1994-3965 G
Street Address
1(&5
I
1-(;2 355
Category
Serial #
,q ,,5 6-J
Name
I
Description
Plan ck. #
Year
recdescv
. .
, ~'.~
¡...-",._,:;r'
PASCO ENGINEERING, INC.
535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A
SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075
[619] 259-8212
FAX [619] 259-4812
,/
WAYNE A. PASCO
RC.E. 29577
May 23, ~994
"
\ \¡ì \:~ "-\
'-....'
..
",: '.',\
l':~;.i\ '~98
?,_::j
J\J~ 10 '99L\
City of Encinitas
Engineering Department
50S South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
ENG\ N ¡::.:;:: ~~?:~::\:\C \ Nn þ$
críY 0; '-",
Attn:
Craig Tackabery
RE:
CAMPBELL GRADING PLAN; HYDROLOGY
Dear Craig:
The purpose of this report is to address the surface storm runoff
that is impacted by the proposed grading shown on the tennis
court grading plan for Richard Campbell.
The proposed tennis court pad is located at the downstream end of
a drainage basin approximately 2.26 ac in size. (See exhibit "A"
attached.) The hydrologic soil group is D throughout the
drainage basin. 0100 generated by the basin is calculated as
being 4.08 cfs. (See calculations attached.)
The grading design as shown provides for the contour grading of
an earthen swale that closely resembles the landform prior to
grading. Other drainage features include an earthen brow ditch
and a 10'x~0'x~.0' deep rip-rap energy dissipator. The quantity
of storm water intercepted by the earthen brow ditch is not
significant to warrant calculations, since the tributary area is
only approximately 0.02 ac.
The average flow velocity of the storm flow in the swale as
calculated herein is 4..-2"1 feet per second. (See calculations
attached. )
We recommend that the contour graded earthen swale be lined with
grass or suitable equivalent material to prevent erosion. We
also recommend that the toe of the proposed fill slope be
protected with grass or other suitable ground covering.
> '
City/PE598
May 23, 2994
Page 2
It is the professional opinion of Pasco Engineering that the
drainage improvements as shown on the tennis court grading plan
for Richard campbell are sufficient to intercept, contain and
convey Q~OO to an appropriate point of discharge.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, please
do not hesitate to contact this office.
Very truly yours,
PASCO ENGINEERING, INC.
fJrfdOúð
Wayne Pasco, President
RCE 29577
MS/WP/js
***************************************************************************
RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE
Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL
(c) Copyright 1982-92 Advanced Engineering Software (aes)
Ver. 1.3A Release Date: 3/06/92 License ID 1388
Analysis prepared by:
Pasco Engineering, Inc.
535 North Hwy 101, Suite A
Solana Beach, CA. 92075
Ph. (619) 259-8212 Fax: (619) 259-4812
************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY **************************
HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS *
CAMPBELL TENNIS COURT GRADING PLAN *
100 YEAR STORM. 5-20-94 MS *
**************************************************************************
FILE NAME: 598.DAT
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 12:40
3/13/1994
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA
USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00
6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) =
SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.00
SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE
SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED
NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED
3.000
FOR FRICTION SLOPE =
.95
***************************************************************************
FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE
1.00 TO NODE
2.00 IS CODE =
21
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««<
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D"
RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500
INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 610.00
UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 461.00
DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 411.00
ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 50.00
URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW (MINUTES) =
*CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH
DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED.
*CAUTION: SUBAREA FLOWLENGTH EXCEEDS COUNTY
NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH
100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 4.007
14.333
USED.
SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) =
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) =
4.08
2.26 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) =
4.08
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF STUDY SUMMARY:
PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) =
TOTAL AREA(ACRES) =
4.08
2.26
Tc(MIN.) =
14.33
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS
-
TABLE ll.--INTERPRETATIONS FOR LA.!'W MANAGEMENT--Continued
Þla
sym 01
Soil
RhC
Ramona sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-----------------
Ramona sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes-----------------
Ramona sandy lorun, 5 to 9 percent slopes-----------------
Ramona sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes, eroded---------
Ramona sandy loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes, eroded--------
Ramona gravelly sandy loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes-------
Ramona gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes'------
Redding gravelly loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes-------------
{edding cobbly loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes----_---------
Redding cobbly loam, dissected, 15 to 50 percent
slopes.
Redding-Urban land complex, 2 to 9 percent slopes:
Redding----------------------------------------------
Urban land-------------------------------------------
Redding-Urban land complex, 9 to 30 percent slopes:
Redding----------------------------------------------
Urban land-------------------------------------------
Reiff fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-------------
Reiff fine sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes-------------
Reiff fine sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes-------------
Riverwash------------------------------------------------
Rositas fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes-----------------
Rositas fine sand, hummocky, 5 to 9 percent slopes-------
~ositas loamy coarse sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes---------
~ositas loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes---------
Rosi tas loamy coarse sand, 9 to 15 percent slopes - - -- -.---
Rough broken land----------------------------------------
~alinas clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-----------------
Salinas clay loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes-----------------
~alinas clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes----------------------
Salinas clay, 2 to 5 percent slopes----_-----------------
San Miguel rocky silt loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes-------
San ~!iguel-Exchequer rocky si 1 t loams, 9 to 70 percent
slopes;
San ~figuel-- - - --- -- - --- - - -- - -- - --- - - -- -- -- --- - --- ----
Exchequer--- --- - ---- -- - - - - -- -- ----:';;::'-.;;,-.....=..::..;:=.:-_;.;:;;:¡:.,.,."".",",'~ "...
þneephead rocKY lïñe sand7Tõam-;-gt"~ 30 'p~rcent
slopes, eroded.
heephead rocky fine sandy loam, 30 to 65 percent
slopes, eroded.
loping gullied land-------------------------------------
oboba stony loamy sand, 9 to 30 percent slopes----------
teep gullied land---------------------------------------
tockpen gravelly clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-------
tockpen gravelly clay loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes-------
tony land-----------------------------------------------
errace escarpments--------------------------------------
idal flats----------------------------------------------
ollhouse rocky coarse sandy loam, 5 to 30 percent
slopes, eroded.
þllhouse rocky coarse sandy loam, 30 to 65 percent
slopes.
Tujunga sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes----------------------
U ban land-----------------------------------------------
V'salia sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes----------------
RaA
RaB
RaC
RaC2
RaD2
ReO
ReE
RdC
ReE
RfF
RhE
RkA
RkB
RkC
Rm
RoA
RrC
RsA
RsC
RsD
RuG
SbA
SbC
SeA
SeB
SmE
! SnG
;:'pt¿
SpG2
SrO
SsE
r:.~
vc\,)
SuA
SuB
SvE
reF
Tf
foE2
foG
ruB
Jr
'aA
Ce foo notes at end of table.
~"""--. '-
Hydro-
logic
group
Erodibili ty
----~~ -~,-.;;.."--~
Limitations for
conversion
from brush to
grass
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Moderate.
Moderate.
Moderate.
Slight.
Slight.
Slight.
Severe.
Severe.
Slight. 1/
Slight. Ï/
Slight. 1/
Slight. 1/
Moderate.
0 Severe 1----- Severe.
_D~w..", ~Se'y.eE£,,-!;:,;::;.:..:.. Severe,. ,......, cw' .','
C Severe l6----"~.'Mëdt'rfâtë. ~... .
B
A
0
0
D
A
D
D
C
C
A
0
B
'C
C
C
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
16----
16----
16----
16----
16----
16----
16----
9-----
9-----
1-----
D
D
D
D
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
C
C
C
C
D
Severe 16----
Severe 16----
Severe 16----
Severe 2, 4--
Severe 2
Severe 2
Severe 2
Severe 2
Severe 2
Severe 1-----
Moderate 2---
Moderate 2---
Slight-------
Slight-------
Severe 9-----
C
Severe 1-----
Severe 2-----
Severe 2-----
Severe 1-----
Moderate 2---
Moderate 2---
Severe 1-----
Severe 1-----
Severe 2, 4
Severe 9-----
Severe 1-----
Severe 2-----
Severe 16----
Moderate. y
Severe. 4/
Moderate :-
Severe.
Slight.
Slight.
Severe.
Severe.
Severe.
Severe.
Slight.
Slight.
37
f
,-' --
,--- .
¡
COUNTY OF' SAN 0 IEGO
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION &
FLOOD CONTROL
I
15' :
"3 - () I (V C. Ht-S .: ¡-
iT,
330 .
,.-
COUNTY OF SAN D!EGO
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION &
FLOOD CONTROL
33°
451
30'
15 I
S'.Z(^,(HeS: ¡~-
451
prCP"/'d by
U.S. DEPARTì\1HJrr OF COMMERCE
NATIONAL OCEANIC M;D AT~loSPHERIC AD.\!IN!STRATION
I
SPECIAL STUDIES BRA;-'¡CII, OFFICE OF HjDROLOGY, NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
30' ~ ,-
I-!
H
I
:Þ
] ]8°
451
301
151
1] 7°
451
30'
15'
] ] {,o
\.oJ
,.
.
***************************************************************************
HYDRAULIC ELEMENTS - I PROGRAM PACKAGE
(C) Copyright 1982-92 Advanced Engineering Software (aes)
Ver. 3.1A Release Date: 2/17/92 License ID 1388
Analysis prepared by:
PASCO ENGINEERING
535 NORTH HWY 101, SUITE A
SOLANA BEACH, CA. 92075
PHONE: (619) 259-8212 FAX (619) 259-4812
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 13:39
5/20/1994
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY **************************
DEPTH OF FLOW CALCULATIONS *
'CONTOUR-GRADED EARTHEN SWALE. *
Q100 SCOUR DETERMINATION. 5-20-94 MS *
**************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
»>CHANNEL INPUT INFORMATION««
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL Zl(HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL) =
Z2(HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL) =
BASEWIDTH(FEET) = 10.00
CONSTANT CHANNEL SLOPE(FEET/FEET) =
UNIFORM FLOW(CFS) = 4.08
MANNINGS FRICTION FACTOR = .0200
15.00
15.00
~~
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NORMAL-DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
»»> NORMAL DEPTH(FEET) =
FLOW TOP-WIDTH(FEET) =
FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) =
HYDRAULIC DEPTH(FEET) = .08
FLOW AVERAGE VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) =
UNIFORM FROUDE NUMBER = 2.674
PRESSURE + MOMENTUM (POUNDS) =
AVERAGED VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) =
SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET) = .361
.09
12.57
.97
4.21
35.79
.275
===========================================================================
CRITICAL-DEPTH FLOW INFORMATION:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
CRITICAL
FLOW TOP-WIDTH(FEET) =
FLOW AREA(SQUARE FEET) =
FLOW HYDRAULIC DEPTH (FEET) =
FLOW AVERAGE VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) =
DEPTH (FEET) = .16
FLOW PRESSURE + MOMENTUM(POUNDS) =
14.76
1. 96
.13
2.08
25.52
. .
AVERAGED CRITICAL FLOW VELOCITY HEAD(FEET) =
CRITICAL FLOW SPECIFIC ENERGY(FEET) = .226
.067
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
r-------"'"
I
. i.'"
280
.9
4
9
:;
-;
4
,I
>8
It¡
.4
,¡
jY.
,7
'0
;4
;2
¡I
.C}
,~
7
6 ¡
~ I
3 I
I
----i
pro vidf"
~(
('
,
[
¡
t
\
ì
\
I
I
,
I
¡
i
¡
!
!
\
1
~
TABLE 1-104.10 B
1 ,2
PE~iISSIBLE VELOCIT1ES V1TH GRASS COVERS
Cove r
Slope
ranee
Permissible velocity o~
Erosion Easi Iy
resista~t soils ~rc:ed soils
6ermudagrass
Percent
( '0-5
( 5-10'
(Over 10
f.p.s. f. p. s.
8 6
7 5 ¡
I
6 4. t
¡
. 7 5 I
6 4 I
5. 3
5 0 ~
'4
3.5 2.5
6uffalograss
Kentucky blu~9r3ss
Srrooth brome
Blue 9 ðï:T!ið
E ml xture
Lespedeza scricea
~eepin9 lov~srass
Yellow bl~!:ste:-.
Kudzu
A!falfa
Crabgrass
) 0-5
) 5-10
)Ov~r 10
) .
( 0-5
( 5-10
)
)
) . 0-5.
)
)
)
) 4 0-5
)
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
ì
i
i
2.5
3.5
Common lcspedeza 3
Sudangrass 3
. , " .
..
1 From Handbook of C~annel Desicn for Soil and Water'Conse~~~ti;~,
U. S. Soi 1 Conservation Service
2 Use velocities ov!:r 5 f.p.s...only ,"'/here. good covers.and proper
maintenance can be oþtained.
3 Annuals, 'used on mi ld slo?es or as t~porary protection unti 1
permanent covers are establ1shed.
4 Use on 5lopcs steeper than 5 percent is not recommended.
:N D IX \
>HT. NO.'
REV.
CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE
PERMISSABLE YELOCITIE S'
." FOR GRASS-LlNED' CHANN5LS
68
r-.. >
~ D
"1' ß'
~ /C
~
, "
¿
C
Œ
/
/
~
>-
I-
Ct.
-'U
0.
C
Q:
Q
------
------- I
~ ~---
/ /--/;::-::-~
//'/ / / l ('-.. --- ------
------ ~ / / "---- -----
---"¿'j ') 7>:74.~/ /
I~:"J ..~~
... ~ - , 00 ì
"A
~!
\
)
--,
---30'ROAD& UTILITY ESMT. PER
FI LE NO. 304302 REC. 12-30-71
N8BO09148/1E --------
-----
-------
----
.1
-------
r <-- ------ ~ ~
' ! '/
--
------