5564 TR 23067-4/1-ot 40 FG 11.2 1 15.3 92 9 04/18/01 5565 TR 23067-4/Lot 39 FG 9.8 114.1 91 9 04/18/01 5566 TR 23067-4/1-ot 38 FG 10.4 114.8 92 9 04/18/01 5567 TR 23067-4/Lot 37 FG 10.9 1 133 90 9 04/18/01 5568 TIZ 23067-4/Lydia Ct 1230.0 8.6 118.6 91 7 04/18/01 5569 TR 23067-4/1-vdia Ct 1223.0 9.4 1183 91 7 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 I.N. 141-99 TR 23067-4 Phase 4 TABLE -1 10 3/ I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I [1 TABLE 11 LOT SUMMARY 1 PETRA 3A 1 J 1 I 1 TABLE 11 Lot Summary Lot;Nuntber Cut, Fill, Transition:: - Maximum Depth of FiB 26 'Transition 21 27 Transition 39 28 Transition 41 29 Transition 35 30 Transition 21 31 Transition 12 32 Transition 12 33 Transition 31 34 Fill 42 35 Fill 56 36 Fill 58 37 Fill 42 38 Fill 59 39 Fill 56 40 Fill 41 41 Transition 21 42 Transition 22 43 Transition 22 44 Transition 51 45 Transition 45 1 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 J.N. 141-99 1 33 �F va13d 1 STMA333S i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho Califomia Area, County of Riverside, Califoinia, J.N. 298-87, dated March I, 1989 1989b, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 aid 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. , 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated , J.N. 141-99, March 10, 1999. , 1999b, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. 1999c, Geotechnical Repoit of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riveiside County, California, J N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. 1999d, Geotechnical Repoit of Rough Grading, Lots IS through 45. Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riveiside County, Califoinia, J.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. 2000x, Geotechnical Report of Rough Giading, Lots I through 66, Tract 23067-5. Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, I.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. 2000b, Geotechnical Repoit of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 25 and 46 through 94, Tract 23067-4, Redhawk Development, Temecula Aica, Riverside County, California, J.N. 14I-99, dated July 17, 2000. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 J.N. 141-99 .1S 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 R APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST CRITERIA LABORATORY TEST DATA it PETRA 7ecP30&7-3, -y# -s,-4 3� I ' APPENDIX A tLABORATORY TEST CRITERIA L� Laboratory Maximum Dry Densit Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for sdected sample of soil in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are given on Plates A-1 and A-2. Exuansion Potential Expansion index tests were performed on selected samples of soil accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard Test No. 18-2. Expansion potential classifications were determined from UBCTable 18-1-B on the basis of the expansion index values. Test results and expansion potentials are presented on Plates A-3 to A-4. 1 Soluble -Sulfate Analvsis ' Chemical analyses were performed on selected samples of sod to determine soluble sulfate contents. These tests wee performed in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Test results are included on Plates A-5 and A-6. 1 1 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 ' I.N. 141-99 37 I H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 P 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' Sample Number Soil Type Optimum Moisture %) Maximum Dry. Density (pef) I Yellow -tan SAND with trace Clay 9.0 130.5 2 Dark brown tine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 130.5 3 Reddish -brown fine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 130.0 5 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 118.5 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 128.0 7 Brown Silty SAND 10.0 131.0 8 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.0 129.0 9 Ycllow-brown Silty SAND 8.5 132.0 10 Liglit brown Silty SAND 12.0 113.5 11 Dark brown Silty SAND 9.5 131.0 12 Yellow-brown SAND 16.5 105.5 13 Li,ht brown coarse SAND 13.5 120.5 14 Black Clayey SILT 16.5 112.5 15 Black SILT with trace Clay and Sand 16.0 110.5 16 Yellow-brown Silty line SAND 12.5 123.0 17 Yellow-brown Silty tine SAND 12.0 124.5 18 Yellow-brown Silty title SAND 14.5 115.5 19 Dark brown Silty SAND 11.5 124.5 20 Brown Silty SAND 80 134.5 21 Brown Silty to Clayey SAND 9.0 132.5 22 Lieht brown fine SAND 10.0 127.0 23 Rcd brown Clayey fine SAND 10.5 129.0 24 Greenish Silty tine SAND 10.0 130.5 25 Red brown Clayey SAND 9.5 130.5 26 Light brown fine to coarse SAND 12.0 123.5 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 1 J.N. 141-99 PlateA-1 1 39 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (Continued) Sample Number Soil Type Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry Density (Pe0 27 Light grey/light brown Silty fine SAND 14.5 118.0 28 Red brown Silly fine SAND 13.0 114.5 29 Brown tine SAND with Silt 12.0 123.5 30 Yellow brown to tan Silty fine SAND 16.5 107.0 31 Light brown fine to coarse SAND 13.5 116.0 32 Red brown Silty medium to coarse SAND 10.0 128.5 33 Light brown Silty SAND 9.0 131.0 1-1 Yellow brown line Silty SAND (import) 10.5 126.5 I-2 Yellow brown line Silty SAND (import) 9.0 131.0 1-3 Grey Silty SAND (import) 9.0 131.5 1-4 Brown Silty SAND (import) 8.0 133.0 1-5 Reddish brown Silty to Clayey SAND (import) 8.0 135.0 1-6 Light brown SAND with trace Gravel/Clay (import) 8.0 135.5 I-7 Reddish brown Silty SAND with Clay (import) 9.5 130.0 1-8 Yellowish hro%i'n Clavcv SAND inm mort 8.0 132.0 ' (1) PER TEST HETI IOU ASTNI D 1557-91 1 [1 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 2001 ' J.N. 141-99 Plate A-2 34 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA' Lot Number Expansion Index Expansion Potential' 26 through 29 26 Low 30 through 32 17 Very Low 33 through 36 29 Low 37 through 42 IS Very Low 42 through 45 19 Very Low SOLUBLE SULFATES' Lot Number Sulfate Content (%) 26 throucb 29 0.0061 30 Ibroueh 32 0.0048 33 through 36 0.0 37 thanigh 41 0.0064 42 through 45 0.0051 (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD 18-2 (3) PER UPC TABLE I8 -1-H 141 PER CALIFORNIA TEST NIE FIIOD NO. 417 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 MAY 2001 Plate A-3 y0 0 L aa�tL ,J7 f4t 4p-', r : ew •t \ w_ GEOTECHNIG4LWEPORT OF ROUGH GRADINC LOTS I THROUGH 66, TRACT 23067-5 REDHAWK DEVELOPMENT, TEMECULA ARF, RIVERSIp,ECOUNTY C.AIIFORNIA 3 w � r£���� ) '~rY �`4��3 t*.�N r♦Yk Y t*, X w i''•y�� r v � a t �.�. �i 1C-4 .3 � - r 3 w �rF.+A. .` s4) i4 c li 1 ' �� dao : ✓f I�' 4} Zr� �Y 4 l Y" ��Ui� if A ��@ A .•a tx 11 �� 5 n I It PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES June 15, 2000 J.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 ' Attention: Mr. Bob Fleming ' Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California This report presents a summary of the observation and testing services provided by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) during rough -grading operations to develop Lots 1 through 66 of Tract 23067-5 in the Redhawk development in Riverside County, California. Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the suitability of the grading for the proposed residential construction are provided herein, as well as foundation -design recommendations based on the as -graded soil and geologic conditions. The purpose of grading was to develop 66 level lots for construction of single-family residences, as well as adjacent slopes and streets. Grading of Tract 23067-5 began in October 1999, and was completed in April 2000. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Removal and recompaction of low-density surface soils, processing of the exposed bottom surfaces or placement of compacted fill under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation and with selective testing by Petra. Earthwork and grading operations were performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the grading -plan review report (see References) and the grading code of PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Or Ste, 103 Temecula, CA 92590 ' Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax(909) 699-6197 Petrote@ibm net 5 CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 the County of Riverside, California. The completed earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now planned. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY General Geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading were frequently observed and mapped by Petra's geologic staff. Geologic Units Geologic conditions observed onsite were generally as anticipated and described in the supplemental subsurface investigation and geotechnical review report for the site by Petra (see References). Removal bottoms were geologically mapped by a Petra geologist. Prior to grading, the site consisted of well-rounded hills underlain by Pauba Formation sandstone with intervening alluvial -filled valleys and colluvial -mantled hillsides. Additionally, there were minor areas of existing artificial -fill materials associated with the construction of Nighthawk Pass Road. All unsuitable soils were removed to expose competent bedrock of the Pauba Formation. The underlying Pauba Formation generally consists of sandy silts and sands which are predominantly fine- to coarse-grained, very well -indurated to cemented, laminated and moist and dense. Groundwater Localized areas of seepage at or near the alluvium/bedrock contact were noted primarily in the canyon areas during grading. However, seepage was also observed W 3 CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 3 in local areas above a siltstone lense exposed near the top of the northwesterly facing cut slope below Lots 5 through 10. Faulting A northeast- and north -south -trending, high -angle fault was mapped during grading operations on the site. This fault does not displace Holocene soils and is not considered active. SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. Ground Preparation All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils, including alluvium and colluvium, were removed to underlying bedrock or to groundwater. The removals varied from approximately 5 to 45± feet below original grades. Removal of unsuitable soils along the toes of the north- to northwest -facing fill slopes below Lots 36 through 45 and 49 through 66 were extended beyond the toes of the slopes to a horizontal distance that was at least equal to the vertical depth of removal. Prior to placing fill, exposed bottom surfaces in removal areas were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve slightly above optimum moisture conditions and then recompacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Toe -of -fill -slope keys were provided at the base of all fill slopes constructed on existing ground surfaces sloping at 5:1 [horizontal: vertical (h:v)] or greater. The fill CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 4 keys were excavated to a minimum depth of 2 feet into competent bedrock materials with a minimum slope of 2 percent to the heel of the key. Oversize Rock Oversize rock was not encountered during the rough -grading operations for Tract 23067-5. Cut/Fill Transition Lots Cut/fill transitions were eliminated from Lots 1, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 22, 31 through 45 and 49 by overexcavating the cut portions and replacing the excavated bedrock materials with compacted fill. Overexcavation of the cut portions extended to depths of approximately 3 to 15 feet below finish grades. Cut Lots Building pads excavated to grade were geologically mapped and Lots 21 and 23 through 30 were determined to be adequate to provide uniform support for the proposed residences and improvements and were left at finish -design grade. Lots 2 through 10, 46, 47 and 48 were also cut to grade; however, these twelve lots were overexcavated to depths of 3 to 5 feet below finish grade and capped with compacted fill to provide uniform foundation support for the proposed residences. Fill Placement and Testing Fill materials consist of onsite soils. All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions, then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent by rolling with a D8 or D9 bulldozer, 834 rubber -tired bulldozer or loaded scrapers. The maximum vertical depth of fill placed within the subject lots as a result of grading is approximately 80± feet. CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 5 Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). Occasional field density tests were also performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556 (sandcone). Test results are presented on Table I (attached) and test locations are shown on the enclosed rough -grading plans (Plates 3 and 4). Field density tests were taken at vertical intervals of approximately 1 to 2 feet and the compacted fills were tested at the time of placement to verify that the specified moisture content and minimum required relative compaction of 90 percent had been achieved. At least one in-place density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed and/or for each 2 feet in vertical height of compacted fill. The actual number of tests taken per day varied with the project conditions, such as the number of earthmovers (scrapers) and availability of support equipment. When field density tests produced results less than the required minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The substandard area was then reworked, moisture -conditioned, if necessary, recompacted and retested until a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent was achieved. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was the basis for determining which maximum dry density value, summarized in a following section, was applicable for a given density test. One -point checks were performed to supplement visual classification. Fill Slope Construction All fill slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v). Maximum fill -slope height is approximately 53± feet located on Lot 50. Final surface compaction on the fill slopes was achieved by overfilling and backrolling the slopes during construction and then trimming to the compacted inner core or by backrolling the slopes with a sheepsfoot roller. tp CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 6 Slope stability calculations evaluating the gross stability of the 53 -foot -high fill slope on Lot 50 are provided in the grading -plan review report prepared by Petra that included Tract 23067-5 (see References). The calculations resulted in factors of safety of 1.94 and 1.25 for static and pseudo -dynamic (seismic) loading conditions, respectively. A seismic coefficient of 0.2g was used for seismic loading due to proximity of the Elsinore fault. Cut Slopes All cut slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (h:v). Maximum cut -slope height is approximately 28± feet located on Lot 22 (and ascending to Lots 9 and 10). Due to favorable geologic conditions exposed on cut slopes, no buttress fills or stabilization fills were considered necessary. Seepage and/or saturated sandy bedrock materials were locally observed above a siltstone lense exposed near the top of the cut slope below Lots 5 through 9. Due to this condition, all cut lots above the cut slope (Lots 1 through 10) were capped with approximately 3 to 5 feet of compacted fill with a 10 -foot fill cap placed on Lot 1. In addition, a subdrain designed to intercept future potential seepage that may originate from the cut slope was constructed along the toe of the slope on Lots 29 and 30. The subdrain will be connected to the storm drain on Chaote Street. Subdrains Following clean -outs to competent bedrock, subdrains were installed in the primary drainage courses. The subdrains were designed to mitigate the potential build-up of hydrostatic pressures below compacted fills due to infiltration of surfaces waters and migration of offsite -water sources. The approximate location of the subdrains are shown on the accompanying maps (Plates 1 and 2). It CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 7 Settlement Monuments At the completion of rough -grading, a deep settlement monument (SM -7) was constructed on Lot 55 to monitor post -grading settlement of the compacted fill and underlying alluvial materials left -in-place. This monument was initially surveyed on February 8, 2000, and has been re -surveyed on a regular basis (1- and 2 -week intervals) through May 30, 2000. The settlement -monitoring data gathered tc date indicate that the deep -fill area has settled up to approximately I inch with settlement continuing at a steady rate. Therefore, it is recommended that construction be delayed in lot areas that are underlain with greater than approximately 50 feet of fill until such time additional survey data indicate that the settlement has stabilized and any future .long-term secondary settlement will be within acceptable limits. On the basis of this discussion, it is recommended that construction be temporarily delayed on Lots 52 through 63. Lot Summary A summary of the maximum depths of fill placed on each lot is provided in Table II. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil types observed during grading were determined in our laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix A. Expansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of soil existing at or near finish -pad grade within the subject lots. These tests were performed in CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 8 accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analyses Water-soluble sulfate'contents were also determined for representative samples of soil existing at or near pad grade of the subject lots in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. These tests resulted in negligible sulfate contents of less than 0.1 percent. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. POST -GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Landscaping and Maintenance of Graded Slopes Cut and fill slopes within Tract 23067-5 are considered grossly and surficially stable. However, the fill slopes are comprised of granular soils and, unless mitigation measures are taken, the slopes will be subject to a low to moderate degree of surficial erosion, raveling and possible slumping during periods of heavy rainfall. Therefore, all graded slopes should be landscaped with a deep-rooted (4 to 5 feet deep), drought - resistant, woody -plant species. To provide temporary slope protection while the woody materials mature, the slopes should be planted with a herbaceous -plant species that will mature in one season or provided with some other protection, such as jute matting or polymer covering. The temporary protection should be maintained until the woody material has fully matured. A landscape architect should be consulted to determine the most suitable plant materials and irrigation requirements. To mitigate future surficial erosion and slumping, a permanent slope -maintenance program should be initiated. Proper slope maintenance must include regular care of drainage- and erosion -control provisions, rodent control, prompt repair of leaking irrigation systems and replacement of dying- or dead -plant materials. The irrigation system should be designed and maintained to provide a constant moisture content in CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 9 the soils. Overwatering, as well as overdrying, of the soils can lead to surficial erosion and slumping. Homeowners should be advised of the potential problems that can develop when drainage on the pads and slopes is altered in any way. Drainage can be altered due to the placement of fill and construction of garden walls, retaining walls, walkways, patios, swimming pools and planters. Pad Drainage ' Drainage on the lots should be designed to carry surface water away from all graded slopes and structures. Pad drainage should be designed for a minimum gradient of I percent with drainage directed to the adjacent streets. After dwellings are constructed, positive drainage away from the structures and slopes should be provided on the lots ' by means of earth swales, sloped concrete flatwork and area drains. Utility Trenches All utility -trench backfill within street right-of-ways, utility easements, under ' sidewalks, driveways and building -floor slabs and within or in proximity to slopes, should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by a Petra representative to verify adequate tcompaction. Excavations for trenches that exceed 4 feet in depth should be laid-back at a maximum gradient of 1:1 (h:v). For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfills should be placed in lifts no greater than ' 2 feet in thickness and then mechanically compacted with a hydra -hammer, pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than S inches and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. W 10 CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 10 As an alternative for shallow trenches (18 inches or less in depth) where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under building -floor slabs, imported clean sand having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed by a representative of Petra to verify an adequate degree of compaction and that the trench backfill will not be subject to adverse settlement. To avoid point -loads and subsequent distress to asbestos, clay, cement or plastic pipe, imported sand bedding should be placed at least 1 foot above all pipe in areas where excavated trench materials may contain oversize rock. Sand -bedding materials should thoroughly be jetted prior to placement of backfill. FOUNDATION -DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our observations during grading and field and laboratory testing, the preliminary foundation -design recommendations presented in our geotechnical investigation report (see References) are considered applicable for the subject lots. The recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. Allowable -Bearing Values An allowable -bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of 24 -inch -square pad footings and 12 -inch -wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade in compacted fill materials. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1 foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable -bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third for short -duration wind and seismic forces. NU CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 11 Settlement Based on the above bearing values and maximum depth of fill (i.e., 32± feet), a total settlement of footings is expected to be less than 0.75 inch and differential settlement less than one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 25 to 50± feet. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during or shortly following the completion of construction as the loads are applied. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure increasing at the rate of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot, may be used to determine lateral bearing for building footings constructed on level ground. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 times the dead -load forces may also be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Expansive Soil Conditions Laboratory test data indicate the foundation soils underlying the subject lots exhibit a VERY LOW, LOW or MEDIUM expansion potential, as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Standard 18-2. Minimum design recommendations for footings and residential -floor slabs for each of the above conditions are presented in the following sections based on a lot -by -lot evaluation. However, additional slab thickness, footing size and/or reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations, as determined by the project architect and/or structural engineer. A summary of the expansion test results and associated lots is provided in Appendix A. 0- CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 12 Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or less) Lots 1 through 5, 11 through 16, 22, 26 through 30, 36 through 40, 42, 43, 45, 48, 49, 50 and 54 through 66 for a total of 39 lots have a very low expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. • Footings - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. • Building -Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with It CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 13 weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Presaturation of the subgrade soils below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage -floor slabs should be pre -watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Lots 6 through 10, 17, 19, 21, 23 through 25, 31 through 35, 41, 44, 46, 47 and 51 through 53 for a total of 23 lots have a low expansion potential based upon laboratory - test results. • Footines - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, near the bottoms of the footings. • Building -Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. ' CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 14 - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the ' concrete. - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar ' manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with ' weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one ' bottom. - Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage - floor slabs should be prewatered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade soils. Medium Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 51 to 90) Lots 18 and 20 for a total of two lots have a medium expansion potential based upon laboratory -test results. • Footings All exterior footings for both one-story and two-story construction should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. ' Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the ' lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bats spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, near the bottoms of the footings. 15 ' CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 15 • Building -Floor Slabs ' Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. ' - Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches ' of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. ' - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. ' Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage - floor slabs should be presoaked to achieve a moisture content that is 5 percent or greater above optimum moisture content. This moisture should penetrate to a minimum depth of 18 inches into the subgrade soils. Post -Tensioned Slabs ' Post -tensioned -slab systems may be used for the subject site. The following recommendations are for soils with Very Low, Low and Medium expansion potential. The actual design of the post -tensioned -slabs should be performed by the project structural engineer based on a 20 -foot -unsupported length at the comers. However, ' the onsite soils have been evaluated and the following soil parameters for construction of post -tensioned slab -on -ground in general conformance with design specifications of the 1997 Uniform Building Code are being provided for use in the design of the slab systems. M ito, CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 16 Soluble Sulfates Laboratory test data indicate soils within the subject lots contain a negligible soluble - sulfate content. As such, concrete in contact with soil may utilize Type I or lI Portland cement. Structural Setbacks Footing setbacks of residential structures from property lines and from the tops and toes of the engineered fill slopes should conform to the minimum setback requirements of 1997 UBC Figure 18-I-1, Chapter 18. Structural setbacks of retaining walls, swimming pools and spas proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes should be analyzed separately. Footing Observations All building footing trenches should be observed by a Petra representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing soils and to depths conforming to 1997 UBC Figure 18-I-1, Chapter 18. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the placement forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture -softened soil and/or any construction debris, should be removed prior to placing concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility -trench excavations should not be placed in slab -on -grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. RETAINING -WALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Allowable -Bearing Capacity and Lateral Rest Footings for retaining walls may be designed using the allowable -bearing capacity and lateral -resistance values recommended for building footings; however, when I I? CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 17 calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings are not covered with concrete flatwork. Active and At -Rest Earth Pressures An active lateral -earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having a density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should be used for design of cantilevered walls retaining a drained, level backfill. Where the wall backfill slopes upward, at 2:1 (h:v), the above values should be increased to 52 pcf. The above values are for onsite soils which exhibit very low and low expansive potentials and are placed behind the walls a minimum horizontal distance equal to one-half the wall height. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. For design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, an at -rest earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having density of 53 pcf should tentatively be used for walls supporting a level backfill. This value should be increased to 78 pcf for an ascending 2:1 (h:v) backfill. Drainage Perforated pipe -and -gravel subdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Perforated pipe should consist of 4 -inch - minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR -35 with the perforations laid - down. The pipe should be encased in a 1 -foot -wide column of 0.75- to 1.5 -inch, open - graded gravel extending above the wall footing to a minimum height of 1.5 feet above the footing or to a height equal to one-third the wall height, whichever is greater. The gravel should be completely wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Solid outlet pipes should be connected to the subdrains and routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. wwh E CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 18 Weepholes, if used, should be 3 -inch -minimum diameter and provided at maximum intervals of 6 feet along the walls. Open, vertical masonry joints should be provided at 32 -inch -minimum intervals. One -cubic -foot of gravel should be placed behind the weepholes or open -masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Waterproofing The portions of retaining walls supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Retaining -Wall Backfill All retaining -wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8 -inch -maximum horizontal lifts, water or air-dried as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions and compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Flooding or jetting of backfill materials should be avoided. A Petra representative should verify adequate compaction of all backfill. MASONRY GARDEN WALLS Footings for free-standing masonry -block garden walls should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to mitigate the potential for unsightly cracking, positive separations should also be provided in the garden walls at a maximum horizontal spacing of 20 feet, and at comers. These separations should be provided in the blocks only and not extend through the footing. The footing should be placed monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as an effective "grade beam" below the wall. M Ig CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 19 In areas where garden walls may be proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes, the footings should be deepened such that a minimum horizontal clearance of 7 feet is maintained between the outside bottom edges of the footings and the face of the slope. POST- GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Petra should be notified at the appropriate times in order that we may provide the following observation and testing services during the various phases of post -grading construction. ' Building Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. • Retainine-Wall Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and ' competent soil -bearing conditions. ' - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. ' - Observe and verify proper installation of subdrainage systems prior to placing wall backfill. Observe and test placement of all wall backfill to verify adequate compaction. ' Masonry Garden Walls Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. 1 as CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 20 - Re -observe all footing trenches following removal of any slough and/or saturated soils and re -excavate to proper depth. • Exterior Concrete-Flatwork Construction - Observe and test subgrade soils below all concrete-flatwork areas to verify adequate compaction and moisture content. • Utility -Trench Backfill - Observe and test placement of all utility -trench backfill to verify adequate compaction. • Re -Grading - Observe and test placement of any fill to be placed above or beyond the finish grades shown on the grading plans. CENTEX HOMES June 15, 2000 Lots 1 through 66 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 21 This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Please call if you have any questions pertaining to this report. Respectfully submitted, v W �Exp.o Stephen M. Po Lt. In ? Z,^, Senior Associat �GP� GE 692 °Or rAI Attachments: Table I Field Density Test Results Table II - Lot Summary References Plates 1 and 2 - As -Built Geotechnical Maps (in pocket) Plates 3 and 4 - Density Test Location Maps (in pocket) Appendix A - Laboratory Test Criteria/Laboratory Test Data Distribution: (6) Addressee (4) Centex Homes — Field Trailer Attention: Mr. Gary Keller En ' TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TEST::.:. ; . TEST,: '. - -...''JEST : ' , .:::.;:::.::': `.: ELEV. :,MOISTURE'DENS,ITY,:::,Comp,:..:: i[::.SOIL,::;: :DATE..:.:: [:: NO:::.::;'; .::. : ;.LOCATION :.:? .;.:::: ` ::.::(ffj"::.::`::. (°lo} ..:....::.:.: .:(Pefjl::"`:':'.: ' Tract 23067-5 11/10/99 2105 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 slope 1111.0 9.5 116.0 87 3 ' 11/10/99 2106 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1112.0 9.0 117.5 88 3 11/10/99 2107 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1117.0 11.5 119.5 90 3 11/10/99 2108 RT No. 2105 -- 9.5 116.5 88 3 ' 11/10/99 2109 RT No. 2106 6.5 116.5 88 3 11/10/99 2110 TR 23067-5/1-ot 44 slope 11 l 1.0 6.5 116.5 88 3- 11/10/99 2111 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1112.0 8.0 115.5 87 3 11/10/99 2112 TR 23067-5/1-ot 42 slope 1110.0 7.0 115.0 86 3 11/10/99 2113 RT No. 2108 -- 8.0 121.0 91 3 11/10/99 2114 RT No. 2109 8.0 122.5 92 3 ' 11/10/99 2115 RT No. 2110 9.0 122.5 92 3 11/10/99 2116 RT No. 2111 7.0 121.0 91 3 11/10/99 2117 RT No. 2112 -- 8.0 122.0 92 3 ' 11/10/99 2124 TR 23067-5/1-ot 43 slope 1119.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 11/10/99 2125 TR 23067-5/1-ot 43 slope 1120.0 10.0 119.5 90 3 11/10/99 2126 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1112.0 9.0 120.5 91 3 t 11/10/99 2127 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1113.0 8.0 121.5 91 3 11/10/99 2128 TR 23067-5/1-ot 45 slope 1122.0 10.5 121.0 91 3 11/10/99 2129 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 slope 1123.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 11/10/99 2130 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1 l 13.0 9.5 120.5 91 3 11/10/99 2131 TR 23067-5/1-ot 41 slope 1114.0 8.5 121.0 91 3 ' 11/12/99 2146 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1117.0 8.5 121.5 91 3 11/12/99 2147 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1118.0 10.0 120.5 91 3 11/12/99 2148 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1119.0 6.5 121.5 91 3 11/12/99 t 2149 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1120.0 6.5 121.5 91 3 11/12/99 2150 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1122.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 11/12/99 2151 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1123.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 ' 11/12/99 2157 TR 23067-5/1.ot 40 slope 1120.0 10.5 120.0 90 3 11/12/99 2158 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1121.0 8.5 122.0 92 3 11112/99 2159 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1123.0 9.0 119.0 92 4 11/12/99 t 2160 TR 23067-5/1.ot 44 slope 1124.0 9.5 118.5 91 4 11/15/99 2161 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 slope 1124.0 12.0 121.0 91 3 11/15/99 2162 TR 23067-5/1.ot 36 slope 1125.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 ' 11/15/99 2163 TR 23067-5/1-ot 40 slope 1122.0 8.0 117.0 90 4 11/15/99 2164 TR 23067-5/1-ot 40 slope 1123.0 5.0 112.0 86 4 11/15/99 2165 TR 23067-5/1-ot 45 slope 1125.0 9.0 121.5 91 3 ' 11/15/99 2166 TR 23067-5/1-ot 45 slope 1126.0 7.5 121.5 91 3 11/15/99 2167 RT No. 2164 -- 7.0 117.5 90 4 11/15/99 2177 TR 23067-5/1-ot 44 slope 1127.0 13.0 115.0 88 4 ' 11/15/99 2178 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1128.0 8.5 122.0 92 3 11/15/99 2179 TR 23067-5/Lot41 slope 1125.0 8.5 121.5 91 3 ' 11/15/99 2180 TR 23067-5/1.ot 41 slope 1126.0 8.0 116.0 89 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I1 'r �7 TABLE I Field Density Test Restults ;TEST :. TEST. ... TEST .:'::'`: `: ':'': a;.:.::' i . ELEV..... DATE'.: ' ' (lr) %YILl.I..... 11/15/99 2181 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 slope 1127.0 6.5 120.0 90 3 11/15/99 2182 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 slope 1128.0 6.5 113.5 87 4 11/15/99 2183 RT No. 2177 8.5 120.0 92 4 11/15/99 2184 RT No. 2180 8.5 118.5 91 4 11/15/99 2185 RT No. 2182 11.0 121.0 91 3 11/15/99 2187 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 slope 1127.0 11.5 117.0 90 4 11/15/99 2188 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 slope 1128.0 12.0 118.0 91 4 11/15/99 2189 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1128.0 9.5 122.5 92 4 11/15/99 2190 TR 23067-5/L.ot 43 slope 1129.0 10.0 119.0 92 4 11/15/99 2198 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1131.0 10.0 119.5 91 7 11/15/99 2199 TR 23067-5/L.ot 43 slope 1132.0 9.5 118.0 90 7 11/15/99 2200 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1129.0 7.5 117.0 89 7 11/15/99 2201 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1130.0 6.5 117.0 89 7 11/15/99 2202 RT No. 2200 9.5 120.0 92 7 11/15/99 2203 RT No. 2201 11.5 119.0 91 7 11/16/99 2216 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1134.0 10.0 119.5 92 4 11/16/99 2217 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1135.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 11/16/99 2218 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1133.0 11.5 117.5 90 4 11/16/99 2219 TR 23067-5/L.ot 41 slope 1134.0 13.5 117.5 90 4 11/16/99 2220 TR 23067-5/L.ot 39 slope 1133.0 9.5 126.5 95 3 11/16/99 2221 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 slope 1134.0 9.0 118.0 91 4 11/16/99 2224 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 slope 1134.0 8.5 117.5 92 6 11/16/99 2225 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 slope 1135.0 9.5 116.0 91 6 11/16/99 2226 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1136.0 12.0 112.0 91 16 11/16/99 2227 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1137.0 12.0 112.0 91 16 11/16/99 2228 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1135.0 8.0 123.0 92 3 11/16/99 2229 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1136.0 8.5 116.5 91 6 11/16/99 2238 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1138.0 12.5 121.5 92 21 11/16/99 2239 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1140.0 8.0 123.0 93 21 11/16/99 2240 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1138.0 9.0 122.0 92 21 11/16/99 2241 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1139.0 8.5 121.0 91 21 11/16/99 2242 TR 23067-5/L.ot 37 slope 1138.0 9.5 122.0 92 21 11/16/99 2243 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 slope 1139.0 9.5 124.0 94 21 11/17/99 2266 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 slope 1141.0 8.5 120.0 91 21 11/17/99 2267 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1142.0 11.5 118.5 91 4 11/17/99 2268 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1141.0 13.0 119.0 92 4 11/17/99 2269 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1142.0 10.5 120.0 91 21 11/18/99 2270 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 slope 1142.0 12.0 115.0 90 6 11/18/99 2271 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 slope 1143.0 10.0 118.5 91 4 11/18/99 2272 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1143.0 13.5 110.0 91 13 11/18/99 2273 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1144.0 10.5 113.5 91 17 11/18/99 2274 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 slope 1137.0 14.0 114.0 92 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 2 95 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults :%% TEST._..'`;:: TEST : ; .-:' ',:,;.,f':';'L+LJ*;*'V. MuttTUICL�:.:IilaV51;1'Y,;::LV1YlY...c;;.:::.:StstL°,: r; DATE.:.; NO: : : LOCATION (tt) f% - (pct, ; (ala) TYPL' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 3 FM Tract 23067-5 11/18/99 2275 TR 23067-5/1.ot 36 slope 1138.0 11.5 118.5 91 4 11/18/99 2294 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1144.0 10.0 117.5 90 4 11/18/99 2295 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1145.0 10.0 119.5 92 4 11/18/99 2296 TR 23067-5/1.ot 40 1143.0 7.5 113.0 87 4 11/18/99 2297 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 1144.0 9.0 113.5 87 4 11/18/99 2298 TR 23067-5/L.ot 42 1144.0 8.0 121.0 91 3 11/18/99 2299 TR 23067-5/1.ot 42 1145.0 8.5 122.0 92 3 11/18/99 2300 RTNo.2296 -- 9.0 120.0 92 4 11/18/99 2301 TR 23067-5/L.ot 41 1145.0 10.5 116.5 91 6 11/18/99 2302 RT No. 2297 -- 12.5 117.0 90 4 11/18/99 2303 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1143.0 11.0 116.0 91 6 11/18/99 2304 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1144.0 11.0 115.0 90 6 11/18/99 2305 TR 23067-5/Lot44 1145.0 9.5 118.0 91 4 11/19/99 2306 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1146.0 11.0 120.0 91 21 11/19/99 2307 TR 23067-5/1-ot 44 1147.0 8.5 120.5 91 21 11/19/99 2308 TR 23067-5/1-ot 39 1144.0 11.0 120.5 91 21 11/19/99 2309 TR 23067-5/1.ot 39 1145.0 12.0 122.0 92 21 11/19/99 2343 TR 23067-5/1-ot 43 1247.0 9.5 123.0 93 21 11/19/99 2344 TR 23067-5/L.ot 42 1148.0 8.5 120.0 91 21 11/19/99 2345 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 1150.0 11.5 121.0 91 21 11/19/99 2346 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 1151.0 11.0 122.5 92 21 11/19/99 2347 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 1143.0 12.0 119.5 90 21 11/19/99 2348 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1144.0 12.0 120.0 91 21 11/22/99 2354 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 1152.0 10.0 122.5 92 21 11/22/99 2355 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1153.0 10.5 127.5 96 21 11/22/99 2356 TR 23067-5/1.ot 39 1151.0 11.0 123.5 93 21 11/22/99 2357 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 1152.0 9.0 123.5 93 21 11/22/99 2358 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 1152.0 10.5 119.5 90 21 11/22/99 2359 TR 23067-5/1-ot 37 1153.0 11.0 123.0 92 3 11/22/99 2364 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1155.0 8.0 122.5 92 3 11/22/99 2365 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1156.0 8.5 119.0 92 4 11/22/99 2366 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 1154.0 9.0 124.0 93 3 11/22/99 2367 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 1155.0 11.0 118.0 91 4 11/22/99 2368 TR 23067-5/1.ot 36 1148.0 9.0 125.0 93 20 11/22/99 2369 TR 23067-5/Lot36 1149.0 10.5 124.0 92 20 11/23/99 2383 TR 23067-5/1.ot 45 1159.0 8.5 126.5 94 20 11/23/99 2384 TR 23067-5/1.ot45 1160.0 6.5 123.0 92 3 11/23/99 2385 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 1158.0 7.0 120.0 92 4 11/23/99 2386 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 1159.0 8.0 119.0 92 4 11/23/99 2387 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 1154.0 9.5 122.0 92 3 11/23/99 2388 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 1155.0 9.0 122.0 92 3 11/23/99 2403 TR 23067-5/1-ot 39 1159.0 7.5 127.0 94 20 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 3 FM TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST.:;' TEST TEST,: [':`'.[.::;°.`:.�°_ELN;Y.e�._;.'1VIf?1J'1't�iCN.f`IlL4i\Sl'!:'Y':.:;,t:UiYlLfisS::%:i;g�Ulfl:__�.; DATE ' .. NO. i., LOCATIOx � � �� -(Pe f). (10 ,TYPE .:'. 11/23/99 2404 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 1160.0 7.0 122.5 91 20 11/23/99 2405 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 1161.0 9.0 124.0 92 20 11/23/99 2406 TR 23067-5/L.ot 42 1162.0 8.5 124.0 92 20 11/23/99 2407 TR 23067-5/L.ot 45 1163.0 8.0 120.5 91 3 11/23/99 2408 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 1164.0 9.5 123.5 92 20 11/23/99 2409 TR 23067-5/1-ot 39 1160.0 7.0 123.0 92 3 11/23/99 2410 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 1161.0 7.5 125.0 93 20 11/23/99 2413 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 11467.0 7.5 122.0 91 20 11/23/99 2414 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 1168.0 8.5 121.0 91 3 11/23/99 2415 TR 23067-5/1-ot 42 1163.0 7.5 121.5 90 20 11/23/99 2416 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 1164.0 7.5 124.0 92 20 11/24/99 2437 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1102.0 11.0 114.5 86 3 11/24/99 2438 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1103.0 12.5 115.0 86 3 11/24/99 2439 RT No. 2437 -- 8.5 123.5 93 3 11/24/99 2440 RT No. 2438 -- 10.5 121.5 91 3 11/24/99 2441 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1104.0 8.5 116.0 89 4 11/24/99 2442 RT No. 2441 -- 11.5 117.5 90 4 11/24/99 2443 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1104.0 10.5 118.0 91 4 11/24/99 2444 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1105.0 11.0 117.5 90 4 11/24/99 2445 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1105.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 11/24/99 2446 TR 23067-5/1.ot 51 slope 1106.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 11/24/99 2447 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1106.0 12.0 122.5 92 3 11/24/99 2448 TR 23067-5/1.ot 52 slope 1107.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 11/24/99 2457 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1108.0 11.0 121.0 91 21 11/24/99 2458 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1109.0 10.0 119.5 90 21 11/24/99 2459 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1108.0 10.0 121.5 92 21 11/24/99 2460 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1109.0 10.0 119.0 92 4 11/29/99 2462 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1110.0 11.5 122.5 92 3 11/29/99 2463 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1111.0 11.5 118.0 91 4 11/29/99 2464 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1110.0 9.0 120.5 91 3 11/29/99 2465 TR 23067-5/1.ot 50 slope 11 l 1.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 11/29/99 2466 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1112.0 8.0 120.0 90 3 11/29/99 2467 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1114.0 9.0 121.0 91 3 11/29/99 2468 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1111.0 8.5 116.5 91 6 11/29/99 2469 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1113.0 10.0 118.5 91 4 11/30/99 2494 TR 23067-5/1-ot 53 slope 1117.0 8.0 121.0 .91 3 11/30/99 2495 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1118.0 7.0 117.0 90 4 11/30/99 2496 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 slope 1116.0 13.0 115.5 90 6 11/30/99 2497 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1117.0 12.0 115.5 90 6 11/30/99 2498 TR 23067-5/1.ot 51 slope 1120.0 10.0 118.5 91 4 11/30/99 2499 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1121.0 10.5 117.5 90 4 11/30/99 2500 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1120.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 4 19 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST':. TESL - °- ::- TEST: 2::_ ELPsY:-::P#YltJisTt RE U1hNS11'Y.; AUUM'., t::SUM:,€ ; :DATE.LOCATION (% PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. I4I-99 TABLE -15 M Tract 23067-5 11/30/99 2501 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 slope 1121.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 11/30/99 2502 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 slope 1123.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 11/30/99 2503 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1124.0 10.0 119.5 90 21 11/30/99 2504 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1120.0 8.0 116.0 91 6 11/30/99 2505 TR 23067-5/Lot52 slope 1121.0 8.0 117.0 91 6 11/30/99 2506 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1122.0 9.5 118.0 92 6 11/30/99 2507 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 slope 1123.0 10.0 119.0 93 6 11/30/99 2508 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1124.0 13.5 114.5 92 17 11/30/99 2509 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1125.0 11.5 116.0 91 6 12/01/99 2537 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 1124.0 14.0 114.5 91 19 12/01/99 2538 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1125.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 12/01/99 2539 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1125.0 13.0 113.0 91 17 12/01/99 2540 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1126.0 11.0 114.0 91 19 12/01/99 2541 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1129.0 12.0 117.5 91 4 12/01/99 2542 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1131.0 12.0 116.5 91 6 12/01/99 2543 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1127.0 12.0 118.5 91 4 12/01/99 2544 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1128.0 10.0 118.5 91 4 12/01/99 2545 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1130.0 16.5 108.5 90 13 12/02/99 2573 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1135.0 10.0 108.0 84 6 12/02/99 2574 TR 23067-5/1.ot 53 1136.0 8.5 109.5 86 6 12/02/99 2575 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1133.0 11.0 118.5 93 6 12/02/99 2576 TR 23067-5/L.ot 50 slope 1134.0 12.5 118.5 92 6 12/02/99 2577 RT No. 2573 -- 9.0 119.0 92 4 12/02/99 2578 RT No. 2574 -- 9.5 117.0 91 6 12/02/99 2579 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1138.0 9.5 116.0 90 6 12/02/99 2580 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1139.0 7.0 120.0 93 6 12/02/99 2581 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1133.0 8.0 116.0 90 6 12/02/99 2582 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1134.0 9.5 115.5 90 6 12/02/99 2583 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1135.0 6.0 117.0 91 6 12/02/99 2584 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1136.0 9.5 119.5 93 6 12/02/99 2585 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1139.0 8.5 123.0 96 6 12/02/99 2586 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 1140.0 6.0 117.5 91 6 12/02/99 2587 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1121.0 8.5 123.0 92 3 12/02/99 2588 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1122.0 7.5 121.5 91 3 12/02/99 2589 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1123.0 11.5 121.0 90 3 12/02/99 2590 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 slope 1124.0 8.0 123.5 92 3 12/03/99 2591 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1114.0 15.0 123.0 88 6 12/03/99 2592 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1116.0 12.5 111.0 87 6 12/03/99 2593 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1123.0 11.5 116.5 91 6 12/03/99 2594 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1124.0 13.0 115.0 90 6 12/03/99 2595 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1143.0 11.0 113.0 90 19 12/03/99 2596 TR 23067-5/1-ot 53 slope 1144.0 11.0 115.0 90 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. I4I-99 TABLE -15 M TABLE Field Density Test Restults ;`'::TEST .* TEST ;.:::.:::':::.;:r.':.;ELEV.:.,:MOLSTLiRE TEST E„i!'SITY:: fiiVlF.,;:?::i;;;.:5::..::`.:..: :: DATE LVO..' ;... ..: LOGATI©N (Bj (moi' (�ICt) (+%} TYPE ' Tract 23067-5 12/03/99 2597 TR 23067-5/Lot53 1141.0 7.0 123.0 92 3 12/03/99 2598 TR 23067-5/1-ot53 1142.0 9.5 123.0 92 3 12/03/99 2599 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1143.0 11.0 120.5 90 3 12/03/99 2600 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1143.0 8.5 127.0 95 3 ' 12/03/99 2601 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1144.0 10.0 126.5 95 3 12/03/99 2602 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 1145.0 10.5 120.5 90 3 12/03/99 2603 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 N slope 1144.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 ' 12/03/99 2604 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 N slope 1145.0 10.0 125.0 94 3 12/03/99 2605 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 N slope 1146.0 10.0 121.5 91 3 12/03/99 2606 TR 23067-5/Lot 47 1171.0 8.5 119.5 92 4 12/03/99 2607 TR 23067-5/1.ot 47 1172.0 8.0 118.0 91 4 12/03/99 2608 TR 23067-5/1.ot 48 1172.0 10.0 119.5 92 4 12/03/99 2609 TR 23067-511-ot 48 1173.0 7.5 119.0 91 4 ' 12/03/99 2610 TR 23067-5/1-ot 50 slope 1142.0 11.0 118.5 91 4 12/03/99 2611 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1143.0 14.0 112.0 86 4 12/03/99 2612 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1144.0 7.5 118.5 91 4 ' 12/03/99 2613 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1145.0 8.0 112.5 86 4 12/03/99 2614 RT No. 2611 -- 11.0 119.5 92 4 12/03/99 2615 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1143.0 11.0 115.5 90 6 ' 12/03/99 2616 RT No. 2613 10.5 120.0 90 3 12/03/99 2617 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 1146.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 12/03/99 2618 TR 23067-5/1-ot 39 1161.0 8.5 120.0 90 3 ' 12/03/99 2619 TR 23067-5/L.ot 39 1162.0 9.0 120.0 90 3 12/03/99 2620 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 1163.0 7.5 117.0 91 6 12/03/99 2621 TR 23067-5/L.ot 36 1158.0 8.0 124.0 93 3 ' 12/03/99 2622 TR 23067-5/Lot36 1159.0 10.0 122.0 91 3 12/06/99 2623 TR 23067-5/Lot54 1147.0 10.0 114.0 91 19 12/06/99 2624 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1148.0 11.0 122.0 92 3 ' 12/06/99 2625 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1144.0 9.5 124.0 93 3 12/06/99 2626 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1145.0 12.0 119.0 93 6 12/06/99 2627 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1146.0 12.0 117.0 91 8 ' 12/06/99 2628 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1147.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 12/06/99 2629 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1147.0 7.0 116.0 90 8 12/06/99 2630 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1148.0 6.5 112.0 87 8 12/06/99 2631 RT No. 2630 11.5 116.5 90 8 12/06/99 2632 RT No. 2591 9.5 112.5 87 8 ' 12/06/99 2633 RT No. 2592 6.5 113.5 88 8 12/06/99 2634 RT No. 2632 = 12.5 115.5 90 6 12/06/99 2635 RT No. 2633 -- 11.5 120.5 90 3 ' 12/06/99 2636 TR 23067-5/1-ot 53 slope 1116.0 8.0 118.5 93 6 12/06/99 2637 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 slope 1117.0 12.0 115.5 90 6 12/06/99 2638 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1126.0 9.0 115.5 87 21 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -16 M TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST. TESTTEST: ° E,LEV:. MOISTURE :.DENSITY .,C(f1YIP;5........ DATE hi0i LOCATION O (%J (pefj' (%) TYP L PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 7 30 Tract 23067-5 12/06/99 2639 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 1127.0 7.5 116.5 88 21 12/06/99 2640 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1122.0 9.5 118.0 89 21 12/06/99 2641 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1123.0 8.0 114.0 86 21 12/06/99 2642 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1119.0 15.5 104.0 81 6 12/06/99 2643 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1120.0 11.5 116.0 88 21 12/07/99 2689 RT No. 2638 -- 10.5 121.0 91 21 12/07/99 2690 RT No. 2639 9.5 119.5 90 21 12/07/99 2691 RT No. 2640 11.0 120.0 90 21 12/07/99 2692 RT No. 2641 12.0 119.5 90 21 12/07/99 2693 RT No. 2642 9.0 120.5 91 21 12/07/99 2694 RT No. 2643 -- 10.0 118.5 91 4 12/07/99 2695 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 slope '' 1122.0 9.5 118.0 91 4 12/07/99 2696 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1123.0 11.5 118.5 91 4 12/07/99 2697 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1123.0 8.5 114.0 89 6 12/07/99 2698 RT No. 2697 -- 9.5 115.5 90 6 12/07/99 2699 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 1124.0 8.5 116.0 91 6 12/07/99 2700 TR 23067-5/Lot56 1125.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 12/07/99 2701 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1148.0 13.5 116.5 90 8 12/07/99 2702 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1149.0 11.0 122.0 92 3 12/07/99 2703 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1148.0 12.0 117.0 91 8 12/07/99 2704 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 slope 1149.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 12/07/99 2705 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1124.0 10.5 113.0 87 4 12/07/99 2706 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1125.0 10.0 112.5 87 4 12/07/99 2721 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1127.0 11.5 118.0 91 4 12/07/99 2722 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1128.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 12/07/99 2723 RT No. 2705 -- 10.0 121.0 91 3 12/07/99 2724 RT No. 2706 -- 10.0 119.5 90 21 12/08/99 2725 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1128.0 11.5 111.0 86 4 12/08/99 2726 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1129.0 11.5 117.5 91 4 12/08/99 2727 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1129.0 13.0 116.5 89 4 12/08/99 2728 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1130.0 13.5 115.0 84 4 12/08/99 2729 TR 23067-5/L.ot 54 slope 1131.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 12/08/99 2730 RT No. 2725 -- 11.5 117.5 91 4 12/08/99 2731 RT No. 2727 12.0 119.5 92 4 12/08/99 2732 RT No. 2728 -- 11.5 120.0 90 3 12/08/99 2733 TR 23067-5/L.ot 50 slope 1148.0 11.0 109.0 84 4 12/08/99 2734 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1149.0 10.0 112.5 87 4 12/08/99 2745 RT No. 2733 -- 11.0 112.0 86 4 12/08/99 2746 RT No. 2734 14.0 117.0 90 4 12/08/99 2747 RT No. 2745 -- 10.0 120.0 90 3 12/08/99 2748 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 slope 1131.0 10.5 117.0 90 4 12/08/99 2749 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1132.0 10.5 117.0 91 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 7 30 TABLE Field Density Test Restults TE$T. ;:r: °.TEST_ TEST _::[^::.[.. ' :... '. ELEV;:::MOISTURE DENSITY -_CO P.: :::: °,SOIL::- DATE NO. LOCATION ;, _lftj .. f`i fpetj:- 12/08/99 2750 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1139.0 12.0 119.0 91 4 12/08/99 2751 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1140.0 10.5 117.0 90 4 12/09/99 2775 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1150.0 11.5 114.5 92 19 12/09/99 2776 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1151.0 9.0 111.0 90 16 12/09/99 2777 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1134.0 13.0 117.0 90 4 12/09/99 2778 TR 23067-5/1.ot 55 1135.0 11.5 119.0 91 4 12/09/99 2779 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1137.0 11.5 120.0 93 4 12/09/99 2780 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1138.0 10.0 119.0 89 21 12/09/99 2781 TR 23067-5/1.ot 18 1150.0 5.0 104.5 82 22 12/09/99 2782 TR 23067-5/1-ot 50 slope 1152.0 10.0 118.5 93 22 12/09/99 2783 TR 23067-5/1-ot 50 slope 1154.0 7.0 110.0 87 22 12/09/99 2784 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1136.0 11.0 120.5 91 21 12/09/99 2785 RT No. 2780 -- 11.0 122.5 93 21 12/09/99 2786 RT No. 2781 -- 9.0 119.0 94 22 12/09/99 2787 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1155.0 11.0 123.0 93 21 12/09/99 2788 RT No. 2783 -- 11.0 117.0 92 22 12/09/99 2789 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 1154.0 12.5 119.5 90 21 12/09/99 2808 TR 23067-5/1-ot 17 1155.0 11.0 119.0 91 4 12/09/99 2809 TR 23067-5/L.ot 17 1156.0 13.0 115.5 91 22 12/09/99 2810 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 1155.0 12.0 115.0 91 22 12/09/99 2811 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1156.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 12/10/99 2812 TR 23067-5/L.ot 48 1172.0 4.5 107.0 84 22 12/10/99 2813 TR 23067-5/L.ot 48 1173.0 4.5 109.0 85 22 12/10/99 2814 TR 23067-5/1.ot 48 1174.0 6.5 111.5 87 22 12/10/99 2815 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1158.0 6.5 120.5 95 22 12/10/99 2816 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 1159.0 9.5 118.0 92 22 12/10/99 2817 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 1160.0 8.0 121.5 95 22 12/10/99 2818 TR 23067-5/1.ot 49 1161.0 13.5 116.0 90 8 12/10/99 2819 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 1163.0 12.0 118.0 91 4 12/10/99 2820 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1158.0 16.5 110.5 90 16 12/10/99 2821 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1159.0 9.0 116.5 90 8 12/10/99 2822 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1159.0 13.5 115.0 91 22 12/10/99 2823 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1160.0 14.0 114.5 90 22 12/10/99 2824 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 1163.0 8.0 117.5 91 4 12/10/99 2825 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 1164.0 12.0 116.5 91 22 12/10/99 2826 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1160.0 415.5 1 1 1.0 90 16 12/10/99 2827 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1161.0 14.0 112.0 91 16 12/10/99 2828 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 slope 1165.0 10.5 116.0 91 22 12/10/99 2829 TR 23067-5/1-ot 49 slope 1166.0 12.5 112.5 90 17 12/10/99 2830 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 1162.0 13.0 114.5 90 22 12/10/99 2831 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 1163.0 12.5 113.5 91 17 12/13/99 2832 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1164.0 13.5 117.0 92 22 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -18 T,"cpc3o�7-3, V TABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST_'. ESI'. ;'::::..TEST ELEV.: . MOISTURE; DENSITY. ,G40,1%4P. ;_ %: SOIL :: . DATE:NO:,..., - I£jCA ION:: ::; .: Rj ?:.... j, :',:.::.::.,�pef? ;�aoj'.:: ;:::TYPE';_a PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 9 301 Tract 23067-5 12/13/99 2833 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 slope 1165.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 12/13/99 2834 TR 23067-5/1-ot 49 1165.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 12/13/99 2835 TR 23067-5/L.ot 49 1166.0 9.0 118.5 91 4 12/13/99 2836 TR 23067-5/1-ot 51 slope 1167.0 11.5 1 l 1.5 88 4 12/13/99 2837 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 slope 1168.0 13.0 115.0 88 4 12/13/99 2838 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1165.0 7.5 107.0 82 4 12/13/99 2839 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1166.0 14.0 111.5 86 4 12/13/99 2840 RT No. 2838 -- 14.5 112.5 87 4 12/13/99 2841 RT No. 2839 9.5 118.0 91 4 12/13/99 2842 RT No. 2836 10.0 115.5 89 4 12/13/99 2843 RT No. 2837 9.5 115.5 89 4 12/13/99 2844 RT No. 2840 -- 6.0 111.0 85 4 12/13/99 2845 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 1167.0 10.5 115.0 88 4 12/13/99 2846 RT No. 2842 -- 11.0 119.5 92 4 12/13/99 2847 RT No. 2843 -- 8.5 114.0 88 4 12/13/99 2848 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1145.0 11.5 114.0 89 6 12/13/99 2849 RT No. 2848 -- 11.5 115.0 90 6 12/13/99 2850 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 slope 1120.0 11.0 114.0 86 21 12/13/99 2879 RT No. 2850 -- 10.5 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2880 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1120.0 13.0 115.5 91 21 12/14/99 2881 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1121.0 11.0 120.0 91 20 12/14/99 2882 TR 23067-5/Lot54 1143.0 10.5 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2883 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1144.0 10.5 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2884 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1145.0 8.0 118.0 91 4 12/14/99 2885 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1146.0 11.0 117.0 90 4 12/14/99 2886 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1123.0 11.5 120.0 92 4 12/14/99 2887 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1124.0 11.0 119.5 92 4 12/14/99 2888 RT No. 2812 -- 12.0 119.0 91 4 12/14/99 2889 RT No. 2813 10.5 116.0 90 6 12/14/99 2890 RT No. 2814 -- 10.0 118.0 91 4 12/14/99 2891 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1125.0 10.5 120.0 92 4 12/14/99 2892 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1126.0 12.5 118.5 91 4 12/14/99 2893 TR 23067-5/Lot58 1127.0 11.5 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2894 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1128.0 12.0 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2895 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1124.0 9.0 117.0 90 4 12/14/99 2896 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1125.0 10.5 122.5 92 3 12/14/99 2897 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1127.0 10.5 121.5 91 3 12/14/99 2898 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1128.0 10.5 121.5 91 3 12/14/99 2899 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1143.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2900 TR 23067-5/Lot56 1144.0 12.0 119.0 92 4 12/14/99 2901 RT No. 2844 -- 11.5 116.5 90 4 12/14/99 2902 RT No. 2845 12.0 119.0 92 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 9 301 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults mum UKE Ai 12/14/99 2903 RT No. 2847 -- 9.5 119.5 92 4 12/14/99 2904 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1166.0 11.0 120.0 92 4 12/15/99 2932 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1129.0 10.0 118.0 90 4 2933 TR 23067-5/Lot57 1130.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 '12/15/99 12/15/99 2934 TR 23067-5/L.ot56 slope 1131.0 12.0 122.0 92 3 12/15/99 2935 TR 23067-5/L.ot 56 slope 1132.0 10.0 120.5 91 3 12/15/99 2936 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1144.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 ' 12/15/99 2937 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1145.0 11.0 124.0 93 3 12/15/99 2938 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1143.0 11.5 121.5 91 3 12/15/99 2939 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1144.0 10.5 117.0 90 4 12/15/99 2940 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1133.0 6.0 121.5 91 3 12/15/99 2941 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1134.0 9.0 115.5 91 22 2942 TR 23067-5/1-ot 58 slope 1135.0 10.5 117.5 92 4 '12/15/99 12/15/99 2943 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 slope 1136.0 10.5 118.5 91 4 12/15/99 2944 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1144.0 13.5 117.0 90 4 12/15/99 2945 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 slope 1145.0 10.5 120.0 90 3 ' 12/15/99 2946 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1147.0 8.5 116.5 91 6 12/15/99 2947 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1148.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 12/16/99 2995 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1149.0 14.0 113.0 87 4 12/16/99 2996 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 slope 1150.0 15.0 112.0 86 4 12/16/99 2997 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1138.0 9.0 118.5 91 4 '12/16/99 2998 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1139.0 7.5 120.0 90 3 12/16/99 2999 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1134.0 10.5 114.5 88 4 12/16/99 3000 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1135.0 15.0 115.0 89 4 ' 12/16/99 3001 RT No. 2995 -- 11.0 117.0 90 4 12/16/99 3002 RT No. 2996 10.5 117.5 90 4 12/16/99 3003 RT No. 2999 -- 12.5 121.0 91 21 12/16/99 3004 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1140.0 12.5 119.0 92 4 12/16/99 3005 RT No. 3000 11.5 120.0 91 21 12/16/99 3006 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1136.0 13.0 121.0 91 21 '12/16/99 3007 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1147.0 8.5 117.0 90 4 12/16/99 3008 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1148.0 11.0 117.5 90 4 12/16/99 3009 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1141.0 10.0 114.0 88 4 '12/16/99 3010 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1142.0 7.5 109.0 86 22 12/16/99 3011 RT No. 3009 9.5 119.0 92 4 12/16/99 3012 RT No. 3010 -- 9.5 116.5 92 22 12/16/99 3013 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1138.0 9.5 127.5 96 3 12/16/99 3014 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1139.0 12.0 118.5 90 7 12/16/99 3015 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1162.0 12.0 120.0 92 7 '12/16/99 3016 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 1163.0 11.5 117.0 90 4 12/16/99 3017 TR 23067-5/1.ot 54 1153.0 12.0 115.5 91 22 12/16/99 3018 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 1154.0 12.5 115.0 90 22 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JUNE 2000 ' J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 10 �3 TABLE Field Density Test Restults EST -TEST''.-:.` _ TEST _ ELEV. MQ1lSTURE. - DENSITY EYIlYiF. DATE ` i NO: LOCATION- M TYPE - PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 11 M Tract 23067-5 12/16/99 3019 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1141.0 10.0 118.5 90 7 12/16/99 3020 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1142.0 9.0 115.5 90 6 12/17/99 3021 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1148.0 10.0 119.5 90 21 12/17/99 3022 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1149.0 11.5 118.5 91 4 12/17/99 3023 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1159.0 11.0 118.0 91 4 12/17/99 3024 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1160.0 12.0 117.0 90 4 12/17/99 3025 TR 23067-5/1-ot 50 slope 1168.0 11.0 122.5 93 21 12/17/99 3026 TR 23067-5/1-ot 50 slope 1169.0 10.5 121.5 92 21 12/17/99 3027 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1129.0 6.5 112.5 85 21 12/17/99 3028 TR 23067-511-ot 58 1130.0 7.0 110.0 83 21 12/17/99 3029 TR 23067-5/1-ot 60 1126.0 8.0 118.0 89 21 12/17/99 3030 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 1127.0 10.0 118.5 89 21 12/17/99 3031 TR 23067-5/L.ot 50 slope 1171.0 5.0 116.0 87 21 12/17/99 3032 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1152.0 12.5 118.5 90 2 12/17/99 3033 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1153.0 11.5 117.5 90 7 12/17/99 3034 TR 23067-5/1.ot55 slope 1138.0 7.5 109.0 83 7 12/17/99 3035 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 slope 1139.0 13.0 117.5 90 4 12/17/99 3036 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1165.0 12.5 117.0 90 4 12/17/99 3037 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 1166.0 10.5 121.0 91 21 12/17/99 3038 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1152.0 12.0 121.0 91 21 12/17/99 3039 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1153.0 12.5 118.5 91 4 12/17/99 3040 RT No. 3027 -- 8.0 111.5 84 21 12/17/99 3041 RT No. 3028 10.0 114.5 86 21 12/17/99 3042 RTNo.3029 11.0 120.0 91 21 12/17/99 3043 RT No. 3030 10.5 119.5 90 21 12/17/99 3070 RT No. 3031 -- 8.0 123.5 94 7 12/20/99 3071 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 slope 1170.0 10.5 118.0 90 7 12/20/99 3072 RT No. 3034 -- 9.0 117.0 90 4 12/20/99 3073 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1140.0 10.0 115.0 90 22 12/20/99 3074 RT No. 3040 -- 9.5 120.5 92 7 12/20/99 3075 RT No. 3041 -- 13.0 115.5 90 6 12/20/99 3076 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1156.0 11.0 121.0 92 7 12/20/99 3077 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1157.0 8.5 118.0 90 7 12/20/99 3078 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 1172.0 11.0 115.0 91 6 12/20/99 3079 TR 23067-5/Lot 49 1173.0 10.0 121.5 93 7 12/20/99 3080 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1157.0 8.5 119.5 91 7 12/20/99 3081 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1158.0 10.0 119.0 91 7 12/20/99 3082 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1134.0 12.5 118.5 90 7 12/20/99 3083 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1135.0 12.0 119.5 91 7 12/20/99 3108 TR 23067-5/1.ot 61 1134.0 11.0 121.0 92 7 12/20/99 3109 TR 23067-5/1-ot 61 1135.0 10.5 121.0 92 7 12/20/99 3110 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 1139.0 12.5 119.5 91 7 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 11 M TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST: JEST .:::..: :.. :.... TEST'. i..'`'";; :. ' .::: ...::...:ELEV[ DATE. NQ:':,.; LOCATION. '.;.: a:. (f4)`.' : "..:.: (%a? i .:': (pei :`n [ EIo)` ; [:€ tsTIF .E:... . 12/20/99 3111 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 1140.0 10.0 119.5 91 7 12/20/99 3112 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1156.0 13.5 116.5 91 6 12/20/99 3113 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1157.0 12.5 112.5 90 17 12/21/99 3114 TR 23067-5/L.ot 54 1160.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 12/21/99 3115 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1161.0 11.O 123.5 93 3 12/21/99 3116 TR 23067-5/L.ot 56 1150.0 9.0 117.0 90 4 12/21/99 3117 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1151.0 12.0 120.0 91 7 12/21/99 3118 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1139.0 10.0 113.5 87 4 12/21/99 3119 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1140.0 13.0 118.0 91 4 12/21/99 3120 RT No. 3118 -- 10.5 118.5 91 4 12/21/99 3121 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1159.0 9.5 121.0 92 7 12/21/99 3122 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1560.0 10.5 116.5 91 6 12/21/99 3123 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1151.0 9.5 116.0 91 6 12/21/99 3124 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1152.0 10.0 117.0 90 4 12/21/99 3125 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1144.0 15.0 115.0 90 22 12/21/99 3126 TR 23067-5/Lot58 1145.0 8.5 117.0 90 4 12/21/99 3152 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1162.0 13.0 121.0 93 2 12/21/99 3153 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 1163.0 11.5 121.5 93 2 12/21/99 3154 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1158.0 11.5 122.0 94 2 12/21/99 3155 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 slope 1157.0 11.0 120.0 92 2 12/21/99 3156 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 1142.0 8.5 123.5 92 20 12/21/99 3157 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1143.0 8.5 124.5 92 20 12/21/99 3158 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 1164.0 8.0 124.0 92 20 12/21/99 3159 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1160.0 9.0 122.0 91 20 12/21/99 3160 TR 23067-5/Lot56 1155.0 9.0 125.0 93 20 12/21/99 3161 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1134.0 8.0 113.0 87 2 12/21/99 3162 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1126.0 7.0 111.0 85 2 12/22/99 3163 RT No. 3161 -- 7.5 119.0 91 7 12/22/99 3164 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1135.0 10.5 108.5 85 6 12/22/99 3165 RT No. 3162 -- 12.5 113.5 89 6 12/22/99 3166 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1127.0 12.5 119.0 91 7 12/22/99 3167 RT No. 3164 -- 9.5 117.5 90 4 12/22/99 3168 RT No. 3165 -- 7.5 116.0 90 6 12/22/99 3169 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1132.0 10.5 119.0 91 7 12/22/99 3171 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 1134.0 14.0 113.5 87 4 12/22/99 3173 RT No. 3171 -- 13.5 114.5 88 6 12/22/99 3175 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1135.0 13.0 111.5 87 6 12/22/99 3176 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 1136.0 12.5 113.5 87 4 12/22/99 3177 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1129.0 12.5 116.5 89 4 12/22/99 3178 RT No. 3173 -- 11.5 118.0 91 4 12/22/99 3179 RT No. 3175 11.5 117.5 90 4 12/22/99 3180 RT No. 3176 12.0 117.5 90 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 12 35 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST': . -TEST'. TEST ":.;ELEEV:. MOISTU ENSITY : COW- cr;.,SUII�'s}.r: DATE Nd.::':.:-:- LOCATION::. {tt) {%? :(pcf). Ne) - TYPE . . PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 13 310 Tract 23067-5 12/22/99 3181 RT No. 3177 -- 12.0 118.5 91 4 12/22/99 3206 TR 23067-5/L.ot 17 1157.0 9.5 109.5 83 4 12/22/99 3207 TR 23067-5/l.ot 17 1158.0 7.5 113.5 87 4 12/22/99 3208 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1144.0 11.5 120.0 91 4 12/22/99 3209 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1145.0 12.0 119.0 90 4 12/22/99 3210 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1141.0 10.5 114.5 87 4 12/22/99 3211 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1142.0 10.0 116.5 89 4 12/23/99 3228 RT No. 3206 -- 10.0 120.5 92 4 12/23/99 3229 RT No. 3207 12.0 117.0 91 4 12/23/99 3232 RT No. 3210 9.5 120.5 92 4 12/23/99 3233 RT No. 3211 -- 10.5 120.0 91 4 12/23/99 3234 TR 23067-5/Lot53 1163.0 12.5 118.0 90 4 12/23/99 3235 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 1164.0 11.5 118.5 90 4 12/23/99 3236 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1169.0 15.0 115.0 90 6 12/23/99 3237 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 slope 1170.0 10.5 124.5 95 4 12/27/99 3254 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1172.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 12/27/99 3255 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1173.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 12/27/99 3256 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 1160.0 12.5 120.5 91 3 12/27/99 3257 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1161.0 10.5 121.5 91 3 12/27/99 3260 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1157.0 12.5 119.5 91 7 12/27/99 3261 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1158.0 10.5 125.5 94 3 12/27/99 3264 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1154.0 10.5 118.0 90 7 12/27/99 3265 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1155.0 8.0 115.5 90 6 12/27/99 3266 TR 23067-5/Lot49 1174.0 11.5 118.0 90 7 12/27/99 3267 TR 23067-5/1-ot49 1175.0 13.0 123.0 93 3 12/27/99 3268 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1164.0 12.0 120.0 92 7 12/27/99 3269 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1165.0 9.5 119.0 91 7 12/28/99 3286 TR 23067-5/1-ot 62 1139.0 10.5 117.5 90 4 12/28/99 3287 TR 23067-5/L.ot 62 1140.0 9.5 120.5 91 3 12/28/99 3288 TR 23067-5/1-ot 17 slope 1151.0 10.0 125.0 94 3 12/28/99 3289 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1152.0 8.5 124.0 93 3 12/28/99 3290 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1170.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 12/28/99 3291 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1171.0 9.0 123.0 92 3 12/28/99 3292 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1163.0 9.0 119.5 92 4 12/28/99 3293 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1164.0 10.5 117.5 90 4 12/28/99 3306 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1164.0 12.5 119.0 91 7 12/28/99 3307 TR 23067-5/L.ot56 1165.0 12.0 120.0 91 7 12/28/99 3308 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 14.5 114.0 87 7 12/28/99 3309 TR 23067-5/1-ot 52 10.5 116.5 90 23 12/28/99 3310 RT No. 3308 -- 11.5 118.5 90 7 12/28/99 3311 TR 23067-5/1-ot 18 1158.0 11.5 123.0 92 3 12/28/99 3312 TR 23067-5/1-ot 18 1159.0 11.0 120.0 91 7 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 13 310 TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST . ° ' TEST .' TEST: ",: is ::::...::..ELEV. MOISTME MNSIT.Y. COMP:: ` ,,'.SOIL `< . .:DATE NO. LOCATION.:...::.....:`:::;:.;'�1t). - [%) (0013:.::. (%)'.::`::;,:: TYPE : PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 14 FIA Tract 23067-5 12/28/99 3313 TR 23067-5/L.ot 16 1149.0 13.0 118.5 90 7 12/28/99 3314 TR 23067-5/Lot16 1150.0 8.0 118.0 91 4 12/28/99 3315 TR 23067-5/1-ot 53 1171.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 12/28/99 3316 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1172.0 9.5 120.0 90 3 12/28/99 3317 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1148.0 10.0 110.0 85 23 12/28/99 3318 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1149.0 7.5 109.0 84 23 12/28/99 3319 RT No. 3317 -- 12.5 116.5 90 23 12/28/99 3320 RT No. 3318 -- 8.0 123.5 93 3 12/29/99 3344 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1172.0 8.0 117.5 90 4 12/29/99 3345 TR 23067-5/L.ot 54 1173.0 11.5 118.0 90 7 12/29/99 3346 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1162.0 10.5 119.5 91 7 12/29/99 3347 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1163.0 10.5 121.5 91 3 12/29/99 3348 TR 23067-5/L.ot 16 1150.0 10.0 120.0 90 3 12/29/99 3349 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1151.0 10.0 119.5 91 7 12/29/99 3356 TR 23067-5/1-ot 61 1136.0 10.0 116.5 91 6 12/29/99 3357 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1137.0 10.5 115.0 90 6 12/29/99 3358 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1145.0 12.0 119.5 91 7 12/29/99 3359 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1146.0 10.0 121.5 91 3 12/29/99 3360 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1152.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 12/29/99 3361 TR 23067-5/L.ot 16 1153.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 12/30/99 3381 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1161.0 9.5 116.5 90 4 12/30/99 3382 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1162.0 9.0 117.0 90 4 12/30/99 3383 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1157.0 13.0 119.0 91 4 12/30/99 3384 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1158.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 12/30/99 3385 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1155.0 9.5 127.0 95 3 12/30/99 3386 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1156.0 10.5 114.5 88 7 12/30/99 3387 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 slope 1145.0 13.5 117.5 90 7 12/30/99 3388 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 slope 1146.0 12.5 117.0 90 4 12/30/99 3389 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1172.0 11.0 122.0 93 7 12/30/99 3390 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1173.0 12.0 120.5 92 7 12/30/99 3393 RT No. 3386 -- 12.0 115.5 88 7 12/30/99 3394 TR 23067-5/1-ot 36 1157.0 9.0 114.0 87 7 12/30/99 3395 RT No. 3393 -- 11.0 119.5 91 7 12/30/99 3396 RT No. 3394 -- 11.5 120.0 92 7 12/30/99 3397 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 1158.0 9.5 117.0 90 4 12/30/99 3398 TR 23067-5/1-ot 37 1150.0 8.0 123.5 93 3 12/30/99 3401 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1174.0 8.5 116.0 90 8 12/30/99 3402 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1178.0 10.0 111.5 86 8 12/30/99 3403 TR 23067-5/1-ot 16 1161.0 8.5 112.5 87 8 12/30/99 3404 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1167.0 9.5 117.0 90 4 12/30/99 3410 RT No. 3402 -- 11.0 117.0 90 4 12/30/99 3411 RT No. 3403 9.0 121.5 91 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 14 FIA TABLE Field Density Test Restults 'TEST. ;'ji..` ;",..;€:: a€.; LOCATION:.. .... '::,^.:; :::-_._°. (tt).:,::::.° . (gf )° (pct)::::.: M, 3412 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1163.0 9.5 116.0 90 8 '12/30/99 12/30/99 3413 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1150.0 9.5 117.5 90 4 12/30/99 3414 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1151.0 11.0 118.0 90 7 01/03/00 3427 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1155.0 12.5 119.5 92 4 01/03/00 3428 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1156.0 13.0 120.5 90 3 01/03/00 3429 TR 23067-5/L.ot 56 slope 1164.0 9.0 125.0 94 3 3430 TR 23067-5/L.ot 56 slope 1165.0 8.5 126.5 95 3 '01/03/00 01/03/00 3431 TR 23067-5/L.ot 36 1159.0 8.5 119.0 89 3 01/03/00 3432 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1160.0 6.0 110.5 85 8 3433 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1160.0 11.0 115.0 88 8 '01/03/00 01/03/00 3434 TR 23067-5/Lot 36 1161.0 8.5 111.0 85 8 01/03/00 3463 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1170.0 9.5 117.5 90 4 3464 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1171.0 10.5 120.0 90 3 '01/03/00 01/03/00 3465 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1160.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 01/03/00 3466 TR 23067-5/1.ot 56 1161.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 3469 TR 23067-5/1-ot 60 1142.0 13.5 118.5 91 4 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3470 TR 23067-5/1-ot 60 1143.0 11.0 123.5 93 3 01/04/00 3471 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 1160.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 3472 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1161.0 8.5 116.5 91 6 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3473 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1160.0 11.5 121.0 91 3 01/04/00 3474 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1161.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 01/04/00 3477 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 1142.0 9.5 125.5 94 3 01/04/00 3478 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 1143.0 12.5 119.5 92 4 01/04/00 3479 TR 23067-5/1.ot 59 slope 1148.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 01/04/00 3480 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 slope 1149.0 12.0 121.0 91 3 01/04/00 3481 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1160.0 12.0 122.0 92 3 01/04/00 3482 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1161.0 10.5 124.0 93 3 3487 TR 23067-5/1.ot 19 1165.0 12.5 119.0 91 2 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3491 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1164.0 7.5 124.0 93 3 01/04/00 3492 TR 23067-5/1.ot 3 1166.0 7.5 1261.5 94 3 3493 TR 23067-5/1.ot 3 1167.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 '01/04/00 01/04/00 3503 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1169.0 7.5 126.0 94 3 01/04/00 3504 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1170.0 7.5 125.0 93 3 01/04/00 3505 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1169.0 10.5 123.0 92 3 01/04/00 3506 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1170.0 11.5 120.5 90 3 01/05/00 3524 TR 23067-5/1-ot 64 1144.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 01/05/00 3525 TR 23067-5/1.ot 64 1146.0 9.5 122.0 92 3 01/05/00 3526 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1165.0 19.0 124.0 93 3 01/05/00 3527 TR 23067-5/Channel St 11;66 11.5 123.5 93 3 01/05/00 3536 TR 23067-5/1-ot 64 1159.0 12.0 119.5 92 4 01/05/00 3537 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1160.0 11.0 123.0 93 3 01/05/00 3538 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1149.0 10.5 123.0 92 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -115 M, TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST; ia::r : TEST :::: "'. .. TEST:.. I':. ... ::: ELEV. MOISTURE ]DENSITY: COMP SOIL DATE:':~' :NO.:: ( (pCj%:: "E..:.c ' Tract 23067-5 3539 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1151.0 11.5 120.0 90 3 '01/05/00 01/05/00 3546 TR 23067-5/L.ot 63 1159.0 12.5 118.5 91 4 01/06/00 3547 TR 23067-5/L.ot 63 1151.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 3548 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1159.0 11.5 122.5 92 3 '01/06/00 01/06/00 3549 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1160.0 11.0 119.5 92 4 01/06/00 3554 TR 23067-5/L.ot 37 1161.0 11.0 118.5 91 4 3555 TR 23067-5/Lot 37 1162.0 11.5 120.0 91 21 '01/06/00 01/06/00 3556 TR 23067-5/L.ot 45 slope 1160.0 6.0 123.0 93 3 01/06/00 3557 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1161.0 6.0 121.5 91 3 3558 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1155.0 7.0 127.0 96 3 '01/06/00 01/06/00 3559 TR 23067-5/1-ot 43 slope 1158.0 9.0 119.0 91 1 01/06/00 3560 TR 23067-5/Lot 42 slope 1156.0 9.5 123.5 93 3 01/06/00 3561 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1155.0 8.0 123.5 93 3 01/06/00 3562 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1150.0 7.5 120.5 91 3 01/06/00 3563 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 slope 1157.0 8.5 123.0 93 3 3564 TR 23067-5/Lot38 slope 1153.0 8.0 124.0 93 3 '01/06/00 01/06/00 3566 TR 23067-5/Lot 40 slope 1142.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 01/06/00 3567 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 slope 1135.0 8.0 113.0 91 19 01/06/00 3568 TR 23067-5/1-ot42 slope 1135.0 8.0 119.5 91 1 01/06/00 3569 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 slope 1138.0 8.5 120.0 92 1 01/06/00 3570 TR 23067-5/Lot 44 slope 1142.0 7.0 116.5 91 6 '01/06/00 3571 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 slope 1148.0 8.0 125.5 94 3 01/06/00 3581 RT No. 3431 11.0 123.5 92 3 01/06/00 3582 RT No. 3432 12.0 119.5 92 8 '01/06/00 3583 RT No. 3433 9.5 124.5 96 8 01/06/00 3584 RT No. 3434 10.0 121.0 93 8 01/07/00 3621 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1162.0 11.5 119.5 92 4 '01/07/00 3622 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1163.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 01/07/00 3623 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 slope 1148.0 10.0 116.0 91 6 01/07/00 3624 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 slope 1149.0 9.5 117.5 91 4 '01/07/00 3626 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 slope 1172.0 12.5 122.5 92 3 01/07/00 3627 TR 23067-5/1.ot 56 slope 1174.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 01/07/00 3628 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1164.0 12.0 119.0 92 4 01/07/00 3629 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1165.0 11.0 121.5 91 3 01/07/00 3630 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1151.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 01/07/00 3631 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1152.0 12.0 118.0 91 4 01/10/00 3647 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 slope 1173.0 9.5 127.5 96 3 01/10/00 3648 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 slope 1175.0 10.5 123.0 93 3 01/10/00 3649 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 slope 1158.0 8.0 123.5 93 3 01/10/00 3650 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 slope 1159.0 11.5 116.5 91 6 01/10/00 3651 TR 23067-5/Lot58 1160.0 14.0 116.0 91 6 01/10/00 3652 TR 23067-5/1-ot58 1161.0 11.5 112.0 90 19 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. tJ.N. 141-99 7k �o109 3, - 4, -s, - L JUNE 2000 TABLE -I 16 31 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults ��1'L'Ji� "'" 3L`Jl � ... .. ...rGO L.:-. ... .::,. .u�..aa.• DATE.: NO. :LOCATION. (D) (%) " (pet Op fiYPE_ PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 17 0 Tract 23067-5 O1/10/00 3653 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1165.0 10.5 120.0 92 4 O1/10/00 3654 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1166.0 10.0 113.5 88 6 O1/10/00 3655 RT No. 3654 -- 10.0 118.5 91 4 01/10/00 3675 TR 23067-5/L.ot 16 1162.0 10.5 116.0 91 6 01/10/00 3676 TR 23067-5/1.ot 16 1163.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 01/10/00 3677 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 1174.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 O1/10/00 3678 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1175.0 8.5 113.0 88 6 01/10/00 3679 TR 23067-5/L.ot 60 1152.0 17.0 108.5 90 13 01/10/00 3680 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 1153.0 16.5 109.0 90 13 01/10/00 3681 RT No. 3678 -- 11.0 115.0 90 6 O1/11/00 3694 TR 23067-5/1-ot 60 1152.0 13.5 111.5 87 6 O1/11/00 3695 TR 23067-5/L.ot 60 1153.0 10.0 120.0 92 4 O1/11/00 3696 RT No. 3694 -- 10.0 118.0 91 4 O1/11/00 3697 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1164.0 10.0 116.0 91 6 O1/11/00 3698 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1165.0 9.5 121.5 91 3 O1/11/00 3701 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1163.0 11.5 120.0 90 3 O1/11/00 3702 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1164.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 O1/11/00 3718 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1156.0 15.0 115.5 90 61 O1/11/00 3719 TR 23067-5/1-ot 65 1157.0 13.5 110.0 88 17 O1/11/00 3720 RT No. 3719 -- 13.5 112.5 90 17 01/1 1/00 3721 TR 23067-5/1.ot 56 1175.0 16.0 108.0 87 17 01/11/00 3722 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 1176.0 12.0 119.0 91 4 01/11/00 3723 RT No. 3721 -- 12.5 116.5 91 6 01/11/00 3734 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 slope 1162.0 12.0 116.5 91 6 O1111/00 3735 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 slope 1163.0 12.5 115.0 92 17 O1/12/00 3738 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1178.0 12.0 123.5 93 3 01/12/00 3739 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 slope 1179.0 12.5 124.5 94 3 01/12/00 3740 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 slope 1163.0 12.0 113.0 92 29 01/12/00 3741 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 slope 1164.0 16.0 103.0 85 13 01/12/00 3742 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 slope 1158.0 109.5 120.0 92 10 01/12/00 3743 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 slope 1159.0 11.0 115.0 90 6 O1/12/00 3746 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1159.0 13.5 113.5 92 29 01/12/00 3747 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1160.0 13.0 118.5 91 10 01/12/00 3748 RT No. 3741 -- 12.0 110.0 91 13 O1/12/00 3777 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1171.0 16.0 114.0 92 29 01/12/00 3778 TR 23067-511-ot 56 1172.0 17.5 111.5 90 29 01/12/00 3779 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1165.0 13.0 112.0 91 29 01/12/00 3780 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1165.0 16.5 110.0 93 27 O1/12/00 3781 TR 23067-5/Lot66 1160.0 12.0 117.0 90 4 01/12/00 3782 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1161.0 13.5 117.0 90 4 O1/13/00 3783 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1168.0 15.5 111.0 90 29 O1/13/00 3784 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1169.0 14.5 113.5 92 29 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 17 0 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST. TEST, . 'MST>:...( :`:.'i:f ,.;'::_:iiELliN. MO1S'1'UIf .. ULri�51'L'Y: 4COW..,..:r.St3ti DATE'.:. ;': NO:; .: _.. LOCATION PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 18 Tract 23067-5 01/13/00 3785 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1160.0 12.5 112.0 91 29 01/13/00 3786 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1162.0 15.0 108.0 91 27 01/13/00 3787 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1182.0 14.5 115.5 94 29 01/13/00 3788 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1183.0 13.0 113.5 92 29 01/13/00 3789 TR 23067-5/Lot15 1167.0 13.5 104.0 92 11 01/13/00 3790 TR 23067-5/L.ot 15 1168.0 13.5 108.5 92 27 01/13/00 3793 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 1177.0 19.5 106.0 90 27 01/13/00 3794 TR 23067-5/Lot51 1179.0 8.5 118.5 91 4 01/13/00 3795 TR 23067-511-ot 52 1181.0 30.0 86.0 81 12 01/13/00 3796 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1177.0 13.0 119.0 91 4 01/13/00 3797 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1178.0 11.0 124.5 94 3 01/13/00 3798 TR 23067-5/L.ot 62 1164.0 15.5 112.0 91 29 01/13/00 3799 TR 23067-5/L.ot 62 1165.0 11.3 117.0 91 6 01/13/00 3800 TR 23067-5/1-ot 66 1160.0 12.0 115.5 90 6 01/13/00 3801 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1161.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 01/13/00 3831 TR 23067-5/1-ot 53 1183.0 23.0 99.5 84 27 01/13/00 3832 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1184.0 23.0 98.0 83 27 01/13/00 3833 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 1180.0 8.5 105.0 89 27 01/13/00 3834 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 1181.0 18.5 107.0 91 27 01/13/00 3835 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1178.0 16.0 109.0 92 27 01/13/00 3836 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1179.0 20.0 103.5 88 27 01/13/00 3837 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1168.0 12.0 114.5 90 6 01/13/00 3838 TR 23067-5/L.ot 58 1169.0 10.5 115.5 90 6 01/13/00 3839 TR 23067-5/1-ot 63 1162.0 6.0 116.0 89 4 01/13/00 3840 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 1163.0 8.0 117.5 90 4 01/14/00 3841 RT No. 3831 -- 15.5 104.5 89 27 01/14/00 3842 RT No.3832 14.0 111.0 94 27 01/14/00 3843 RT No. 3833 11.0 120.0 90 3 01/14/00 3844 RT No. 3836 21.0 107.0 91 27 01/14/00 3845 RT No. 3839 10.5 118.5 90 4 01/14/00 3846 RT No. 3841 14.0 103.0 87 27 01/14/00 3847 RT No. 3846 -- 15.5 108.5 92 27 01/14/00 3850 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1163.0 11.5 121.5 91 4 01/14/00 3851 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 slope 1166.0 9.0 110.5 90 16 01/14/00 3852 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 slope 1167.0 11.5 105.0 92 28 01/14/00 3868 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 slope 1165.0 14.5 113.0 92 29 01/14/00 3869 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 slope 1166.0 13.0 113.5 92 29 01/14/00 3870 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1183.0 14.0 111.5 90 29 01/14/00 3871 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1184.0 14.5 110.5 94 27 O1/14/00 3872 TR 23067-5/1-ot 17 slope 1171.0 13.0 112.5 91 29 01/14/00 3873 TR 23067-5/1.ot 17 slope 1172.0 16.5 110.0 93 27 01/14/00 3876 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1183.0 15.5 1 l 1.5 91 28 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 18 TABLE Field Density Test Restults .TEST' TEST l'185'i' EL&V.-U mr::.:: rNUM! DATE ' NO : LOCATi©N- ift) MY. (pef): (%).:.:.':TYPE PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 19 7 A Tract 23067-5 01/14/00 3877 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1184.0 14.5 110.5 93 27 01/17/00 3882 TR 23067-5/L.ot 53 1184.0 16.0 108.5 92 27 01/17/00 3883 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1185.0 12.5 104.5 91 28 01/17/00 3884 TR 23067-5/1-ot 58 slope 1179.0 16.5 106.5 90 27 01/17/00 3885 TR 23067-5/1-ot 58 slope 1180.0 9.5 111.0 90 29 01/17/00 3886 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1165.0 9.5 113.0 92 29 01/17/00 3887 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1166.0 10.0 101.5 82 29 01/17/00 3888 RT No. 3887 -- 11.0 111.5 90 29 01/17/00 3918 TR 23067-5/Lot 43 1168.0 12.0 119.0 91 4 01/17/00 3919 TR 23067-5/1.ot 42 1166.5 9.0 121.5 91 3 01/17/00 3920 TR 23067-5/Lot 41 1166.0 12.5 117.0 90 4 01/17/00 3921 TR 23067-5/L.ot 40 1165.0 10.0 121.5 91 3 01/17/00 3922 TR 23067-5/Lot 39 1164.5 11.5 119.5 92 4 01/17/00 3923 TR 23067-5/Lot 38 1164.0 10.5 126.0 95 3 01/17/00 3924 TR 23067-5/L.ot 37 1163.5 11.5 121.0 91 3 01/17/00 3925 TR 23067-5/1.ot 36 1163.0 10.0 123.0 92 3 01/18/00 3926 TR 23067-5/L.ot 54 1184.0 8.0 113.5 92 29 01/18/00 3927 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1185.0 15.0 107.0 91 27 01/18/00 3934 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1180.0 12.5 112.5 91 29 01/18/00 3935 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1181.0 18.0 111.0 90 29 01/18/00 3936 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1168.0 20.0 107.5 91 27 01/18/00 3937 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1169.0 16.0 110.5 90 29 01/18/00 3938 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1167.0 13.0 107.5 91 27 01/18/00 3939 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1167.0 16.0 106.0 90 27 01/18/00 3940 RT No. 3795 -- 10.0 128.0 96 3 01/18/00 3941 TR 23067-5/Lot 52 1183.0 10.5 125.0 94 3 01/18/00 3942 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1187.0 12.5 111.5 90 29 01/18/00 3943 TR 23067-5/1-ot 54 1188.0 13.0 112.0 91 29 01/18/00 3944 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1188.0 11.0 112.0 91 29 01/18/00 3945 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1189.0 11.0 113.5 92 29 01/18/00 3946 TR 23067-5/1.ot 59 1178.0 15.0 113.0 91 29 01/18/00 3947 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 1170.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 01/18/00 3948 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 1168.0 13.5 113.5 92 29 01/18/00 3949 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 1169.0 14.5 113.5 92 29 01/18/00 3950 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1167.0 13.5 114.5 90 22 01/18/00 3951 TR 23067-5/1.ot 66 1169.0 9.5 114.0 90 22 O1/I8/00 3952 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1170.0 12.0 115.0 91 22 01/18/00 3953 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1189.0 10.5 119.5 90 9 01/19/00 3954 TR 23067-5/1-ot 56 1183.0 11.0 113.5 88 6 01/19/00 3955 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1184.0 11.5 113.5 88 6 01/19/00 3956 TR 23067-5/1.ot 60 slope 1172.0 13.0 114.0 92 29 01/19/00 3957 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 slope 1173.0 13.5 117.5 90 4 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 19 7 A TABLE I Field Density Test Restults TESTTEST TEST EL Y. MOLyFURE, DENSITY COMPi • ,_SOIL , DATE NO. LOCATI© . : (Pct? . . -:07) PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 20 113 Tract 23067-5 01/19/00 3958 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1167.0 12.0 118.0 91 4 01/19/00 3959 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1168.0 14.0 119.0 91 4 01/19/00 3965 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1179.0 10.0 112.5 88 6 01/19/00 3966 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 1180.0 6.0 111.0 87 6 01/19/00 3967 TR 23067-5/1-ot 62 1174.0 10.0 114.5 90 6 01/19/00 3968 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 1175.0 11.0 113.5 92 29 01/19/00 3969 TR 23067-5/1-ot 66 1169.0 11.5 117.0 91 6 01/19/00 3970 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1170.0 8.5 110.0 88 29 01/19/00 3971 RT No. 3970 -- 10.5 116.5 91 6 01/19/00 3972 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1180.0 13.5 110.5 89 29 01/19/00 3973 TR 23067-5/Lot 57 1181.0 13.5 118.5 90 4 01/19/00 3974 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 1180.0 11.0 119.5 92 4 01/19/00 3975 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 1181.0 11.5 119.5 92 6 01/19/00 3976 TR 23067-5/1-ot 65 slope 1173.0 12.0 117.0 92 6 01/19/00 3977 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 slope 1174.0 14.0 108.5 85 6 01/19/00 3978 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1175.0 11.0 113.5 87 6 01/19/00 3979 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1176.0 13.0 116.0 91 6 01/19/00 4004 RT No. 3954 -- 10.0 110.5 90 29 01/19/00 4005 RT No. 3955 12.0 115.0 90 6 01/19/00 4006 RT No. 3965 10.5 119.0 93 6 01/19/00 4007 RT No. 3966 11.5 115.5 90 6 01/19/00 4008 RT No. 3972 10.0 122.5 92 3 01/19/00 4009 RT No. 3977 9.0 118.5 91 4 01/19/00 4010 RT No. 3978 -- 8.5 121.5 91 3 01/19/00 4011 TR 23067-5/1-ot 64 1174.0 9.5 121.5 92 3 01/19/00 4012 TR 23067-5/1-ot 61 1175.0 13.5 119.5 92 4 01/19/00 4013 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1181.0 11.0 123.0 93 3 01/20/00 4018 TR 23067-5/1-ot 55 1191.0 10.0 121.5 91 3 01/20/00 4019 TR 23067-5/L.ot 55 1192.0 9.5 122.5 92 3 01/20/00 4020 TR 23067-5/L.ot 56 1190.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 01/20/00 4021 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 1189.0 8.5 119.5 93 6 01/20/00 4022 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1171.0 6.0 113.5 89 6 01/20/00 4023 TR 23067-5/L.ot 17 1172.0 4.5 110.5 86 8 01/20/00 4024 TR 23067-5/1.ot 57 1190.0 9.0 119.0 92 4 01/20/00 4025 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1191.0 6.0 117.0 90 4 01/20/00 4026 TR 23067-5/L.ot 61 1171.0 15.0 113.0 92 29 01/20/00 4027 TR 23067-5/L-ot 61 1172.0 10.0 115.0 90 22 01/21/00 4054 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1189.0 7.0 119.5 92 4 01/21/00 4055 TR 23067-5/1-ot 58 1190.0 8.5 120.5 93 4 01/21/00 4056 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 slope 1175.0 10.5 122.0 94 4 01/21/00 4057 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 slope 1176.0 12.0 117.5 90 4 01/21/00 4058 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1173.0 16.0 116.5 94 29 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 20 113 TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST`:° TEST •::DATE :NO LOCATION (itj' {%} (pefj: (90) TYPE PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -121 Zi4 Tract 23067-5 01/21/00 4059 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 1174.0 17.0 109.0 92 27 01/21/00 4060 RT No. 4022 13.5 122.0 95 6 O1/21/00 4061 RT No. 4023 13.5 118.0 92 6 O1/21/00 4066 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1186.0 8.5 124.0 92 20 01/21/00 4067 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1187.0 13.0 104.5 91 28 01/21/00 4068 TR 23067-5/L.ot 61 1179.0 8.5 115.5 90 6 01/21/00 4069 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1180.0 11.5 125.0 93 20 01/21/00 4070 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1176.0 12.0 122.5 91 20 01/21/00 4071 TR 23067-5/L.ot 64 1177.0 10.5 117.0 91 6 01/21/00 4087 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1176.0 8.4 127.8 95 20 01/24/00 4088 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1177.0 8.5 122.7 91 20 01/24/00 4089 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 1179.0 8.8 121.3 90 20 01/24/00 4090 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 1180.0 11.6 115.5 90 6 01/24/00 4091 TR 23067-5/1.ot 58 1189.0 7.6 123.2 92 20 01/24/00 4092 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 1190.0 9.3 120.4 91 3 01/24/00 4093 TR 23067-5/L.ot 65 slope 1178.0 5.3 122.8 92 3 01/24/00 4094 TR 23067-5/L.ot 65 slope 1179.0 7.9 120.9 91 3 01/24/00 4095 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 slope 1187.0 8.1 120.5 91 3 01/24/00 4096 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 slope 1188.0 7.9 125.0 94 3 01/25/00 4115 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 slope 1181.0 8.7 111.5 87 6 01/25/00 4116 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 slope 1182.0 8.2 114.5 89 6 O1/25/00 4117 TR 23067-5/L.ot 63 1185.0 9.7 120.8 91 3 01/25/00 4118 TR 23067-5/Lot63 1186.0 10.2 122.4 91 20 01/25/00 4119 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1187.0 9.0 127.4 95 20 01/25/00 4120 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1188.0 8.8 123.7 92 20 01/25/00 4121 RT No. 4115 10.1 114.8 90 6 01/25/00 4122 RT No. 4116 7.7 120.3 90 3 01/26/00 4158 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1164.0 6.8 127.6 95 20 01/26/00 4159 TR 23067-5/Lot18 1168.0 5.6 125.9 94 9 01/26/00 4160 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1165.0 9.7 125.2 93 20 01/26/00 4161 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1166.0 8.5 128.6 96 20 01/27/00 4186 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1168.0 10.6 125.0 94 3 01/27/00 4187 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1169.0 9.6 118.9 91 10 01/27/00 4188 TR 23067-5/L.ot 18 1167.0 12.2 119.6 91 10 01/27/00 4189 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1168.0 11.5 111.5 90 29 01/27/00 4190 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1168.0 10.4 122.1 92 3 01/27/00 4191 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1169.0 10.3 122.0 92 3 01/27/00 4192 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1171.0 9.7 112.3 88 6 01/27/00 4193 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1172.0 12.7 113.3 92 29 01/27/00 4194 RT No. 4192 11.7 115.0 90 6 01/27/00 4195 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 17 1170.0 9.4 122.9 91 20 01/27/00 4196 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 17 1171.0 9.6 120.8 90 20 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -121 Zi4 TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST :TEST TEST ' ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP.: ;:.:'.'. SOII::::;:.. :DATE':. N.0; LOCATION (R)''' M (pet) (°la)`:. TYPE:.:: PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 22 L15 Tract 23067-5 01/27/00 4197 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1171.0 10.7 124.8 93 20 01/27/00 4198 TR 23067-5/1-ot 16 1172.0 12.9 118.2 90 10 01/28/00 4214 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1168.0 11.3 119.5 91 10 01/28/00 4215 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1169.0 10.3 126.7 94 20 01/28/00 4216 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1172.0 12.4 115.5 90 6 01/28/00 4217 TR 23067-5/L.ot 14 1173.0 13.1 115.7 90 6 01/28/00 4220 TR 23067-5/L.ot 17 slope 1173.0 8.7 115.7 90 6 01/28/00 4221 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1174.0 11.6 118.2 90 10 01/28/00 4222 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1171.0 12.2 114.3 93 29 01/28/00 4223 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1172.0 14.7 115.0 90 6 01/28/00 4226 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1175.0 11.8 117.8 90 10 01/28/00 4227 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1176.0 8.3 117.9 90 10 01/28/00 4228 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1172.0 10.3 119.5 91 10 01/28/00 4229 TR 23067-5/1-ot 15 1173.0 10.3 118.0 90 10 01/31/00 4251 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1176.0 12.6 111.5 90 29 01/31/00 4252 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1177.0 14.2 109.1 92 27 01/31/00 4253 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1178.0 9.4 120.9 93 25 01/31/00 4255 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 1177.0 11.0 121.1 91 3 01/31/00 4256 TR 23067-5/1-ot 17 1178.0 9.8 115.6 90 6 01/31/00 4258 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1176.0 9.9 1 l 1.4 87 6 01/31/00 4259 TR 23067-5/1-ot 14 1177.0 9.7 108.8 85 6 01/31/00 4260 RT No. 4258 -- 9.8 108.6 93 6 01/31/00 4261 RT No. 4259 -- 9.5 117.1 91 6 02/01/00 4292 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1178.0 9.1 119.3 91 10 02/01/00 4293 TR 23067-5/1-ot 14 1179.0 13.2 118.9 91 10 02/01/00 4294 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 slope 1177.0 16.5 109.9 93 27 02/01/00 4295 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 slope 1178.0 17.2 108.4 92 27 02/01/00 4308 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 19 1179.0 12.4 114.6 90 6 02/01/00 4309 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 19 1180.0 13.6 111.7 90 29 02/01/00 4310 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1180.0 14.1 114.8 90 6 02/01/00 4311 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1181.0 12.0 114.6 90 6 02/01/00 4318 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1181.0 15.5 113.1 92 39 02/01/00 4319 TR 23067-5/L.ot 15 1182.0 16.6 111.4 90 39 02/02/00 4323 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1184.0 11.3 117.9 90 35 02/02/00 4324 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1185.0 10.5 123.9 95 35 02/02/00 4325 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1186.0 9.8 122.7 94 35 02/02/00 4330 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1182.0 15.1 113.9 92 29 02/02/00 4331 TR 23067-5/1-ot 16 1183.0 16.3 108.7 92 27 02/03/00 4357 TR 23067-5/1-ot 15 1182.0 13.7 114.7 93 27 02/03/00 4358 TR 23067-5/1-ot 15 1183.0 16.1 111.2 90 27 02/03/00 4363 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 1187.0 8.4 109.3 93 27 02/03/00 4364 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 1183.5 7.4 114.3 93 29 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -I 22 L15 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST` TEST'. TEST . ELEV. A4OISTURE DENSITY _COW. .DATE'NO. LOCATION (ftj ��°� - e - -- %) ,.ME PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -123 yto Tract 23067-5 02/03/00 4365 TR 23067-5/L.ot 51 1180.0 17.4 97.9 91 30 02/03/00 4366 TR 23067-5/L.ot 50 1177.5 8.3 127.0 95 3 02/03/00 4367 TR 23067-5/L.ot 49 1176.0 7.7 120.3 90 3 02/03/00 4368 TR 23067-5/L.ot 48 1174.5 9.3 111.0 94 27 02/03/00 4369 TR 23067-5/Lot 47 1173.5 9.3 114.8 93 29 02/03/00 4370 TR 23067-5/L.ot 46 1172.0 6.4 114.5 93 29 02/03/00 4371 TR 23067-5/Lot 45 1170.5 7.9 121.1 91 3 02/03/00 4372 TR 23067-5/L.ot 44 1169.5 6.5 118.4 90 10 02/07/00 4376 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1185.0 15.3 107.2 90 27 02/07/00 4384 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1182.0 15.9 109.5 93 27 02/07/00 4385 TR 23067-5/Channel St 1183.0 15.3 109.5 93 27 02/08/00 4395 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 1194.5 6.4 122.5 92 10 02/08/00 4396 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 1193.0 7.3 119.4 91 10 02/08/00 4397 TR 23067-5/Lot 54 1190.5 10.1 118.8 91 29 02/08/00 4402 TR 23067-5/L.ot 15 1183.0 16.1 110.5 94 4 02/08/00 4403 TR 23067-5/L.ot 15 1184.0 11.9 117.6 90 6 02/08/00 4422 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 19 1186.0 12.7 112.2 91 6 02/09/00 4423 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 19 1187.0 11.8 119.0 93 29 02/11/00 4478 TR 23067-5/Lot 50 slope 1170.0 10.3 119.2 92 4 02/11/00 4479 TR 23067-5/Lot 51 slope 1164.0 11.0 117.4 90 4 02/11/00 4480 TR 23067-5/L.ot 52 slope 1160.0 12.0 122.7 91 20 02/11/00 4481 TR 23067-5/Lot 53 slope 1178.0 9.9 122.8 91 20 02/11/00 4482 TR 23067-5/L.ot 54 slope 1174.0 9.0 116.1 91 6 02/11/00 4483 TR 23067-5/Lot 55 slope 1176.0 11.0 116.9 90 4 02/11/00 4484 TR 23067-5/Lot 56 slope 1184.0 18.6 989.0 92 30 02/11/00 4485 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 slope 1175.0 11.2 114.2 92 29 02/11/00 4486 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 slope 1185.0 9.9 115.8 90 6 03/21/00 4680 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1190.0 12.3 117.6 90 4 03/21/00 4681 TR 23067-5/Nighthawk Pass 1191.0 15.2 114.7 93 29 03/21/00 4690 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1167.0 11.1 119.2 91 24 03/21/00 4691 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1158.0 13.4 117.4 92 23 03/21/00 4692 TR 23067-5/Lot 34 1159.0 11.2 117.5 91 22 03/21/00 4693 TR 23067-5/L.ot 34 1160.0 11.5 118.1 91 24 03/21/00 4694 TR 23067-5/L.ot 33 1161.0 12.2 118.2 91 24 03/21/00 4695 TR 23067-5/Lot 33 1162.0 12.5 117.8 90 24 03/21/00 4696 TR 23067-5/L.ot 35 1164.0 12.0 116.4 90 22 03/21/00 4697 TR 23067-5/Lot 34 1165.0 11.7 119.0 91 24 03/22/00 4705 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1164.0 12.2 113.4 91 27 03/22/00 4706 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1165.0 16.0 109.0 92 27 03/22/00 4707 TR 23067-5/L.ot 33 1166.0 13.1 114.0 92 29 03/22/00 4708 TR 23067-5/Lot 33 1167.0 12.9 111.9 89 29 03/22/00 4709 RT No. 4708 -- 11.8 112.6 90 24 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -123 yto ITABLEI Field Density Test Restults TEST'.; TEST!.:`:..i ":::.TEST..:; ELEV. . MOISTURE.: DENSITY Ot3iY2P:. .: 03/27/00 4710 TR 23067-5/Lot 32 1168.0 13.4 115.3 91 29 ' 03/27/00 4711 TR 23067-5/1-ot 34 1167.0 13.6 114.1 92 29 03/27/00 4712 TR 23067-5/Lot 34 1168.0 13.5 114.4 93 29 03/27/00 4713 TR 23067-5/Lot 32 1170.0 14.6 115.0 92 27 03/27/00 4714 TR 23067-5/1.ot 32 1171.0 13.8 113.9 91 27 03/22/00 4727 TR 23067-5/Lot 32 1175.0 16.2 111.9 89 27 03/22/00 4728 RT No. 4727 -- 13.7 112.7 90 27 ' 03/22/00 4729 TR 23067-5/1-ot 33 1170.0 12.5 112.6 90 27 03/22/00 4730 TR 23067-5/1-ot 33 1171.0 13.8 113.5 91 27 ' 03/23/00 4735 TR 23067-5/1.ot 31 1177.0 12.5 120.9 91 27 03/23/00 4736 TR 23067-5/L.ot 31 1178.0 12.5 120.1 90 27 03/23/00 4737 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1167.0 7.6 126.7 95 27 03/23/00 4738 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1168.0 10.9 124.1 93 27 03/22/00 4753 TR 23067-5/Lot 20 1169.0 10.0 122.8 92 27 03/22/00 4754 TR 23067-5/Lot 20 1170.0 11.1 115.1 90 29 03/22/00 4755 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1169.0 12.7 118.6 93 10 03/23/00 4756 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1170.0 11.4 121.3 91 10 03/23/00 4757 TR'23067-5/Lot 20 1171.0 14.4 113.4 91 27 03/23/00 4758 TR 23067-5/Lot 20 1172.0 12.2 120.7 91 27 03/23/00 4759 TR 23067-5/1-ot 20 1173.0 12.2 116.2 91 24 03/23/00 4760 TR 23067-5/1-ot 19 1172.0 12.6 120.6 91 24 ' 03/23/00 4761 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 1173.0 13.2 115.1 90 24 03/23/00 4762 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1174.0 13.2 113.1 91 24 03/23/00 4763 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 1173.0 14.1 114.0 92 24 03/23/00 4770 TR 23067-5/Lot 22 1174.0 13.9 111.4 89 24 03/23/00 4771 RT No. 4770 9.2 116.7 90 24 03/24/00 4776 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 20 1188.0 12.0 113.4 91 29 ' 03/24/00 4777 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 20 1189.0 9.6 115.9 91 24 03/24/00 4786 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 19 1190.0 13.3 114.8 90 24 03/24/00 4787 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 18 1191.0 15.3 110.2 88 29 ' 03/24/00 4788 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 17 1190.0 13.4 111.4 89 24 03/24/00 4789 TR 23067-5/slope Lot 17 1191.0 17.3 102.0 86 6 03/25/00 4790 RT No. 4787 -- 12.0 102.3 90 29 03/25/00 4791 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 slope 1191.0 8.6 117.1 91 6 03/25/00 4792 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 slope 1190.0 14.3 115.7 90 6 03/25/00 4793 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 slope 1191.0 10.6 122.3 92 6 ' 03/25/00 4794 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1190.0 11.7 122.7 92 3 03/25/00 4795 TR 23067-5/1.ot 16 1191.0 9.0 120.1 90 3 03/25/00 4796 RT No. 4788 -- 13.5 115.5 90 6 ' 03/25/00 4797 RT No. 4789 16.4 112.6 90 17 03/27/00 4823 TR 23067-5/Lot 11 1195.0 10.4 107.1 84 6 03/27/00 4824 TR 23067-5/L.ot 11 1196.0 9.8 105.5 82 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 TABLE -124 J.N. 141-99 7edvff l0P-3, - y. -S, -G y% TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST:?,'i;TEST`;.'a[_ 's'.;`:°; : TEST..r'..r-€€.€MOISTURE DENSITY COW,- SO DATE, .1 'NO;-' .... LOEATIt)N {ft) {%} ... (pefl (%) PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -125 m Tract 23067-5 03/27/00 4825 RT No. 4823 -- 9.9 112.5 90 17 03/27/00 4826 RT No. 4824 -- 8.5 117.1 91 6 03/27/00 4827 TR 23067-511-ot 13 1193.0 9.4 115.5 90 1 03/27/00 4828 TR 23067-5/Lot 13 1192.0 8.5 116.3 91 1 03/27/00 4829 TR 23067-5/Lot 10 1199.0 12.4 120.5 91 3 03/27/00 4830 TR 23067-5/Lot11 1200.0 10.0 123.0 92 3 03/27/00 4831 TR 23067-5/Lot 13 1193.0 13.6 107.7 91 3 03/27/00 4832 TR 23067-5/Lot 13 1194.0 10.6 109.0 92 3 03/27/00 4841 TR 23067-5/L.ot 1 1188.0 11.3 119.4 92 4 03/27/00 4842 TR 23067-5/L.ot 2 1192.0 12.0 115.0 90 6 03/27/00 4843 TR 23067-5/Lot 4 1197.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 03/27/00 4844 TR 23067-5/Lot3 1193.0 9.6 127.1 96 3 03/27/00 4849 TR 23067-5/Lot2 1193.0 14.2 115.4 90 6 03/27/00 4850 TR 23067-5/Lot 2 1194.0 9.6 125.5 94 3 03/28/00 4863 TR 23067-5/Lot 67 1207.0 14.2 112.2 90 17 03/28/00 4864 TR 23067-5/Lot 67 1208.0 13.3 113.0 91 17 03/28/00 4865 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1205.0 11.5 115.9 91 6 03/28/00 4866 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1206.0 15.8 108.6 92 6 03/28/00 4867 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1207.0 12.2 116.2 91 6 03/28/00 4868 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1209.0 13.7 112.2 90 17 03/28/00 4869 TR 23067-5/Lot 1 1192.0 7.7 118.6 93 6 03/28/00 4870 TR 23067-5/Lot 1 1193.0 10.6 119.6 93 6 03/28/00 4871 TR 23067-5/Lot 3 1195.0 11.8 114.4 92 17 03/28/00 4872 TR 23067-5/Lot3 1196.0 12.1 111.6 90 17 03/28/00 4873 TR 23067-5/Lot5 1197.0 14.9 112.3 90 17 03/28/00 4874 TR 23067-5/Lot6 1199.0 13.4 112.3 90 17 03/28/00 4875 TR 23067-5/Lot8 1202.0 9.8 124.9 93 13 03/28/00 4876 TR 23067-5/Lot9 1202.0 14.6 116.8 91 6 03/28/00 4877 TR 23067-5/Lot 12 1198.0 9.1 118.0 92 6 03/28/00 4878 TR 23067-5/Lot 12 1199.0 11.7 122.6 92 3 03/28/00 4879 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1193.0 12.3 111.6 90 17 03/28/00 4880 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1192.0 15.0 116.1 91 6 03/28/00 4881 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1194.0 9.5 122.0 91 20 03/28/00 4882 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1196.0 10.6 126.8 94 20 03/28/00 4883 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1198.5 12.0 117.7 92 6 03/28/00 4884 TR 23067-5/Lot 16 1195.5 9.4 122.3 91 20 03/29/00 4891 TR 23067-5/Chaote Street 1158.0 10.3 119.1 92 4 03/29/00 4892 TR 23067-5/Chaote Street 1159.0 14.0 115.4 90 6 03/29/00 4893 TR 23067-5/Lot 12 1201.0 11.9 117.3 90 4 03/29/00 4894 TR 23067-5/Lot 12 1202.0 11.6 113.5 91 17 03/29/00 4895 TR 23067-5/Lot 14 1202.0 11.3 119.7 92 4 03/29/00 4896 TR 23067-5/L.ot 15 1197.0 12.8 112.3 90 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 I.N. 141-99 TABLE -125 m TABLE Field Density Test Restults TEST TEST TEST. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP: SOIL DATE NO% LOCATI©N PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -126 q9 Tract 23067-5 03/29/00 4897 TR 23067-5/Lot 31 1179.5 8.5 119.6 91 10 03/29/00 4898 TR 23067-5/Lot 32 1177.0 9.5 119.7 91 10 03/29/00 4899 TR 23067-5/Lot 33 1173.5 7.7 120.1 92 10 03/29/00 4900 TR 23067-5/Lot 34 1170.5 8.5 115.6 90 6 03/29/00 4901 TR 23067-5/1.ot 35 1167.5 11.1 116.6 91 6 04/05/00 4962 TR 23067-5/Lot 17, E slope top 1187.0 11.3 112.7 91 19 04/05/00 4963 TR 23067-5/Lot 17, E slope face 1184.0 8.8 111.6 87 6 04/05/00 4964 RT No. 4963 -- 7.9 119.3 93 6 04/05/00 4965 TR 23067-5/Channel St Sta 36+10 1178.0 10.0 121.8 94 25 04/05/00 4966 TR 23067-5/Channel St Sta 38+50 1190.5 9.6 123.5 92 20 04/05/00 4971 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1191.0 8.5 121.7 93 24 04/05/00 4972 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1189.0 6.9 121.8 93 24 04/05/00 4973 TR 23067-5/Lot 17 slope 1197.0 11.9 118.8 92 23 04/05/00 4974 TR 23067-5/Lot 18 slope 1191.0 7.9 119.5 92 24 04/05/00 4975 TR 23067-5/Lot 19 slope 1190.0 12.0 104.6 91 18 04/05/00 4976 TR 23067-5/Lot 20 slope 1193.0 11.0 120.7 94 23 04/06/00 4979 TR 23067-5/1.ot 35 1161.0 8.8 123.4 92 20 04/06/00 4980 TR 23067-5/1-ot 34 1170.8 10.6 114.1 92 29 04/06/00 4981 TR 23067-5/Lot 33 1173.8 11.1 115.2 93 29 04/06/00 4982 TR 23067-5/1.ot 32 1177.3 8.8 123.2 91 20 04/06/00 4983 TR 23067-5/1-ot 31 1179.9 9..7 123.5 92 20 04/06/00 4984 TR 23067-5/1.ot 22 1176.5 11.2 109.3 95 18 04/06/00 4985 TR 23067-5/1.ot 20 1173.7 10.9 122.2 94 24 04/06/00 4986 TR 23067-5/1-ot 19 1174.8 10.6 123.1 94 24 04/06/00 4987 TR 23067-5/1-ot 18 1176.8 8.7 117.5 92 6 04/06/00 4988 TR 23067-5/1-ot 17 1179.6 12.0 122.9 94 24 04/10/00 5034 TR 23067-5/1-ot 13 1200.0 7.8 116.5 90 23 04/10/00 5035 TR 23067-5/1-ot 13 1199.0 7.4 119.9 90 3 04/10/00 5036 TR 23067-5/1.ot 14 1197.0 11.9 117.9 91 23 04/10/00 5037 TR 23067-5/Lot14 1198.0 10.1 116.8 91 23 04/12/00 5058 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1196.0 14.5 112.8 90 19 04/12/00 5059 TR 23067-5/Lot 35 1195.0 7.7 117.6 90 25 04/12/00 5060 TR 23067-5/1-ot 32 1190.0 11.2 116.9 91 23 04/12/00 5061 TR 23067-5/L.ot 32 1191.0 10.0 116.2 90 23 04/12/00 5062 TR 23067-5/Lot 31 1193.0 11.4 115.7 93 19 04/12/00 5063 TR 23067-5/Lot 31 1194.0 12.3 112.6 90 19 04/12/00 5076 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1216.0 10.1 117.5 90 24 04/12/00 5077 TR 23067-5/1-ot 57 1215.0 9.4 118.4 91 24 04/12/00 5078 TR 23067-5/1-ot 59 1214.0 10.7 116.8 91 23 04/12/00 5079 TR 23067-5/Lot 59 1215.0 11.2 117.0 91 23 04/12/00 5073 TR 23067-5/1-ot 16 1198.2 12.4 114.5 90 22 04/12/00 5074 TR 23067-5/Lot 15 1200.1 12.1 116.9 92 22 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -126 q9 TABLEI Field Density Test Restults ;TEST';`::.::: TEST;: TEST:€:::.:°^.€'€. [ :€' `€'ELEV:' 'MOVSTURE :DENSITY;: COlYTP '' ? °3t3II :._ DATL: NO: LE2CATIUN - - _ € (ft) (%)' (ped ego) TYP)8 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -1 27 50 Tract 23067-5 04/12/00 5075 TR 23067-5/L.ot 14 1201.9 8.7 117.4 90 25 04/22/00 5186 TR 23067-5/Lot 6 FG 8.9 123.4 93 3 04/22/00 5187 TR 23067-5/Lot 5 FG 10.1 122.1 92 3 04/22/00 5188 TR 23067-5/Lot 4 FG 12.6 117.0 91 23 04/27/00 5250 TR 23067-5/L.ot 66 FG 9.3 117.3 91 6 04/27/00 5251 TR 23067-5/Lot 65 FG 9.1 118.7 92 6 04/27/00 5252 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 FG 8.9 125.2 97 9 04/27/00 5253 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 FG 9.0 129.0 97 9 04/27/00 5254 TR 23067-5/Lot 63 FG 8.6 124.6 94 9 04/28/00 5261 TR 23067-5/Lot 62 FG 8.4 125.2 94 9 04/28/00 5262 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 FG 10.3 124.6 94 9 04/28/00 5263 TR 23067-5/Lot 60 FG 10.3 126.4 95 9 04/28/00 5264 TR 23067-5/L.ot 59 FG 9.1 129.4 98 0 9 04/28/00 5265 TR 23067-5/Lot 58 FG 9.8 127.3 96 9 04/28/00 5266 TR 23067-5/L.ot 57 FG 9.0 123.6 93 9 05/17/00 5336 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1170.0 12.0 118.3 92 32 05/17/00 5337 TR 23067-5/L.ot 66 1169.0 13.1 112.1 90 19 05/17/00 5338 TR 23067-5/L.ot 64 1170.0 11.7 116.5 91 32 05/17/00 5339 TR 23067-5/Lot 64 1171.0 10.9 115.4 89 32 05/17/00 5340 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1173.0 11.5 116.8 92 22 05/17/00 5341 TR 23067-5/Lot 61 1174.0 - 11.8 115.0 91 22 05/17/00 5342 RT No.5339 12.0 115.7 90 32 05/22/00 5367 TR 23067-5/L.ot 66 1179.0 9.7 117.5 90 25 05/22/00 5368 TR 23067-5/Lot 66 1180.0 8.8 118.6 91 25 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 TABLE -1 27 50 TABLE II Lot Summary PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 5;L Cu ,,Fi11,.Transition �sfi.{. � . a V ..<tra.='r S Max�mum.DeptWdVFi11v q v. ft)i�-.nJ"::r;�q5„y,. ME�} t} +I of Number f k�.i .3gt-As •�� Tract 23067-5 1 fill 10 2 fill 5 3 fill 5 4 fill 3 5 fill 3 6 fill 3 7 fill 3 8 fill 3 9 fill 3 10 fill 3 11 fill 10 12 fill 19 13 fill 30 14 fill 35 15 fill 35 16 fill 45 17 fill 35 18 fill 30 19 fill 15 20 fill 5 21 cut PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 5;L Lot Summary (Continued) �I of Namber Gut, Fill; Transition- ' MaximumM ith*of Fill (ft��m,,, 22 cut 23 cut 24 cut 25 cut 26 cut 27 cut 28 cut 29 cut 30 cut 31 fill 5 32 fill 15 33 fill 17 34 fill 12 35 fill 10 36 fill 25 37 fill 20 38 fill 20 39 fill 20 40 fill 25 41 fill 25 42 fill 28 43 fill 30 44 fill 30 45 fill 12 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 .�9 Lot Summary (Continued) PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 sv Cut; FilIg,,M tion •' ,; I'M iinum ham., 46 fill 3 47 fill 3 48 fill 3 49 fill 20 50 fill 25 51 fill 45 52 fill 60 53 fill 75 54 fill 80 55 fill 80 56 fill 80 57 fill 75 58 fill 75 59 fill 70 60 fill 65 61 fill 60 62 fill 55 63 fill 50 64 fill 45 65 fill 40 66 fill 40 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 sv REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. 1989b, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated , J.N. 141-99, March 10, 1999. , 1999b, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. , 1999c, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. , 1999d, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, I.N. 141-99, dated October 28, 1999. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 SI iAPPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST CRITERIA i Laboratory Maximum Dry Density iMaximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected sample of soil in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are given on Plate A-1. Expansion Potential ' Expansion index tests were performed on selected samples of soil accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard Test No. 18-2. Expansion potential classifications were determined from UBC Table 18 -I -B on the basis of the expansion index values. Test results and expansion potentials are presented on Plates A-2 to A-3. Soluble -Sulfate Analysis Chemical analyses were performed on selected samples of soil to determine soluble sulfate contents. These tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Test results are included on Plate A-4. 1 I PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 i J.N. 141-99 5f LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' TSaiuple, Number=, ;- 4;JJ{. ='r=` •"_ :`- i " - °Soil Type_ ' �Fv� t'L•:: ?. 3. O_ ptimui_n' Moistuie.(%) r �.t Maximum Di=,Y'. - ..( el]v. L.:.-. 1 Yellow -tan SAND with trace Clay 9.0 130.5 2 Dark brown fine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 130.5 3 Reddish -brown tine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 130.0 5 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 118.5 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 128.0 7 Brown Silty SAND 10.0 131.0 8 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.0 129.0 9 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 8.5 132.0 10 Light brown Silty SAND 12.0 113.5 11 Dark brown Silty SAND 9.5 131.0 12 Yellow-brown SAND 16.5 105.5 13 Light brown coarse SAND 13.5 120.5 14 Black Clayey SILT 16.5 112.5 15 Black SILT with trace Clay and Sand 16.0 110.5 16 Yellow-brown Silty fine SAND 12.5 123.0 17 Yellow-brown Silty fine SAND 12.0 124.5 18 Yellow-brown Silty fine SAND 14.5 115.5 19 Dark brown Silty SAND 11.5 124.5 20 Brown Silty SAND 8.0 134.5 (I) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD 18-2 (3) PER UBC TABLE 18-1-B (4) PER CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD NO. 417 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 PlateA-1 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA2 Lot Number:, Expansion Judex Expansion Potential's., Ithrough 3 19 Very Low 4 through 5 7 Very Low 6 through 8 26 Low 9 through 10 32 Low ll through 13 13 Very Low 14 through 16 12 Very Low 17 27 Low 18 54 Medium 19 28 Low 20 58 Medium 21 49 Low 22 20 Very Low 23 through 25 25 Low 26 through 28 2 Very Low 29 through 30 4 Very Low 31 through 32 24 Low 33 through 35 26 Low 36 17 Very Low 37 9 Very Low 38 4 Very Low 39 2 Very Low 40 5 Very Low 41 24 Low 42 9 Very Low 43 1 Very Low ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-2 1 <: - Lot;Nuinlier'd••' " panston:Iuilextfi' _ ' .+r :Expaii§ion Potgntial': 44 36 Low 45 16 Very Low 46 33 Low 47 24 Low 48 8 Very Low 49 and 50 5 Very Low 51 through 53 35 Low 54 through 55 0 Very Low 56 through 57 16 Very Low 58 through 60 4 Very Low 61 through 63 0 Very Low 64 through 66 13 Very Low 1 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-3 SOLUBLE SULFATES' ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-4 1 m "Sttlfate'Coiitent(..%a)', :'.-.., I through 3 0.01 4 through 8 0.004 9 through 10 0.006 11 through 16 0.005 17 through 19 0.007 20 through 22 0.01 23 through 25 0.002 26 through 28 0.001 29 through 30 0.003 31 through 32 0.014 33 through 35 0.001 36 through 38 0.004 39 through 42 0.001 43 through 46 0.001 47 through 50 0.001 5l through 53 0.001 54 through 56 0.006 57 through 60 0.01 60 through 66 0.005 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. JUNE 2, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Plate A-4 1 m ri F] J f �i r 7 749 RESPONSE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUILDING AND SAFETY; GRADING DIVISlOk SOILS REPORT CHECK CORRECTIONS, DATED JULY 7, 2000, FOR GEOTECHNICA'L,jdEPORT Of ROUGH GRADING LOGS 7 THR&O 66,OF TRACT 23067-5 FEDNAWk DEVELOPMENT, TEMECULA AREA RIVERSIDE.COt`47-Y, CALIFORNIA 5 t f -7 a 1;� �6Y .:• �� a T � � W� i� DY� ✓, CENTEX HOMES 224O.Wirdlow Circle, Suite 1.50 Corona, Celifornla 91,720 t.: N i 4 t f -7 a 1;� �6Y .:• �� a T � � W� i� DY� ✓, � i { t.: N 4 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES Jelly 17, 2000 J.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 ' Attention: Mr. Mike Aller ' Subject: Response to County of Riverside Building and Safety, Grading Division, Soils Report Check Corrections, Dated July 7, 2000, for Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66 of ' Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California References: 1) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated June 15, 2000. 2) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000b, Geotechnical Report of Final Grading, Lots 1 through 8, 14 and 16, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 6, 2000. Per your request, Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) has prepared this response to the County of Riverside Building and Safety , Grading Division, Soils Report Check ' Corrections dated July 7, 2000, for Lots I through 66 of Tract 23067-5 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. A copy of the review sheet is attached ' for your convenience. The following responses address Comments 1 through 6 of the subject review sheet. ' Comment No. 1 — "The keyway location, depths and dimensions for fill slopes ' are not being shown on the exhibit Plates. Please show keyways." Response — Alluvial removals in the major canyons created large excavations 30 to 40 feet in depth exposing competent bedrock. Where applicable, fill keys were 27620 Commerce Censer Dc Ste. 103 PEGEOTECHNICAL INC constructed and are shown on the enclosed grading plan. Temecula, CA 92590 ' Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax(909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm net CENTEX HOMES July 17, 2000 TR 23067-5 Lots 1-66/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 ' Page 2 • Comment No. 2 — "Sub -drains were being proposed (in the approved preliminary ' geotechnical investigation report, Plate 6) in the canyons around lots 32, 33 & 43, 44. The grading report does not show such subdrains being installed in these vicinities. Please provide explanation as to the reasoning for subdrains not being ' installed." Response — Preliminary locations for subdrains are often shown in preliminary geotechnical investigation reports. The actual as -built locations are usually different, depending on overexcavation conditions and grading logistics. Canyon ' subdrains installed in Tract 23067-5 were located by the project civil engineer and are shown on the grading plans. Canyon subdrains were installed in the canyon around Lots 32 and 33. but were not shown by the project civil engineer's grading ' plans. The location and elevations of these subdrains are shown on the enclosed grading plans. ' • Comment No. 3 — "In regards to the subdrains, please identity and label starting points, discharging points and connecting points (for continuing drains across this phase and connecting to other drains of other phases)." ' Response — Canyon subdrains installed in Tract 23067-5 have been labeled "beginning of drain" and "drain outlet" on the enclosed grading plans. • Comment No. 4 — "Item 5 of the conditions for approving grading report (by County Geologist, Mr. Steve A. Kupferman, dated 6/8/99, a copy attached for your ' reference and record) requires that the geotechnical consultant to confirm internal friction angle and cohesion values for fill slopes during grading and document such in the grading report. Please provide explanation with supporting data regarding ' this condition." ' Response — Representative samples of fill materials were tested during grading to confirm internal friction angle and cohesion values for fill slopes constructed in Tract 23067-5. Shear -test plots are attached for your review. ' • Comment No. 5 — "Lots 1-8, 14 & 16 were observed to exhibit some surface cracks during rough grading inspection on 5/8/00. A correction notice was written ' and required the geotechnical consultant of record to provide explanations regarding this findings. Please address such surface cracks." ' Response — Rough grading was incomplete on Lots 1 through 8, 14 and 16 at the time of rough -grading observation on May 8, 2000. Rough grading on these lots were completed by moisture -conditioning and compacting to 90 percent relative ' compaction and then blading- off to design grade. Field density tests were provided in the referenced report dated June 15, 2000. The final grading for the subject lots K CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-5 Lots 1-66/Temecula Area July 17, 2000 J.N. 141-99 Page 3 was discussed in the referenced report dated July 6, 2000. All earthwork and grading operations were performed for the subject lots in accordance with the recommendations presented in our report dated June 15, 2000, and the grading code of the County of Riverside. The compacted earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the planned construction. • Comment No. 6 --Depths and elevations of removals have not been documented on the exhibit Plate 2 & 4 for lots 19 through 48. Please provide some elevations indicating depths of removals." ' Response — Elevations of removal depths in fill areas were inadvertently omitted for Lots 19 through 48. Elevations have been added where appropriate for your information. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please ' contact this office. OQO� ESS/o �G\NEEF C, 6 E w2 N0.1 * Exp. Or - Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Um i No.692 0 i u Exp. o sf FOTEty{Nv�P \)EOF CAUFOj 3fephen M. Poole Senior Associate 1 GE 692 r I *\CH4e W k� !A 2n h 219 z \l EC OQ j 4r OCF AS\E Attachments: Building and Safety Grading Division Soils Report Check Corrections Figure 1 - Direct Shear Test Data - Slope Material Figure 2 - Direct Shear Test Data - Slope Material Plates 1 through 4 - Geotechnical Maps (in pocket) ' Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) County of Riverside, Building and Safety, Grading Division Attention: Mr. Mack Hakakian 4 V y 1 TO THE APPLICANT_ The following list of corrections need your attention and follow-up. Please revise / make changes / provide additional data on the report and resubmit these for recheck including a correction response. Indicate on the corrected report where the corrections are made and clearly distinguish ' all revisions using clouds, revision triangles, footnotes etc. so a recheck can be accomplished in a timely manner. BUILDING AND SAFETY, GRADING DIVISION SOILS REPORT CHECK CORRECTIONS Date: July 7, 2000 Site: Tract 23067-5 BOR: 990024 BY: Mack Hakakian We have received the following report titled: PHONE: (909)955-2823 " GEOTECHNCIAL REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING, LOTS 1 THROUGH 66, TRACT 23067-5, REDHAWK DEVELOPMENT, TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA", prepared by Petra Geotechnical, Inc., date June 15, 2000, Job Number 141-99. In review of the above referenced report the following items need your follow up and response: ' Recommendation Note: The exhibits provided in the grading report have been clustered with relatively large size numbers (density test numbers) that have made the exhibits eligible. Please use care in selecting lettering size that reduces clustering and swarming data presented. ' Reminder Note: Please be advised that lots 52-63 are currently being monitored for settlement (per grading report, page 7). No building permits will be issued on these lots until such time that the ' geotechnical consultant provides written certification that all settlements have occurred, completed and the lots are released for construction. ' I- The keyways location, depths and dimensions for fill slopes are not being shown on the exhibit Plates. Please show keyways. ' 2- Sub -drains were being proposed (in the approved preliminary geotechnical investigation report, Plate 6) in the canyons around lots 32, 33 & 43, 44. The grading report does not show such subdrains being installed in these vicinities. Please provide explanation as to the reasoning for subdrains not being ' installed. ' ZO'd ZT:bT OOOZ Z InC 9081-SS6-606:xE3 30NUISISSU lIW2J3d UW11 s 3- In regards to the subdrains, please identify and label starting points, discharging points and connecting points (for continuing drains across this phase and connecting to other drains of other phases). 4- Item 5 of the conditions for approving grading report (by County Geologist, Mr. Steve A. Kupferman, dated 6/8/99, a copy attached for your reference and record) requires that the geotechnical consultant to confirm internal friction angle and cohesion values for fill slopes during grading and document such in the grading report. Please provide explanation with supporting data regarding this condition. 5- Lots 1-8, 14 & 16 were observed to exhibit some surface cracks during rough grading inspection on 5/8/00. A correction notice was written and required the geotechnical consultant of record to provide explanations regarding this findings. Please address such surface cracks. 6- Depths and elevations of removals have not been documented on the exhibit Plate 2 & 4 for lots 19 through 48. Please provide some elevations indicating depths of removals. Please provide response to the above for review and approval. £0'd LT:bT OOOL L Inf 908T-SS6-606:xp3 30NtilSISSH EWd3d tiWll /_ NORMAL STRESS - pounds per square foot SAMPLE LOCATION DESCRIPTION FRICTION ANGLE COHESION (PSF) • SLOPE I ® 0.0 Fine- to Coarse -Grained SAND 32 150 NOTES: Samples remolded to 90 % of maximum dry Density Samples were presoaked 24 hours minimum prior to shearing J.N. 141-99 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. REMOLDED TEST SAMPLES FIGURE 7 NORMAL STRESS - pounds per square foot SAMPLE LOCATION DESCRIPTION FRICTION ANGLE COHESION (PSF) • SLOPE 2 @ 0.0 Silty SAND (SM) 30 100 NOTES: Samples remolded to 90 % of maximum dry Density Samples were presoaked 24 hours minimum prior to shearing J.N. 141-99 1 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. I REMOLDED TEST SAMPLES FIGURE 2 -44 GRADING (ROUGH 61 ENT IN THE CALIFONIA tk � i' ♦ PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES September 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 CENTEX HOMES ' 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Harold Meyers Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and Lots 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riverside County, California This report presents a summary of the observation and testing services provided by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) during rough -grading operations to develop Lots 1 through 17 and Lots 46 through 61 of Tract 23067-3 in the Temecula area of Riverside County, California. Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the suitability of the grading for the proposed residential construction are provided herein, as well as foundation -design recommendations based on the as -graded soil conditions. The purpose of grading was to develop 33 level lots for construction of single-family residences, as well as adjacent slopes and streets. Grading on these selected lots began in June 1999, and was completed in August 1999. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Removal and recompaction of low-density surface soils, processing of the exposed bottom surfaces or placement of compacted fill under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation and with selective testing by Petra. Earthwork and grading operations were performed in accordance with the recommendations PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 / Petrate@ibm net R CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. t41-99 Page 2 presented in the grading -plan review report (see References) and the grading code of the County of Riverside, California. The completed earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now planned. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY General Geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading were frequently observed and mapped by Petra's geologic staff. Geologic Units Geologic conditions observed onsite were generally as anticipated and described in the supplemental subsurface investigation and geotechnical review report for the site by Petra and others (see References). Removal bottoms were geologically mapped by a Petra geologist. The site consisted of well-rounded hills comprised of Pauba formational sandstone, younger Quaternary alluvial -filled valleys and colluvial - mantled hillsides. Additionally, there were minor areas of existing artificial -fill materials associated with the construction of Nighthawk Pass Road. All unsuitable alluvial soils were removed to expose competent bedrock of the Pauba Formation. The underlying Pauba formational sandstones generally consisted of sandy silts and coarse sands which were predominantly fine-grained, very well -indurated to cemented, laminated, moist and dense. 3 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 3 Groundwater No areas of subsurface water were encountered during alluvial -removal excavations within this area of the site. Faulting No faults were encountered during grading operations on the site. SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. Ground Preparation All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils were removed to underlying bedrock. The removals varied from approximately 10 to 20± feet below original grades. Prior to placing fill, the exposed bottom surfaces were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions, then recompacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Toe -of -fill -slope keys were placed at the base of all fill slopes. Fill keys were excavated a minimum of 2 feet into competent bedrock materials with a minimum slope of 2 percent to the heel of the key. A Z CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 4 Disposal of Oversize Rock Oversize materials were not encountered during the rough -grading operations for these lots. Cut/Fill Transition Lots Cut/fill transition lots were eliminated due to overexcavation of the cut portion of the transition lots. The removals within the cut portion extended to depths of approximately 10 feet below finish grades. Cut Lots Building pads and slopes within cut lots were cut to grade, geologically mapped and those that were determined to be adequate to provide uniform support for the proposed residences and improvements without remediation were left at -finish design grade. Fill Placement and Testing Fill materials consist of onsite soils. All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent by rolling with a D8 or D9 bulldozer, 834 rubber -tired bulldozer or loaded scrapers. The maximum vertical depth of fill placed within the subject lots as a result of grading is approximately 32± feet. Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). Occasional field density tests were also performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556 (sandcone). Test results are presented on Table I (attached) and test locations are shown on the enclosed rough -grading plans (Plates 1 and 2). 5 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 5 Field density tests were taken at vertical intervals of approximately 1 to 2 feet and the compacted fills were tested at the time of placement to verify that the specified moisture content and minimum required relative compaction of 90 percent had been achieved. At least one in-place density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed and/or for each 2 feet in vertical height of compacted fill. The actual number of tests taken per day varied with the project conditions, such as the number of earthmovers (scrapers) and availability of support equipment. When field density tests produced results less than the required minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The substandard area was then reworked, recompacted and retested until a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent was achieved. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was the basis for determining if the maximum dry density value, summarized in a following section, was applicable for each given density test. One -point check's were performed to supplement visual classification. Fill Slope Construction All fill slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2: I (horizontal: vertical [h:v]). Maximum fill -slope height is approximately 20± feet located on 'Lot 1 of Tract 23067-3. Final surface compaction on the fill slopes was achieved by overfilling and backrolling the slopes during construction and then trimming to the compacted inner core or by backrolling the slope with a sheepsfoot roller. Lot Summary A summary of the cut, fill and transition lots onsite with the maximum depth of fill is provided in the attached Table II. a CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 6 LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil types observed during grading were determined in our laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix A. Expansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of soil existing at or near finish -pad grade within the subject lots. These tests were performed to accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. Atterberg Limits Liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of soils was performed on a selected sample of onsite soil which had an expansion indices greater than 20 in accordance with ASTM Test Method D4318-93. The test result is summarized in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analyses Water-soluble sulfate contents were also determined for representative samples of soil existing at or near pad grade of the subject lots in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. These tests resulted in negligible sulfate contents of less than 0.1 percent. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. W CA CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 7 POST -GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Landscaping and Maintenance of Graded Slopes The fill slopes are comprised of granular, relatively cohesionless soils and, unless mitigation measures are taken, the slopes will be subject to a tow to moderate degree of surficial erosion, raveling and possible slumping during periods of heavy rainfall. The fill slopes should be landscaped with a deep-rooted (4 to 5 feet deep), drought - resistant, woody plant species. To provide temporary slope protection while the woody materials mature, the slopes should be planted with a herbaceous plant species that will mature in one season or provided with some other protection, such as jute matting or polymer covering. The temporary protection should be maintained until the woody material has become fully mature. A landscape architect should be consulted to determine the most suitable plant materials and irrigation requirements. To mitigate future surficial erosion and slumping, a permanent slope -maintenance program should be initiated. Proper slope maintenance must include regular care of drainage- and erosion -control provisions, rodent control, prompt repair of leaking irrigation systems and replacement of dying or dead plant materials. The irrigation system should be designed and maintained to provide a constant moisture content in the soils. Overwatering, as well as overdrying, of the soils can lead to surficial erosion and slumping. Homeowners should be advised of the potential problems that can develop when drainage on the pads and slopes is altered in any way. Drainage can be altered due to the placement of fill and construction of garden walls, retaining walls, walkways, patios, swimming pools and planters. 0 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 8 Pad Drainage Drainage on the lots should be designed to carry surface water away from all graded slopes and structures. Pad drainage should be designed for a minimum gradient of l percent with drainage directed to the adjacent streets. After dwellings are constructed, positive drainage away from the structures and slopes should be provided on the lots by means of earth swales, sloped concrete flatwork and area drains. Utility Trenches All utility -trench backfill within street right-of-ways, utility easements, under sidewalks, driveways and building -floor slabs and within or in proximity to slopes, should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by a Petra representative to verify adequate compaction. Excavations for trenches that exceed 4 feet in depth should be laid-back at a maximum gradient of 1:1 (h: v). For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfills should be placed in lifts no greater than 2 feet in thickness and then mechanically compacted with a hydra -hammer, pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than 8 inches and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. As an alternative for shallow trenches (18 inches or less in depth) where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under building -floor slabs, imported clean sand having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed. CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 9 To avoid point -loads and subsequent distress to asbestos, clay, cement or plastic pipe, imported sand bedding should be placed at least 1 foot above all pipe in areas where excavated trench materials contain significant oversize rock. Sand -bedding materials should thoroughly jetted prior to placement of backfill. FOUNDATION -DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our observations during grading and field and laboratory testing, the preliminary foundation design recommendations presented in our geotechnical investigation report (see References) are considered applicable for the subject lots. The recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. Allowable -Bearing Values ' An allowable -bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of 24 -inch -square pad footings and 12 -inch -wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade in compacted fill materials. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1 foot of ' width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. Recommended allowable -bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Settlement ' Based on the above bearing values and maximum depth of fill (i.e., 32± feet), a total settlement of footings is expected to be less than 0.75 inch and differential settlement ' less than one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 25 to 50± feet. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during or shortly tfollowing the completion of construction as the loads are applied. 1 /D CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 ' TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 10 Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure increasing at the rate of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot, may be used to determine lateral bearing for building footings constructed on level ground. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 times the dead -load forces may also be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral -sliding resistance. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Expansive Soil Conditions 1 Laboratory test data indicate the foundation soils underlying the subject lots exhibit ' VERY LOW and MEDIUM expansion potential, as classified in accordance with UBC Standard Test No. 18-2. Minimum design recommendations for footings and ' residential -floor slabs for this condition are presented below. However, additional slab thickness, footing size and/or reinforcement may be necessary for structural ' considerations, as determined by the project architect and/or structural engineer. A summary of the expansion test results and associated lots is provided in Appendix A. ' Results of our laboratory tests indicate Lots 1 through 17, 46 through 52 and 58 ' through 61 exhibit a VERY LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -B. Since the onsite soils exhibit expansion indices of less than 20, the design of slab -on -ground foundations is exempt from the procedures outlined in 1997 UBC Section 1815. Based on the above soil conditions, it is recommended ' that footings and floors be constructed and reinforced in accordance with the following minimum criteria. However, additional slab thickness, footing sizes and/or ' reinforcement should be provided as required by the project architect or structural engineer. 1 1 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page I1 • FOOtmRs - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e. 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. • Building -Floor Slabs - Living -area concrete floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9) or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. - Living -area concrete floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be poured separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Presaturation of the subgrade soils below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and W 10- CENTEX HOLIES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 12 garage -floor slabs should be pre -watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. Results of our laboratory tests indicate soils within Lots 53 through 57 exhibit a MEDIUM expansion potential as classified in accordance with 1997• UBC Table 18 -I -B. The 1997 UBC specifies that slab -on -ground foundations (floor slabs) on soils with an expansion index greater than 20 require special design considerations in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815. The design procedures outlined in 1997 UBC Section 1815 are based on a plasticity index of the different soil layers existing within the upper 15 feet of the building site. Based on subsurface stratigraphy and distribution of the different soil types, we have calculated an effective plasticity index of 17 in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815.4.2. The design and construction recommendations that follow are based on the above soil conditions and may be considered for minimizing the effects of moderately expansive soils. These recommendations have been based on the previous experience of Petra on projects with similar soil conditions. Although construction performed in accordance with these recommendations has been found to minimize post -construction movement and/or cracking, they generally do not positively mitigate all potential effects of expansive soil. The owner, architect, design civil engineer, structural engineer, and contractors must be made aware of the expansive soil conditions which exist at the site. Furthermore, it is recommended that additional slab thicknesses, footing sizes and/or reinforcement more stringent than recommended below be provided as required or specified by the project architect or structural engineer. • Footings - Exterior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction should be founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. Interior continuous footings may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for both one- and two-story construction.. All 13 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 ' TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 13 ' continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one - and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. ' Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum t of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways, near the bottom one-third of the footings. • Buildine-Floor Slabs The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor -slab ' thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815 based on an effective plasticity index of 17. Unless a more stringent design is recommended by the architect or the structural engineer, we recommend a ' minimum slab thickness of 4 inches for both living -area and garage -floor slabs and reinforcing consisting of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on centers, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete ' chairs or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid -height. Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor t barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the ' concrete. Garage -floor slabs should also be poured separately from adjacent wall footings ' with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion - joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across ' garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. ' Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage - floor slabs should be pre -watered to achieve a moisture content that is 5 percent ' or greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 18 inches into the subgrade soils. R CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 14 Soluble Sulfates Laboratory test data indicate soils within the subject lots have a negligible soluble - sulfate content. As such, concrete in contact with soil may utilize Type I or fI Portland cement. Structural Setbacks Footing setbacks of residential structures from property lines and from the tops and toes of the engineered -fill slopes should conform to the minimum setback requirements of 1997 UBC Chapter 18. Structural setbacks of retaining walls, swimming pools and spas proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes should be analyzed separately. Footing Observations All building footing trenches should be observed by a Petra representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing soils and to depths conforming to 1997 UBC Chapter 18. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the placement forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture -softened soil and/or any construction debris, should be removed prior to placing concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility -trench excavations should not be placed in slab -on -grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. W �5 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 15 RETAINING -WALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Allowable -Bearing_ Capacity and Lateral Rest Footings for retaining walls may be designed using the allowable -bearing capacity and lateral -resistance values recommended for building footings: however, when calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings are not covered with concrete flatwork. Active Earth Pressures An active lateral -earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having a density of 35 (very low) and 45 (medium) pounds per cubic foot should be used for design of cantilevered walls retaining a drained, level backfill. Where the wall backfill slopes upward, at 2:1 (h:v). the above values should be increased to 52 (very low) and 75 (medium) pounds per cubic foot. The above values are for onsite soils which exhibit very low and medium expansive potentials and are placed behind the walls a minimum horizontal distance equal to one-half the wall height. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. Drainage Perforated pipe -and -gravel subdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Perforated pipe should consist of 4 -inch - minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR -35 with the perforations laid - down. The pipe should be encased in a 1 -foot -wide column of 0.75- to 1.5 -inch, open - graded gravel extending above the wall footing to a minimum height of 1.5 feet above the footing or to a height equal to one-third the wall height, whichever is greater. The gravel should be completely wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 16 equivalent. Solid outlet pipes should be connected to the subdrains and routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. Weepholes, if used, should be 3 -inch -minimum diameter and provided at maximum intervals of 6 feet along the walls. Open, vertical masonry joints should be provided at 32 -inch -minimum intervals. One -cubic -foot of gravel should be placed behind the weepholes or open -masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Waterproofing The portions of retaining walls supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Retaining -Wall Backfill All retaining -wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8 -inch -maximum horizontal lifts, water or air-dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Flooding or jetting of backfill materials should be avoided. A Petra representative should verify adequate compaction of all backfill. MASONRY GARDEN WALLS The footings should also be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to mitigate the potential for unsightly cracking, positive separations should also be provided in the garden walls at a maximum horizontal spacing of 20 feet. These separations should be provided in the blocks only and not W i? CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 17 extend through the footing. The footing should be placed monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as an effective "grade beam" below the wall. In areas where garden walls may be proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes, the footings should be deepened such that a minimum horizontal clearance of 7 feet is maintained between the outside bottom edges of the footings and the face of the slope. POST- GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Petra should be notified at the appropriate times in order that we may provide the following observation and testing services during the various phases of post -grading construction. • Building Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. • Retaining -Wall Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. - Observe and verify proper installation of subdrainage systems prior to placing wall backfill. - Observe and test placement of all wall backfill. �' X34107-3 - 4 CENTEX HOMES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 18 • Masonry Garden Walls - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches following removal of any slough and/or saturated soils and re -excavate to proper depth. • Exterior Concrete-Flatwork Construction - Observe and test subgrade soils below all concrete-flatwork areas to verify adequate compaction and moisture content. • Utility -Trench Backfill - Observe and test placement of all utility -trench backfill. • Re -Grading - Observe and test placement of any fill to be placed above or beyond the finish grades shown on the grading plans. i /4 CENTEX HONIES September 16, 1999 TR 23067-3 Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 19 This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Please call if you have any questions pertaining to this report. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Stephen M. F Senior Assoc GE 692 Attachments: Table I - Results of Field Density Tests Table II - Lot Summary References Plates l and 2 - Density Test Location Map (in pocket) Appendix A - Laboratory Test Criteria/Laboratory Test Data Distribution: (4) Addressee 'TEST TEST TEST ': :.: ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP. SOIL DATE .. NO..:.. LOCATION,...:.' (ff). (%) (pef) (%) TYPE '06/01/99 1 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1224.0 7.0 116.5 90 8 06/01/99 2 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1225.0 7.0 115.5 90 6 06/01/99 3 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1226.0 12.5 115.5 90 6 ' 06/01/99 4 TR 23067-3/Lott 1227.0 12.5 115.0 90 6 06/02/99 5 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1229.0 13.5 121.0 93 1 6 TR 23067-3/Lott 1230.0 13.5 116.5 90 8 '06/02/99 06/02/99 7 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1232.0 10.5 115.5 89 1 06/02/99 8 RT No. 7 10.5 118.0 9d 1 9 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1233.0 12.0 112.0 88� 6 '06/03/99 06/03/99 10 RT No. 9 13.5 117.0 92 6 06/04/99 11 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1234.0 11.0 120.5 92 1 12 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1236.0 11.5 125.0 94 3 '06/04/99 06/04/99 13 TR 23067-3/L.ot 1 1238.0 10.5 126.0 95 3 06/04/99 14 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1239.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 15 TR 23067-3/Calle Banvelow 1206.0 11.5 117.0 90 2 '07/20/99 07/20/99 16 TR 23067-3/Calle Banvelow 1207.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 07/20/99 17 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1208.0 10.5 110.5 85 2 18 RT No. 17 13.0 117.5 90� 2 '07/20/99 07/20/99 19 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1209.0 8.0 118.0 91 2 07/20/99 20 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1207.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 21 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1208.0 9.0 122.0 92 3 '07/20/99 07/20/99 22 TR 23067-3/Calle Banvelow 1210.0 9.5 116.0 89 2 07/20/99 23 RT No. 22 10.0 118.5 91 2 07/20/99 24 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1212.0 11.5 118.0 91 2 07/20/99 25 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1213.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 07/21/99 26 TR 23067-3/Calle Banvelow 1214.0 12.0 122.5 92 3 27 TR 23067-3/Calle Banvelow 1215.0 12.5 121.5 92 3 '07/21/99 07/21/99 28 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1216.0 12.5 119.0 91 2 07/21/99 29 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1217.0 13.5 118.0 90 2 30 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1217.0 9.0 122.5 92 3 '07/21/99 07/21/99 31 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1218.0 10.5 121.5 92 3 07/21/99 32 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1218.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 33 TR 23067-3/Lot60 1219.0 8.0 122.0 92 3 '07/21/99 07/21/99 34 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1220.0 13.0 114.0 88 2 07/21/99 35 RT No. 34 13.0 119.0 91 2 36 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1218.0 10.0 118.0 90 2 '07/21/99 07/21/99 37 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1219.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 07/21/99 38 TR 23067-3/L.ot 59 1221.0 12.0 118.0 91 2 07/21/99 39 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1222.0 12.0 120.0 90 3 ' 07/21/99 40 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1218.0 11.5 119.0 90 3 07/21/99 41 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1219.0 11.0 121.5 91 3 '07/21/99 42 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1223.0 11.0 123.5 93 3 07/21/99 43 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1224.0 12.0 119.0 92 2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I I OSA ' TESTTES,T.', TEST : 'ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY. 'COMP. SOIL DATE . .:.'.' Nd:, .' : LOCATION - (ft) M (Pcf) .. (°la) TYPE 07/21/99 44 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1224.0 10.5 126.5 95 3 '07/21/99 45 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1225.0 10.5 123.0 92 3 07/21/99 46 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1209.0 7.0 108.0 83 2 07/21/99 47 TR 23067-3/1.ot 61 1210.0 9.5 107.0 82- 2 '07/21/99 48 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 106.0 8.0 120.5 91 3 07/21/99 49 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1207.0 10.5 116.5 89 2 50 TR 23067-3/1-ot 59 1225.0 11.0 123.5 93 3 '07/22/99 07/22/99 51 RT No. 46 10.5 122.5 92 3 07/22/99 52 RT No. 47 8.0 121.5 91 3 53 RT No. 49 -- 95 117.0 90 ✓ 2 '07/22/99 07/22/99 54 TR 23067-3/1.ot 6 1226.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 07/22/99 55 TR 23067-3/1-ot 59 1226.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 56 TR 23067-3/1-ot 59 1227.0 95 119.5 90 3 '07/22/99 07/22/99 57 TR 23067-3/1-ot 6 1226.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 07/22/99 58 TR 23067-3/1-ot 6 1227.0 95 124.5 93 3 07/22/99 59 TR 23067-3/1.ot 61 1217.0 5.5 117.5 88 ✓ 3 07/22/99 60 TR 23067-311-ot 61 1218.0 70 119.0 89 3 07/22/99 61 RT No. 59 -- 8.5 120.0 90 3 62 RT No. 60 -- 8.5 121.5 91 3 '07/22/99 07/22/99 63 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1209.0 12.0 117.0 90 2 07/22/99 64 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1210.0 11.0 118.5 91 2 65 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1219.0 12.0 108.5 92 5 '07/22/99 07/22/99 66 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1220.0 13.5 113.5 96 5 07/22/99 67 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1211.0 12.0 120.5 90 3 07/22/99 68 TR 23067-3/1-ot5 1212.0 13.0 118.5 91 2 1 07/22/99 69 TR 23067-3/Access road 1225.0 8.5 117.0 90 2 07/22/99 70 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1218.0 9.5 111.0 94 5 07/22/99 71 RT No. 65 -- 12.0 117.5 90 2 07/23/99 72 TR 23067-3/Lot5 1212.0 11.0 119.5 90 3 07/23/99 73 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1214.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 74 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 slope 1221.0 13.5 118.0 90 2 '07/23/99 07/23/99 75 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 slope 1222.0 11.5 110.5 93 5 07/23/99 76 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1222.0 13.5 114.5 90 6 77 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1223.0 15.0 114.5 90 6 '07/23/99 07/23/99 78 TR 23067-3/1-ot5 1217.0 11.0 104.0 88 5 07/23/99 79 RT No. 78 -- 12.0 109.0 92 5 80 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1219.0 105 120.0 90 3 '07/23/99 07/23/99 81 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1220.0 10.0 117.0 90 2 07/23/99 82 TR 23067-3/Calle Banelos 1206.0 12.0 122.5 92 3 83 TR 23067-3/Calle Banelos 1208.0 12.5 117.5 90 2 '07/23/99 07/23/99 84 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1211.0 85 109.0 85 -g��� 6 07/23/99 85 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1213.0 7.5 112.5 88 \�j 6 86 TR 23067-3/I of 7 1215.0 11.0 I I I.5 87 6 '07/23/99 07/23/99 87 TR 23067-3/Lot7 1216.0 10.5 113.0 88\� �^ 6 0 �v PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I 2 � 3 ' TEST DATE TEST.., NO.. '' TEST ':", LOCATION' " ELEV..,,' (fej MOISTURE (%) DENSITY (pcf) COMP. (%) SOXL.. TYPE 88 RT No. 84 10.0 117.0 92/ 6 '07/23/99 07/23/99 89 RT No. 85 11.0 115.0 90/ 6 07/23/99 90 RT No. 86 10.0 115.5 90✓ 6 91 RT No. 87 12.0 112.0 94 ✓ 5 '07/23/99 07/24/99 92 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1216.0 13.5 118.0 90 2 07/24/99 93 TR 23067-3/1.ot 6 1217.0 12.5 120.0 90 3 07/24/99 94 TR 23067-3/Lot 5 1217.0 12.5 118.5 91 2 07/24/99 95 TR 23067-3/Lot 5 1218.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 07/24/99 96 TR 23067-3/1-ot 6 1219.0 13.0 118.0 90 2 07/24/99 97 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1220.0 13.5 120.0 90 3 07/24/99 98 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1223.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 07/24/99 99 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1224.0 10.0 118.5 91 2 100 TR 23067-3/1.ot 4 1225.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 '07/24/99 07/24/99 101 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1226.0 12.0 119.5 90 3 07/24/99 102 TR 23067-3/Calle Banuelos 1221.0 13.0 122.5 92 3 103 TR 23067-3/Calle Banuelos 1222.0 10.0 116.5 90 4 '07/24/99 07/26/99 104 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1227.0 9.5 113.5 91 17 07/26/99 105 TR 23067-3/1-ot 60 1228.0 7.0 114.0 91 17 106 TR 23067-3/Access road 1229.0 11.5 113.0 91 17 '07/26/99 07/26/99 107 TR 23067-3/Access road 1230.0 8.5 112.5 91 16 07/26/99 108 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1224.0 11.0 117.5 92 6 07/26/99 109 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1225.0 9.5 117.5 92 6 07/26/99 110 TR 23067-3/1-ot 6 1227.0 10.0 116.5 91 6 07/26/99 111 TR 23067-3/1-ot 6 1228.0 13.0 120.5 90 3 112 TR 23067-3/Lot 5 1229.0 12.0 119.5 90 3 t07/26/99 07/26/99 113 TR 23067-3/1.ot 5 1230.0 9.5 122.0 92 3 07/26/99 114 TR 23067-3/Lot 5 1228.0 13.5 115.5 90 6 115 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1230.0 12.5 120.5 91 3 '07/26/99 07/26/99 116 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1230.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 07/26/99 117 TR 23067-3/1-ot 60 1231.0 7.0 112.0 90 6 07/26/99 118 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1231.0 11.0 117.5 90 4 07/26/99 119 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1232.0 10.0 120.0 90 3 07/26/99 120 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1232.0 10.5 116.0 91 6 121 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1233.0 11.0 119.0 91 2 '07/26/99 07/27/99 122 TR 23067-3/Lot10 1220.0 14.0 115.0 88- 4 07/27/99 123 TR 23067-3/1-ot 10 1221.0 11.0 113.5 87\> 4 124 RT No. 122 11.0 118.0 91 J/J( 4 '07/27/99 07/27/99 125 RT No. t23 -- 10.5 118.5 91 4 07/27/99 126 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1222.0 9.0 114.5 89 6 127 TR 23067-3/1-ot 11 1224.0 11.0 113.0 881 6 '07/27/99 07/27/99 128 RT No. 126 15.0 1 10 5 91 13 , 07/27/99 129 RT No. 127 -- 14.5 113.5 91 17 '07/27/99 130 TR 23067-3/1-ot8 1230.0 14.0 115.5 90 6 07/27/99 131 TR 23067-3/1-ot 8 1231.0 12.5 122.5 92 3 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 Page T -I 3 a ' TEST TEST, TEST %: : : ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP. SOIL DATE NO. LOCATION, TYPE ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I 4 075 132 TR 23067-3/Lot 10 1226.0 10.0 113.5 89 6 '07/27/99 07/27/99 133 TR 23067-3/Lot 10 1227.0 11.5 111.0 87a 5 07/27/99 134 RT No. 132 -- 14.0 113.0 9051` 6 135 RT No. 133 -- 12.5 117.0 90V 4 '07/27/99 07/27/99 136 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1232.0 14.5 113.5 91 2 07/27/99 137 TR 23067-3/Lot 7 13.5 120.5 91 3 138 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1230.0 11.5 119.0 91 2 '07/27/99 07/27/99 139 TR 23067-3/Lot 12 1231.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 07/27/99 140 TR 23067-3/Lot 10 1233.0 9.5 116.5 90 4 141 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1234.0 10.5 117.0 90 4 '07/27/99 07/27/99 142 TR 23067-3/Lot8 1232.0 1 L 115.0 90 6 07/27/99 143 TR 23067-3/Lot 9 1233.0 14.5 114.0 91 17 144 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1236.0 13.5 116.0 89 2 '07/27/99 07/27/99 145 TR 23067-3/Lot 7 1237.0 14.0 112.0 86 2 07/27/99 146 TR 23067-3/Lot 9 1233.0 12.0 118.0 91 2 07/27/99 147 TR 230,67-3/L.ot 10 1234.0 12.5 116.5 90 4 07/27/99 148 RT No. 144. 13.0 115.5 90 6 07/27/99 149 RT No. 145 -- 12.5 117.5 90 2 150 TR 23067-3/Lot8 1236.0 14.0 117.0 90 4 '07/28/99 07/28/99 151 TR 23067-3/Lot 8 1237.0 13.5 116.5 90 4 07/28/99 152 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1233.0 13.5 119.0 91 4 153 TR 23067-3/Lot 12 1234.0 16.5 111.0 93 5 '07/28/99 07/28/99 154 TR 23067-3/Lot 7 1230.0 10.0 112.0 88 a 6 07/28/99 155 RT No. 154 -- 11.5 115.5 90 6 156 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1236.0 11.5 113.5 89 6 '07/28/99 07/28/99 157 RT No. 156 12.5 117.0 90 4 07/28/99 158 TR 23067-3/Lot 8 1236.0 12.5 115.5 90 6 159 TR 23067-3/Lot 8 1237.0 11.5 121.5 91 3 '07/28/99 07/28/99 160 TR 23067-3/L.ot 10 1235.0 17.0 116.5 90 4 07/28/99 161 TR 23067-3/Lot 10 1236.0 .11-5 122.0 92 3 '07/28/99 162 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1213.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 07/28/99 163 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1214.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 07/28/99 164 TR 23067-3/Lot 13 1229.0 12.5 122.0 92 3 '07/28/99 165 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1214.0 10.5 118.5 91 2 07/28/99 166 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1215.0 10.5 120.5 90 3 07/28/99 167 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1220.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 '07/28/99 168 TR 23067-3/L.ot 15 1221.0 9.5 116.5 90 8 07/29/99 169 TR 23067-3/Lot 10 1236.0 15.5 114.0 91 17 07/29/99 170 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1237.0 15.5 1145 91 17 '07/29/99 171 TR 23067-3/Lot13 1230.0 12.0 118.0 90 2 07/29/99 172 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1231.0 10.5 121 5 91 3 07/29/99 173 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1219.0 12.0 121 0 91 3 '07/29/99 174 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1218.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 07/29/99 177 TR 23067-3/L of 15 1227.0 100 117.0 90 4 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I 4 075 ' TEST TEST TEST:ELEV. MOISTURE.. DENSITY - COMP. SOIL DATE NO: LOCATION (If) (%'3 (pef) (.%) TYPE 07/29/99 178 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1228.0 10.5 118.5 91 2 '07/29/99 179 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1223.0 11.0 117.5 90 2 07/29/99 180 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1224.0 11.0 122.0 92 3 07/29/99 181 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1235.0 9.5 115.0 90 6 '07/29/99 182 TR 23067-3/Lot 13 1236.0 8.5 117.5 91 8 07/29/99 185 TR 23067-3/Lot 13 1237.0 10.0 126.0 95 3 186 TR 23067-3/Lot 12 1238.0 10.5 119.5 90 3 '07/29/99 07/29/99 187 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1231.0 10.0 113.5 88 1 8 07/29/99 188 RT No. 187 -- 11.5 115.0 90 PS 8 191 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1235.0 15.0 119.5 90 3 '07/30/99 07/30/99 192 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1236.0 8.5 121.0 91 3 07/30/99 193 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1234.0 12.0 121.0 91 3 194 TR 23067-3/Lot60 1235.0 12.5 120.0 90 3 '07/30/99 07/30/99 195 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1234.0 11.5 115.0 90 6 07/30/99 196 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1238.0 14.5 115.5 90 6 197 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1228.0 11.0 115.0 90 A '07/30/99 07/30/99 198 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1229.0 11.0 117.0 90 2 07/30/99 201 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1238.0 11.0 118.0 92 8 202 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1230.0 12.0 120.0 90 3 '07/30/99 07/30/99 205 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1238.0 10.5 113.5 91 17 07/30/99 206 TR 23067-3/Lot17 1240.0 12.0 114.5 91 17 207 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1239.0 10.5 118.5 91 2 '07/30/99 07/30/99 208 TR 23067-3/Lot 15 1241.0 11.5 117.0 90 2 07/30/99 211 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1239.0 11.0 120.0 92 2 212 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1240.0 11.0 118.0 90 2 '07/30/99 08/02/99 215 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1242.0 13.5 120.0 92 4 08/02/99 2t6 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1243.0 13.0 119.5 92 4 217 TR 23067-3/Lot59 1232.0 7.0 112.0 87 8 '08/02/99 08/02/99 218 RT No. 217 8.0 116.5 90 8 08/02/99 219 TR 23067-3/Lot 59 1233.0 11.0 117.0 90 4 220 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1234.0 11.0 119.0 91 4 t08/02/99 08/02/99 221 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1231.0 9.5 117.5 90 4 08/02/99 222 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1221.0 12.0 112.0 86 4 223 RT No. 222 -- 11.0 117.0 90 4 t08/02/99 08/02/99 224 TR 23067-3/Lot 48 1223.0 9.5 120.5 91 3 08/02/99 225 TR 23067-3/Lot 48 1224.0 11.5 120.5 90 3 226 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1224.0 11.0 118.0 90 2 '08/02/99 08/02/99 227 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1225.0 11.5 119.0 91 2 08/02/99 228 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1229.0 10.5 120.0 90 3 229 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1230.0 10.0 119.5 90 3 '08/02/99 08/03/99 230 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1227.0 13.5 117.5 90 4 08/03/99 231 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1228.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 232 TR 23067-3/Lot 47 1230.0 15.5 110.5 91 13 '08/03/99 08/03/99 233 TR 23067-3/Lot 48 1231.0 14.0 110.0 91 13 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 7-�3 0& 7 - �l� �$, - G Page T -I 5 J& ' TEST TEST DATE NO. ELFW. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP.- SOIL -' ._ }N: ...... (If) f%} (pef) (/o) TYPE. . 08/03/99 234 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1226.0 11.0 119.5 90 9 08/03/99 235 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1221.0 12.5 118.5 90 9 08/03/99 236 TR 23067-3/1-ot 51 1233.0 10.0 118.5 90 9 08/03/99 237 TR 23067-3/1-ot 52 1234.0 12.0 122.5 93 9 08/03/99 238 TR 23067-3/Lot47 1.236.0 11.0 110.5 86 8 08/03/99 239 TR 23067-3/Lot 47 1237.0 11.0 117.5 91 8 08/03/99 240 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1233.0 13.0 113.5 88 8 08/03/99 241 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1234.0 10.0 112.5 '87 8 08/03/99 242 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1235.0 12.5 115.0 90 6 08/03/99 243 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1236.0 15.0 1 15.5 90 6 08/03/99 244 RT No. 238 -- 8.0 124.0 93 3 08/03/99 245 RT No. 240 10.5 118.0 92 8 08/03/99 246 RT No. 241 -- 12.0 119.5 93 8 08/03/99 247 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1228.0 13.0 110.0 91 13 08/03/99 248 TR 23067-311-ot 49 1230.0 11.0 117.0 90 2 08/03/99 249 TR 23067-3/1-ot 48 1231.0 8.0 122.0 93 2 08/03/99 250 TR 23067-3/L.ot 52 1236.0 13.5 112.0 92 13 08/03/99 251 TR 23067-3/1.ot 52 1237.0 11.5 120.0 90 3 08/03/99 252 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1233.0 12.5 121.0 91 3 08/04/99 255 TR 23067-3/Lot 52 1238.0 10.0 120.5 91 3 08/04/99 256 TR 23067-3/Lot 53 1239.0 10.0 120.5 91 3 08/04/99 257 TR 23067-3/1-ot 50 1233.0 9.5 112.0 84 3 08/04/99 258 TR 23067-3/1-ot 50 1235.0 9.0 114.0 86 3 08/04/99 259 TR 23067-3/Lot 46 1238.0 13.0 119.0 90 2 08/04/99 260 TR 23067-3/1.ot 46 1239.0 8.5 123.0 92 3 08/04/99 261 RT No. 257 -- 12.5 120.0 90 3 08/04/99 262 RT No. 258 -- 9.5 123.5 93 3 08/04/99 263 TR 23067-3/L.ot 51 1238.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 08/04/99 264 TR 23067-3/1-ot 51 1240.0 11.5 119.0 90 3 08/04/99 265 TR 23067-3/1-ot 48 1240.0 12.5 120.0 90 3 08/04/99 266 TR 23067-3/Lot47 1241.0 12.0 117.0 90 4 08/04/99 267 TR 23067-3/1-ot 50 1239.0 12.0 118.5 91 2 08/04/99 268 TR 23067-3/1-ot 49 1240.0 14.5 117.0 90 2 08/04/99 269 TR 23067-3/L.ot 48 1243.0 12.5 120.5 91 3 08/04/99 270 TR 23067-3/Lot 47 1244.0 11.0 116.0 90 8 08/04/99 271 TR 23067-3/1-ot 59 1231.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 08/04/99 272 TR 23067-3/1-ot 61 1234.0 13.0 115.0 90 6 08/04/99 273 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1241.0 12.0 120.5 90 3 08/04/99 274 TR 23067-3/1-ot 52 1242.0 11.5 122.5 92 3 08/04/99 275 TR 23067-3/Lot 47 1242.0 14.5 114.0 91 17 08/04/99 276 TR 23067-3/Lot 48 1243.0 12.5 114.0 90 17 08/05/99 277 TR 23067-3/Lot 3 slope 1228.0 11.5 113.0 91 16 08/05/99 278 TR 23067-3/1-ot 4 slope 1230.0 12.5 112.0 91 16 08/05/99 280 TR 23067-3/1-ot 46 1244.0 13.0 117.5 90 2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J.N. 141-99 SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 Page T -I 6 a °.TEST,; BATE 'PEST NO.' TEST LOCATION ELEV. (ft) MOISTURE °: (T) -- DENSITY (pct):: COW.. -: SOIL:;; TYPE;- 281 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1242.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 '08/05/99 08/05/99 282 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1243.0 12.5 120.0 90 3 08/05/99 283 TR 23067-3/L.ot 2 slope 1235.0 13.5 112.0 91 16 08/05/99 284 TR 23067-3/Lot2 slope 1236.0 12.0 117.0 91 6 08/05/99 1 285 TR 23067-3/1-ot 4 1229.0 14.5 115.0 90 6 08/05/99 286 TR 23067-3/L.ot 5 1230.0 15.0 111.0 94 5 287 TR 23067-3/Lot 3 1233.0 12.5 112.5 91 16 '08/05/99 08/05/99 288 TR 23067-3/1-ot3 1234.0 10.5 113.5 90 17 08/05/99 289 TR 23067-3/L.ot4 1232.0 13.0 113.5 90 17 08/05/99 290 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1233.0 13.0 113.5 90 17 08/05/99 291 TR 23067-3/L.ot 2 1235.0 13.5 116.0 90 6 08/05/99 292 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1238.0 13.0 117.0 91 6 08/06/99 293 TR 23067-3/Lot2 1237.0 12.0 120.5 90 3 08/06/99 294 TR 23067-3/1-ot 2 1238.0 13.0 116.0 91 6 08/06/99 295 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1235.0 13.0 118.0 90 2 08/06/99 296 TR 23067-3/1-ot 5 1236.0 12.0 117.5 90 2 08/06/99 297 TR 23067-3/Lot l slope 1239.0 10.5 121.0 91 3 08/06/99 298 TR 23067-3/1-ot 1 slope 1240.0 10.5 121.0 91 3 299 TR 23067-3/Lot 3 1238.0 12.0 114.5 90 6 '08/06/99 08/06/99 300 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1239.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 08/06/99 301 TR 23067-3/Lot 2 1241.0 7.5 117.5 90 2 302 TR 23067-3/1-ot 3 1240.0 7.5 119.0 90 9 '08/06/99 08/06/99 303 TR 23067-3/1.ot 4 1237.0 10.5 118.5 90 9 08/06/99 304 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1238.0 10.0 118.5 90 9 305 TR 23067-3/Lot3 1240.0 11.5 118.5 90 9 '08/06/99 08/06/99 306 TR 23067-3/L.ot 1 1242.0 10.5 122.5 93 9 08/09/99 317 TR 23067-3/Lot l7 slope 1242.0 11.0 116.0 90 8 318 TR 23067-3/L.ot 15 slope 1240.0 10.5 121.0 92 9 '08/09/99 08/09/99 319 TR 23067-3/Lot 13 slope 1238.0 10.5 119.5 90 9 08/10/99 326 TR 23067-3/1.ot 7 slope 1238.0 10.5 110.0 93 5 08/10/99 327 TR 23067-3/Lot 9 slope 1238.0 13.0 108.5 92 5 08/10/99 328 TR 23067-3/Lot i l slope 1240.0 10.5 117.5 90 2 08/10/99 329 TR 23067-3/L.ot 61 1236.0 14.5 116.0 91 6 330 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1237.0 12.5 119.0 91 10 '08/10/99 08/10/99 331 TR. 23067-3/Lot 58 1234.0 10.5 119.5 91 10 08/10/99 332 TR 23067-3/1.ot 58 1235.0 10.0 114.5 90 6 333 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 slope 1242.0 9.0 103.5 88 5 '08/10/99 08/10/99 334 RT No. 333 8.5 107.0 90 5 08/10/99 335 TR 23067-3/L.ot58 1236.0 13.0 121.0 92 10 '08/10/99 336 TR 23067-3/1-ot 58 1237.0 13.5 118.0 90 10 08/10/99 337 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1236.0 12.5 120.0 91 9 08/10/99 338 TR 23067-3/Lot 60 1238.0 13.0 119.5 91 9 '08/10/99 339 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1244.0 11.0 121.5 91 3 08/10/99 340 TR 23067-3/Lot 51 1244.0 10.0 1240 93 3 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I 7 ,1" 'TEST DATE TEST NO. TEST LOCATION ELEV.; .. M MOISTURE " (�) DENSITY (pef) COMP.:: (%a)'.:: SOIL _ TYPE 08/10/99 341 TR 23067-3/Lot 46 1245.0 11.0 121.0 91 3 '08/10/99 342 TR 23067-3/Lot 47 1246.0 12.0 118.0 91 10 08/12/99 363 TR 23067-3/Lot 53 slope 1245.0 11.0 117.0 91 6 364 TR 23067-3/1-ot 53 slope 1247.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 t08/12/99 08/13/99 367 TR 23067-3/Lot 17 1246.0 8.0 124.5 93 3 08/13/99 368 TR 23067-3/Lot 16 1245.0 9.0 125.5 95 3 08/13/99 369 TR 23067-3/L.ot 15 1244.5 7.5 128.5 97 3 ' 08/13/99 370 TR 23067-3/Lot 14 1244.0 7.0 115.0 90 6 08/13/99 371 TR 23067-3/1-ot 13 1243.5 10.5 122.5 92 3 372 TR 23067-3/Lot 12 1242.5 8.5 116.0 91 6 '08/13/99 08/13/99 373 TR 23067-3/Lot 11 1242.0 9.0 122.0 92 3 08/13/99 374 TR 23067-3/1-ot 10 1241.5 8.0 117.0 92 6 08/13/99 375 TR 23067-3/1-ot 9 1241.0 8.5 113.5 92 16 ' 08/13/99 376 TR 23067-3/Lot 8 1240.5 9.5 120.5 91 3 08/13/99 377 TR 23067-3/1-ot 7 1240.0 110 123.5 93 3 378 TR 23067-3/Lot 6 1239.5 9.5 117.5 92 6 '08/13/99 08/13/99 379 TR 23067-3/Lots 1240.0 7.5 119.5 93 6 08/13/99 380 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 1241.0 12.0 118.5 91 2 381 TR 23067-3/1-ot 3 1242.0 8.5 114.5 92 16 '08/13/99 08/13/99 382 TR 23067-3/1-ot 2 1243.0 8.5 115.5 93 16 08/13/99 383 TR 23067-3/Lot 1 1244.0 12.5 119.5 91 2 08/16/99 386 TR 23067-3/Lot 4 slope 1234.0 12.0 109.5 90 13 ' 08/16/99 387 TR 23067-3/Lot 2 slope 1239.0 11.5 114.5 90 6 08/17/99 388 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow Ave 1237.0 9.5 117.0 90 2 389 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1238.0 10.5 122.5 92 3 '08/17/99 08/18/99 390 TR 23067-3/Lot 52 1244.0 11.5 125.0 94 3 08/18/99 391 TR 23067-3/1-ot 51 1245.0 6.5 113.5 92 16 08/18/99 392 TR 23067-3/Lot 50 1245.5 11.5 121.0 91 3 ' 08/18/99 393 TR 23067-3/Lot 49 1246.0 9.5 125.5 94 3 08/18/99 394 TR 23067-3/Lot 48 1246.5 6.5 115.0 90 5 395 TR 23067-3/Lot47 1247.0 12.0 117.5 90 2 '08/18/99 08/20/99 425 TR 23067-3/1-ot 48 1208.0 10.5 114.5 8711 9 08/20/99 426 RT No. 425 -- 10.5 119.0 90d 9 08/23/99 441 TR 23067-3/Lot 58 1240.0 8.0 121.5 91 3 08/23/99 442 TR 23067-3/1-ot 59 1239.5 8.5 124.5 93 3 08/23/99 443 TR 23067-3/1-ot 60 1239.0 7.0 123.5 93 3 444 TR 23067-3/Lot 61 1240.0 7.5 116.0 90 8 '08/23/99 08/23/99 445 TR 23067-3/1-ot 53 1243.5 8.0 130.0 97 3 ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page T -I 8 0 TABLE I1 Lot Summary pis phi✓. ?w';,' V"rYgM ,Tiausitiori'�.�z�:. 14-4 ':' 'E: •h ♦ :`.`.'�.�,-xaJ....s �'�1Vlazunum�.Dept&"of �FiU•:: F .j'j-. .H'..� `_ "`�.k ': �y Tract 23067-3 Tract 1 F 20 2 T LO 3 T 10 4 F 16 5 F 30 6 F 21 7 T 25 8 T 10 9 T 8 10 T 22 11 F 20 12 F 12 13 T 14 14 T 13 15 F 25 16 F 32 17 F 32 46 F 10 47 F 11 48 F 24 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 ' J.N. 141-99 31 TABLE II (Continued) '-S7LoG:Numioer .1.`Gut; r ."Ri`�'�":.�'W y('4. EiI1Transitiori MaxiuYum=Depth of =Fill-: ' 49 F 25 50 F 17 51 F 21 52 T 10 53 C 3 54 C -- 55 C 56 C 57 C -- 58 C 6 59 T 16 60 F 31 61 F 31 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 9�- REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical. Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. , 1989b, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. , 1999a, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. 1999b, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated March 10, 1999, J.N. 141-99. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST CRITERIA Laboratory Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected sample of soil in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are given on Plate A-1. Expansion Potential Expansion index tests were performed on selected samples of soil accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard Test No. 18-2. Expansion potential classifications were determined from UBC Table 18 -I -B on the basis of the expansion index values. Test results and expansion potentials are presented on Plate A-2. Soluble -Sulfate Analysis Chemical analyses were performed on selected samples of soil to determine soluble sulfate contents. These tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Test results are included on Plate A-2. Atterbere Limits Atterberg limit tests (Liquid Limit and Plasticity Index) were performed on selected samples to verify visual classifications. These tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D4318-84. Test results are presented on Plate B-3. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 3� LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' Boring Number Soil Type - Optimum Moisture, - Maximum Dry Density 1 Yellow -tan SAND with trace Clay 9.0 130.5 2 Dark brown fine to medium Siltv SAND 9.0 1305 3 Reddish -brown fine to medium Silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown Siltv SAND 9.5 130.0 5 Yellow-brown Silty SAND 9.5 1 18 5 6 Brown Silty SAND 9.5 128.0 7 Brown Silty SAND 10.0 131.0 8 Yellow-brown Siltv SAND 9.0 129.0 9 Yellow-brown Siltv SAND 8.5 132.0 10 Light brown Siltv SAND 12.0 1 1 3.5 11 Dark brown Siltv SAND 9.5 131.0 12 Yellow-brown SAND 16.5 1055 13 Light brown coarse SAND 13.5 120.5 14 Black Clavev SILT 165 1 l2 5 Black SILT with trace Clayand Sand 16.0 I I0 5 t17l5 16 Yellow-brown Silty Fine SAND 12.5 123 0 Yellow-brown Silty Fine SAND 12.0 124.5 PLATE A-1 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 ' J.N. 141-99 57 EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA' Lot Number. Ex anion Index Expansion Potentia13 Tract 23067-03 1 through 3 5 Very Low 4 and 5 6 Very Low 6 through 8 3 Very Low 9 through l 1 10 Very Low 12 through 14 16 Very Low 15 through 17 12 Very Low 46 through 49 9 Very Low 50 through 52 4 Very Low 53 through 57 74 Medium 58 through 61 3 Very Low SOLUBLE SULFATES' 4" Lot: Sulfate Content (%) Lots I through 3 00144 Lots 6 through 8 0.0024 Lots 9 through 11 0.0072 Lots 12 through 14 0.0048 Lots 15 through 17 0.0024 Lots 46 through 49 0.0024 Lots 50 through 52 0.0060 Lots 53 through 57 0.0072 Lots 58 through 61 0.0012 PLATE A-2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 J.N. 141-99 39 Atterberg Limits5 - - Lot - 'Tia4icity Index Lots 53-57 17 (I) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-9I ' (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD TEST I8-2 (3) PER UBC TABLE 18-1-B (4) PER CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD NO. 417 (5) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D4318-93 PLATE A-3 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 ' J.N. 141-99 m 0 rl Wt PETRA OFFICES THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ' April 2, 2002 J.N. 141-99 ' BGR990024 CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 92880 Attention: Mr. Lance Clements Subject: Response to Riverside County Building and Safety Department - ' Transportation and Land Management Agency Letter Dated February 27, 2002, BGR990024, Tract 23067-5, Temecula Area, ' Riverside County, California References: 1) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000a, Geotechnical Report of Rough ' Grading, Lots I through 66, Tract 23067-5, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated July 15, 2000. ' 2) Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 2000b, Response to Riverside County Planning Department Geotechnical Report Review Sheet for Grading ' Plan Check No. GR0688B, Tract 23067-5, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated November 2, 2000. ' Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) is pleased to provide this response to Riverside County ' Building and Safety Department - Transportation and Land Management letter dated February 27, 2002, for BGR990024 within Tract 23067-5 in the Temecula area of ' Riverside County, California. Provided herein is the specific comment and our response. A copy of the review sheet is attached at the end of this response for your ' convenience. ' Comment — "The soils consultant of the project shall address the stability of bluff considering geotechnical and geological characteristics of bluff. The impact of potential failure of bluff on adjacent access road, storm drain and slope supporting ' structures need to be evaluated as soon as possible by the soils consultant of record. ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 41640 Corning Place . Suite 107 . Murrieta . CA 92562 . Tel (909) 600-9271 a Fax (909) 600-9215 a I CENTEX HOMES April 2, 2002 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 2 Response—Slope-stability analyses were performed for the slopes below Lots 61 and 63 for both static and pseudo -static conditions as these lots are representative of the conditions for Lots 58 tbfough 66, the area of concern. The slope heights vary from 45 feet for Lot 61 to 57 feet for Lot 63. In addition, the distance from ' bottom of fill slope to top of stream embankment slope varies from 40 to 85 feet for Lots 61 and 63, respectively. The purposes of the analyses were to evaluate the 1 existing conditions and also to evaluate the condition where the native material in front of the existing fill slope has been removed. The house pads above this area were constructed on compacted engineered fill. The results of this grading ' operation was reported in our rough -grading report dated July 15, 2000. The slope - stability analyses indicated the following results. U 1 LJ 1 The analyses indicates that the factor of safety for the existing conditions exceed the minimum factor of safety. The factor of safety for the condition where the native stream embankment has been completely removed has factors of safety exceeding the minimum factor of safety required for Lot 61 and marginal factors of safety for Lot 63. The marginal conditions indicated in the analysis for Lot 63 appears very unlikely as over 75 feet of soil has to be removed. If only part of the 75 feet of soil is removed, the factor of safety would increase. The potential of the embankment completely eroding away from the toe of slope below Lot 63 is very unlikely. c> The reasonable scenario would be the possibility of the steeper slopes slumping in- place. if slumping does occur over time, this slumping is outside the zone of influence for the critical failure circles of the existing fill slope. Therefore, the existing fill slopes, toe of the fill slopes and house fill pad should remain stable. W 3 r7777777777777777 F'77-777-9 .7777. Lnt. oadifioa £ilTtioof AisEance160 Static. Pseu do :.toTLP,O£StrBath.,:. ....,. ..: l ' Einliainkttierit:.'.;... : 61 Existing 45 40 1.87 1.39 61 Stream bank has 45 0 1.69 128 been removed 63 Existing 57 85 1.78 1.30 63 Stream bank has 57 0 124 1.08 been removed The analyses indicates that the factor of safety for the existing conditions exceed the minimum factor of safety. The factor of safety for the condition where the native stream embankment has been completely removed has factors of safety exceeding the minimum factor of safety required for Lot 61 and marginal factors of safety for Lot 63. The marginal conditions indicated in the analysis for Lot 63 appears very unlikely as over 75 feet of soil has to be removed. If only part of the 75 feet of soil is removed, the factor of safety would increase. The potential of the embankment completely eroding away from the toe of slope below Lot 63 is very unlikely. c> The reasonable scenario would be the possibility of the steeper slopes slumping in- place. if slumping does occur over time, this slumping is outside the zone of influence for the critical failure circles of the existing fill slope. Therefore, the existing fill slopes, toe of the fill slopes and house fill pad should remain stable. W 3 1 1 1 1 t CENTEX HOMES April 2, 2002 TR 23067-5/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 3 R'e appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL, INC. S(ephen M. Senior Ass( GE 692 Attachment: Riverside County Review Sheet Appendix A - Slope -Stability Analysis Lot 61 Appendix B - Slope -Stability Analysis Lot 63 Distribution: (3) Addressee (1) I-Iunsaker and Associates, Inc. Attention: Mr. Paul 1-Iuddleston (2) Riverside County - Building & Safety Department Attention: Mr. Abdul Behnawa ?rea30&7-3, W J I I 1 I COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE OF a, e TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY m BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT tl $A ETT O6T T. H. Ingram Director February 27, 2002 TO: CENTEX HOMES/ Attention Mr. Bob Dinsmore/ project manager for owner 2280 WARDLOW CIR , SPACE # 150 CORONA, CALIFORNIA 91720 RE: BGR990024 TR23067-5 Dear Mr. Bob Dinsmore: On February 8, 2002, County of Riverside became aware of a potential unsafe bluff adjacent to 100 yr flood plain that is shown on sheet 7 of grading plans for tract 23067-5 during an inspection and a correction was issued. Centex Home is listed as the owner and permittee for grading of the above project. Therefore this letter is written to make the owner of project aware of the potential unsafe bluff. The owner shall provide appropriate preventive measures to safeguard life or limb, health, property and public welfare. Preventive measures shall include at minimum the followings: Site shall be secured for public safety immediately. 2. The soils consultant of the project shall address the stability of bluff considering geotechnical and geological characteristics of bluff. The impact of potential failure of bluff on adjacent access road storm drain and slope supporting structures need to he evaluated as soon as possible by the soils ' consultant of record. 3. The civil engineer of the project needs to address and evaluate the potential erosion of toe of bluff by 100 -yr flow and design mitigation measures to prevent future erosion of bluff as soon as possible. ' Planning Department, Flood Control, and other State and Federal agencies' approvals may be required depending on proposed mitigation measures in items 2 and 3 above. ' Should you have any question please do not hesitate to call me at (909) 600-6119. Sincerely, Abdul S. Behnaw�Sl Senior Civil Engineer t cc: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. ' MURRIETA Regional Office 039493 Los Alamos Rd. Murrieta RdoRiverside CA 925630 Tel: (909)6000 -6119• FAX600-6119 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX A SLOPE -STABILITY ANALYSIS LOT 61 1 PETRA 2 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 Segment 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Loi61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C'ISTEDWIMWCASTAL.PLO Gewwn yPTe 00212002 40ZAM PETRA v 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIMG7CASTAL.PL2 Rw By: Petra GwcewhaiM, Inc 03/21/2002 490 It PETRA ij 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.87 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I � 9 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 *•• GSTABL7 ••* ' GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. . * * Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 . --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 4:30 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California _ ' BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 16 Top Boundaries t 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below End 1 0.00 124.00 400.00 124.00 3 2 400.00 124.00 404.00 125.00 2 ' 3 404.00 125.00 410.00 130.00 2 4 410.00 130.00 415.00 135.00 2 5 415.00 135.00 425.00 140.00 2 6 425.00 140.00 432.00 145.00 2 7 432.00 145.00 442.00 150.00 8 442.00 150.00 451.00 155.00 2 2 ' 9 451.00 155.00 457.00 160.00 2 10 457.00 160.00 462.00 165.00 2 11 462.00 165.00 465.00 170.00 2 12 465.00 170.00 477.00 169.00 2 13 477.00 169.00 505.00 168.00 1 ' 14 505.00 168.00 512.00 167.50 1 15 512.00 167.50 556.00 190.00 1 16 556.00 190.00 700.00 190.00 1 17 0.00 75.00 360.00 84.00 2 18 360.00 84.00 400.00 124.00 2 ' 19 477.00 169.00 511.00 135.00 2 20 511.00 135.00 700.00 135.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Pie.. ' Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 160.0 33.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 100.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 0 3125.0 125.0 100.0 21.0 0.00 0.0 0 ' A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 300.00(ft) and X = 500.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X - 550.00(ft) and X = 650.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. ' Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points ' Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 � 9 I E 11 I E C:\stedwin\g7castal.OVT Page 2 td 2 359.81 122.06 3 369.70 120.55 4 379.64 119.47 5 389.62 118.84 6 399.62 118.65 7 409.61 118.90 8 419.59 119.58 9 429.52 120.71 10 439.40 122.28 11 449.20 124.27 12 458.90 126.70 13 468.49 129.55 14 477.94 132.83 15 487.23 136.51 16 496.36 140.60 17 505.29 145.09 18 514.02 149.97 19 522.53 155.23 20 530.79 160.86 21 538.80 166.85 22 546.54 173.18 23 553.99 179.85 24 561.14 186.84 25 564.09 190.00 1.874 "• Individoal data on the 41 slices Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hot Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.8 1191.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 9.9 3334.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 9.9 4958.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 10.0 6040.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 5.1 3336.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 4.9 3352.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 0.4 276.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 4.0 3128.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 5.6 6449.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 0.4 571.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 5.0 9048.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 4.6 10358.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 5.4 13701.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 4.5 12926.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15 2.5 7754.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 7.4 25142.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17 2.6 9403.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18 7.2 27665.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19 1.8 7289.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 6.0 25940.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21 1.9 8851.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22 3.1 15180.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23 3.0 15969.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24 3.5 19208.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25 8.5 44054.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26 0.9 4584.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27 9.3 42833.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28 9.1 36848.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29 6.0 21190.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30 2.6 8426.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31 0.3 902.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32 6.7 18812.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33 2.0 5074.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34 8.5 20788.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35 8.3 18912.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36 8.0 16545.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37 7.7 13753.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38 7.5 10609.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 39 2.0 2349.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40 5.1 3930.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41 3.0 629.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 td I 11 11 11 1 Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft)' 1 400.00 124.00 2 409.28 120.26 3 418.81 117.23 4 428.54 114.93 5 438.42 113.37 6 448.38 112.5E 7 458.38 112.51 8 468.36 113.21 9 478.25 114.66 30 488.01 116.86 11 497.57 119.78 12 506.88 123.42 13 515.90 127.75 14 524.56 132.75 15 532.82 138.39 16 540.63 144.64 17 547.94 151.46 18 554.72 158.81 19 560.93 166.65 20 566.52 174.94 21 571.48 183.62 22 574.50 190.00 2.076 Failure Surface Specified By 31 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.06 122.31 3 319.75 120.89 4 329.69 119.74 5 339.65 118.87 6 349.63 118.29 7 359.63 117.97 8 369.63 117.94 9 379.63 118.19 10 389.61 118.71 11 399.58 119.51 12 409.52 120.59 13 419.43 121.94 14 429.30 123.57 15 439.11 125.47 16 448.87 127.65 17 458.57 130.09 18 468.19 132.81 19 477.74 135.79 20 487.20 139.04 21 496.56 142.54 22 505.83 146.31 23 514.98150.33 24 524.02 154.61 25 532.94 159.14 26 541.73 163.91 27 550.38 168.92 28 558.89 174.18 29 567.24 179.67 30 575.45 185.39 31 581.69 190.00 "•" 2.094 ••" Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 409.26 120.22 3 418.77 117.14 4 428.49 114.77 5 438.35 113.12 6 448.31 112.20 7 458.31 112.02 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OW Page 3 I, I I 1 L 8 468.29 112.59 9 478.21 113.88 30 488.00 115.91 11 497.61 118.66 12 507.00 122.10 13 516.11 126.23 14 524.88 131.03 15 533.28 136.45 16 541.26 142.49 17 548.76 149.09 18 555.76 156.24 19 562.22 163.88 20 568.09 171.97 21 573.34 180.48 22 577.95 189.35 23 578.23 190.00 ••` 2.099 `•` Failure Surface Specified By 29 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 358.01 118.01 3 366.43 112.61 4 375.21 107.82 5 384.30 103.67 6 393.67 100.17 7 403.26 97.35 8 413.03 95.22 9 422.93 93.78 10 432.90 93.06 11 442.90 93.04 12 452.88 93.73 13 462.78 95.13 14 472.56 97.23 15 482.16 100.02 16 491.54 103.48 17 500.65 107.60 18 509.45 112.36 19 517.89 117.73 20 525.92 123.69 21 533.51 130.20 22 540.61 137.24 23 547.20 144.76 24 553.24 152.73 25 558.70 161.11 26 563.55 169.86 27 567.76 178.92 ..8 511.32 188.27 29 571.84 190.00 2.118 Failure Surface Specified By 34 Coordinate Point X-SUIf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.51 120.91 3 319.12 118.15 4 328.82 115.72 5 338.60 113.63 6 348.45 111.87 7 358.34 110.44 8 368.28 109.35 9 378.26 108.61 10 388.25 108.20 11 398.25 108.14 12 408.24 108.42 13 418.23 109.04 14 428.18 110.00 15 438.09 111.29 16 447.96 112.93 17 457.76 114.90 18 467.49 117.21 Points Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 4 ),2 I 1 1 1 19 477.14 119.84 20 486.69 122.81 21 496.13 126.10 22 505.46 129.71 23 514.66 133.63 24 523.71 137.87 25 532.62 142.41 26 541.37 147.26 27 549.95 152.40 28 558.34 157.83 29 566.55 163.55 30 574.56 169.54 31 582.35 175.80 32 589.93 182.33 33 597.28 189.10 34 598.19 190.00 2.194 Failure Surface Specified By 34 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.56 121.06 3 319.21 118.43 4 328.94 116.12 5 338.74 114.13 6 348.60 112.46 7 358.50 111.11 8 368.45 110.09 9 378.43 109.39 10 388.42 109.02 11 398.42 108.98 12 408.42 109.26 13 418.40 109.87 14 428.35 110.80 15 438.28 112.06 16 448.15 113.64 17 457.97 115.54 18 467.72 117.77 19 477.39 120.31 20 486.97 123.16 21 496.46 126.33 22 505.83 129.80 23 515.09 133.58 24 524.22 137.66 25 533.22 142.03 26 542.06 146.70 27 550.75 151.65 28 559.27 156.89 29 567.61 162.40 30 575.77 168.18 31 583.74 174.22 32 591.51 180.52 33 599.07 187.07 34 602.23 190.00 '•• 2.215 Failure Surface Specified By 24 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 409.18 120.03 3 418.60 116.68 4 428.23 113.97 5 438.01 111.91 6 447.91 110.50 7 457.88 109.75 8 467.88 109.68 9 477.87 110.26 10 487.79 111.52 11 497.60 113.43 12 507.27 115.99 13 516.74 119.19 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.ONT Page 5 /3 I I 1 1 I 1 14 525.98 123.01 15 534.95 127.45 16 543.60 132.47 17 551.89 138.05 18 559.80 144.18 19 567.27 150.82 20 574.29 157.94 21 580.82 165.51 22 586.83 173.51 23 592.29 181.88 24 596.85 190.00 •"' 2.247 Failure Surface Specified By 28 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 357.12 116.97 3 364.80 110.57 4 372.99 104.83 5 381.63 99.81 6 390.67 95.52 7 400.03 92.01 8 409.66 89.30 9 419.47 87.40 10 429.42 86.34 11 439.42 86.11 12 449.40 86.73 13 459.29 88.18 14 469.03 90.46 15 478.54 93.54 16 487.76 97.42 17 496.62 102.05 18 505.06 107.41 19 513.02 113.46 20 520.45 120.16 21 527.28 127.46 22 533.48 135.31 23 539.00 143.65 24 543.80 152.42 25 547.85 161.57 26 551.11 171.02 27 553.57 180.71 28 555.02 189.50 "• 2.249 Failure Surface Specified By 36 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 308.65 118.98 3 317.50 114.33 4 326.55 110.08 5 335.78 106.23 6 345.17 102.78 7 354.70 99.75 8 364.35 97.13 9 374.11 94.94 10 383.95 93.18 11 393.86 91.84 12 403.82 90.94 13 413.81 90.48 14 423.81 90.45 15 433.80 90.86 16 443.77 91.70 17 453.68 92.98 18 463.54 94.69 19 473.31 96.83 20 482.97 99.39 21 492.52 102.37 22 501.92 105.76 23 511.17 109.56 24 520.25 113.77 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 6 /y I LJ C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 7 135 .;4 603.91 183.57 36 608.94 190.00 2.337 CSI 1 I [] /5 25 529.13 118.36 t 26 537.81 123.33 27 546.25 128.68 28 554.46 134.40 29 562.41 14.46 30 570.09 1466.87 ' 31 577.48 153.60 32 584.57 160.66 33 591.35 168.01 34 597.80 175.65 135 .;4 603.91 183.57 36 608.94 190.00 2.337 CSI 1 I [] /5 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CSSTEOWIMlGMASTAL.PLT Run By Petra Geotechrn 1, Inc. 03272002 430 PETRA 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 141-99, 23067-5, LoW Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIMGMASTAL.PL2 Run By Pepe Geotechnical, Inc 03212002 4 34 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.39 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 ***GSTABL7 •ff ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 " --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencers Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Data: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 4:34 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 16 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 124.00 400.00 124.00 3 2 400.00 124.00 404.00 125.00 2 3 404.00 125.00 410.00 130.00 2 4 410.00 130.00 415.00 135.00 2 5 415.00 135.00 425.00 140.00 2 6 425.00 140.00 432.00 145.00 2 7 432.00 145.00 442.00 150.00 2 8 442.00 150.00 451.00 155.00 2 9 451.00 155.00 457.00 160.00 2 10 457.00 160.00 462.00 165.00 2 11 462.00 165.00 465.00 170.00 2 12 465.00 170.00 477.00 169.00 2 13 477.00 169.00 505.00 168.00 1 14 505.00 168.00 512.00 167.50 1 15 512.00 167.50 556.00 190.00 1 16 556.00 190.00 700.00 190.00 1 17 0.00 75.00 360.00 84-002 18 360.00 84.00 400.00 124.00 2 19 477.00 169.00 511.00 135.00 2 20 511.00 135.00 700.00 135.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (Pcf) (Psf) (deg) Param. (Psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 200.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 150.0 32.0 0.00, 0.0 0 3125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.150 Bas Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure = 0.0(psf) A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 300.00(ft) and X = 500.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 550.00(ft) and X = 650.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y - 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. I 1 1 I U 1 1 I C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 FA ' ' Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 359.81 122.06 3 369.70 120.55 4 379.64 119.47 5 389.62 118.84 6 399.62 110.65 7 409.61 118.90 0 419.59 119.58 9 429.52 120.71 10 439.40 122.28 11 449.20 124.27 12 458.90 126.70 13 468.49 129.55 14 477.94 132.83 15 487.23 136.51 16 496.36 140.60 17 505.29 145.09 18 514.02 149.97 19 522.53 155.23 20 530.79 160.86 21 538.80 166.85 22 546.54 173.18 23 553.99 179.85 24 561.14 186.84 25 564.09 190.00 1.386 "• Individual data on the 41 slices Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Nor Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.8 1191.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 178.8 0.0 0.0 2 9.9 3334.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.2 0.0 0.0 3 9.9 4958.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 743.7 0.0 0.0 4 10.0 ' 6040.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 906.1 0.0 0.0 5 5.1 3336.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.5 0.0 0.0 6 4.9 3352.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 502.9 0.0 0.0 7 0.4 276.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.5 0.0 0.0 8 4.0 3128.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 469.2 0.0 0.0 9 5.6 6449.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 967.4 0.0 0.0 10 0.4 571.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.8 0.0 0.0 11 5.0 9048.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1357.2 0.0 0.0 12 4.6 10358.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1553.8 0.0 0.0 13 5.4 13701.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2055.2 0.0 0.0 14 4.5 12926.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1939.0 0.0 0.0 15 2.5 7754.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1163.2 0.0 0.0 16 7.4 25142.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3771.3 0.0 0.0 17 2.6 9403.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1410.5 0.0 0.0 18 7.2 27665.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4149.8 0.0 0.0 19 1.8 7289.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1093.4 0.0 0.0 20 6.0 25940.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3891.1 0.0 0.0 21 1.9 8851.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1327.7 0.0 0.0 22 3.1 15180.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2277.1 0.0 0.0 23 3.0 15969.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2395.4 0.0 0.0 24 3.5 19208.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2881.2 0.0 0.0 25 8.5 44054.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6608.1 0.0 0.0 26 0.9 4584.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 687.7 0.0 0.0 27 9.3 42833.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6425.1 0.0 0.0 28 9.1 36848.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5527.3 0.0 0.0 29 6.0 21190.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3178.5 0.0 0.0 30 2.6 8426.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1264.0 0.0 0.0 31 0.3 902.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.4 0.0 0.0 32 6.7 18812.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2821.9 0.0 0.0 33 2.0 5074.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 761.1 0.0 0.0 34 8.5 20788.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3118.3 0.0 0.0 35 8.3 18912.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2836.8 0.0 0.0 36 8.0 16545.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2481.7 0.0 0.0 FA I 1 1 1 I 11 C:\stedwm\g7castal.00T Page 3 37 7.7 13753.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2063.0 0.0 0.0 38 7.5 10609.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1591.5 0.0 0.0 39 2.0 2349.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 352.4 0.0 0.0 40 5.1 3930.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 589.6 0.0 0.0 41 3.0 629.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 31 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.86 122.31 3 319.75 120.89 4 329.69 119.74 5 339.65 118.87 6 349.63 118.29 7 359.63 117.97 8 369.63 117.94 9 379.63 118.19 10 369.61 118.71 11 399.56 119.51 12 409.52 120.59 13 419.43 121.94 14 429.30 123.57 15 439.11 125.47 16 448.67 127.65 17 458.57 130.09 18 468.19 132.81 19 477.74 135.79 20 487.20 139.04 21 496.56 142.54 22 505.83 146.31 23 514.98 150.33 24 524.02 154.61 25 532.94 159.14 26 541.73 163.91 27 550.38 168.92 28 558.89 174.18 29 567.24 179.67 30 575.45 185.39 31 561.69 190.00 "` 1.495 Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Pointe Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 409.28 120.26 3 418.81 117.23 4 428.54 114.93 5 438.42 113.37 6 448.38 112.56 7 458.38 112.51 8 468.36 113.21 9 478.25 114.66 10 488.01 116.86 11 497.57 119.78 12 506.88 123.42 13 515.90 127.75 14 524.56 132.75 15 532.82 138.39 16 540.63 144.64 17 547.94 151.46 18 554.72 158.81 19 560.93 166.65 20 566.52 174.94 21 571.48 183.62 22 574.50 190.00 "*` 1.515 '•• Failure Surface Specified By 34 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.51 120.91 RM L 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 4 ,� j 3 319.12 118.15 ' 4 328.82 115.72 5 33B.60 113.63 6 348.45 111.87 7 8 358.34 110.99 368.28 109.35 9 378.26 108.61 10 388.25 108.20 11 398.25 108.14 12 408.29 108.42 13 918.23 709.09 t 14 428.18 110.00 15 438.09 111.29 16 447.96 112.93 17 457.76 114.90 18 467.49 117.21 ' 19 477.14 119.84 20 486.69 122.81 21 496.13 126.10 22 505.46 129.71 23 514.66 133.63 ' 24 523.71 137.87 25 532.62 142.41 26 541.37 147.26 27 549.95 152.40 28 558.39 157.83 ' 29 566.55 163.55 30 574.56 169.54 31 582.35 175.80 32 589.93 182.33 33 34 597.28 598.19 190.00 ` + 1.524 `++189.10 Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 900.00 129.00 ' 2 409.26 120.22 3 418.77 117.14 4 428.99 114.77 5 438.35 113.12 6 448.31 112.20 7 458.31 112.02 8 468.29 112.59 9 478.21 113.88 10 488.00 115.91 11 497.61 118.66 ' 12 507.00 122.10 13 516.11 126.23 14 524.88 131.03 15 533.28 136.45 16 541.26 142.49 17 548.76 149.09 18 555.76 156.24 19 562.22 163.88 20 568.09 171.97 21 22 573.39 577.95 189.35 ' 23 578.23 190.00 1.526 .*`180.98 Failure Surface Specified By 34 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) ' 1 300.00 124.00 2 .309.56 121.06 3 319.21 118.43 4 328.94 116.12 5 338.74 114.13 6 348.60 112.46 7 358.50 111.11 8 368.45 110.09 -s, ,� j 11 1 [1 I I C 9 378.43 109.39 10 388.42 109.02 11 398.42 108.98 12 408.42 109.26 13 418.40 109.87 14 428.35 110.80 15 438.28 112.06 16 448.15 113.64 17 457.97 115.54 18 467.72 117.77 19 477.39 120.31 20 486.97 123.16 21 496.46 126.33 22 505.83 129.80 23 515.09 133.58 24 524.22 137.66 25 533.22 142.03 26 542.06 146.70 27 550.75 151.65 28 559.27 156.89 29 567.61 162.40 30 575.77 168.18 31 583.74 174.22 32 591.51 180.52 33 599.07 187.07 34 602.23 190.00 1.534 Failure Surface Specified By 29 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 358.01 118.01 3 366.43 112.61 4 375.21 107.82 5 384.30 103.67 6 393.67 100.17 7 403.26 97.35 8 413.03 95.22 9 422.93 93.78 10 432.90 93.06 11 442.90 93.04 12 452.88 93.73 13 462.78 95.13 14 472.56 97.23 15 482.16 100.02 16 491.54 103.48 17 500.65 107.60 18 509.45 112.36 19 517.89 117.73 20 525.92 123.69 21 533.51 130.20 22 540.61 137.24 23 547.20 144.76 24 553.24 152.73 25 558.70 161.11 26 563.55 169.86 27 567.76 178.92 28 571.32 188.27 29 571.84 190.00 1.542 "« Failure Surface Specified By 24 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 409.18 120.03 3 418.60 116.68 4 428.23 113.97 5 438.01 111.91 6 447.91 110.50 7 457.88 109.75 8 467.88 109.68 Coordinate Pmnts Coordinate Points C:\stedvin\g7castal.OUT Page 5 4? A I 1 1] 1 I u 1 9 47787 110.26 10 487..79 111.52 11 497.60 113.43 12 507.27 115.99 13 516.74 119.19 14 525.98 123.01 15 534.95 127.45 16 543.60 132.47 17 551.89 138.05 18 559.80 144.18 19 567.27 150.82 20 574.29 157.94 21 580.82 165.51 22 586.83 173.51 ' 23 592.29 181.88 24 596.85 190.00 "' 1.596 Failure Surface Specified By 36 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 308.65 118.98 3 317.50 114.33 4 326.55 110.08 5 335.78 106.23 6 345.17 102.78 7 354.70 99.75 8 364..35 97.13 9 374.11 94.94 10 383.95 93.18 11 393.86 91.84 12 403.82 90.94 13 413.81 90.48 14 423.81 90.45 15 433.80 90.86 16 443.77 91.70 17 453.68 92.98 18 463.54 94.69 19 473.31 96.83 20 482.97 99.39 21 492.52 102.37 22 501.92 105.76 23 511.17 109.56 24 520.25 113.77 25 529.13 116.36 26 537.81 123.33 27 546.25 128.68 28 554.46 134.40 29 562.41 140.46 30 570.09 146.87 31 577.48 153.60 32 584.57 160.66 33 591.35 168.01 34 597.80 175.65 35 603.91 183.57 36 608.44 190.00 •*' 1.603 Failure Surface Specified By 28 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 357.12 116.97 3 364.80 110.57 4 372.99 104.83 5 381.63 99.81 6 390.67 95.52 7 400.03 92.01 8 409.66 89.30 9 419.47 87.40 10 429.42 86.34 11 439.42 86.11 Points Points C:\stedwm\g7castal.OUT Page 6 ,23 27.+* 553.57 .+`180.71 28 555.02 189.50 1.691 [I 1 CII C [ I 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7casta1.OUT Page 7 ON 12 449 40 86.73 13 459.29 88.18 14 469.03 90.46 15 478.54 93.54 16 17 487.76 996.62 97.42 102.05 18 505.06 107.41 19 513.02 113.46 20 520.45 120.16 21 527.28 127.46 22 533.98 135.31 ' 23 539.00 143.65 24 543.80 152.42 ' 25 547.85 161.57 26 551.11 171.02 27.+* 553.57 .+`180.71 28 555.02 189.50 1.691 [I 1 CII C [ I 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7casta1.OUT Page 7 ON 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141.99, 23067-5, LoM Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIN\G7CASTAL PLT Run By. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 03/212002 4:34 C 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 It PETRA 141-99, 23067-5, LoM Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C\STMWINIG7CASTAL PLO GeometryPrev 03/212002 506AM 1$0e Shc Sal Total! Saturated Cotreswn Frictwn Prez. Deec. Type Unit Wt. Unft Wt. Intercept Angle Surface No. (Pcf): (Pct (psf) (deg) No. Fill 1 135. 135. 160 :33. 0 Pauba 2 135.: 135. 1DO. i30. 0 Alluvium 3 125.; 125. 100 27. 0 1400 -_---._..__..-_-...i .................... _. ---- '....-....... ..... ..__-_. 1300 --- ----- .--- .. ---------------------------------- ------------- ------ -----—..--- .----- .........<. 1200 -.._.._-_........__i ..............._._.--_-- i..._._.................. i..-.. _._.-._-_---.-....' Termination Limits............-_ 6 1 ? iD\' 1 • 5Initiation Points 2 \ II 2 _... 3 9' 1100 ---- ----------- _.............................................. a 2 Segrnerd Len.=10.0It 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 It PETRA M M M M I• M M M M M M M M M M M M 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C XSTEDWINIG7CASTAL PL2 Run By: Pella Ge techs c [, Inc 03212002 506 0 PETRA 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.69 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method C:\stedwrn\g7castal.OUT Page 1 ' • ' ".GSTABL7 *** Ga . k ' GSTABL7 by Carry H. Gregory, P.E. ' • Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 ` --Slope Stability Analysis - Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 5:06 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. ' Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7cestal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:97castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lat61 ' Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 7 Top Boundaries 11 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (£t) (ft) (£t) Below Bnd 1 0.00 124.00 430.00 124.00 3 ' 2 430.00 124.00 474.00 168.00 2 3 474.00 168.00 477.00 169.00 2 4 477.00 169.00 505.00 168.00 1 5 505.00 168.00 512.00 167.50 1 6 512.00 167.50 556.00 190.00 1 7 556.00 190.00 700.00 190.00 1 8 0.00 75.00 360.00 84.00 2 9 360.00 84.00 430.00 124.00 2 10 477.00 169.00 511.00 135.00 2 11 511.00 135.00 700.00 135.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS ' 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (Psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 160.0 33.0 0.00 0.0 0 ' 2 135.0 135.0 100.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. ' 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 300.00(ft) and X = 500.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 550.00(ft) and X - 650.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 30.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. ' ` ` Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 359.81 122.06 3 369.70 120.55 4 379.64 119.47 5 389.62 118.84 6 399.62 118.65 7 409.61 118.90 8 419.59 119.58 9 429.52 120.71 10 439.40 122.28 1 I I 1 I I C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 32 slices Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Surcharge Norm Tan Nor ver Load (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Coordinate Points FXj 11 449.20 124.27 12 458.90 126.70 13 468.49 129.55 14 477.94 132.83 15 487.23 136.51 16 496.36 140.60 17 505.29 145.09 18 514.02 149.97 19 522.53 155.23 20 530.79 160.8E 21 538.80 166.85 22 546.54 173.18 23 553.99 179.85 24 561.14 186.84 25 564.09 190.00 1.687 lndividual data on the Water Water Force Force Slice Width Weight Top Bot No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.8 1191.7 0.0 0.0 2 9.9 3334.5 0.0 0.0 3 9.9 4958.1 0.0 0.0 4 10.0 6040.8 0.0 0.0 5 10.0 6568.1 0.0 0.0 6 10.0 6532.8 0.0 0.0 7 10.0 5935.6 0.0 0.0 8 3.3 1768.8 0.0 0.0 9 6.6 3114.8 0.0 0.0 10 0.5 207.8 0.0 0.0 11 9.4 9100.2 0.0 0.0 12 9.8 19876.9 0.0 0.0 13 9.7 29549.5 0.0 0.0 14 9.6 38255.4 0.0 0.0 15 5.5 25857.5 0.0 0.0 16 3.0 14789.4 0.0 0.0 17 0.9 4584.5 0.0 0.0 18 9.3 42833.8 0.0 0.0 19 9.1 36848.4 0.0 0.0 20 6.0 21190.2 0.0 0.0 21 2.6 8426.8 0.0 0.0 22 0.3 902.4 0.0 0.0 23 6.7 18812.5 0.0 0.0 24 2.0 5074.0 0.0 0.0 25 8.5 20788.6 0.0 0.0 26 8.3 18912.0 0.0 0.0 27 8.0 16545.0 0.0 0.0 28 7.7 13753.5 0.0 0.0 29 7.5 10609.7 0.0 0.0 30 2.0 2349.1 0.0 0.0 31 5.1 3930.9 0.0 0.0 32 3.0 629.2 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 23 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (£t) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.83 119.31 3 418.03 115.38 4 427.52 112.22 5 437.24 109.87 6 447.12 108.33 7 457.09 107.62 8 467.09 107.74 9 477.04 108.69 10 486.89 110.47 11 496.54 113.06 12 505.95 116.44 13 515.05 120.60 14 523.77 125.50 15 532.05 131.10 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 32 slices Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Surcharge Norm Tan Nor ver Load (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Coordinate Points FXj I 1 [1 1 16 539 83 137.38 17 547.07 144.28 18 553.71 151.76 19 559.70 159.77 20 565.00 168.25 21 569.58 177.14 22 573.41 186.36 23 574.56 190.00 "' 1.778 Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.82 119.29 3 417.99 115.31 4 427.46 112.09 5 437.16 109.65 6 447.02 108.00 7 456.99 107.17 8 466.99 107.15 9 476.96 107.94 10 486.83 109.55 11 496.54 111.94 12 506.02 115.13 13 515.21 119.07 14 524.04 123.75 15 532.47 129.13 16 540.44 135.18 17 547.88 141.85 18 554.76 149.11 19 561.02 156.91 20 566.63 165.19 21 571.54 173.90 22 575.73 182.98 23 578.31 190.00 "' 1.804 Failure Surface Specified By 24 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 407.57 117.47 3 415.78 111.75 4 424.53 106.91 5 433.74 103.01 6 443.29 100.07 7 453.11 98.14 8 463.07 97.24 9 473.06 97.37 10 483.00 98.53 11 492.76 100.71 12 502.24 103.89 13 511.34 108.03 14 519.97 113.09 15 528.02 119.01 16 535.42 125.74 17 542.09 133.19 18 547.95 141.29 19 552.94 149.96 20 557.01 159.09 21 560.11 168.60 22 562.22 178.38 23 563.30 188.32 24 563.31 190.00 1.934 Failure Surface Specified By 29 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 358.01 118.01 3 366.43 112.61 4 375.21 107.82 Points Points Points C:\stedwin\g7castal. OUT Page 3 30 I 1 5 384.30 103.67 6 393.67 100.17 7 403.26 97.35 8 413.03 95.22 9 422.93 93.78 10 432.90 93.06 11 442.90 93.04 12 452.88 93.73 13 462.78 95.13 14 472.56 97.23 15 482.16 100.02 16 491.54 103.48 17 500.65 107.60 18 509.45 112.36 19 517.89 117.73 20 525.92 123.69 21 533.51 130.20 22 540.61 137.24 23 547.20 144.76 24 553.24 152.73 25 558.70 161.11 26 563.55 169.86 27 567.76 178.92 28 571.32 188.27 29 571.84 190.00 1.938 Failure Surface Specified By 25 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.75 119.15 3 417.82 114.96 4 427.19 111.44 5 436.78 108.62 6 446.55 106.50 7 456.45 105.11 8 466.43 104.45 9 476.43 104.51 10 486.40 105.31 11 496.28 106.84 12 506.03 109.09 13 515.58 112.04 14 524.69 115.69 15 533.91 120.01 16 542.59 124.98 17 550.88 130.57 18 558.74 136.75 19 566.13 143.49 20 573.01 150.75 21 579.33 158.50 22 585.07 166.68 23 590.19 175.27 24 594.68 184.21 25 597.07 190.00 aa. 1.959 ..a Failure Surface Specified By 31 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.86 122.31 3 319.75 120.89 4 329.69 119.74 5 339.65 118.87 6 349.63 118.29 7 359.63 117.97 8 369.63 117.94 9 379.63 118.19 10 389.61 118.71 11 399.58 119.51 12 409.52 120.59 13 419.43 121.94 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OU Page 4 3/ I I 1 1 I [1' 1 14 429.30 123.57 15 439.11 125.47 16 448.67 127.65 17 458.57 130.09 18 468.19 132.81 19 477.74 135.79 20 487.20 139.04 21 496.5E 142.54 22 505.83 146.31 23 514.98 150.33 24 524.02 154.61 25 532.94 159.14 26 541.73 163.91 27 550.38 168.92 28 558.89 174.18 29 567.24 179.67 30 575.45 165.39 31 581.69 190.00 ««' 1.981 ««` Failure Surface Specified By 25 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.D0 2 407.54 117.43 3 415.69 111.63 4 424.36 106.65 5 433.48 102.54 6 442.95 99.34 7 452.69 97.07 8 462.60 95.76 9 472.60 95.42 10 982.58 96.06 11 492.45 97.67 12 502.11 100.23 13 511.49 103.72 14520.47 108.10 15 528.99 113.34 16 536.96 119.38 17 544.30 126.17 18 550.95 133.64 19 556.83 141.73 20 561.90 150.34 21 566.11 159.42 22 569.42 168.85 23 571.79 178.57 24 573.20 188.47 25 573.27 190.00 1.987 "' Failure Surface Specified By 28 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 357.12 116.97 3 364.80 110.57 4 372.99 104.83 5 381.63 99.81 6 390.67 95.52 7 400.03 92.01 8 409.66 89.30 9 419.47 87.40 10 429.42 86.34 11 439.42 86.11 12 449.40 86.73 13 459.29 88.18 14 469.03 90.46 15 478.54 93.54 16 487.76 97.42 17 496.62 102.05 18 505.06 107.41 19 513.02 113.46 20 520.45 120.16 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 5 3I I [1 1 I I I 21 527.28 127.46 22 533.48 135.31 23 539.00 143.65 24 543.80 152.42 25 547.85 161.57 26 551.11 171.02 27 553.57 180.71 28 555.02 189.50 2.074 Failure Surface Specified By 34 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.51 120.91 3 319.12 118.15 4 328.82 115.72 5 338.60 113.63 6 348.45 111.87 7 358.34 110.44 8 368.28 109.35 9 378.26 108.61 30 388.25 100.20 11 398.25 108.14 12 408.24 108.42 13 418.23 109.04 14 428.18 110.00 15 438.09 111.29 16 447.96 112.93 17 457.76 114.90 18 467.49 117.21 19 477.14 119.84 20 486.69 122.81 21 496.13 126.10 22 505.46 129.71 23 514.66 133.63 24 523.71 137.87 25 532.62 142.41 26 541.37 147.26 27 549.95 152.40 28 558.34 157.83 29 566.55 163.55 30 574.56 169.54 31 582.35 175.80 32 589.93 182.33 33 597.28 189.10 34 598.19 190.00 *"« 2.081 ««` Coordinate Points C:\stedw>n\g7castal.OUT Page 6 13 m m A m m m m m m m m m = m m = m m 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIMG7CASTAL PLT Run By. Petra Geotechnical, Inc 03121!1002 506 PETRA 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C.\STEDWIh�GXA5TAL PL2 Run a�: Petra Gc t.f niccL Inc 0321/2002 5 04 �l h 100 200 300 400 S00 600 700 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.28 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 * GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. " " Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 " --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer s Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-19B6, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 5:04 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. ' Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. ' 7 Top Boundaries 11 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below End 1 0.00 124.00 430.00 124.00 3 ' 2 430.00 124.00 474.00 168.00 2 3 474.00 168.00 477.00 169.00 2 4 477.00 169.00 505.00 168.00 1 5 505.00 168.00 512.00 167.50 1 6 512.00 167.50 556.00 190.00 1 ' 7 556.00 190.00 700.00 190.00 1 8 0.00 75.00 360.00 84.00 2 9 360.00 84.00 430.00 124.00 2 10 477.00 169.00 511.00 135.00 2 11 511.00 135.00 700.00 135.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS ' 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (Pat) No. 1 135.0 135.0 200.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 0 ' 2 135.0 135.0 150.0 32.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.150 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure = 0.0(psf) A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 300.00(ft) and X = 500.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X - 550.00(ft) and X - 650.00(ft) ' Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. " " Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 ' 2 359.81 122.06 3 369.70 120.55 4 379.64 119.47 5 389.62 118.84 1 1 3b I I I 1 7i2 C:\stedwin\g7castal.oUT Page 2 32 slices 6 399 62 118.65 Tie 7 409.61 118.90 Force Surcharge a Tan 419.59 119.58 Load 9 (lbs) 429.52 120.71 (lbs) 10 0.0 439.40 122.28 0.0 11 0.0 449.20 124.27 0.0 12 0.0 458.90 126.70 0.0 13 0.0 468.49 129.55 0.0 14 0.0 477.94 132.83 0.0 15 0.0 487.23 136.51 0.0 16 0.0 496.36 140.60 0.0 17 0.0 505.29 145.09 0.0 10 0.0 514.02 149.97 0.0 19 0.0 522.53 155.23 0.0 20 0.0 530.79 160.86 0.0 21 0.0 538.80 166.85 0.0 22 0.0 546.54 173.18 0.0 23 0.0 553.99 179.85 0.0 24 0.0 561.14 186.84 0.0 25 0.0 564.09 190.00 0.0 0.0 xxx 1.282 xx. 0.0 Individual data on the 0.0 6425.1 0.0 Water Water 0.0 5527.3 0.0 Force Force Slice Width Weight Top Bot No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.8 1191.7 0.0 0.0 2 9.9 3334.5 0.0 0.0 3 9.9 4958.1 0.0 0.0 4 10.0 6040.8 0.0 0.0 5 10.0 6560.1 0.0 0.0 6 10.0 6532.8 0.0 0.0 7 10.0 5935.6 0.0 0.0 8 3.3 1768.8 0.0 0.0 9 6.6 3114.8 0.0 0.0 10 0.5 207.8 0.0 0.0 11 9.4 9100.2 0.0 0.0 12 9.8 19876.9 0.0 0.0 13 9.7 29549.5 0.0 0.0 14 9.6 38255.4 0.0 0.0 15 5.5 25857.5 0.0 0.0 16 3.0 14789.4 0.0 0.0 17 0.9 4584.5 0.0 0.0 18 9.3 42033.0 0.0 0.0 19 9.1 36848.4 0.0 0.0 20 6.0 21190.2 0.0 0.0 21 2.6 8426.8 0.0 0.0 22 0.3 902.4 0.0 0.0 23 6.7 18812.5 0.0 0.0 24 2.0 5074.0 0.0 0.0 25 8.5 20788.6 0.0 0.0 26 8.3 18912.0 0.0 0.0 27 8.0 16545.0 0.0 0.0 28 7.7 13753.5 0.0 0.0 29 7.5 10609.7 0.0 0.0 30 2.0 2349.1 0.0 0.0 31 5.1 3930.9 0.0 0.0 32 3.0 629.2 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 23 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.83 119.31 3 418.03 115.38 4 427.52 112.22 5 437.24 109.87 6 447.12 108.33 7 457.09 107.62 8 467.09 107.74 9 477.04 108.69 10 486.89 110.47 1 7i2 C:\stedwin\g7castal.oUT Page 2 32 slices Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Surcharge Norm Tan Her Ver Load (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 0.0 0.0 178.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 743.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 906.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 985.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 979.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 890.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 265.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 467.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1365.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2981.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4432.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5738.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3878.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2218.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 687.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6425.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5527.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3178.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1264.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2821.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 761.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3118.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2836.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2481.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2063.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1591.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 352.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 589.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 0.0 0.0 Coordinate Points 17 I 1 11 496.54 113.06 12 505.95 116.44 13 515.05 120.60 14 523.77 125.50 15 532.05 131.10 16 539.83 137.38 17 547.07 144.28 18 553.71 151.76 19 559.70 159.77 20 565.00 168.25 21 569.58 177.14 22 573.41 186.38 23 574.56 190.00 `aa 1.353 "` Failure Surface Specified By 23 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.82 119.29 3 417.99 115.31 4 427.46 112.09 5 437.16 109.65 6 447.02 108.00 7 456.99 107.17 8 466.99 107.15 9 476.96 107.94 10 486.83 109.55 11 496.54 111.94 12 506.02 115.13 13 515.21 119.07 14 524.04 123.75 15 532.47 129.13 16 540.44 135.18 17 547.88 141.85 18 554.76 149.11 19 561.02 156.91 20 566.63 165.19 21 571.54 173.90 22 575.73 182.98 23 578.31 190.00 1.366aaa Failure Surface Specified By 31 Point X -Sur£ Y -Surf No. (£t) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.86 122.31 3 319.75 120.89 4 329.69 119.74 5 339.65 118.87 6 349.63 118.29 7 359.63 117.97 8 369.63 117.94 9 379.63 118.19 10 389.61 118.71 11 399.58 119.51 12 409.52 120.59 13 419.43 121.94 14 429.30 123.57 15 439.11 125.47 16 448.87 127.65 17 458.57 130.09 18 468.19 132.81 19 477.74 135.79 20 487.20 139.04 21 496.56 142.54 22 505.83 146.31 23 514.98 150.33 24 524.02 154.61 25 532.94 159.14 26 541.73 163.91 27 550.38 168.92 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 3 38 I 1 1A F 28 558.89 174.18 29 567.24 179.67 30 575.45 185.39 31 581.69 190.00 «*' 1.440 Failure Surface Specified By 29 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 350.00 124.00 2 358.01 118.01 3 366.43 112.61 4 375.21 107.02 5 384.30 103.67 6 393.67 100.17 7 403.26 97.35 8 413.03 95.22 9 422.93 93.78 10 432.90 93.06 11 442.90 93.04 12 452.88 93.73 13 462.78 95.13 14 472.56 97.23 15 482.16 100.02 16 491.54 103.48 17 500.65 107.60 18 509.45 112.36 19 517.89 117.73 20 525.92 123.69 21 533.51 130.20 22 540.61 137.24 23 547.20 144.76 24 553.24 152.73 25 556.70 161.11 26 563.55 169.86 27 567.76 178.92 28 571.32 188.27 29 571.84 190.00 •^' 1.443 **' Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 124.00 2 408.75 119.15 3 417.82 114.96 4 427.19 111.44 5 436.78 108.62 6 446.55 106.50 7 456.45 105.11 8 466.43 104.45 9 476.43 104.51 10 486.40 105.31 11 496.20 106.84 12 506.03 109.09 13 515.58 112.04 14 524.89 115.69 15 533.91 120.01 16 542.59 124.98 17 550.88 130.57 18 558.74 136.75 19 566.13 143.49 20 573.01 150.75 21 579.33 158.50 22 585.07 166.68 23 590.19 175.27 24 594.68 184.21 25 597.07 190.00 1.447 Failure Surface Specified By 34 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 4 9A I 1 1 I 1 I 1 [ �I 2 309.51 120.91 3 319.12 118.15 4 328.82 115.72 5 338.60 113.63 6 348.45 111.87 7 358.34 110.44 8 368.28 109.35 9 378.26 108.61 10 388.25 108.20 11 398.25 108.14 12 408.24 108.42 13 418.23 109.04 14 428.18 110.00 15 438.09 111.29 16 447.96 112.93 17 457.76 114.90 18 467.49 117.21 19 477.14 119.84 20 486.69 122.81 21 496.13 126.10 22 505.46 129.71 23 514.66 133.63 24 523.71 137.87 25 532.62 142.41 26 541.37 147.26 27 549.95 152.40 28 558.34 157.83 29 566.55 163.55 30 574.56 169.54 31 582.35 175.80 32 589.93 182.33 33 597.28 189.10 34 598.19 190.00 *•• 1.466 *•• Failure Surface Specified By 34 Point X -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 300.00 124.00 2 309.56 121.06 3 319.21 118.43 4 328.94 116.12 5 338.74 114.13 6 348.60 112.46 7 358.50 111.11 8 368.45 110.09 9 378.43 109.39 10 388.42 109.02 11 398.42 108.98 12 408.42 109.26 13 418.40 109.87 14 428.35 110.80 15 438.28 112.06 16 448.15 113.64' 17 457.97 115.54 18 467.72 117.77 19 477.39 120.31 20 486.97 123.16 21 496.46 126.33 22 505.83 129.80 23 515.09 133.58 24 524.22 137.66 25 533.22 142.03 26 542.06 146.70 27 550.75 151.65 28 559.27 156.89 29 567.61 162.40 30 575.77 168.18 31 583.74 174.22 32 591.51 180.52 33 599.07 187.07 34 602.23 190.00 Coordinate Points C:\3tedwin\g7castal.OVT Page 5 LIA 7W I [1 1 1 1 LJ 1 *** 1.474 *** Failure Surface Specified By 24 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (£t) 1 400.00 124.00 2 407.57 117.47 3 415.78 111.75 4 424.53 106.91 5 433.74 103.01 6 443.29 100.07 7 453.11 98.14 8 463.07 97.24 9 473.06 97.37 10 483.00 98.53 11 492.76 100.71 12 502.24 103.89 13 511.34 108.03 14 519.97 113.09 15 528.02 119.01 16 535.42 125.74 17 542.09 133.19 18 547.95 141.29 19 552.94 149.96 20 557.01 159.09 21 560.11 168.60 22 562.22 178.38 23 563.30 188.32 24 563.31 190.00 **• 1.480 *" Failure Surface Specified By 25 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (£t) 1 400.00 124.00 2 407.54 117.43 3 415.69 111.63 4 424.36 106.65 5 433.48 102.54 6 442.95 99.34 7 452.69 97.07 8 462.60 95.76 9 472.60 95.42 10 482.58 96.06 11 492.45 97.67 12 502.11 100.23 13 511.49 103.72 14 520.47 108.10 15 528.99 113.34 16 536.96 119.38 17 544.30 126.17 18 550.95 133.64 19 556.83 141.73 20 561.90 150.34 21 566.11 159.42 22 569.42 168.85 23 571.79 178.57 24 573.20 188.47 25573.27 190.00 •*• 1.506 *`* Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 6 y/ 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141.99, 23067-5, Lot61 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIN\G7CASTAL PLT Run By, Pete Geotechnical, Inc. 0321/2002 5.04 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 I 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX B 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 II 1 11 I 1 SLOPE -STABILITY ANALYSIS LOT 63 PETRA y3 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 Segment 1000 0 141-99,23067-5, Lot 63 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C'\STF.DWN\G]CASTAI,PLO Cre.ne Prmvi 03/2712002 609AM 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWINlG7CASTAL PL2 Run By: Petra Ce "hn c 1, Inc. 03/21/2002 6.10 It PETRA 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 GSTABI-7 FSmin=1.78 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I 1 1 1 1 1 1 [] 1 C:\stedwan\g7castal.OUT Page 1 "• GSTABL7 •"* GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. '• version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 --Slope Stability Analysis— Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 0312112001 Time of Run: 6:10 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 15 Top Boundaries 19 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bud 1 0.00 125.00 400.00 125.00 3 2 400.00 125.00 462.00 130.00 3 3 462.00 130.00 474.00 135.00 3 4 474.00 135.00 505.00 140.00 3 5 505.00 140.00 519.00 145.00 3 6 519.00 145.00 525.00 150.00 2 7 525.00 150.00 529.00 155.00 2 8 529.00 155.00 532.00 160.00 2 9 532.00 160.00 534.00 165.00 2 10 534.00 165.00 536.00 170.00 2 11 536.00 170.00 538.00 178.00 2 12 538.00 178.00 607.00 175.00 2 13 607.00 175.00 622.00 175.00 1 14 621.00 175.00 650.00 189.00 1 15 650.00 189.00 750.00 189.00 1 16 0.00 85.00 467.00 85.00 2 17 467.00 85.00 519.00 145.00 2 18 607.00 175.00 626.00 156.00 2 19 626.00 156.00 750.00 156.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Prez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (Psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 160.0 33.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 100.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 400.00(ft) and X = 550.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 600.00(ft) and X = 700.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Dosed, The Minimum Elevation AtWhich A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 50. 00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 8 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 177.48 2 557.59 170.97 1!6 C L I 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 3 566.56 166.55 4 576.35 164.50 5 586.34 164.95 6 595.90 167.88 7 604.43 173.09 8 606.32 175.03 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface =-17.858 The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 9 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 177.48 2 557.10 170.44 3 565.70 165.33 4 575.27 162.45 5 585.26 161.99 6 595.07 163.97 7 604.10 168.26 8 611.82 174.62 9 612.10 175.00 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface =-18.343 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. ' ' Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method Failure Surface Specified By 20 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 437.50 128.02 2 447.42 126.75 3 457.39 125.93 4 467.38 125.57 5 477.38 125.67 6 487.36 126.23 7 497.31 127.24 8 507.20 128.71 9 517.02 130.63 10 526.73 132.99 11 536.33 135.80 12 545.79 139.05 13 555.09 142.72 14 564.21 146.52 15 573.14 151.33 16 581.85 156.24 17 590.32 161.55 18 598.54 167.24 19 606.50 173.30 20 608.52 175.00 1.776 "' Individual data on the 32 slices Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Her Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 9.9 1285.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 10.0 3592.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 4.6 2285.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 5.4 3664.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 6.6 6632.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 3.4 4061.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 10.0 12980.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 9.9 13957.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 7.2 10446.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 0.5 672.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 2.2 3298.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 9.8 16516.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 2.0 3671.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 6.0 12684.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47 1 1 i 15 16 17 18 i 19 20 21 12 23 i 24 25 26 27 28 i 29 30 31 32 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i C:\stedvin\g7castal.00T Page 3 1.7 4284.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 6197.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 9479.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 7471.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 8663.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1561.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 8689.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 42194.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 45921.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 39763.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 33245.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 26449.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 19462.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.2 12376.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 5284.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 101.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 92.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 38.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.95 124.01 3 419.93 123.31 4 429.92 122.89 5 439.92 122.77 6 449.92 122.95 7 459.91 123.41 8 469.88 124.16 9 479.82 125.20 10 489.73 126.54 11 499.60 128.16 12 509.42 130.06 13 519.17 132.25 14 528.86 134.73 15 538.48 137.48 16 548.00 140.52 17 557.44 143.83 18 566.78 147.41 19 576.00 151.27 20 585.11 155.39 21 594.10 159.78 22 602.96 164.42 23 611.67 169.32 24 620.24 174.47 25 621.06 175.00 ••• 2.049 ••• failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 482.65 128.72 3 491.06 123.31 4 500.09 119.02 5 509.60 115.93 6 519.43 114.09 7 529.42 113.53 8 539.39 114.26 9 549.19 116.26 10 558.65 119.51 11 567.61 123.94 12 575.93 129.49 13 583.47 136.06 14 590.10 143.54 15 595.71 151.82 16 600.22 160.75 17 603.54 170.18 18 604.58 175.11 ••• 2.093 ••• riI 1 1 Failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 484.13 131.09 3 493.59 127.84 4 503.30 125.46 5 513.19 123.94 6 523.17 123.31 7 533.16 123.57 8 543.10 124.72 9 552.89 126.75 10 562.46 129.65 11 571.74 133.38 12 580.65 137.93 13 589.11 143.25 14 597.07 149.30 15 604.46 156.04 16 611.22 163.41 17 617.30 171.35 18 619.61 175.00 ..r 2.111 ... Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 437.50 128.02 2 444.62 121.00 3 452.43 114.75 4 460.84 109.34 5 469.76 104.82 6 479.10 101.25 7 488.76 98.66 8 498.63 97.08 9 508.61 96.52 10 518.60 96.99 11 528.49 98.49 12 538.17 101.00 13 547.54 104.50 14 556.50 108.94 15 564.95 114.28 16 572.81 120.47 17 579.99 127.43 18 586.41 135.09 19 592.01 143.38 20 596.73 152.20 21 600.51 161.45 22 603.32 171.05 23 604.07 175.13 ••r 2.117 ... Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 437.50 128.02 2 445.61 122.17 3 454.19 117.03 4 463.17 112.64 5 472.50 109.03 6 482.10 106.23 7 491.90 104.25 8 501.83 103.12 9 511.83 102.83 10 521.81 103.40 11 531.71 104.81 12 541.46 107.06 13 550.97 110.13 14 560.19 114.01 15 569.05 118.65 16 577.48 124.03 17 585.42 130.10 C:%s0edwin\g7castal.OQT Page 4 119 I I 1 1 1 1 18 592.82 136.84 19 599.61 144.17 20 605.76 152.06 21 611.21 160.44 22 615.93 169.26 23 618.40 175.00 2.130 Failnre Surface Specified By 29 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.67 122.44 3 419.42 120.24 4 429.26 118.43 5 439.15 117.00 6 449.10 115.95 7 459.08 1I5.28 8 469.07 115.00 9 479.07 115.10 10 489.06 115.59 11 499.01 116.46 12 508.94 117.72 13 518.81 119.35 14 528.60 121.37 15 538.31 123.76 16 547.92 126.52 17 557.42 129.65 18 566.79 133.14 19 576.02 137.00 20 585.09 141.20 2I 594.00 145.75 22 602.72 150.64 23 611.25 155.87 24 619.57 161.41 25 627.67 167.28 26 635.54 173.45 27 643.16 179.92 28 650.53 186.68 29 652.88 189.00 "' 2.149 "' Failure Surface Specified By 29 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.71 122.60 3 419.50 120.56 4 429.35 118.87 5 439.27 117.55 6 449.22 116.59 7 459.20 115.99 8 469.20 115.76 9 479.20 115.90 10 489.19 116.40 11 499.15 117.26 12 509.07 118.49 13 518.95 120.08 14 528.75 122.03 15 538.48 124.34 16 548.12 127.00 17 557.66 130.01 18 567.08 133.37 19 576.37 137.07 20 585.52 141.11 21 594.51 145.48 22 603.34 150.17 23 611.99 155.19 24 620.46 160.51 25 628.72 166.15 26 636.77 172.08 Points Points C:istedwinlg7castal.OUT Page 5 $o I L] I I 1 [1 27 644.60 178.30 28 652.20 184.80 29 656.76 189.00 2.161 "* Failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 484.12 131.05 3 493.56 127.75 4 503.25 125.29 5 513.12 123.67 6 523.09 122.92 7 533.09 123.05 8 543.04 124.03 9 552.87 125.89 10 562.50 128.59 11 571.85 132.11 12 580.87 136.44 13 589.47 141.53 14 597.60 147.36 15 605.20 153.86 16 612.19 161.01 17 618.54 168.73 18 623.28 175.64 "• 2.176 Failure Surface Specified By 27 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 407.58 118.48 3 415.65 112.57 4 424.15 107.30 5 433.03 102.70 6 442.24 98.81 7 451.72 95.63 8 461.42 93.21 9 471.28 91.53 10 481.24 90.63 11 491.24 90.50 12 501.22 91.15 13 511.12 92.56 14 520.88 94.74 15 530.44 97.66 16 539.75 101.32 17 548.75 105.66 18 557.38 110.73 19 565.60 116.43 20 573.35 122.75 21 580.59 129.65 22 587.17 137.09 23 593.36 145.02 24 598.81 153.40 25 603.60 162.18 26 607.70 171.30 27 609.03 175.00 "• 2.192 •*' C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 6 41 m m m m m m = i m m i m m m m m m m m 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63 Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C %STPDW IN\G7CASTAL PLT Run 6v Pelra Geolech=al. Inc. 03/212002 6 10 s IM Ml M M== M M M M M M M M M M M M 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.30 ItPETRA Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, Seismic Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C.\STEDWPAG7CASTAL.PL: Ron By: Perra Gcotectwcel. Inc. 03/21/2002 613 1500 # FS=Sdlolal Saturated Cohesion Friction Pmz Load : Valuea 1.30it W1Unit Wt Intercept Angle Surface Hor¢ Eqk 0150g< b 143c0 (pc0 (pat) (tleg) No c 1.485.01350 2000 35Q 0 d 1.495.0135.0 150.0 32.0: 0 e 1.50 25.0 1250 100.0 270 0 g 1.53 1400 . ...................... i 1.55 1 1.55 1300 .____._....__.i....._ ................!.. --'—__--- _..i------ ---------------- :...... .............. .:._----- --- _.... _...L......_.._.`.' .............. a 1200 :............... ........ !......... .......- ------ i.......... ...._......!....._.... ..... .... !...... _....__ ..... M . f9_ ... cd. ..... _(.... ............. 12 6 14 2 4 / / \2 2 1100 ._._._.__.......i ......... .............J_...... .....'_.___.:...._......... ........:.-.-\-._....; ...... .................. __...._....._... /6 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.30 ItPETRA Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I L 1 1 1 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 •" GSTABL7 •t• " GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. '• Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 '* --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 6:13 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, Seismic Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 15 Top Boundaries 19 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below End 1 0.00 125.00 400.00 125.00 3 2 400.00 125.00 462.00 130.00 3 3 462.00 130.00 474.00 135.00 3 4 474.00 135.00 505.00 140.00 3 5 505.00 140.00 519.00 145.00 3 6 519.00 145.00 525.00 150.00 2 7 525.00 150.00 529.00 155.00 2 8 529.00 155.00 532.00 160.00 2 9 532.00 160.00 534.00 165.00 2 10 534.00 165.00 536.00 170.00 2 11 536.00 170.00 538.00 178.00 2 12 538.00 178.00 607.00 175.00 2 13 607.00 175.00 622.00 175.00 1 14 622.00 175.00 650.00 189.00 1 15 650.00 189.00 750.00 189.00 1 16 0.00 85.00 467.00 85.00 2 17 467.00 85.00 519.00 145.00 2 18 607.00 175.00 626.00 156.00 2 19 626.00 156.00 750.00 156.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 200.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 150.0 32.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.150 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure - 0.0(psf) A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 400.00(ft) and X = 550.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 600.00(ft) and X = 700.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. ' • Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method 5V I L L I [1 1 I C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 arthquake Failure Surface Specified By 20 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf or Vet Load No. (ft) (ft) 192.7 0.0 0.0 1 437.50 128.02 342.9 0.0 0.0 2 447.42 126.75 994.9 0.0 0.0 3 457.39 125.93 947.0 0.0 0.0 4 467.38 125.57 567.0 0.0 0.0 5 477.38 125.67 494.8 0.0 0.0 6 487.36 126.23 550.7 0.0 0.0 7 497.31 127.24 642.6 0.0 0.0 8 507.20 128.71 421.9 0.0 0.0 9 517.02 130.63 299.6 0.0 0.0 30 526.73 132.99 303.4 0.0 0.0 11 536.33 135.80 888.2 0.0 0.0 12 545.79 139.05 986.8 0.0 0.0 13 555.09 142.72 919.4 0.0 0.0 14 564.21 146.82 792.6 0.0 0.0 15 573.14 151.33 13.8 0.0 0.0 16 581.85 156.24 17 590.32 161.55 18 598.54 167.24 19 606.50 173.30 20 60B.52 175.00 1.301 "` Individual data on the 32 slices Water Water Tie Tie B Force Force Force Force Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan H No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (1 1 9.9 1285.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 10.0 3592.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 4.6 2285.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 5.4 3664.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 6.6 6632.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 3.4 4061.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 10.0 12980.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 8 9.9 13957.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 9 7.2 10446.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 10 0.5 672.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 2.2 3298.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 9.8 16516.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 13 2.0 3671.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14 6.0 12684.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 15 1.7 4284.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 2.3 6197.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17 3.0 9479.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 18 2.0 7471.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 19 2.0 8663.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 20 0.3 1561.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21 1.7 8689.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 22 7.8 42194.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 23 9.3 45921.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 24 9.1 39763.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 25 8.9 33245.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 26 8.7 26449.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 27 8.5 19462.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 288.2 12376.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 29 8.0 5284.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30 0.5 101.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31 0.7 92.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32 0.8 38.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 25 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.95 124.01 3 419.93 123.31 4 - 429.92 122.89 5 439.92 122.77 6 449.92 122.95 7 459.91 123.41 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 arthquake Force Surcharge or Vet Load bs) (lbs) (lbs) 192.7 0.0 0.0 538.8 0.0 0.0 342.9 0.0 0.0 549.7 0.0 0.0 994.9 0.0 0.0 609.2 0.0 0.0 947.0 0.0 0.0 093.6 0.0 0.0 567.0 0.0 0.0 100.9 0.0 0.0 494.8 0.0 0.0 477.5 0.0 0.0 550.7 0.0 0.0 902.7 0.0 0.0 642.6 0.0 0.0 929.7 0.0 0.0 421.9 0.0 0.0 120.8 0.0 0.0 299.6 0.0 0.0 234.3 0.0 0.0 303.4 0.0 0.0 329.1 0.0 0.0 888.2 0.0 0.0 964.5 0.0 0.0 986.8 0.0 0.0 967.4 0.0 0.0 919.4 0.0 0.0 856.4 0.0 0.0 792.6 0.0 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 5S I 1 1 1 8 469 .88 124.16 9 479.82 125.20 10 489.73 126.54 11 499.60 128.16 12 509.42 130.06 13 519.17 132.25 14 528.86 134.73 15 538.48 137.48 16 548.00 140.52 17 557.44 143.83 18 566.78 147.41 19 576.00 151.27 20 585.11 155.39 21 594.10 159.78 22 602.96 164.42 23 611.67 169.32 24 620.24 174.47 25 621.06 175.00 1.435 •• Failure Surface Specified By 29 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.67 122.44 3 419.42 120.24 4 429.26 118.43 5 439.15 117.00 6 449.10 115.95 7 459.06 115.28 B 469.07 115.00 9 479.07 115.10 10 489.06 115.59 11 499.02 116.46 12 508.94 117.72 13 518.81 119.35 14 528.60 121.37 15 538.31 123.76 16 547.92 126.52 17 557.42 129.65 18 566.79 133.14 19 576.02 137.00 20 585.09 141.20 21 594.00 145.75 22 602.72 150.64 23 611.25 155.87 24 619.57 161.41 25 627.67 167.28 26 635.54 173.45 27 643.16 179.92 28 650.53 186.68 29 652.88 189.00 ••" 1.479 ••• Failure Surface Specified By 29 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 409.71 122.60 3 419.50 120.56 4 429.35 118.87 5 439.27 117.55 6 449.22 116.59 7 459.20 115.99 8 469.20 115.76 9 479.20 115.90 10 489.19 116.40 11 499.15 117.26 12 509.07 118.49 13 518.95 120.08 14 528.75 122.03 15 538.48 124.34 16 548.12 127.00 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7cdstal.00T Page 3 56 I 1 1 1 11 1 1 [1 17 557.66 130.01 18 567.08 133.37 19 576.37 137.07 20 585.52 141.11 21 594.51 145.48 22 603.34 150.17 23 611.99 155.19 24 620.46 160.51 25 628.72 166.15 26 636.77 172.08 27 644.60 178.30 28 652.20 184.80 29 656.7E 189.00 `** 1.485 •*• Failure Surface Specified By 18 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 484.13 131.09 3 493.59 127.84 4 503.30 125.46 5 513.19 123.94 6 523.17 123.31 7 533.16 123.57 6 543.10 124.72 9 552.89 126.75 10 562.46 129.65 11 571.74 133.38 12 580.65 137.93 13 589.11 143.25 14 597.07 149.30 15 604.46 156.04 16 611.22 163.41 17 617.30 171.35 18 619.61 175.00 *" 1.503 *'" Failure Surface Specified By 23 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 437.50 128.02 2 445.61 122.17 3 454.19 111.03 4 463.17 112.64 5 472.50 109.03 6 482.10 106.23 7 491.90 104.25 8 501.83 103.12 9 511.83 102.83 10 521.81 103.40 11 531.71 104.81 12 541.46 107.06 13 550.97 110.13 14 560.19 114.01 15 569.05 118.65 16 577.48 124.03 17 585.42 130.10 18 592.82 136.84 19 599.61 144.17 20 605.76 152.06 21 611.21 160.44 22 615.93 169.26 23 618.40 175.00 ••• 1.521 •"* Failure Surface Specified By 18 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 484.12 131.05 3 493.56 127.75 4 503.25 125.29 5 513.12 123.67 Coordinate Points Coordinate Points Coordinate Points C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 4 .57 I 1 1 1 I I 6 523.09 122.92 7 533.09 123.05 8 543.04 124.03 9 552.87 125.89 10 562.50 128.59 11 571.85 132.11 12 580.87 136.44 13 589.47 141.53 14 597.60 147.36 15 605.20 153.86 16 612.19 161.01 17 618.54 168.73 18 623.28 175.64 "• 1.535 Failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 135.16 2 482.65 128.72 3 491.06 123.31 4 500.09 119.02 5 509.60 115.93 6 519.43 114.09 7 529.42 113.53 8 539.39 114.26 9 549.19 116.26 10 558.65 119.51 11 567.61 123.94 12 575.93 129.49 13 583.47 136.06 14 590.10 143.54 15 595.71 151.8^_ 16 600.22 160.75 17 603.54 170.18 18 604.58 175.11 `•' 1.543 Failure Surface Specified By 23 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 437.50 128.02 2 444.62 121.00 3 452.43 114.75 4 460.84 109.34 5 469.76 104.82 6 479.10 101.25 7 488.76 98.66 8 498.63 97.08 9 508.61 96.52 10 518.60 96.99 11 528.49 98.49 12 538.17 101.00 13 547.54 104.50 14 556.50 108.94 15 564.95 114.28 16 572.81 120.47 17 579.99 127.43 18 586.41 135.09 19 592.01 143.38 20 596.73 152.20 21 600.51 161.45 22 603.32 171.05 23 604.07 175.13 •" 1.550 *•' Failure Surface Specified By 27 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 400.00 125.00 2 407.58 118.48 3 415.65 112.57 4 424.15 107.30 5 433.03 102.70 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 5 39 I 1 rI 1 I 1 I I 6 442.24 98.81 1 451.72 95.63 8 461.42 93.21 9 471.28 91.53 10 481.24 90.63 11 491.24 90.50 12 501.22 91.15 13 511.12 92.56 14 520.88 94.74 15 530.44 97.66 16 539.75 101.32 17 548.75 105.68 18 557.38 110.73 19 565.60 116.43 20 573.35 122.75 21 580.59 129.65 22 587.27 137.09 23 593.36 145.02 24 598.81 153.40 25 603.60 162.18 26 607.70 171.30 27 609.03 175.00 '•' 1.552 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 6 S/ 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, Seismic Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWIN\G7CASTAL.PLT Run By. Peva Geote hn,wI Inc. 03212002 613 IM 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1500 'V W 1400 v 1300 1200 t kA 1100 Segment 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream BankRedhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C ISTEDWIN\G7CASTAL PLO GeometryPwiew 03/210002 1016 PM 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 M M� M M M M = = = = M M = M M = M M 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 0 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream BankRedhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C:\STEDVaMG7CASTAL.PL2 Run uy: Petra Geotechnical, = 03'21/2002 10.18 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 B00 GSTABL7 FSmin=1.24 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 •�• GSTABL7** + +* GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. + ++ Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABLE -1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 10:18 ' Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:97castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT ' PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream Bank Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values lasted. ' 8 Top Boundaries 12 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Ind 1 0.00 125.00 400.00 125.00 3 ' 2 400.00 125.00 462.00 130.00 3 3 462.00 130.00 505.00 130.00 3 4 505.00 130.00 538.00 130.00 2 5 538.00 130.00 607.00 175.00 2 6 607.00 175.00 622.00 175.00 1 ' 7 622.00 175.00 650.00 189.00 1 8 650.00 189.00 750.00 189.00 1 9 0.00 85.00 467.00 85.00 2 10 467.00 85.00 505.00 130.00 2 11 607.00 175.00 626.00 156.00 2 ' 12 626.00 156.00 750.00 156.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(.) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Pies. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pc£) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 160.0 33.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 100.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random ' Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 400.00(ft) and X = 550.00(ft) ' Each Surface Terminates Between X = 600.00(ft) and X = 700.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y - 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial ' Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical + First. safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method + Failure Surface Specified By 8 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.83 2 559.99 137.40 3 569.86 139.05 4 579.17 142.68 5 587.59 198.16 6 599.60 155.29 7 600.05 163.63 8 603.58 172.77 +"" 1.239 """ 61 I 1 I I I C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 2 6y Individual data on the 7 slices Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Force Force Surcharge Slice Width Weight Top Bot Norm Tan Hot Ver Load No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 10.0 4679.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' 0.0 2 9.9 12429.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 9.3 16281.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 B.9 15987.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 7.1 12299.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 5.5 6807.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 3.5 1632.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 14 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.88 126.53 3 531.64 124.35 4 541.60 123.48 5 551.59 123.94 6 561.43 125.73 7 570.94 128.82 8 579.96 133.14 9 588.32 138.63 10 595.87 145.18 11 602.49 152.68 12 608.05 160.99 13 612.45 169.97 14 614.13 175.00 *** 1.327 Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.49 125.62 3 530.97 122.43 4 540.78 120.50 5 550.76 119.84 6 560.74 120.48 7 570.55 122.40 B 580.04 125.57 9 589.03 129.94 10 597.39 135.43 11 604.97 141.95 12 611.64 149.40 13 617.30 157.65 14 621.84 166.55 15 625.20 175.97 16 625.36 176.66 ++: 1.462 +++ Failure Surface Specified By 17 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.79 126.29 3 531.42 123.60 4 541.29 121.97 5 551.27 121.41 6 561.26 121.92 7 571.13 123.50 8 580.78 126.14 9 590.08 129.80 10 598.94 134.44 11 607.25 140.01 12 614.91 146.44 13 621.83 153.66 14 627.94 161.57 15 633.16 170.10 16 637.43 179.15 17 638.92 183.46 1.477 *** 6y I lJ Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 522.45 128.95 3 532.43 128.45 4 542.43 128.50 5 552.41 129.10 6 562.35 130.25 7 572.20 131.94 8 581.95 134.17 9 591.56 136.93 10 601.01 140.22 11 610.26 144.02 12 619.28 148.33 13 628.06 153.12 14 636.56 158.39 15 644.76 164.12 16 652.63 170.28 17 660.15 176.88 18 667.29 183.87 19 671.98 189.00 1.545 "` Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 130.00 2 484.75 127.76 3 494.61 126.09 4 504.55 124.99 5 514.53 124.48 6 524.53 124.55 7 534.51 125.20 8 544.43 126.44 9 554.27 128.25 30 563.98 130.63 11 573.54 133.57 12 582.91 137.06 13 592.06 141.10 14 600.96 145.66 15 609.58 150.73 16 617.88 156.29 17 625.85 162.34 18 633.46 168.83 19 640.67 175.76 20 647.47 183.09 21 652.33 189.00 1.581 Failure Surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.03 2 559.33 134.24 3 569.14 132.28 4 579.14 132.01 5 589.04 133.44 6 598.55 136.52 7 607.41 141.16 8 615.35 147.24 9 622.15 154.57 30 627.61 162.95 11 631.58 172.13 12 633.69 190.85 " 1.618 Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 130.00 2 484.32 126.36 3 493.90 123.51 4 503.69 121.47 C:\stedwin\glcastal.OUT Page 3 110-5 I I 1 [1 1 1 1 5 513.61 120.25 6 523.61 119.06 7 533.60 120.30 8 543.52 121.57 9 553.30 123.66 10 562.87 126.56 11 572.16 130.24 12 581.12 134.69 13 589.68 139.86 14 597.77 145.73 15 605.36 152.25 16 612.37 159.38 17 618.76 167.07 18 624.49 175.26 19 625.30 176.65 "** 1.651 Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.82 126.38 3 531.39 123.47 4 541.15 121.27 5 551.04 119.82 6 561.01 119.11 7 571.01 119.14 8 580.98 119.92 9 590.87 121.45 10 600.61 123.71 11 610.15 126.69 12 619.45 130.37 13 628.44 134.74 14 637.09 139.77 15 645.33 145.43 16 653.13 151.69 17 660.43 158.52 18 667.21 165.87 19 673.42 173.71 20 679.03 181.99 21 683.04 189.00 •*• 1.698 Failure Surface Specified By 13 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.83 2 558.97 133.40 3 568.59 130.69 4 578.55 129.79 5 588.51 130.72 6 598.13 133.46 7 607.08 137.91 8 615.07 143.92 9 621.83 151.29 10 627.13 159.77 11 630.78 169.08 12 632.67 178.90 13 632.68 180.34 1.706 •" C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 4 66 141-99, 23067.5, Lot 63, W/O Stream BankRedhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C GTEDWIN%G7CASTAL PLT Run Bv. Petra Geotechnical. Inc 03/21/2002 10:10 M M M M M M M M M M M M M iM M M M M M 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream BankRedhawk Area, Riverside Co, California C:ISTEDWIMG7CAST.5L PL2 Run By Petra Gontadmical, Im 03/21/2002 10:15 1500 # FS Soil : Soo Total Saturated Cohesion Fncbon PrezLoad Value a 1.08 Desc. Type Und Wt. Und Wt. Intercept Angle Surface Honz Eqk 0.150 g< b 1.12 No. (pc0 (Pc0 (PST) (de9) No C 1.19 Fill : 1 135.0 135.0 2000 35.0 0 d 119 Pauba: 2 135.0 135.0 150.0 32.0 0 e 1.21 Alluvium 3 125.0 125.0 1000 27.0. 0'�'� f 1.25 29 . 1400 g-11 1 1.30 1 1.31',' 1300 _..-___.-.-.._..i.__................. i.......... _._-_-__: Ih 1200 ......._.......... ._..............__.: ...:....-. ............ ........_: ....!. 9�....__._.R-_................. 12 j 2' 3 1100 --------------- .......9............ - ,._._.._..._ .__. _..,.. ......././2 i.........._. __......_____-__._..-, ..._ .......... ..... 2 1000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 GSTABI-7 FSmin=1.08 PETRA Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OUT Page 1 ***GST 7 *** * GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. •' *` Version 1.0, January 1996; Version 1.14, Sept 1999 " --Slope Stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Modified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices (Based on STABL6-1986, by Purdue University) Run Date: 03/21/2002 Time of Run: 10:15 Run By: Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Input Data Filename: C:g7castal. Output Filename: C:g7castal.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: C:g7castal.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream Bank Redhawk Area, Riverside Co, California BOUNDARY COORDINATES Note: User origin value specified. Add 0.00 to X -values and 1000.00 to Y -values listed. 8 Top Boundaries 12 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 125.00 400.00 125.00 3 2 400.00 125.00 462.00 130.00 3 3 462.00 130.00 505.00 130.00 3 4 505.00 130.00 538.00 130.00 2 5 538.00 130.00 607.00 175.00 2 6 607.00 175.00 622.00 175.00 1 7 622.00 175.00 650.00 189.00 1 8 650.00 189.00 750.00 189.00 1 9 0.00 B5.00 467.00 85.00 2 10 467.00 85.00 505.00 130.00 2 11 607.00 175.00 626.00 156.00 2 12 626.00 156.00 750.00 156.00 2 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Plez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (Pcf) (psi) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 135.0 135.0 200.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 135.0 135.0 150.0 32.0 0.00 0.0 0 3 125.0 125.0 100.0 27.0 0.00 0.0 0 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.150 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure = 0.0(psf) A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Seen Specified. 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 30 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 5 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 400.00(ft) and X - 550.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 600.00(ft) and X - 700.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 10.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method ` Failure Surface Specified By 8 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.83 2 559.99 137.40 3 569.86 139.05 4 579.17 142.68 C 1 1 5 587.54 148.16 6 594.60 155.24 7 600.05 163.63 8 603.58 172.17 ••• 1.078 ""' 1 Individual data on the Water Water Force Force Slice Width weight Top Bot No. (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 1 1 10.0 4679.4 0.0 0.0 2 9.9 12429.5 0.0 0.0 3 9.3 16281.0 0.0 0.0 4 8.4 15987.3 0.0 0.0 5 6 7.1 12299.0 5.5 6807.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 7 3.5 1632.2 0.0 0.0 Failure Surface Specified By 14 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 1 2 521.88 126.53 3 531.64 124.35 4 541.60 123.48 5 551.59 123.99 6 561.93 125.73 1 7 570.94 128.82 8 579.96 133.14 9 588.32 138.63 10 595.87 145.18 11 602.49 152.68 1 12 608.05 160.99 13 612.45 169.97 14 614.13 175.00 •*• 1.115 Failure Surface Specified By 17 1 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.79 126.29 3 531.92 123.60 1 9 541.29 127.97 5 551.27 121.41 6 561.26 121.92 7 571.13 123.50 8 580.78 126.19 9 590.08 129.80 1 30 598.94 134.44 11 607.25 140.01 12 614.91 146.44 13 621.83 153.66 14 627.94 161.57 ' 15 633.16 170.10 16 637.43 179.15 17 638.92 183.46 1.189 ••' Failure Surface Specified By 16 1 Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.49 125.62 3 530.97 122.43 1 4 540.78 120.50 5 550.76 119.84 6 560.74 120.48 7 570.55 122.40 8 9 580.04 589.03 125.57 129.94 1 10 597.39 135.43 11 604.97 141.95 12 611.64 149.40 1 1 1 C:\stedwin\g7castal.OVT Page 2 7 slices Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Surcharge Norm Tan Nor Ver load (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) 0.0 0.0 701.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1864.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2442.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2398.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1844.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1021.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 244.8 0.0 0.0 coordinate Points Coordinate Points Coordinate Points I 1 1 I k 1 I 13 617.30 157.65 14 621.84 166.55 15 625.20 175.97 16 625.36 176.68 1.193 Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 522.45 128.95 3 532.43 128.45 4 542.43 128.50 5 552.41 129.10 6 562.35 130.25 7 572.20 131.94 8 581.95 134.17 9 591.56 136.93 10 601.01 140.22 11 610.26 144.02 12 619.28 148.33 13 628.06 153.12 14 636.56 158.39 15 644.16 164.12 16 652.63 170.28 17 660.15 176.88 18 667.29 183.87 19 671.96 189.00 "" 1.211 **• Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 130.00 2 484.75 127.76 3 494.61 126.09 4 504.55 124.99 5 514.53 124.48 6 524.53 124.55 7 534.51 125.20 8 544.43 126.44 9 554.27 128.25 30 563.98 130.63 11 513.54 133.57 12 582.91 137.06 13 592.06 141.10 14 600.96 145.66 15 609.58 150.73 16 617.88 156.29 17 625.85 162.34 18 633.46 168.83 19 640.67 175.76 20 647.47 183.09 21 652.33 189.00 1.253 '«" Failure Surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.83 2 559.33 134.24 3 569.14 132.28 4 579.14 132.01 5 589.04 133.44 6 598.55 136.52 7 607.41 141.16 8 615.35 147.24 9 622.15 154.57 30 627.61 162.95 11 631.58 172.13 12 633.69 180.85 «." 1.292 :.. Failure Surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf C:\stedvin\g7castal.OUT Page 3 71 I 1 1 1 1 C 1 1] 1 1 No. (ft) (ft) 1 512.50 130.00 2 521.62 126.38 3 531.39 123.47 4 541.15 121.27 5 551.04 119.82 6 561.01 119.11 7 571.01 119.14 8 580.98 119.92 9 590.87 121.45 30 600.61 123.71 11 610.15 126.69 12 619.45 130.37 13 628.44 134.74 14 637.09 139.77 15 645.33 145.43 16 653.13 151.69 17 660.43 158.52 18 667.21 165.87 19 673.42 173.71 20 679.03 181.99 21 683.04 189.00 *** 1.300 Failure Surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 475.00 130.00 2 484.32 126.36 3 493.90 123.51 4 503.69 121.47 5 513.61 120.25 6 523.61 119.86 7 533.60 120.30 B 543.52 121.57 9 553.30 123.66 10 562.87 126.56 11 572.16 130.24 12 581.12 134.69 13 589.68 139.86 14 597.77 145.73 15 605.36 152.25 16 612.37 159.38 17 618.76 167.07 18 624.49 175.26 19 625.30 176.65 *1 Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 550.00 137.83 2 559.97 138.57 3 569.90 139.78 4 579.76 141.45 5 589.53 143.59 6 599.18 146.19 7 608.71 149.24 8 618.08 152.73 9 627.27 156.66 10 636.27 161.03 11 645.05 165.81 12 653.60 170.99 13 661.90 176.58 14 669.92 182.55 15 677.65 188.09 16 677.77 189.00 *** 1.312 *** Points Points C:\stedvin\g7cast a LOUT Page 4 / 01 141-99, 23067-5, Lot 63, W/O Stream BankRedhawk Area, Riverside Co, California CASTEDWINWCASTAL PLT Run By Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 03/212002 10.15 PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES CENTEX HOMES 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Harold Meyers �o-Ts I-Zz 4-4-6j 61Z-- zo Sacs— V*f4,_L.to-5 October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Subject: Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 18 through 45, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California This report presents a summary of the observation and testing services provided by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) during rough -grading operations to develop Lots 18 through 45 of Tract 23067-3. Lots I through 17 and 46 through 61 were previously reported (see References). Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the suitability of the grading for the proposed residential construction are provided herein, as well as foundation -design recommendations based on the as -graded soil conditions. The purpose of grading was to develop 28 level lots for construction of single-family residences, as well as adjacent slopes and streets. Grading on these selected lots began in June 1999, and was completed in October 1999. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Removal and recompaction of low-density surface soils, processing of the exposed bottom surfaces or placement of compacted fill under the purview of this report have been completed under the observation and with selective testing by Petra. Earthwork and grading operations were performed in accordance with the recommendations PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC. 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste, 103 Temecula, CA 92590 ' Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax: (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm net CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 2 presented in the grading -plan review report (see References) and the grading code of the County of Riverside, California. The completed earthwork has been reviewed and is considered adequate for the construction now planned. On the basis of our observations and field and laboratory testing, the recommendations presented in this report were prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is expressed or implied. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY General Geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading were frequently observed and mapped by Petra's geologic staff. Geologic Units Geologic conditions observed onsite were generally as anticipated and described in the supplemental subsurface investigation and geotechnical review report for the site by Petra (see References). Removal bottoms were geologically mapped by a Petra geologist. The site consisted of well-rounded hills comprised of Pauba formational sandstone and younger Quaternary alluvial -filled valleys and colluvial -mantled hillsides. Additionally, there were minor areas of existing artificial -fill materials associated with the construction of Nighthawk Pass Road. All unsuitable alluvial soils were removed to expose competent bedrock of the Pauba Formation. The underlying Pauba Formation generally consisted of sandy silts and sands which were predominantly fine- to coarse-grained, very well -indurated to cemented, laminated and moist and dense. Localized thin clay seams and silty clay beds were mapped in the cut slope above Lots 32 through 37. 3 ' CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 3 Groundwater ' Localized areas of seepage at or near the bedrock/alluvium contact were noted during grading. Additional seepage was encountered on the initial -cut -slope and in the 1 buttress backcut for the north -facing slope above'Lot�hrough 32. L_ Faulting No faults were encountered during grading operations on the site. ' SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND DENSITY TESTING Site Clearing and Grubbing Prior to grading, all grasses, weeds, brush and shrubs were stripped and removed from the site. Clearing operations included the removal of all trash, debris and similar unsuitable materials. Ground Preparation All deposits of existing artificial -fill materials and low-density native soils were removed to underlying bedrock. The removals varied from approximately 5 to 35± feet below original grades. Prior to placing fill, the exposed bottom surfaces were scarified to depths of 6 to 8 inches, watered as necessary to achieve at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions, then recompacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Toe -of -fill -slope keys were placed at the base of all fill slopes. Fill keys were excavated a minimum of 2 feet into competent bedrock materials with a minimum slope of 2 percent to the heel of the key. V CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 4 ' Disposal of Oversize Rock ' Oversize materials were not encountered during the rough -grading operations for these lots. Cut/Fill Transition Lots ' Cut/fill transition lots were eliminated due to overexcavation of the cut portion of the transition lots. The removals within the cut portion extended to depths of ' approximately 10 feet below finish grades. ' Cut Lots Building pads and slopes within cut lots were cut to grade, geologically mapped and ' those that were determined to be adequate to provide uniform support for the proposed residences and improvements without remediation were left at finish -design grade. Fill Placement and Testing ' Fill materials consist of onsite soils. All fills were placed in lifts restricted to approximately 6 to 8 inches in maximum thickness, watered as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions, then compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent by rolling with a D8 or D9 bulldozer, 834 rubber -tired bulldozer or loaded scrapers. The maximum vertical depth of fill placed within the subject lots as a result of grading is approximately 57± feet. Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017 (nuclear gauge). Occasional field density tests were also performed in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1556 (sandcone). Test results are presented on Table I (attached) and test locations are shown on the enclosed rough -grading plans (Plate 1). R S CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 5 Field density tests were taken at vertical intervals of approximately l to 2 feet and the compacted fills were tested at the time of placement to verify that the specified moisture content and minimum required relative compaction of 90 percent had been achieved. At least one in-place density test was taken for each 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed and/or for each 2 feet in vertical height of compacted fill. The actual number of tests taken per day varied with the project conditions, such as the number of earthmovers (scrapers) and availability of support equipment. When field density tests produced results less than the required minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, the approximate limits of the substandard fill were established. The substandard area was then reworked, recompacted and retested until a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent was achieved. Visual classification of earth materials in the field was the basis for determining if the maximum dry density value, summarized in a following section, was applicable for each given density test. One -point checks were performed to supplement visual classification. Fill Slope Construction All 511 slopes were constructed at a maximum ratio of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical [h:v]). Maximum fill -slope height is approximately 11± feet located on Lot 22 of Tract 23067-3. Final surface compaction on the fill slopes was achieved by overfilling and backrolling the slopes during construction and then trimming to the compacted inner core or by backrolling the slope with a sheepsfoot roller. Buttress Fill Due to locally unfavorable out -of -slope bedding orientations and groundwater seepage, the cut slope proposed above Lots 32 and 37 required removal and replacement with a compacted -buttress fill. A buttress -fill key with a width of 20 feet and a depth of 3 it 0 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 6 feet was constructed at the base of the slope. An internal backdrain was also installed in the buttress fill in accordance with our standard recommendations near the toe -of - slope and the seepage area approximately mid -slope. The locations of the backdrain installed in buttress fill was determined during grading based on local topography and the most feasible exit points for outlet pipe. Subdrains Following clean -outs to competent bedrock, subdrains were installed in the primary drainage course through the center of Tract 23067-3. The subdrains were designed to mitigate the potential build-up of hydrostatic pressures below compacted fills due to infiltration of surfaces waters and migration of offsite water sources. The approximate location of the subdrains are shown on the accompanying map (Plate 1). Lot Summary A summary of the cut, fill and transition lots onsite with the maximum depth of fill is provided in Table II. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil types observed during grading were determined in our laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557-91. Pertinent test values are summarized in Appendix A. Expansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of soil existing at or near finish -pad grade within the subject lots. These tests were performed in W 7 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 7 accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard 18-2. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analyses Water-soluble sulfate contents were also determined for representative samples of soil existing at or near pad grade of the subject lots in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. These tests resulted in negligible sulfate contents of less than 0.1 percent except for Lots 22 through 25 and 32 through 34 where a sulfate content greater than 0.1 percent was measured. For these lots, Type V cement should be used. Test results are summarized in Appendix A. POST -GRADING CONSIDERATIONS Landscaping and Maintenance of Graded Slopes The fill slopes are comprised of granular, relatively cohesionless soils and, unless mitigation measures are taken, the slopes will be subject to a low to moderate degree of surfrcial erosion, raveling and possible slumping during periods of heavy rainfall. The fill slopes should be landscaped with a deep-rooted (4 to 5 feet deep), drought - resistant, woody plant species. To provide temporary slope protection while the woody materials mature, the slopes should be planted with a herbaceous plant species that will mature in one season or provided with some other protection, such as jute matting or polymer covering. The temporary protection should be maintained until the woody material has become fully mature. A landscape architect should be consulted to determine the most suitable plant materials and irrigation requirements. To mitigate future surficial erosion and slumping, a permanent slope -maintenance program should be initiated. Proper slope maintenance must include regular care of drainage- and erosion -control provisions, rodent control, prompt repair of leaking a CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 8 irrigation systems and replacement of dying or dead plant materials. The irrigation system should be designed and maintained to provide a constant moisture content in the soils. Overwatering, as well as overdrying, of the soils can lead to surficial erosion and slumping. Homeowners should be advised of the potential problems that can develop when drainage on the pads and slopes is altered in any way. Drainage can be altered due to the placement of fill and construction of garden walls, retaining walls, walkways, patios, swimming pools and planters. Pad Drainage Drainage on the lots should be designed to carry surface water away from all graded slopes and structures. Pad drainage should be designed for a minimum gradient of l percent with drainage directed to the adjacent streets. After dwellings are constructed, positive drainage away from the structures and slopes should be provided on the lots by means of earth swales, sloped concrete flatwork and area drains. Utility Trenches All utility -trench backfill within street right-of-ways, utility easements, under sidewalks, driveways and building -floor slabs and within or in proximity to slopes, should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by a Petra representative to verify adequate compaction. Excavations for trenches that exceed 4 feet in depth should be laid-back at a maximum gradient of 1: l (h:v). For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfills should be placed in lifts no greater than 2 feet in thickness and then mechanically compacted with a hydra -hammer, pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 9 should be placed in lifts no greater than 8 inches and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. As an alternative for shallow trenches (18 inches or less in depth) where pipe may be damaged by mechanical compaction equipment, such as under building -floor slabs, imported clean sand having a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. No specific relative compaction will be required; however, observation, probing and, if deemed necessary, testing should be performed. To avoid point -loads and subsequent distress to asbestos, clay, cement or plastic pipe, imported sand bedding should be placed at least 1 foot above all pipe in areas where excavated trench materials contain significant oversize rock. Sand -bedding materials ' should thoroughly jetted prior to placement of backfill. ' FOUNDATION -DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 'General Based on our observations during grading and field and laboratory testing, the preliminary foundation -design recommendations presented in our geotechnical ' investigation report (see References) are considered applicable for the subject lots. The recommendations are presented in the following sections of this report. Allowable -Bearing Values An allowable -bearing value of 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of 24 -inch -square pad footings and 12 -inch -wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade in compacted fill materials. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional l foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot. W 10 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 10 Recommended allowable -bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Settlement Based on the above bearing values and maximum depth of fill (i.e., 32± feet), a total settlement of footings is expected to be less than 0.75 inch and differential settlement less than one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 25 to 50± feet. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during or shortly following the completion of construction as the loads are applied. Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure increasing at the rate of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth, to a maximum value of 2,500 pounds per square foot, may be used to determine lateral bearing for building footings constructed on level ground. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 times the dead -load forces may also be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. An increase of one-third of the above values may also be used when designing for short -duration wind and seismic forces. Expansive Soil Conditions Laboratory test data indicate the foundation soils underlying the subject lots exhibit VERY LOW expansion potential, as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Standard Test 18-2. Minimum design recommendations for footings and residential - floor slabs for this condition are presented below. However, additional slab thickness, footing size and/or reinforcement may be necessary for structural considerations, as determined by the project architect and/or structural engineer. A summary of the expansion test results and associated lots is provided in Appendix A. 7)�vl30 & 7-3, -91 " s, -6 �� CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page l 1 Results of our laboratory tests indicate the lots exhibit a VERY LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -B. Since the onsite soils exhibit expansion indices of less than 20, the design of slab -on -ground foundations is exempt from the procedures outlined in 1997 UBC Section 1815. Based on the above soil conditions, it is recommended that footings and floors be constructed and reinforced in accordance with the following minimum criteria. However, additional slab thickness, footing sizes and/or reinforcement should be provided, as required, by the project architect or structural engineer. • Footings - Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in 1997 UBC Table 18 -I -C (i.e., 12 -inch minimum depth for one-story and 18 - inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one- and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second -story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. • Building -Floor Slabs Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with either 6 -inch by 6 -inch, No.6 by No.6 welded -wire mesh (6x6-W2.9xW2.9); or with No.3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or brick to ensure the desired placement near mid -depth. ' Living -area concrete -floor slabs should be underlain with a moisture -vapor barrier consisting of a polyvinyl -chloride membrane, such as 6 -mil visqueen or equivalent. All laps within the membrane should be sealed and at least 2 inches A �a CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 12 of clean sand be placed over the membrane to promote uniform curing of the concrete. - Garage -floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living -area floor slabs. Garage -floor slabs should also be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/8 -inch -minimum, felt expansion -joint materials and quartered with weakened -plane joints. A 12 -inch -wide grade beam founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The grade beam should be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. - Presaturation of the subgrade soils below floor slabs will not be required; however, prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all living -area and garage -floor slabs should be pre -watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. Soluble Sulfates Laboratory test data indicate soils within the subject lots have a negligible soluble - sulfate content except for Lots 22 through 25 and 32 through 34. As such, concrete in contact with soil may utilize Type I or 11 Portland cement except for Lots 22 through 25 and 32 through 34 where Type V Portland cement should be utilized. Structural Setbacks Footing setbacks of residential structures from property lines and from the tops and toes of the engineered fill slopes should conform to the minimum setback requirements of 1997 UBC Chapter 18. Structural setbacks of retaining walls, swimming pools and spas proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes should be analyzed separately. Footing Observations All building footing trenches should be observed by a Petra representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing soils and to depths conforming to 1997 UBC Chapter 18. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the - 13 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 13 placement forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture -softened soil and/or any construction debris, should be removed prior to placing concrete. Excavated soils derived from footing and utility -trench excavations should not be placed in slab -on -grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. RETAINING -WALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Allowable -Bearing Capacity and Lateral Rest Footings for retaining walls may be designed using the allowable -bearing capacity and lateral -resistance values recommended for building footings; however, when calculating passive resistance, the upper 6 inches of the footings should be ignored in areas where the footings are not covered with concrete flatwork. Active and At -Rest Earth Pressures An active lateral -earth pressure equivalent to a fluid having a density of 35 pounds per cubic foot should be used for design of cantilevered walls retaining a drained, level backfill. Where the wall backfill slopes upward, at 2:1 (h:v), the above values should be increased to 52 pounds per cubic foot. The above values are for onsite soils which exhibit very low and low expansive potentials and are placed behind the walls a minimum horizontal distance equal to one-half the wall height. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. q\/ /V CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 14 Drainage Perforated pipe -and -gravel subdrains should be installed behind all retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Perforated pipe should consist of 4 -inch - minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR -35 with the perforations laid - down. The pipe should be encased in a I -foot -wide column of 0.75- to 1.5 -inch, open - graded gravel extending above the wall footing to a minimum height of 1.5 feet above the footing or to a height equal to one-third the wall height, whichever is greater. The gravel should be completely wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Solid outlet pipes should be connected to the subdrains and routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. Weepholes, if used, should be 3 -inch -minimum diameter and provided at maximum intervals of 6 feet along the walls. Open, vertical masonry joints should be provided at 32 -inch -minimum intervals. One -cubic -foot of gravel should be placed behind the weepholes or open -masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Waterproofing The portions of retaining walls supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Retaining -Wall Backfill All retaining -wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8 -inch -maximum horizontal lifts, water or air-dried as necessary to achieve near -optimum moisture conditions and compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Flooding or A t6 CENTEX HOMES TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area October 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 Page 15 jetting of backfill materials should be avoided. A Petra representative should verify adequate compaction of all backfill. MASONRY GARDEN WALLS The footings should also be reinforced with a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one top and one bottom. In order to mitigate the potential for unsightly cracking, positive separations should also be provided in the garden walls at a maximum horizontal spacing of 20 feet. These separations should be provided in the blocks only and not extend through the footing. The footing should be placed monolithically with continuous rebars to serve as an effective "grade beam" below the wall. In areas where garden walls may be proposed on or near the tops of descending slopes, the footings should be deepened such that a minimum horizontal clearance of 7 feet is maintained between the outside bottom edges of the footings and the face of the slope. POST- GRADING OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Petra should be notified at the appropriate times in order that we may provide the following observation and testing services during the various phases of post -grading construction. • Building Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. It /G CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 16 • Retaining -Wall Construction - Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches, if necessary, if trenches are found to be excavated to inadequate depth and/or found to contain significant slough, saturated or compressible soils. - Observe and verify proper installation of subdrainage systems prior to placing wall backfill. Observe and test placement of all wall backfill. • Masonry Garden Walls Observe all footing trenches when first excavated to verify adequate depth and competent soil -bearing conditions. - Re -observe all footing trenches following removal of any slough and/or saturated soils and re -excavate to proper depth. • Exterior Concrete-Flatwork Construction - Observe and test subgrade soils below all concrete-flatwork areas to verify adequate compaction and moisture content. • Utility -Trench Backfill - Observe and test placement of all utility -trench backfill. • Re -Grading - Observe and test placement of any fill to be placed above or beyond the finish grades shown on the grading plans. i? CENTEX HOMES October 28, 1999 TR 23067-3, Redhawk/Temecula Area J.N. 141-99 Page 17 This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Please call if you have any questions pertaining to this report. Respectfully submitted, PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 8 Pal C 348 Stephen M. Senior Ass( GE 642 Attachments: Table I - Summary of Field Density Tests Table II - Lot Summary References Plate 1 - Density Test Location Map (in pocket) Appendix A - Laboratory Test Criteria/Laboratory Test Data Distribution: (6) Addressee (4) Centex Homes — Field Trailer MW U TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST . DATE :. TEST NO. TEST LOCATION ...' "'.: ELEV. (ft) MOISTURE M DENSITY (Pct) COMP:, SOIL 07/29/99 175 TR 23067-3/1-ot IS 1221.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 07/29/99 176 TR 23067-3/Lot18 1222.0 10.5 119.0 91 2 07/29/99 183 TR 23067-3/Lot 18 1225.0 12.0 122.0 92 3 07/29/99 184 TR 23067-3/Lot IS 1226.0 13.0 117.0 91 5 07/30/99 189 TR 23067-3/1-ot 19 slope 1226.0 11.5 118.5 93 5 07/30/99 190 TR 23067-3/1-ot 19 slope 1227.0 12.0 118.5 90 5 07/30/99 199 TR 23067-3/Lot IS slope 1230.0 15.0 114.5 90 17 07/30/99 200 TR 23067-3/Lot 19 slope 1231.0 13.5 113.0 91 17 07/30/99 203 TR 23067-3/Lot 18 1223.0 10.5 120.0 92 2 07/30/99 204 TR 23067-3/1.ot 18 1234.0 9.5 118.0 91 2 07/30/99 209 TR 23067-311-ot 18 1238.0 13.5 113.0 90 17 07/30/99 210 TR 23067-3/Lot 19 1233.0 11.5 119.0 91 2 08/02/99 213 TR 23067-3/Lot 18 1239.0 10.0 120.0 92 2 08/02/99 214 TR 23067-3/Lot 19 1240.0 11.0 118.0 90 2 08/03/99 253 TR 23067-3/1-ot45 1243.0 15.0 113.0 85 3 08/03/99 254 RT No. 253 -- 9.0 119.5 90 3 08/05/99 279 TR 23067-3/Lot 45 1243.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 08/09/99 307 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1198.0 8.5 106.5 82) 4 08/09/99 308 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 1189.0 9.0 110.0 84 4 08/09/99 309 RT No. 307 -- 9.5 117.0 90 ' 4 08/09/99 310 RT No. 308 -- 8.5 110.0 85+� 4 08/09/99 311 TR 23067-3/Lot38 1197.0 7.5 109.0 84 2 08/09/99 312 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1198.0 9.0 111.0 85 7 08/09/99 313 RT No. 310 -- 9.0 117.0 90 2 08/09/99 314 RT No. 311 11.5 114.5 88 2 08/09/99 315 RT No. 312 12.5 118.5 91 2 03/09/99 316 RT No. 314 -- 11.5 120.0 92 2 08/09/99 320 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1199.0 7.5 104.5 87 2 08/09/99 321 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1200.0 10.0 109.0 84 2 08/09/99 322 RT No. 320 -- 13.0 115.0 90 6 08/09/99 323 RT No. 321 -- 15.0 1 I LO 91 16 08/09/99 324 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1204.0 12.5 118.0 90 2 08/09/99 325 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1205.0 12.0 118.0 90 2 08/10/99 343 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1202.0 12.5 117.5 90 4 08/10/99 344 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1203.0 13.5 115.0 90 6 08/10/99 345 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1208.0 12.5 121.0 92 9 08/10/99 346 TR 23067-3/1.ot39 1209.0 14.5 117.5 91 4 03/10/99 347 TR 23067-3/L.ot 38 1205.0 9.0 117.5 92 6 08/10/99 348 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1207.0 11.5 116.0 91 6 08/10/99 349 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1209.0 10.0 115.5 90 6 OS/10/99 350 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1210.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 08/11/99 351 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 slope 1215.0 11.5 123.0 92 3 03/11/99 352 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 slope 1216.0 13.0 116.0 91 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 1 `i'/Pa30� TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST DATE TEST=,. NO. TEST_ - . LOCATIOi�t ECFV. (ftj (%j (Pcf)- - MP. '(%) TYPE 08/11/99 353 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1214.0 8.5 118.5 91 2 08/11/99 354 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1215.0 9.5 120.0 92 2 08/11/99 355 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1213.0 14.0 116.5 91 6 08/11/99 356 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 1212.0 14.0 115.5 90 6 08/12/99 357 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1213.0 10.0 117.0 90 4 08/12/99 358 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1214.0 6.5 116.5 90 4 08/12/99 359 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 slope 1217.0 10.0 123.0 92 3 08/12/99 360 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 slope 1210.0 11.0 117.0 90 4 08/12/99 361 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 slope 12190 10.5 123.5 93 3 08/12/99 362 TR 23067-3/1-ot 40 1220.0 18.0 121.0 91 3 08/13/99 365 Lot 39 1221.0 14.5 116.5 88 3 08/13/99 366 RT No. 365 -- 10.0 120.0 90 3 08/16/99 384 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1235.0 9.5 1155 91 2 08/16/99 385 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1238.0 9.5 118.0 91 2 08/18/99 397 TR 23067-3/Lot 18 1278.0 10.5 125.5 94 3 08/18/99 398 TR 23067-3/1-ot 18 1280.0 10.5 123.0 93 3 08/18/99 399 TR 23067-3/1.ot 18 1276.0 11.5 113.0 86 9 08/18/99 400 TR 23067-3/Lot 18 1278.0 11.5 113.5 86 9 08/18/99 401 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1179.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 08/19/99 402 RT No. 399 -- 10.0 120.5 91 9 08/19/99 403 RT No. 400 -- 9.5 119.0 90 9 08/19/99 404 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1184.0 10.5 118.0 90 2 08/19/99 405 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1186.0 9.5 1175 90 2 08/19/99 406 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1186.0 8.5 120.0 91 9 08/19/99 407 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1187.0 7.5 120.0 91 9 08/19/99 408 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1191.0 7.5 113.5 87 2 08/19/99 409 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1192.0 8.5 117.5 90 2 08/19/99 410 RT No. 408 -- 8.0 118.5 91 2 08/19/99 411 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1189.0 8.5 122.5 92 3 08/19/99 412 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1190.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 08/19/99 413 TR 23067-3iLongfellow 1195.0 12.5 120.0 90 3 08/19/99 414 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1196.0 8.0 120.0 90 3 08/19/99 415 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1196.0 11.5 122.0 92 3 08/19/99 416 TR 23067-3/Lot27 1198.0 9.5 123.0 93 3 08/19/99 417 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1194.0 10.5 125.0 94 3 08/19/99 418 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1195.0 9.0 124.0 93 3 08/20/99 419 TR 23067-3/Lot39 1205.0 9.0 120.0 90 3 08/20/99 420 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1206.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 08/20/99 421 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1200.0 11.5 120.0 90 3 08/20/99 422 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1202.0 13.0 117.5 90 2 08/20/99 423 TR 23067-3/Lot 40 1221.0 11.5 122.5 92 3 08/20/99 424 TR 23067-3/Lot 40 1222.0 11.0 122.5 92 3 08/20/99 425 TR 23067-3/1-ot 48 1208.0 10.5 114.5 87 9 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T-12 al LO) TABLE I Field Density Test Results TEST":..,: TEST TEST',;, ELEV. MOISTURE DEINSITY COMP. ;:;:SOIL DATE' :.? "' NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (pet) (%a)`, TYPE 08/20/99 426 RT No. 425 -- 10.5 119.0 90 9 08/20/99 427 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1207.0 10.5 118.5 91 3 08/20/99 428 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1209.0 10.5 121.0 93 3 08/20/99 429 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1209.0 10.0 124.0 92 2 08/20/99 430 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1210.0 10.0 120.0 91 2 08/21/99 431 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1211.0 10.5 118.5 83 4 08/21/99 432 RT No. 431 -- 15.5 108.0 90 4 08/21/99 433 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1211.0 15.0 116.5 90 9 08/21/99 434 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1217.0 12.0 119.0 91 9 08/21/99 435 TR 23067-3/Lot 40 1223.0 10.5 120.5 90 9 08/21/99 436 TR 23067-3/Lot 40 1224.0 13.5 119.5 91 9 08/23/99 437 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1214.0 12.0 120.0 90 3 08/23/99 438 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1215.0 11.5 120.0 91 3 08/23/99 439 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1222.0 11.5 120.5 91 3 08/23/99 440 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1223.0 11.5 121.0 92 3 08/23/99 446 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1223.0 14.5 116.0 90 8 08/23/99 447 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1224.0 11.0 126.5 95 3 08/23/99 448 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1215.0 8.0 118.5 91 2 08/23/99 449 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1216.0 9.5 119.5 91 2 08/23/99 450 TR 23067-3/L.ot 30 1223.0 11.0 125.0 94 3 08/23/99 451 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1224.0 9.5 123.5 93 3 08/23/99 452 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1170.0 8.5 109.5 84 4 08/23/99 453 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1171.0 10.0 116.5 90 4 08/23/99 454 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1172.0 9.5 115.0 90 6 08/23/99 455 RT No. 452 -- 10.5 116.0 91 6 08/23/99 456 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1186.0 10.0 111.0 83 3 08/23/99 457 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1169.0 7.0 105.0 80 2 08/23/99 458 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1270.0 7.5 113.5 87 2 08/23/99 459 RT No. 456 -- 10.5 115.5 88 2 08/23/99 460 RT No. 457 8.5 111.5 86 2 08/23/99 461 RT No. 458 9.0 121.0 92 2 08/23/99 462 RT No. 459 -- 9.5 107.5 82 2 08/23/99 463 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1178.0 11.0 1 1 1.0 85 2 08/24/99 465 RT No. 460 -- 8.0 1 1 1.0 85 2 08/24/99 466 RT No. 462 11.0 120.0 91 9 08/24/99 467 RT No. 463 11.0 122.0 92 9 08/24/99 468 RT No. 465 -- 6.0 119.0 90 9 08/24/99 469 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1173.0 10.0 115.5 90 8 08/24/99 470 TR 23067-3/Lot29 1176.0 11.0 118.0 90 2 08/24/99 471 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1177.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 08/24/99 472 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1180.0 10.0 116.0 90 9 08/24/99 473 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1181.0 13.5 116.0 90 9 08/24/99 474 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1179.0 13.5 113.0 91 16 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 3 TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST ,: DATE TEST ':. NO. TEST LOCATION : ELEV. (ft) MOISTURE.. : (40) ' : DENSITY (PcIJ- COMP. (%) SOIL TYPE 08/24/99 475 TR 23067-3/L.ot 28 1180.0 11.0 117.0 90 2 08/24/99 476 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1185.0 8.5 118.5 91 2 08/24/99 477 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1221.0 6.5 115.5 89 2 08/24/99 478 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1222.0 6.5 114.5 88 2 08/24/99 479 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 slope 1225.0 10.5 127.5 96 3 08/24/99 480 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 slope 1226.0 10.0 125.5 94 3 08/24/99 481 RT No. 477 -- 7.0 117.0 90 2 08/24/99 482 RT No. 478 -- 11.5 123.5 93 3 08/24/99 483 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1182.0 10.0 116.5 90 8 08/25/99 484 TR 23067-3/L.ot 29 1184.0 11.5 117.5 91 8 08/25/99 485 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1185.0 9.0 117.5 90 2 08/25/99 486 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1186.0 9.5 118.0 91 2 08/25/99 487 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1190.0 10.5 119.0 91 2 08/25/99 488 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1191.0 11.0 119.5 91 2 08/25/99 489 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1192.0 14.5 114.5 91 17 08/25/99 490 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1193.0 14.0 117.0 90 2 08/25/99 491 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1187.0 10.5 122.5 92 3 08/25/99 492 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1188.0 11.5 124.0 93 3 08/25/99 493 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1193.0 11.0 119.5 91 9 08/25/99 494 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1194.0 11.0 120.5 91 9 08/25/99 495 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1188.0 10.0 118.5 90 9 08/25/99 496 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1189.0 10.5 119.5 91 9 08/25/99 497 TR 23067-3/slope 1081.0 7.0 119.5 91 9 08/26/99 498 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1207.0 10.0 118.5 91 2 08/26/99 499 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1208.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 08/26/99 500 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1198.0 12.5 122.0 92 3 08/26/99 501 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1200.0 13.0 118.5 91 2 08/26/99 502 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1196.0 12.0 121.5 92 3 08/26/99 503 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1197.0 11.0 122.0 92 3 08/26/99 504 Longfellow 1203.0 11.0 117.5 90 2 08/26/99 505 Longfellow 1204.0 10.5 123.5 93 3 08/26/99 506 TR 23067-3/Lot40 1226.0 12.0 121.0 91 3 08/26/99 507 TR 23067-3/Lot 40 1227.0 10.5 123.5 93 3 08/26/99 508 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1225.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 08/26/99 509 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1224.0 12.5 119.5 91 2 08/30/99 510 Nighthawk Pass 1175.0 13.5 1 1 1.0 90 16 08/30/99 511 Nighthawk Pass 1176.0 11.0 118.5 91 2 08/30/99 512 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1179.0 10.0 1225 92 3 08/30/99 513 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1180.0 9.0 122.5 92 3 08/30/99 514 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1190.0 9.5 119.0 90 9 08/30/99 515 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1191.0 9.0 121.5 91 3 08/30/99 516 TR 23067-3/L.ot 29 1182.0 13.0 116.5 87 3 08/30/99 517 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1183.0 10.0 115 0 86 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 4 61 c� TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMA.:..::. SOIL DATE NO. LOCATION (ft) (%n) (pef) (%) : TYPE 08/30/99 518 RT No. 516 12.0 115.5 90 7 08/30/99 519 RT No. 517 -- 9.5 120.0 90 3 08/30/99 520 TR 23067-6 1082.0 12.5 103.5 92 14 08/30/99 522 TR 23067-6/1-ot 29 1192.0 7.0 1 1 1.0 85 2 08/30/99 523 TR 23067-6/Lot 29 1193.0 9.5 114.0 87 2 08/30/99 524 TR 23067-6/1-ot 30 1184.0 10.0 96.0 78 16 08/30/99 525 TR 23067-6/Lot 30 1185.0 6.0 99.5 80 17 08/30/99 530 RT No. 522 -- 12.5 117.0 90 2 08/30/99 531 RT No. 523 12.0 115.0 90 9 08/30/99 532 RT No. 524 12.0 119.5 90 3 08/30/99 533 RT No. 525 -- 12.0 121.0 91 3 08/30/99 535 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1195.0 6.0 1 1 1.5 86 2 08/30/99 536 TR 23067-3/1-ot 29 1196.0 11.0 106.0 81 2 08/30/99 537 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1189.0 9.5 114:0 88 2 08/30/99 538 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1190.0 11.0 117.0 90 2 08/31/99 551 RT No. 535 -- 8.5 117.5 90 2 08/31/99 552 RT No. 536 7.5 120.0 92 2 08/31/99 553 RT No. 537 8.5 1 I 1 5 85 2 08/31/99 554 RT No. 553 -- 10.5 118.0 90 2 08/31/99 559 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1190.0 12.0 118.5 91 2 08/31/99 560 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1191.0 11.0 120.5 92 2 08/31/99 561 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1202.0 12.5 113.5 87 2 08/31/99 562 RT No. 561 -- 12.5 118.0 90 2 08/31/99 568 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1096.0 10.5 118.0 90 2 08/31/99 569 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1097.0 9.0 115.0 90 6 08/31/99 570 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1206.0 11.0 116.5 91 6 08/31/99 571 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1207.0 11.5 115.0 90 6 08/31/99 576 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1198.0 15.0 113.5 92 16 08/31/99 577 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1199.0 9.5 124.5 93 3 08/31/99 578 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1203.0 14.5 117.0 90 2 08/31/99 579 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1204.0 13.0 120.5 91 3 09/01/99 580 TR 23067-3/1-ot 29 1204.0 12.5 121.5 92 3 09/01/99 581 TR 23067-3/1-ot 29 1205.0 12.0 122.5 92 3 09/01/99 582 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1207.0 10.5 116.0 90 8 09/01/99 583 TR 23067-3/1.ot 28 1208.0 10.5 117.5 91 8 09/01/99 588 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1206.0 9.0 117.0 90 2 09/01/99 589 TR 23067-3/Lot27 1207.0 9.0 123.0 92 3 09/01/99 590 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1203.0 8.5 119.0 91 2 09/01/99 591 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1204.0 8.0 120.0 90 3 09/01/99 597 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1212.0 8.0 125.0 94 3 09/01/99 598 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1213.0 8.5 122.5 92 3 09/01/99 599 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1206.0 10.5 122.5 92 3 09/01/99 600 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1207.0 10.0 124.0 93 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 5 0?3 TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST DATE -. TEST_ =::. NO..:: TEST . .. - :LOCATION::;, ::::::ELEV. MY; . MOISTURE,: ` . M -:DENSITY C0MP._'_ :SOIL: . 09/01/99 601 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1205.0 8.0 124.0 93 3 09/01/99 602 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1206.0 8.5 123.0 92 3 09/01/99 603 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1203.0 11.5 116.5 90 8 09/01/99 604 TR 23067-3/L.ot 31 1204.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 09/02/99 608 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1211.0 9.5 115.0 90 6 09/02/99 609 TR 23067-3/l.ot 30 1212.0 8.5 118.0 92 6 09/02/99 610 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1215.0 12.5 122.0 92 3 09/02/99 611 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1216.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 09/02/99 619 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1205.0 10.5 116.5 91 6 09/02/99 620 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1206.0 9.5 117.5 92 6 09/02/99 621 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1209.0 11.5 123.5 93 3 09/02/99 622 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1210.0 13.0 122.0 92 3 09/02/99 627 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1223.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 09/02/99 628 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1224.0 11.0 121.5 91 3 09/02/99 629 TR 23067-3/L.ot 26 1223.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 09/02/99 630 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1224.0 10.0 122.5 92 3 09/02/99 635 TR 23067-3/L.ot 27 1218.0 12.0 116.5 91 6 09/02/99 636 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1219.0 12.0 120.0 90 3 09/02/99 637 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1216.0 12.5 122.5 92 3 09/03/99 643 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1224.0 8.5 119.5 90 3 09/03/99 644 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1225.0 8.5 121.0 91 3 09/03/99 645 TR 23067-3/l.ot 30 1218.0 14.0 117.0 90 2 09/03/99 646 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1219.0 13.0 119.5 90 3 09/03/99 655 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1227.0 10.5 119.5 90 3 09/03/99 656 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1228.0 9.5 126.5 95 3 09/03/99 657 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1223.0 12.5 119.5 90 3 09/03/99 658 TR 23067-3/Lot 28 1224.0 13.0 120.5 91 3 09/03/99 661 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1227.0 14.5 118.0 91 6 09/03/99 662 TR 23067-3/Lot26 1228.0 14.5 116.0 91 6 09/07/99 667 TR 23067-3/Lot 23 slope 1233.0 9.5 116.0 91 6 09/07/99 668 TR 23067-3/Lot 24 slope 1234.0 14.5 114.0 91 17 09/07/99 669 TR 23067-3/Lot 20 slope 1235.0 12.0 119.0 93 6 09/07/99 670 TR 23067-3/Lot 21 slope 1236.0 8.5 120.0 90 3 09/07/99 671 TR 23067-3/Lot 25 slope 1231.0 13.0 116.0 91 6 09/07/99 672 TR 23067-3/Lot 25 slope 1233.0 10.0 117.5 92 6 09/07/99 673 TR 23067-3/Lot 19 slope 1242.0 11.5 120.0 90 3 09/07/99 674 TR 23067-3/Lot 20 slope 1241.0 10.0 121.0 91 3 09/07/99 675 TR 23067-3/Lot 22 slope 1238.0 112.5 119.0 92 4 09/07/99 676 TR 23067-3/Lot 23 slope 1239.0 11.0 119.0 92 4 09/07/99 677 TR 23067-3/Lot 20 1244.0 9.5 118.5 91 4 09/07/99 678 TR 23067-3/Lot 20 1245.0 9.0 117.5 91 4 09/07/99 679 TR 23067-3/Lot 21 1242.0 10.5 117.5 90 2 09/07/99 680 TR 23067-3/Lot 21 1243.0 11.0 120.0 90 2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 6 c�U TABLE Field Density Test Results :TEST DATE _ -_TEST No. `':, TEST .' LOCATION' `. €ELEV.- (ft) MOISTURE^: (%a)' _ _` DENSITY . _ (Pet) COMP ,-_ (%) SOIL ' : TYPE 09/07/99 681 TR 23067-3/1.ot 25 1236.0 11.5 120.5 92 2 09/07/99 682 TR 23067-3/1-ot 25 1237.0 13.0 117.0 91 6 09/07/99 683 TR 23067-3/Lot24 .1239.0 12.0 117.0 90 2 09/07/99 684 TR 23067-3/1-ot 24 1240.0 8.5 115.5 90 6 09/07/99 685 TR 23067-3/1-ot 22 1243.0 7.5 112.5 86 2 09/07/99 686 TR 23067-3/Lot23 1244.0 7.0 114.5 88 2 09/07/99 687 RT No. 685 -- 10.5 117.5 90 2 09/07/99 688 RT No. 686 -- 7.5 120.5 92 2 09/10/99 724 TR 23067-1/Nighthawk Pass 1177.0 15.0 116.5 91 6 09/10/99 725 TR 23067-1/Nighthawk Pass 1178.0 12.5 117.5 92 6 09/10/99 731 TR 23067-3/1.ot 31 1180.0 9.0 112.5 90 17 09/10/99 732 TR 23067-3/1.ot 31 1181.0 5.5 111.5 87 6 09/13/99 737 RT No. 732 -- 9.5 108.0 84 6 09/13/99 738 RT No. 737 -- 9.0 116.0 91 6 09/13/99 741 TR 23067-1/Lot 24 1240.0 10.5 121.0 91 3 09/13/99 742 TR 23067-1/Lot 24 1241.0 11.0 122.0 92 3 09/13/99 743 TR 23067-1[Lot 23 1242.0 9.5 120.5 91 3 09/13/99 744 TR 23067-1/1.ot 23 1243.0 10.5 119.0 93 6 09/13/99 749 TR 23067-3/Lot31 1183.0 10.5 122.0 92 3 09/13/99 750 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1184.0 10.0 123.0 92 3 09/15/99 775 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1196.0 14.0 115.5 90 6 09/15/99 776 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1197.0 12.5 118.5 91 2 09/15/99 777 TR 23067-3/Lot31 1194.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 09/15/99 778 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1195.0 11.5 124.5 93 3 09/15/99 801 TR 23067-3/Lot37 1212.0 13.0 115.0 90 6 09/16/99 802 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 1213.0 9.5 121.0 91 3 09/16/99 821 TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1210.0 13.0 115.5 91 6 09/16/99 822 TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1211.0 12.0 120.0 90 3 09/16/99 831 TR 23067-3/1.ot 36 1216.0 7.5 110.0 91 13 09/16/99 832 TR 23067-3/Lot36 1217.0 6.5 110.5 91 13 09/16/99 833 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1214.0 9.0 111.0 92 13 09/16/99 834 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 1215.0 8.0 106.5 88 13 09/16/99 835 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1205.0 13.0 122.0 92 3 09/16/99 836 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1206.0 9.5 123.5 93 3 09/16/99 837 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1202.0 13.0 115.0 90 6 09/16/99 838 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1203.0 11.0 120.0 90 3 09/16/99 839 RT No. 834 -- 13.0 116.0 90 8 09/16/99 847 TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1215.0 13.5 116.0 91 6 09/16/99 848 TR 23067-3/Lot36 1216.0 13.0 116.5 91 6 09/16/99 849 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1206.0 13.0 117.5 90 2 09/16/99 850 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1207.0 13.5 118.5 91 2 09/16/99 851 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1206.0 12.5 119.5 91 2 09/16/99 852 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1207.0 10.0 118.5 91 2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 7 TABLEI Field Density Test Results TEST:: DATE . ° TEST-_ NO. .:TEST . - LOCATION ELEV.: (ft} ..::. .MOISTURE f°�} DENSITY (Pei ':.:: -CQMP. (%} SOIL: TYPE 09/17/99 859 TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1216.0 12.5 120.5 91 3 09/17/99 860 TR 23067-3/1-ot 35 1217.0 11.0 118.0 90 2 09/17/99 861 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1220.0 11.5 122.5 92 3 09/17/99 862 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 1221.0 11.5 124.5 94 3 09/17/99 867 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1216.0 7.5 120.0 90 3 09/17/99 868 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1217.0 9.5 122.0 92 3 09/17/99 869 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1221.0 9.5 1115 85 3 09/17/99 870 RT No. 869 -- 10.0 122.5 92 3 09/17/99 879 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1211.0 13.5 120.5 91 3 09/17/99 880 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1208.0 9.5 122.0 92 3 09/17/99 881 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1209.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 09/17/99 882 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1210.0 9.0 126.5 95 3 09/17/99 885 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1211.0 9.0 125.0 94 3 09/17/99 888 TR 23067-3/Lot 44 1243.0 10.0 119.5 93 6 09/17/99 889 TR 23067-3/Lot 44 1244.0 8.0 115.5 90 6 09/17/99 890 TR 23067-3/Lot40 1227.0 13.0 112.5 90 17 09/17/99 891 TR 23067-3/1-ot 40 1228.0 9.0 109.0 87 17 09/17/99 892 RT No. 891 -- 11.5 112.5 90 17 09/17/99 893 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1221.0 12.0 116.0 89 2 09/17/99 894 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1226.0 12.5 116.5 90 4 09/17/99 895 TR 23067-3/1-ot 39 1227.0 10.5 120.5 91 3 09/17/99 898 RT No. 893 -- 9.5 123.5 93 3 09/20/99 899 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1222.0 9.0 124.5 93 3 09/20/99 900 TR 23067-3/Lot 27 1221.0 10.0 121.5 92 3 09/20/99 901 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1222.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 09/20/99 902 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1214.5 11.0 120.5 91 3 09/20/99 903 TR 23067-3/1-ot 27 1213.5 11.5 121.5 91 3 09/20/99 916 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1224.0 8.5 120.0 90 3 09/20/99 917 TR 23067-3/Nighthawk Pass 1223.0 7.5 119.5 90 3 09/20/99 918 TR 23067-3/1-ot 41 1234.0 9.0 120.0 90 3 09/20/99 919 TR 23067-3/1-ot 41 1235.0 9.0 119.5 90 3 09/20/99 920 TR 23067-3/1-ot 40 1233.0 8.0 119.0 90 3 09/20/99 921 TR 23067-3/1-ot 40 1232.0 9.0 119.5 90 3 09/20/99 922 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1228.0 8.5 121.5 91 3 09/20/99 923 TR 23067-3/Lot39 12280 9.0 123.0 92 3 09/21/99 924 TR 23067-3/1-ot 21 finish slope 1240.0 8.0 105.0 81 4 09/21/99 925 TR 23067-3/1-ot 23 finish slope 1239.0 10.0 112.5 87 4 09/21/99 926 TR 23067-3/1-ot 18 finish slope 1240.0 10.0 112.5 86 4 09/21/99 927 RT No. 924 -- 8.5 117.0 90 4 09/21/99 928 RT No. 925 9.5 119.5 92 4 09/21/99 929 RT No. 926 -- 9.0 118.5 91 4 09/22/99 944 Lot 18 finish slope 1246.6 9.5 121.0 91 3 09/22/99 945 Lot 19 finish slope 1247.2 8.5 121 5 91 3 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 8 j6 TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST %.. TEST TEST ELEV. MOISTURE DENSITY COMP. . SOIL DATE, ::. NO. LOCATION (ft) (%) (Pel) M ; TYPE 09/22/99 946 Lot 20 finish slope 1247.3 8.5 121.5 91 3 09/22/99 947 Lot 21 finish slope 1247.3 9.5 123.0 93 3 09/22/99 948 Lot 22 finish slope 1246.4 9.0 125.5 95 3 09/22/99 949 TR 23067-3/1-ot 35 1220.0 12.5 119.5 90 3 09/22/99 950 TR 23067-3/1-ot 35 1221.0 11.0 126.0 95 3 09/22/99 951 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1126.0 12.0 121.0 91 3 09/22/99 952 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1125.0 12.5 120.5 91 3 09/22/99 953 TR 23067-3/Lot 26 1127.0 11.5 116.0 91 6 09/22/99 954 TR 23067-3/1-ot 26 1126.0 10.0 120.0 90 3 09/22/99 955 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1119.0 10.0 123.5 93 3 09/22/99 956 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1120.0 10.0 122.0 92 3 09/22/99 963 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow 1236.0 11.0 120.5 91 21 09/22/99 964 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1241.0 11.5 119.5 90 21 09/22/99 965 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1224.0 11.0 119.5 90 21 09/22/99 966 TR 23067-3/1-ot 28 1225.0 9.5 121.5 92 21 09/23/99 967 TR 23067-3/Butterfield Sta 49+00 1225.0 7.5 119.5 92 4 09/23/99 968 TR 23067-3/Butterfield Sta 49+10 1227.0 8.5 116.5 90 4 09/23/99 969 TR 23067-3/Butterfield Sta 50+65 1229.0 7.0 119.5 92 4 09/23/99 970 TR 23067-3/1-ot 26 1231.0 12.5 121.5 91 3 09/23/99 971 TR 23067-3/1-ot 26 1232.0 12.0 120.5 91 3 09/23/99 972 TR 23067-3/Lot 29 1221.0 7.5 118.5 91 2 09/23/99 973 TR 23067-3/1-ot 29 1222.0 7.5 124.0 93 3 09/23/99 974 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Sta 15+05 1226.0 11.0 120.5 91 3 09/23/99 975 TR 23067-3/1-ongfellow Sta 15+15 1227.0 9.5 121.5 91 3 09/23/99 980 TR 23067-3/Lot 44 finish slope 1246.2 9.5 120.5 91 3 09/23/99 981 TR 23067-3/Lonfellow Sta 16+40 1214.0 8.0 124.0 93 3 09/23/99 982 TR 23067-3/Lonfellow Sta 16+40 1212.0 11.0 112.5 88 6 09/23/99 983 TR 23067-3/Lonfellow Sta 17+40 1212.0 9.5 110.5 86 6 09/23/99 984 TR 23067-3/Lonfellow Sta 17+40 1213.0 9.5 116.5 91 6 09/23/99 985 TR 23067-3/Lot 23 finish slope 1244.6 8.0 117.5 92 6 09/23/99 986 TR 23067-3/1-ot 24 finish slope 1242.1 7.5 122.0 92 3 09/23/99 987 TR 23067-3/Lot 25 finish slope 1239.6 8.0 118.0 90 6 09/23/99 994 TR 23067-3/Lonfellow Sta 16+35 1215.0 9.0 119.5 90 3 09/23/99 995 TR 23067-3fLongfellow Sta 15+60 1213.0 8.0 126.0 95 3 09/23/99 996 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Sta 15+65 1215.0 8.5 127.5 96 3 09/23/99 997 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Sta 14+90 1225.0 9.5 117.0 90 6 09/23/99 998 TR 23067-3/1-ot 41 1239.0 8.5 120.0 90 3 09/23/99 999 RT No. 982 -- 10.0 119.5 93 6 09/23/99 1000 RT No. 983 -- 9.5 120.5 94 6 09/24/99 1030 TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1205.0 11.5 109.5 86 6 09/24/99 1031 TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1204.0 10.0 112.0 87 6 09/24/99 1032 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1203.0 8.5 114.0 89 6 09/24/99 1033 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Sta 18+25 1206.0 9.5 112.5 88 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 4 TABLE T -I 9 -S, TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST : DATE ;TEST. NO. .°. ° TEST. = LOCATION ..ELF -V.:; '(ft) MOISTURE : (%a) .: .. ::DENSITY .°=.COMP. (Pets- (°xo) . . :SOIL ."€ TYPE . . 09/24/99 1034 TR 23067-3/1.ongfellow Sta 18+25 1208.0 10.5 106.0 83 6 09/24/99 1035 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Sta 18+25 1209.0 8.0 116.5 91 6 09/24/99 1036 TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1223.0 9.0 121.0 91 3 09/24/99 1037 TR 23067-3/1-ot 36 1224.0 9.5 126.5 95 3 09/24/99 1038 TR 23067-3/Lot 37 12250 11.0 123.0 93 3 09/24/99 1039 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1226.0 12.0 116.0 91 6 09/24/99 1040 TR 23067-3/Lot 38 1228.0 12.5 118.5 91 3 09/24/99 1041 TR 23067-3/1-ot38 1229.0 9.5 119.5 93 3 09/24/99 1056 RT No. 1030 -- 11.0 116.0 92 6 09/24/99 1057 RT No. 1031 10.0 117.5 91 6 09/24/99 1058 RT No. 1032 9.0 116.0 91 6 09/24/99 1059 RT No. 1033 10.0 116.5 91 6 09/24/99 1060 RT No. 1034 -- 10.5 118.0 92 6 09/27/99 1067 TR 23067-3/Lot40 1236.1 8.0 128.0 95 20 09/27/99 1068 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1233.0 10.5 122.5 91 20 09/27/99 1087 TR 23067-6/Lot 26 FG 6.5 123.5 93 3 09/27/99 1088 TR 23067-6/1.ot 27 FG 7.5 127.5 94 20 09/27/99 1089 TR 23067-6/Lot 28 FG 7.5 1205 91 3 10/11/99 1408 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1439.0 10.5 114.5 90 17 10/11/99 1421 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 35 1441.0 6.0 119.5 90 9 10/11/99 1422 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1442.0 6.5 122.5 92 9 10/11/99 1423 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1440.0 8.5 122.0 92 9 10/11/99 1424 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 14410 7.5 126.0 95 9 10/11/99 1425 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 34 1443.0 10.5 120.0 90 9 10/12/99 1450 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1242.0 12.0 119.0 95 19 10/12/99 1451 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1243.0 14.5 113.0 90 17 10/12/99 1452 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1241.0 11.0 115.5 92 17 10/12/99 1453 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1242.0 .13.0 113.0 90 17 10/12/99 1454 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1244.0 11.5 108.5 87 17 10/12/99 1455 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1245.0 12.0 111.0 88 17 10/12/99 1456 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1242.0 12.5 110-5 88 17 10/12/99 1457 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1243.0 10.0 1095 88 17 10/12/99 1458 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1244.0 13.0 118.0 94 17 10/12/99 1459 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1245.0 12.5 116.0 93 17 10/12/99 1460 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 34 1242.0 12.0 113.5 91 17 10/12/99 1461 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1243.0 11.0 114.5 92 17 10/13/99 1462 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1246.0 14.0 113.0 90 17 10/13/99 1463 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1248.0 13.5 117,5 94 17 10/13/99 1464 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1248.0 12.5 117.0 93 17 10/13/99 1465 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1250.0 14.0 117.0 93 17 10/13/99 1466 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 34 1251.0 12.0 116.0 93 17 10/13/99 1467 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 34 1253.0 14.5 114.0 91 17 10/13/99 1468 RT No. 1454 -- 14.0 113.5 91 17 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 10 0�6 TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST DATE TEST NO. TEST LOCATION ELEV. (ft) MOISTURE (30) DENSITY (Pet) COW.:,:- (%) '..', SOIL `,..TYPE 10/13/99 1469 RT No. 1455 -- 13.0 1135 91 17 10/13/99 1470 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1257.0 12.0 118.5 95 17 10/13/99 1471 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1259.0 13.5 115.5 92 17 10/13/99 1472 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1261.0 13.0 117.0 93 17 10/13/99 1473 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1262.0 14.0 1145 91 17 10/13/99 1474 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1264.0 14.5 114.5 92 17 10/13/99 1475 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1265.0 13.0 115.5 92 17 10/13/99 1476 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1267.0 12.5 117.0 93 17 10/13/99 1477 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1269.0 13.5 114.0 91 17 10/14/99 1484 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1271.0 14.0 114.5 92 17 10/14/99 1485 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1273.0 15.5 113.0 90 17 10/15/99 1502 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1213.0 11.5 113.5 91 17 10/15/99 1503 TR 23067-3/Lot31 1214.0 13.0 115.0 92 17 10/15/99 1504 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1215.0 10.5 115.5 92 17 10/15/99 1505 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1216.0 10.5 114.0 91 17 10/18/99 1506 RT No. 1457 -- 10.0 118.5 95 17 10/18/99 1507 Slope face TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1268.0 12.5 120.0 96 17 10/18/99 1508 Slope face TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1256.0 10.5 117.5 94 17 10/18/99 1509 Slope face TR 23067-3/1.ot 32 1254.0 11.0 118.5 95 17 10/18/99 1510 Slope face TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1271.0 10.0 118.0 94 17 10/18/99 1511 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1217.0 13.0 l 1 1.0 89 17 10/18/99 1512 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1218.0 11.5 110.5 88 17 10/18/99 1513 RT No. 1511 -- 11.5 114.5 92 17 10/18/99 1514 RT No. 1512 -- 12.0 116.5 93 17 10/18/99 1515 TR 23067-3/Lot31 1219.0 11.0 118.5 95 17 10/18/99 1516 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1220.0 11.0 117.5 94 17 10/18/99 1517 TR 23067-3/L.ot 30 1219.0 11.5 117.0 94 17 10/18/99 1518 TR 23067-3/Lot 30 1220.0 10.0 116.5 93 17 10/19/99 1531 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1233.0 9.5 120.5 94 6 10/19/99 1532 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1238.0 12.5 116.0 90 6 10/19/99 1533 RT No. 1456 -- 11.5 117.5 91 6 10/19/99 1534 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 34 1243.0 8.5 118.5 92 6 10/19/99 1535 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1243.0 10.5 119.5 93 6 10/19/99 1536 Fill slope TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1267.0 11.5 119.0 92 6 10/19/99 1537 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1255.0 10.0 120.5 94 6 10/19/99 1538 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 32 1237.0 12.0 118.0 92 6 10/19/99 1539 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 33 1227.0 9.5 117.0 91 6 10/19/99 1540 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 34 1226.0 10.5 116.0 90 6 10/19/99 1541 Fill slope TR 23067-3/1-ot 36 1229.0 12.5 116.0 90 6 10/19/99 1548 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1214.0 8.0 119.5 93 6 10/19/99 1549 TR 23067-3/Longfellow Ave 1215.0 10.0 117.0 91 6 10/19/99 1550 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1216.0 8.5 121.0 94 6 10/19/99 1551 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1217.0 10.0 119.5 93 6 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 11 a5 TABLE Field Density Test Results TEST DATE TEST'... `NO. :. :'. TEST. LOCATION.': ELEV. M) MOISTURE f %) . `` DENSITY (pef) :COX (% ' 10/21/99 1575 TR 23067-6 1223.0 5.0 123.0 94 1576 TR 23067-3/Lot 39 1233.0 5.0 120.0 95 '10/21/99 10/21/99 1577 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1219.0 8.0 118.5 92 10/21/99 1578 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1220.0 8.5 121.5 91 10/21/99 1579 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1214.0 7.5 122.5 94 10/21/99 1580 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1215.0 8.0 119.5 94 10/21/99 1581 TR 23067-3/Longfellow 1216.0 10.0 118.0 92 1615 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1217.0 11.0 118.5 92 '10/23/99 10/23/99 1616 TR 23067-3/1-ot 31 1218.0 10.5 118.5 92 10/25/99 1631 TR 23067-3/1-ot 30 1221.5 7.5 127.0 96 10/25/99 1632 TR 23067-3/Lot 31 1221.0 7.5 125.0 95 10/25/99 1633 TR 23067-3/Lot 32 1221.0 5.5 122.5 93 10/25/99 1634 TR 23067-3/Lot 33 1221.0 6.0 119.0 90 1635 TR 23067-3/Lot 35 1223.0 6.0 116.5 88 '10/25/99 10/25/99 1636 TR 23067-3/Lot 36 1225.0 75 116.0 89 10/25/99 1637 TR 23067-3/1-ot 37 1227.5 3.5 111.5 85 1638 TR 23067-3/1-ot 38 1230.5 4.0 116.5 89 t10/25/99 10/26/99 1692 RT No. 1635 8.0 124.0 95 10/26/99 1693 RT No. 1636 10.5 118.5 91 1694 RT No. 1637 6.5 120.0 92 '10/26/99 10/26/99 1695 RT No. 1638 8.5 120.5 92 1 1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 ' J.N. 141-99 TABLE T -I 12 0 TABLE II Lot Summary ... ..a-p'lc+i .,. . � �T'Lot�Number._ .?�, �FY'Y� '•.'ta.. .. i, . i - .. .i'• _..- ':�`.'.%R�U.3:33: 4:si.ClE Cut; •Fill:Tra^n�siti�}o(�n>�=&�;� b: ytJr::.L'i: t. "v)kt"jWv'Nf� ��}'' ):::�..�..:-,; ^ y' "- , e ' . _. '.: ".G.na :C��.=)-• MaYimum:D`epth�'of�,Eill�*;�t� �.� �..�,�'i*fi,.: ".�'�`... _ ' .: h_ ., �a ,�'nn�,! - Tract 23067-3 18 F 27 19 F 27 20 T 5 21 C 3 22 C 3 23 C 3 24 C 3 25 C 3 26 T 13 27 F 35 28 F 57 29 F 53 30 F 27 31 F 27 32 C 5 33 C 3 34 C -- 35 C 5 36 T 15 37 F 20 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 3/ Lot Summary (Continued) PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC OCTOBER 28, 1999 I.N. 141-99 3; 'CueflUNT. AM 38 F 16 39 F 28 40 F 16 41 C 5 42 C -- 43 c -- 44 c 3 45 T 5 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC OCTOBER 28, 1999 I.N. 141-99 3; REFERENCES Petra Geotechnical, Inc., 1989a, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. 1989b, Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. , 1999a, Supplemental Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Grading Plans, Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, dated , J.N. 141-99, March 10, 1999. 1999b, Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated May 14, 1999. , 1999c, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading, Lots 1 through 17 and 46 through 61, Tract 23067-3, Redhawk Development in the Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated September 16, 1999. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 33 ' APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST CRITERIA Laboratory Maximum Dry Density ' Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected sample of sod in accordance with ASTM( Test Method D t557-91. Pertinent test values are given on Plate A -t. ' Expansion Potential ' Expansion index tests were performed on selected samples of soil accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standard Test No. 18-2. Expansion potential classifications were determined from UBC Table 18-I-13 on the basis of the expansion index values. Test results and expansion potentials are presented on Plate A-2. ' Soluble -Sulfate Analysis ' Chemical analyses were performed on selected samples of soil to determine soluble sulfate contents. These tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Test results are included on Plate A-2. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 ' J.N. 141-99 is LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY' Sample Number Soil Type Optimum Moisture (%) Maximum Dry Density (cfl I Yellow -tan SAND w/tr. clay 9.0 130.5 2 Dk. brown tine to medium silty SAND 9.0 130.5 3 Reddish -brown fine to medium silty SAND 9.0 133.0 4 Yellow-brown silty SAND 9.5 130.0 5 Yellow-brown silty SAND 9.5 118.5 6 Brown siltv SAND 9.5 128.0 7 Brown siltv SAND 10.0 131.0 8 Yellow-brown silty SAND 9.0 129.0 9 Yellow-brown silty SAND 8.5 132.0 10 Lt. brown silty SAND 12.0 113.5 11 Dk. brown silty SAND 95 131.0 12 Yellow-brown SAND 16.5 105.5 13 Lt. brown coarse SAND 13.5 120.5 14 Black clavev SILT 16.5 112.5 15 Black SILT w/tr. clay and sand 16.0 110.5 16 Yellow-brown silty fine SAND 12.5 123.0 17 Yellow-brown silty fine SAND 12.0 124.5 18 Yellow-brown silty fine SAND 14.5 t 15.5 19 Dark brown Silty SAND 11.5 124.5 20 Brown Siltv SAND 8.0 134.5 (1) PER TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557-91 (2) PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARD TEST I8-2 (3) PER UBC TABLE 18-1-B PLATE A-1 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 3G EXPANSION INDEX TEST DATA' Lot Number Expansion Index Expansion Potentia0 18 11 Very Low 19 through 21 14 Very Low 22 through 25 1 Very Low 26 through 29 10 Very Low 30 through 31 3 Very Low 32 through 34 3 Very Low 35 through 38 6 Very Low 39 through 41 0 Very Low 42 through 43 1 Very Low 44 through 45 5 Very Low SOLUBLE SULFATES' Lot Sulfate Content (%a) _. 18 0.0024 19 through 21 0.048 22 through 25 0.1728 26 through 29 0.0768 30 through 31 0.0768 32 through 34 0.1152 35 through 38 0.0576 39 through 41 0.0288 42 through 43 00672 44 through 45 0.0960 PLATE A-2 PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. OCTOBER 28, 1999 J.N. 141-99 .� 2 n L RESPONSE 70 GEO,TECHNICAL.REPORT REVIEW SI-IEET (DATED:513199)'BY RIVERSIDE COUNTY Pti1NNING DEPART` iENT,';TRACTS 23067-1 AND 23067-31'THROUd.4I M67-6,:REDHAWK SPECIFIC PLAN TE ' ECUiAAREA, RlVERSIDE.COUNTY, CALIFORNIA vi CENTfX;HOMES 2280';War.low-CirHe,-Suite 150.' C6tona, California91720 14� 099 99:;::` 5 .G � PETRA COSTA MESA • SAN DIEGO • TEMECULA • LOS ANGELES ' May 14, 1999 J. N. 141-99 t CENTEX HOMES ' 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, California 91720 Attention: Mr. Harold Meyers ' Subject: Response to Geotechnical Report Review Sheet (Dated 5/3/99) by Riverside County Planning Department, Tracts 23067-1 and 23067-3 through 23067-6, Redhawk Specific Plan, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California This letter has been prepared by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. (Petra) in response to the subject geotechnical review sheet prepared by the Riverside County Planning ' Department. The review sheet addresses Petra's supplement investigation and grading -plan review report dated March 10, 1999, for Tracts 23067-1 and 23067-3 ' through 23067-6 (see References). For convenience, the review -sheet comments are reiterated and a copy of the geotechnical report review sheet is attached. ' Comment No. 1 — "The report should include an engineering geologic ' evaluation of the proposed cut slopes (structure, bedding orientation, cross sections, areas of potential instability)." ' Response — Numerous cut slopes are planned throughout the proposed development which will expose Quaternary bedrock of the Pauba Formation. The Pauba Formation, as observed onsite, is a massive to thickly bedded, coarse ' to fine silty sandstone. Bedding orientations are generally horizontal to near horizontal with minor dips from 0 to 5 degrees in random orientations. ' Based on our experience in this specific area, Petra has evaluated the highest proposed cut slope using circular analysis for gross stability. Because of the lack of well-defined, continuous planar features within the Pauba Formation, geologic PETRA GEOTECHNICAL INC 27620 Commerce Center Dr. Ste. 103 Temecula. CA 92590 t Tel: (909) 699-6193 Fax (909) 699-6197 Petrate@ibm.net Pa ' CENTEX HOMES May 14, 1999 ' TRs 23067-1 & 23067-3 - 23067-1lRedhawk J. N. 141-99 Page 2 cross-sections depicting bedding for analysis is considered unnecessary at this time. Each slope will be mapped during rough -grading operations to confirm the favorable structure and the type of bedrock materials exposed on the slope face. t If any adverse conditions are encountered, engineering analysis and slope - stability calculations will be conducted. ' Comment No. 2 — "The report should include an evaluation of the surficial stability of the proposed slopes." ' Response -- Surficial slope -stability calculations have been performed for the proposed 2:1 [horizontal: vertical (h:v)] cut and fill slopes considering an infinite ' slope height and a vertical depth of saturation of 4 feet with seepage parallel to the slope face. The calculations are presented on Plates B-1 through B-4 of Appendix B. ' For evaluation of 2:1 (h:v) cut slopes, the lowest shear -strength parameters determined for in-situ bedrock materials (Pauba Formation) as presented in ' Petra's original geotechnical investigation report dated May 8, 1989 (see References) were used in the calculations. The lowest shear -strength parameters are an internal friction angle of �=36 degrees and a cohesion value of c=590 ' psf. The calculations resulted in a factor of safety (FOS) of 3.51 for surficial stability (Plate B-1). ' For 2:1 (h:v) fill slopes, three sets of calculations were performed based on the lowest, average and highest shear -strength parameters determined for samples of ' onsite soil and bedrock materials remolded to 90 percent of maximum dry density as presented in Petra's original geotechnical investigation report (see References). The range in shear -strength values and resultant calculated FOS are ' summarized below. • Lowest: rp=34 degrees and c=100 psf - FOS = 1.19 (Plate B-2) ' • Average: =32 degrees and c=238 psf - FOS = 1.77 (Plate B-3) • Highest: 31 degrees and c=380 psf - FOS = 2.40 (Plate B-4) ' In summary, cut slopes exposing Pauba Formation bedrock materials are expected to posses an adequate FOS for surficial stability. On the other hand, the surficial stability of fill slopes will be dependent on the in-situ compacted ' shear strength of the fill materials used for construction of the slopes. Based o the above FOS, it is recommended that a certain amount of selective grading be ' performed to assure that the fill materials within a horizontal distance of 10± 3 ' CENTEX HOMES May 14, 1999 TRs 23067-1 & 23067-3 - 23067-1/Redhawk J. N. 141-99 ' Page 3 feet from the finish slope surfaces possess an internal friction angle of at least t=30 degrees and a cohesion value of at least c=190 psf. To assure long-term surficial stability of all cut and fill slopes to be constructed ' within the subject tracts, the slopes should be landscaped and maintained in accordance with the recommendations presented in the 1999 report. • Comment No. 3 — "Fills are' proposed to be at least 65 feet thick. Consideration should be given to greater compaction effort (95%) within the lower portions of the deep fills, so as to mitigate the potential for long term settlement. " Response -- As discussed on Page 19, Paragraph 2 of Petra's 1999 report, it is anticipated that the total maximum settlement (i.e., primary settlement) of deep compacted -fill materials will be less than approximately 1.5 inches and that this settlement will occur within a maximum time span of approximately 2 months following the completion of grading. For fills up to about 65 feet deep and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, long-term secondary settlement of deep -fill materials consisting of granular soils (such as those that exist within the site) are typically on the order of about 0.1 percent of the fill thickness (for fine-grained soils, such as silts and clays, long-term secondary settlements are typically about 0.2 percent or greater of the fill thickness). Based on this general guideline, maximum long-term settlement of the deepest fills planned within the subject tracts is not expected to exceed approximately 0.75 inch over the lifetime of the proposed development (design lifetime of 50 years). As such, the anticipated maximum long-term settlement within any area of the project is expected to be well within acceptable tolerable limits. Therefore, compaction of fill materials to a higher relative compaction (such as 95 percent) is not considered critical or necessary. Additionally, settlement monuments will be installed as recommended to evaluate settlement of the deep fills. • Comment No. 4 — "The geotechnical maps in the report indicate test borings on this site drilled by Pacific Soils. The report does not, however, include reference to a Pacific Soils report or the logs of the borings. This issue should be clarified." Response — The subject borings drilled by Pacific Soils were located on our grading plans to provide additional geotechnical information. These borings were never published in any report by Pacific Soils and only summary logs were obtained and provided by our client for our review. A summary of the Pacific Soils' logs is presented in Appendix A. it 1 CENTEX HOMES May 14, 1999 TRs 23067-1 & 23067-3 - 23067-1/Redhawk J. N. 141-99 Page 4 • Comment No. 5 — "The liquefaction potential on this site should be reevaluated with respect to anticipated rise in groundwater levels after development, liquefaction potential within alluvium in areas adjacent to Temecula Creek, and lateral spreading in areas adjacent to Temecula Creek." Response -- Petra concurs that a rise in groundwater levels can be anticipated after development; however, due to their dense nature, neither the compacted fil l materials that will be placed within the site nor the underlying bedrock materials ' supporting the fills will be subject to liquefaction. In areas adjacent to Temecula Creek, Petra has recommended that removals ' extend to groundwater and to an equal horizontal distance beyond the limits of proposed grading. Therefore, the compacted fills placed within these areas will be supported by alluvial materials that will be left in-place below the ' groundwater table. Based on data presented in Petra's Borings B-1 and B-2, the alluvial materials below the groundwater table are not subject to liquefaction. This conclusion is based on their high in-situ densities, on the high to very high ' blow counts required to advance the soil sampler and on the results of consolidation tests which indicate that the alluvial soils below the groundwater table are not subject to any significant settlement under increased overburden ' loads. It is also Petra's conclusions that any rise in groundwater levels after development is not a concern with respect to increasing liquefaction potential. ' In summary, the potential for liquefaction and lateral spreading to occur within the site, including areas adjacent to Temecula Creek, is not considered likely. ' Comment No. 6 — "The report indicates that alluvial removals shall be made to either bedrock, dense native soils that have a relative compaction of 85% or ' greater, or to groundwater. The report should consider including recommendations for evaluating these dense native soils with respect to ' hydroconsolidation." Response -- Based on the results of the consolidation tests accompanying the referenced report, approved competent native soils (relative compaction of 85 ' percent or greater) that may remain in-place below the proposed fills are expected to exhibit a zero to negligible (less than 0.2 percent) potential for ' hydroconsolidation. In -grading sampling and laboratory testing of any native S CENTEX HOMES May 14, 1999 TRs 23067-1 & 23067-3 - 23067-1/Redhawk J. N. 141-99 Page 5 (alluvial soils to remain in- lace' confirm the anticipates( conditions. However, the recommended removal depths provided in our report were based on total removal of unsaturated alluvium to bedrock or to the groundwater table. Therefore, we do not expect to leave any unsaturated alluvium in-place that will require supplemental sampling and testing. • Comment No. 7 — "The report should clearly indicate if building permits and/or foundation construction should occur prior to completion of the recommended settlement monitoring program." Response -- The issuance of building permits and/or construction of building foundations should be delayed until such time that the settlement -monitoring program indicates primary consolidation of deep compacted -fill areas is complete. • Comment No. 8 — "the second paragraph on page 14 of the report indicates that proposed cut slopes are grossly stable to the planned height of 40 feet. T his is inconsistent with the 82 foot high cut slopes evaluated in other portions of the report and shown on the grading plans. This inconsistency should be clarified." ' Response -- Page 14, Paragraph 2 of Petra's 1999 report that refers to a maximum planned cut -slope height of 40 feet is a typographical error. The correct height is 82 feet. 1 1 ek to CENTEX HOMES May 14, 1999 TRs 23067-1 & 23067-3 - 23067-1/Redhawk J.N. 141-99 Page 6 We trust the comments and recommendations presented in this letter adequately address the concerns expressed in the geotechnical -report review sheet. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact this office. Respectfully submitted, NRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. fal Geologist 1348 CB/RJF/MB/SJ/keb P �' . 9CA00 1 iRaCE3664410f to s p Attachments: Geotechnical Report Review Sheet References Appendix A - Pacific Soils Summary of Boring Logs Appendix B - Surficial Slope Stability Analyses Distribution: (2) Addressee (2) Riverside County Planning Department Attention: Mr. Steve Kupferman 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW SHEET ' REVIEW OF GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS INCLUDING- Report NCLUDINGReport Date Date Received Type of Report Preliminary (Initial) ElSoil Report Ingrading or Interim Roughgmde Compaction ❑ Geologic Report x Supplement or Addendw ' Grading Plan Review X Geotechnical 3/10/99 3/12/99 Paving Design ' Final Design By the Consulting Firm Petra Geotechnical Their Job # 141-99 1 Tract # TR 23067-1,-3,-4,-5,-6 Site Address Butterfield Stage Rd & Nighthawk Pass Redhawk Specific Plan Temecula area Lots ' Grading Plan Check No. (if any) BGR 990024 Preliminary Grading Permit (# if issued) Precise Grading Permit (# if issued) ' Assessor's Parcel No(s). Distribution Developer/Owner Centex Homes X Address 2280 Wardlow Circle Ste. 150 Corona CA 91720 Civil Engineer/Architect Hunsaker & Assoc. X Soil Engineer Petra x ' Engineering Geologist Petra x ACTION ' ❑ Report Approved ❑ Report Approved Subject to Conditions below: ❑ Prior to approval of report attend to X Prior to report approval and issuance of grading permits submit: I ) The report should include an engineering geologic evaluation oftheproposed cut slopes (structure bedding orientation cross sections areas ofpotential instability).2)The report ' should include an evaluation of the surficial stability of the proposed slopes 3) Fills are proposed to be at least 65 feet thick Consideration should be given to greater compaction effort (95'%) within the lower portions of the deep fills so as to miuga(c the poicnual for long term settlement 4) The ecoicchnical maps in the report indicate test borings on this site drilled by Pacific Soils The report does not however, include reference to a Pacific Soils report or the logs of the borings This issue should be clarified. 5) The liquefaction potential on this site should be reevaluated with respect to anticipated rise in groundwater levels after development lipuefactton potential within alluvium in areas adiacent to Temecula Creek and lateral spreading in areas admcent to Temecula Creek 6) The report indicates that alluvial removals shall be made to either bedrock dense native ' sods that have a relative compaction of 85R, or greater, or to groundwater. The report should consider including reconuncndations for evaluating, these dense native soils Wath respect to hvdroconsolidation 7) The report should clear) indicate if building permits and/or foundation constmctiorl should occur prior to completion of the recommended settlement ' monitoring progr in 8) The second paragraph on page )4 of the report indicates that proposed cut slopes are grossly stable to the planned height o eet. This is incoinsistent with the 82 foot high cut slopes evaluated in other portions of the report and shown on th adin tans. This in nsistenc ' ould be clarified. cc: Grading Z i Report reviewed by: i Date: 5/3/99 Steven A. upfermah, Senior gmeeiing Geologist 'CEG -1205 G:\GEORI-V TR23067 REFERENCES ' Petra Geotechnical, Inc., Supplemental Soils Engineering and Engineering Geologic Investigation, Portion of Redhawk Project, Vesting of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23064, 23065, 23066 and 23067, Rancho California, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated May 8, 1989. , 1997, Supplemental Evaluation of Faulting, Southwest Portion of Redhawk Project, Rancho California Area, County of Riverside, California, J.N. 298-87, dated March 1, 1989. 1999, Supplemental Subsurface investigation and Geotechnical Review of 40 -Scale Rough -Grading Plans, ' Tract 23067-1 and Tracts 23067-3 through 23067-6, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California, J.N. 141-99, dated March 10, 1999. PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 14, 1999 J.N. 141-99 E APPENDIX A ' PACIFIC SOILS SUMMARY OF BORING LOGS PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 14, 1999 J.N. 141-99 7/�aw- pf0 %- 3, - y, -S, - It BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 3 'GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1155.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -2 DATE FINISHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH (FT) 56.50 LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-13 Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 7/�aw- pf0 %- 3, - y, -S, - It w aaN sF w drn uJ) (7 ac7 'aY ~Z OYZ)m wJw 'g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION u>-w< aoO o_ V~J HS wa OFa wmd vJi 00 Oo O O H M-1155 J ALLUVIUM (Qal): SILTY SAND, fine-grained, brown, dry, loose. 5 150--- 2/1 /2 @ 5.0 ft. slightly moist. 10 -1145 ---SPT 2/2/2 @ 10.0 ft. SILTY SAND, fine to coarse-grained, brown, moist, loose; micaceous. 15 140 SPT 3/2/3 20 135 ---SPT 2/2/4 @ 20.0 ft. SITLY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, reddish brown, moist, loose; micaceous. continued. sAMP ES: PACIFIC SOILS �D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE SZGROUNDWATER - a ENGINEERING, INC. 3❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE ® BULK SAMPLE O TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-2 7/�aw- pf0 %- 3, - y, -S, - It GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 3 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8118/98 GROUND ELEV. 1155.0 BORING DESIG PSE -2 DATE FINISHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH (FT) 56.50 LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-13 Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING r O� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION u~_ a a��_ = N OLL w rn~ rn (7y p0 mw NQ O N M �U on D SPT 4/5/7 / ALLUVIUM (Call : Continued; CLAYEY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, reddish brown, moist, moderately dense; jmicaceous.®q i 4/5/6 j30-1125 @ 30.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, SPT medium brown, moist, moderately dense; micaceous. 35 120 SPT 5/7/10 y @ 36.0 ft. SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium brown, moist, moderately dense; micaceous. 40- 115 6/6/6 SPT 40.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium brown, moist, moderately dense; micaceous. @ 44.0 ft. SAND, medium- to coarse-grained, light brown, moist, moderately dense; micaceous. 45 110 SPT 7/5/5 46.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, / medium brown, moist, medium dense to dense; l micaceous. @ 49.0 ft. SAND, medium- to coarse-grained, light brown, slightly moist, moderately dense; micaceous. continued. sAMP PES: PACIFIC SOILS 0 DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 4GROUNDWATER � ISPT (SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ❑ ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE Q TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 3 of 3 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECTNAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1 1 55.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -2 DATE FINISHED 8118/98 GW DEPTH (FT) 56.50 LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING /i O j0 7°e aF Z O w to a d � �i 3 0 0 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION u z — 5i T W OLL W N~ N OJ ON 000 MWU 00 = 0 V - m J G SPT 2112113 ALLUVIUM IQall: Continued, 55-1100 SPT 2/14/1 �Uy$ l= @ 56.5 ft. becomes wet. 60 095 0/10110 •°tee OU SPT PAUBA FORMATION IOgsl: SANDSTONE, fine- to - coarse-grained, light brown, wet hard; micaceous. 65 090 D 23/50 TOTAL DEPTH 67.0 FT. @ 56.5 FT. GROUNDWATER SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS ❑D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 4GROUNDWATER s❑sPT�srLrrsroolv�sAMPLE — a ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-2 /i /1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18198 GROUND ELEV. 1180.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -3 DATE FINISHED 8/18198 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING /1 J J�O > w— men~ O w UJ wLL �i 3 0 0 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION v~Z w O = �> 00 >ZaQ� =0 x o i_ rn J r rn �v ❑o D m J ALLUVIUM (Qal): SILTY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium brown, dry to slightly moist, loose; micaceous. DRAFT 5 175 4/4/5 SPT 10 170 SPT 4/3/4 @ 14.0 ft. SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, orangish brown, slightly moist, loose; micaceous. 15 165 --_SPT 5/4/6 20 160 SPT 5/6/7 - - PAUBA FORMATION (Qos): SANDSTONE, medium- to coarse-grained, light orangish brown, dry to slightly moist, hard; micaceous. continued. SAMP PEs: PACIFIC SOILS ® DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE ?GROUNDWATER - ENGINEERING, INC. S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOOF SAMPLE ® BULK SAMPLE O TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-3 /1 iy BORING LOG SHEET 2 of 2 'GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1180.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -3 DATE FINISHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING iy w w Y (7 OJ Jw a ¢� �— o f Z O ¢ v) O �m ¢2 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION wZ n~ ¢� w O m O> 00 yz ¢w ¢ 0H y J m rp 2V pO O J SPT 27/30/3 ,. PAUBA FORMATION load: Continued. TOTAD � 26.5 F7. NO Avmll SAMPLE: PACIFIC SOILS ®DRIVEIVE (R ING) SAMPLE 4 GROUNDWATER - ❑ ENGINEERING, INC. S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE ®BULKSAMPLE MIITUBESAMPLE - PLATE A-3 iy 1 1 1 I GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECTNAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1168.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -4 DATE FINISHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-13 Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 Ibs NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 1 1 1 I 13 Y w_ U z ¢ A wLL �> g 3 0 �g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION �Z yZaQ = m O— w N~ N 0 F c7y 00 ¢o � o N O ALLUVIUM IQal1: SILTY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium brown, dry, loose; micaceous. 165 5 4/4/5 i @ 5.0 ft. becoa tIL1'1a f T SPT -1160- @ 9.0 ft. loose to moderately dense. 10 3/3/3- SPT 155 15 13/4/4 SPT 150 @ 19.0 ft. SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, medium brown, slightly moist, moderately dense; micaceous; some 20 coarse grained sand. SPT 4/6/6 145 continued. SAMPLEPACIFIC SOILS FDI DRIVE (R SCROUNDWATER ENGINEERING, INC. FS❑SPT (SPLIT SPOON)SAMPLE ® BULK SAMPLE © TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-4 13 I 1 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 ` DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1168.0 BORING DESIG- PSE -4 DATE FINISHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH FT) LOGGED BY PDT DRIL ER 2-13 Drlllina DRIVE WT. 140 lbs NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING /to W W ` 0 J W . a d ii 3 0 0� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION NZ n >Zaa Ho x n w WOLL w F O f - Nr W ON m J 2O n 00 SPT 7/8/8 ALLUVIUM (Call : Continued; SIi' e- to coarse-grained, medium brown t �?sk9btly moist, moderately dense; micaus. j ceo 1140 :A 30 6/4/5 i SPT 31.0 ft. becomes orangish brown. 135- 3535 35- -S - 9/4/6 . -PT SPT -1130- 3040 40- 8/14/35 SPT SPT PAUBA FORMATION IOosl: SANDSTONE, fine- to coarse-grained, orangish light brown, slightly moist, moderately hard to hard; micaceous. TOTAL DEPTH 41.5 FT. NO WATER, NO CAVING SAMPLETYPES: PACIFIC SOILS ® DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 4ING) GROUNDWATER � S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - a ENGINEERING, INC. ®BULK SAMPLE 0 TUBESAMPLE PLATE A-4 /to 1 S. )�w BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 'GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECTNAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1168.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -5 DATE FINISHED 6/18/98 GW DEPTH Fl36.00 LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-11 Drilling DRNE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL- RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 1 S. )�w O DO �--. u� .O w wLL w 3 0 ¢g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION �Z >zy¢ w O <1- N y m Cly 5O Q0 D O !- J ALLUVIUM IOall: SAND, fine to coarse grained, tan, dry to slightly moist, loose; micaceous. 165 5—SPT 5/3/4 D 160 @ 8.0 ft. becomes medium brown, slightly moist. 10 2/2/3 SPT 155- 15— 5/9/7 - SPT 150 20—SPT 6/6/4 @ 21 .0 ft. becomes tan, moist. -1145- 5continued. continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS M DRLVE (RING) SAMPLE SZGROUNDWATER SOSPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE © TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-5 /7 I GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 LL- DATE STARTED 8/18/98 GROUND ELEV. 1168.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -5 DATE FIIQLSHED 8/18/98 GW DEPTH (F"1) 36.00 LOGGED BY PDT DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING IN W w LL- > D_- Om ¢- D '> a~ z O F f -m as o. N 0 0 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION w SPT 2/4/6 ALLUVIUM (Cal): Continued. @ 26.0 ft. CLAYEY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium brown to orangish brown, moist, loose; micaceous. 140 / • / - a� ' 30 8/9/18 SPT - PAURA FORMATION $Lt1C.$ ND ONE, fine- to medium -grained, brown, moist, r'Jio atel hard; micaceous. 135- 35- 4/20/5 SPT @ 36.0 ft. SANDY SILTSTONE, fine- to medium -grained, brown, wet, moderately hard; micaceous; some coarse grained sand. 130- 40- 0/31/4( SPT @ 41.0 ft. hard. 125 @ 43.0 ft. SANDSTONE, medium- to coarse-grained, - orangish tan, wet hard to very hard; micaceous. 45 0 FOR 5" '• /' SPT E TOTAL DEPTH 47.0 FT. @ 36.0 FT. WATER SAMPLE PACIFIC SOILS ING) SAMPLE MDRIVEIVE (RING) 4GR0UNDWATER � s]SPT(SPOTSPOOMSAMPLE ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE O TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-5 IN I 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1139.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -6 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 0 �� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION TZ >z ¢- H w 0LL w NI- N O c7y cc ¢Oo D O F ALLUVIUM IQall: SILTY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium gray brown, slightly moist, loose. -1135- 355 5- - 130- 10- 2/212 @ 10.0 ft. moist. SPT -1125- 2515 15- 3/5/7 @ 15.0 ft. medium brown; trace of clay. 5.7 116 34 D 120- 20- 2/3/4 SPT @ 20.0 ft. SAND, fine- to medium -grained, light yellow brown, slightly moist, medium dense. 115 continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS ❑D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE �Z GROUNDWATER - ❑ ENGINEERING, INC. 3❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE ® BULK SAMPLE © TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-6 2. BORING LOG w SHEET 2 OF 2 'GEOTECHNICAL PROJECTNO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 ¢gip �_ '> aF- DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1139.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -6 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRRL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING oc�N 2. w �w w C7 O ww DO ¢gip �_ '> aF- Z ,O w Vl Q_ �i 2 3 0 ¢g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ~nZ e= w oc�N o0 yz 00 o m J D 5/5/7 i ALLUVIUM (Call: Continued; SAND, fine- to 6.1 113 34 medium -grained, medium yellow brown to light red brown, . - slightly moist, dense; some silt; trace of clay. 110 i�iR 30 2/3/4 - @ 30.0 ft. moist; micaceous. SPT 05 35 fow"; 8,7 728 75 D 15/23/50 ;� PAUBA FORMATION IOgsl: SANDSTONE, fine- to medium -grained, pale red brown, slightly moist, moderately hard; trace of clay. TOTAL DEPTH 36.5 FT. NO WATER SAMPLEVE ACIFIC SOILS Q DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE (R 4GROUNDWATER SMSPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - Wi ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-6 r I h 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1133.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -7 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING w It0 Y w Z 3 0 O� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION wZ >Za¢� pLL w y~ N O ON 50 moN� O H g j ALLUVIUM IQall: SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, medium brown, moist, moderately dense to medium dense; some clay. 130 ins � 5 25 10 5/7/8 SPT 120 - PAUBA FORMATION IQpsl: SANDSTONE, fine- to medium -grained, light brown, moist, moderatley hard; - some clay. 15— _D_8/15/24' "'_', 0.9 125 86 115 20 8/12/13 @ 20.0 ft. light gray brown, dry to slightly moist. SPT 110 continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS ❑D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 2GROUNDWATER ENGINEERING, INC. S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOOF SAMPLE ® BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-7 It0 I I I I I I I 11 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 D DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1133.0 BORING DESIG.- PSE -7 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) 0 LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP — 30" EASTING I I I I I I I 11 1 0 0 D of z 3: 0 D 0 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION z 12 < 0 M '2 z 00 M0 �<_ M o i ­ M 2U 0W __J D 3/21/2 PAUBA FORMATION jOps): Continued; slightly moist. 3.7 107 17 105 - 30 2/27/2( ell SPT 30.0 ft. GRAVELLY SANDSTONE, fine- to coarse-grained, light gray brown, slightly moist, hard. @ 32.0 ft. cobbles; difficult drilling. too- REFUSAL @ 33.0 FT. NO WATER SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS FD1 DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 2 GROUNDWATER ❑ ENGINEERING, INC a]SPT (SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE !�d BULK SAMPLE M TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-; 1 11 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 LL DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1153.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -8 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (Fl) w LOGGED BY FJE DRIlIER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING '23 w w LL O ¢R Z ¢tn ad w �i i 3 o Qg GEOTECHNICALDESCRIPTION OZ >z ¢� w N (7N E5 00 D O H m J ARTIFICIAL FILL - COMPACTED (Gafcl: SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, medium brown to dark brown, slightly moist to moist, medium dense to dense; blotchy; some clay. 150- 505D 5- 2/2/4 8.7 119 56 D 145 ALLUVIUM (Oat) : SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, red brown, moist, dense. 10- 3/5/6 6.7 118 42 D eke 140- 15- 3/7/10 - @ 15.0 ft. dry to slightly moist. 7.4 116 45 D 135 PAUBA FORMATION (Ops) : SANDSTONE, fine- to - medium -grained, light brown, slightly moist, moderately hard. 20— j 0/15/2 - 9,0 122 64 D - 20.0 ft. SILTY SANDSTONE, fine- to medium -grained, red brown, moist, moderately hard; some clay. 130 continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS OD DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE SZ GROUNDWATER r• S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. EB BULK SAMPLE © TUBE SIMPLE PLATE A-8 '23 I GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 �' DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1153. BORING DESIG. PSE -8 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING am >J lJ J �' O O w_ U H O_ ¢ V1 wLL 2> iE 3 0 ° GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION �Z — < * W F- x w w o �N o0 o wN= o i_ m 2U no D D 0116/1 PAUBA FORMATION (ops): Continued; some coarse 9.9 127 83 grained sand and gravel to 1/4 inch diameter. 125 30- i @ 30.0 ft. fine-grained, medium yellow brown, moist, 0.7 100 42 D-9/11/20 hard; micaceous. 120- 35- 0/16/2 @ 35.0 ft. fine- to coars graied SWegravel to 1/4 r '-^ 2.7 110 14 D - inch diameter. f 115- 40— fc 8.6 126 69 D 15/29/50 @ 40.0 ft. SILTY SANDSTONE, fine- to medium -grained, red brown, slightly moist to moist, hard; some gravel to 3/4 inch diameter. 110- 45— 7/28/4 @ 45.0 ft. light gray, hard. 4.1 171 22 D TOTAL DEPTH 46.5 FT. NO WATER SAMPLE PACIFIC SOILS �D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE I 77 GROUNDWATER � S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE MT TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-8 02y r 1 1 p 1 H 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1237.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -9 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 5 JW J O DO 4~ ,O w V) wLL ii 3 0 0� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION mZ w o- a� a 0 2 �> 00 >zaQ� QW M 0 V) 0 m J VJ U c ❑ D ARTIFICIAL FILL - COMPACTED IQafc1: SILTY SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, medium gray brown to light brown, moist, dense; some gravel to 1/4 inch diameter; some clay; blotchy. -1235- 355 5- 7/1115 0.9 125 85 D 230 ALLUVIUM IQall: CLAYEY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, light red brown, moist, medium dense. / 10 2/313 � SPT 225 fir,✓ � 15 8/16/20;. 7.8 127 65 D PAUBA FOR s : CLAYEY SANDSTONE, fine - to medium-gralv,light red brown, moist, moderately hard. 1220 I 20 6/8/8 i @ 20.0 ft. soft to moderately hard. SPT 215 continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS MD DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE Sc GROUNDWATER SQSPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE ® TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-9 5 I 1 1 1 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1237.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -9 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRIL ER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs. NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING -y, -S, -6 X l( 0 d0 w_ ¢� uF 0 (cm wLL 2> i 3 0 0 GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION NZ yZaQ F w o_ N 0 F �N 50 ¢w ¢ O � 0~ Co gU 0❑ D 9/14122,,_„ PAUBA FORMATION (Ops): Continued. 5.9 107 28 - @ 26.0 ft. SANDSTONE, fine-grained, light gray to - -- medium yellow brown, slightly moist to moist, moderately 210 hard; micaceous; some silt. 30 9/13/21 - @ 30.0 ft. some coarse grained sand. SPT 1205 ti 4w �ti 35 9/31/53`-':.': @ 35.0 ft. fine- to coarse-grained. 8.6 111 45 D TOTAL DEPTH 36.5 FT. NO WATER SAMPLE TYP PACIFIC SOILS SAMP4 LE GROUNDWATER ® DRIVE (RING)❑ � S7SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. ® BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-9 -y, -S, -6 X l( 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1221.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -10 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 2. w w LL O O w J �O ¢ 0> 2 .O ¢ W�w wLL w �i 3 0 'g GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o.~ w o- N~ N o F 'D >- oo =w o 00 O ARTIFICIAL FILL - COMPACTED IQafcl' SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, dark gray brown, moist, dense. 220 i 5 8/9/8 1.6 120 77 D 215 ALLUVIUM IOall: SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, medium gray brown to medium brown, moist, medium dense. 10 4/6/7 @ 10.0 ft. very moist. 1.4 122 81 D 210- 1015 15- 2/3/5 @ 15.0 ft. some coarse sand; some gravel to 1/2 inch 1.0 112 59 D D diameter; visible porosity; less silt. 205 PALMA FORMATION IQps1: SILTY SANDSTONE, fine- to 20- 6/16/17 medium -grained, pale red brown, moist, moderately hard; 1,6 123 85 D some clay. 200 1 continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC 0DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE SZGROUNDWATER .SOILS S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE - ENGINEERING, INC. ®BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-10 J GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1221.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -10 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH T-1) LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 81 > 0 w. Z F"as d V) 0 7m 0� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION v Z N 0 c7N 00 0� O H m 20 D 15/ 7/50 fg PAUBA FORMATION IQosl: Continued; hard. 5.3 119 99 95 TOTAL DEPTH 26.5 FT. NO WATER i SAMPLE TYPES PACIFIC SOILS DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE 4 GROUNDWATER - ■ ENGINEERING, INC. ❑sPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE FS ® BULK SAMPLE OT TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-10 81 19 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET i OF 2 t PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1221,0 BORING DESIG. PSE -10 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) LOGGED BY _ FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs NORTHING ' TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING 19 Ja > OJ w. 1F Hy M w dpw, 7m Sf~n 0� GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GN Ow w t7N z }z 0c <� D O F N~ w m 2O ARTIFICIAL FILL - COMPACTED IQafc1: SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, dark gray brown, moist, dense. 220 8/9/8.f'°+, 'L,,,;-- i� �r`'• 1.6 120 77 D 215 ALLUVIUM IQall: SILTY SAND, fine- to medium -grained, medium gray brown to medium brown, moist, medium dense. 10 4/6/7 @ 10.0 ft. very moist. 1.4 122 81 D 210 15 2/3/5 @ 15.0 ft. some coarse sand; some gravel to 1 /2 inch 1.0 112 59 D diameter; visible porosity; less silt. 205 PAUBA FORMATION IQosl: SILTY SANDSTONE, fine- to 20 j6116/i medium -grained, pale red brown, moist, moderately hard: 1,6 123 85 D some clay. 200 - continued. SAMPLE TYPES: PACIFIC SOILS ❑D DRIVE (RING) SAMPLE =ROUNDWATER - ENGINEERING, INC. SQSPT(SPLIT SPOON) SAMPLE ®BULKSAMPLE ❑T TUBESAMPLE PLATE A-10 19 [1 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SHEET 2 OF 2 PROJECT NO. 400657 PROJECT NAME Redhawk-Track 23067 DATE STARTED 8/24/98 GROUND ELEV. 1221.0 BORING DESIG. PSE -10 DATE FINISHED 8/24/98 GW DEPTH (FT) w LOGGED BY FJE DRILLER 2-R Drilling DRIVE WT. 140 lbs NORTHING TYPE OF DRILL RIG Hollow Stem Auger DROP 30" EASTING .� D OJ 7U u. U Hy ad w as 2> a 2 fn 3 o Qg GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION wF F oLL w m~ N o �N v~iz as jz< =Wcr w 0 D 15/37/50 fo PAUBA FORMATION (Ops) : Continued; hard. 15.3 119 99 -1195— HE TOTAL DEPTH 26 5 FT. NO WATER • Ky' .r ? J' SAM ES: PACIFIC SOILS ❑D DR1VEDRNE (RING) SAMPLE SZ GROUNDWATER S❑SPT(SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE - F ENGINEERING, INC. ®BULK SAMPLE ❑T TUBE SAMPLE PLATE A-10 .� D APPENDIX B ' SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES ' PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. MAY 14, 1999 J.N. 141-99 I/ Surficial Slooe Stabilty Analysis 10 Cut Slope ❑ Fill Slope ❑ Natural Slope Parameters Z = Depth of Saturation (feet) _ Yb = Buoyant Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) = 72• za Yt = Total Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) a = Slope Angle = 26,• ij) = Angle of Internal Friction = 36 ° c = Cohesion (psf) = 5 0 Force Tending to Cause Movement F, = Zy,cosasina = JZytsin2ac Force Tending to Resist Movement F. = Zybcos2atan(� + c Factor of Safetv F.S. = 2ZYbcos2atan(b + 2c , /57/7. Zytsin2a �2 Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 2./ Cu7T 51 ojP�5 le[/4TF B ;a 1 1 I 1 1 Surficial Slope Stabilty Analysis ❑ Cut Slope P9 Fill Slope ❑ Natural Slope Parameters Z = Depth of Saturation (feet) _ 17-1 Yc = Buoyant Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) = 70.6 yt = Total Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) = 1355. o CC = Slope Angle = G C (= Angle of Internal Friction = .3�vo c = Cohesion (psf) = /oo Force Tending to Cause Movement Fo = Zytcosasina = JZytsin2a Force Tending to Resist Movement F, = Zybcoszatan(� + c Factor of Safety F.S. = 2Zybcoyatan(b + 2c Zytsin2a Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 2. / FI�L sLo — ✓. N iii- 99 L o r vES7 S yF.4 2 v,�4 L U,ES' 1�L 147, B-2 35 Surficial Slope Stabilty Analysis ❑ Cut Slope I1 Fill Slope ❑ Natural Slope Parameters Z = Depth of Saturation (feet) Y, = Buoyant Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) = 7?4� Yz = Total Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) _ 1350 a = Slope Angle = 2G. 4, = Angle of Internal Friction = 32 c = Cohesion (psf) = 23P 1 ' Force Tending to Cause Movement F, = Zytcosasina = JZytsin2a 1 Force Tending to Resist Movement Fa = Zy,cos2atan(� + c Factor of Safety F.S. _ 2Zy,cos2atan�b + 2c = 7G 77 Zytsin2a Q.'/ �lLC SL OPS Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 14 7-a3o&7-3 -v, -s, -/ ✓. Al. I5Zl- 99 L f/TE , 5-3 341 1 Surficial Slope Stabilty Analysis ❑ Cut Slope Ili! Fill Slope ❑ Natural Slope Parameters Z = Depth of Saturation (feet) Yb = Buoyant Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) = 72. Yt = Total Unit Weight of Soil (pcf) ac = Slope Angle = 2G.& 4 = Angle of Internal Friction c = Cohesion (psf) = .3,?0 Force Tending to Cause Movement F, = ZYtcosacsinac = Vytsin2ac Force Tending to Resist Movement Fa = Zybcos2atan(� + c Factor of Safety F.S. = 2Zybcos2atan(b + 2c , /039.0 Zy,sin2cc Petra Geotechnical, Inc. /-1 i6,s,LrsT 3�