Loading...
CMD95A - Hwy. 101 Drainage First Annual Mitigation Monitoring Report Leucadia Lowflow Storm Drain Project Wetland Mitigation Plan Carlsbad State Beach Detention Basin Site Prepared For: City of Encinitas 505 Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 920243633 Attention:Mr. Kipp Hefner Prepared By: Prepared By: Brad Burkhart Burkhart Environmental Consulting 4709 Biona Drive San Diego, CA 92116 Gary Hoyt GFH Landscape Architecture 13625 Adrian Street Poway,CA 92064 %BEC August 200 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND i 2.0 PROJECT INSTALLATION MONITORING 6 2.1 CHANGES TO ORIGINAL PLAN 2.1.1 Water Meter Location Basin Water Level & Standpipe 2.1.2 Planting 2.2 INSTALLATION & 120-DAY POANT ESTABLIHSMENT PEIROD 7 2.2.1 Grading and Surface Removals 2.2.2 Erosion Control 2.2.3 Irrigation Installation & Operation 2.2.4 Container Planting 2.2.5 Seeding. 2.2.6 Weeding 2.2.7 Site Fencing 2.2.8 Inspections 3.0 POST-INSTALLATION MONITORING 10 3.1 METHODS 10 3.1.1 Horticultural Monitoring 3.1.2 Botanical Monitoring 3.2 FIRST YEAR HORTICULTURAL MONITORING RESULTS 11 3.2.1 Erosion 3.2.2 Seeding 3.2.3 Container Plants 3.2.4 Weeds 3.2.5 Irrigation 3.2.6 Trash & Debris 3.2.7 Adjacent Construction Impacts 3.2.8 Pests and Diseases 3.3 FIRST YEAR BOTANICAL MONITORING RESULTS 16 3.3.1 Establishment of Seeded Species 3.3.2 Container Plant Survival 3.3.3 Canopy Cover Assessment 3.3.4 Tree Heights 3.3.5 Exotic Invasive Weed Species 3.3.6 Under Story Weed Cover 3.3.7 Transect Photos 4.0 DISCUSSION & ANALYSIS OF PROJECT SUCCESS STANDARDS 20 4.1 SUCCESS STANDARDS 20 4.2 DISCUSSION 20 4.2.1 Erosion Control 4.2.2 Establishment of Seeded Species 4.2.3 Establishment of Container Species 4.2.4 Establishment of Adequate Overstory Cover 4.2.5 No Invasive Exotic Weed Cover 4.2.6 Non-native Weed Cover Under 30% 4.2.7 Increase in Wetland Functions &Values 4.2.8 Replace & Expand Former Hydrological Regime i 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 23 5.1 WEED CONTROL 23 5.1.1 Continued Focus on Weed Eradication 5.1.2 Continued Clearing of Undesirable Aquatic Species 5.2 REMEDIAL PLANTING 24 5.3 IRRIGATION 24 5.4 TRASH &VANDALISM 24 6.0 REFERENCES 25 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Regional Location of Project 2 2 Detailed Project Location 3 3 Site Map 4 LIST OF TABLES 1 Species Established 17 2 Container Plant Survival 18 3 Canopy Cover 18 4 Percent Cover of Weeds 19 5 Project Success Standards 20 LIST OF APPENDICES A Transect Data Sheets B Understory Species List C Representative Site Photos ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND As mitigation for the loss of 0.11 acre of wetlands resulting from the enlargement of a detention basin associated with the Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain System Project in Encinitas, California, the City of Encinitas (City) is restoring the original O.1 lacre of wetland and creating 0.33 acre of new wetlands (BEC 2000) on a mitigation site located in the expanded detention basin at Carlsbad State Beach on the northern edge of the City (see Figures 1, 2, & 3). This mitigation is designed to meet the conditions set forth in the following permits and opinions issued for this project: • Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Nationwide Permit 43 (No. 200100198-MAT) • California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 1601 Streambed Alteration Permit No. 5-291-00 • California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit No. 00-235 CDP These permits require implementation of the conceptual mitigation plan and construction documents approved for the project in 2001 (BEC 2000). Work began on project grading and planting in October 2002 and was completed February 11, 2003. The Plant Establishment Period, which was intended to be 120-days, was extended to cover several remedial winter storm repairs and ended on August 11, 2003. The first year annual monitoring period ended August 11, 2004. GFH Landscape Architecture (GFH) and Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC) were hired by the City to perform both installation and long-term monitoring for the project. The City hired Vadnais Corporation for project installation and they in turn used Tarzian Landscape, Inc. as their landscape installation contractor. Habitat West was then hired to perform long-term maintenance activities. This report reviews the installation, and first year of mitigation monitoring and maintenance work completed between October 2002 and August 2004 and presents an analysis of first year botanical data collected to determine if the mitigation plantings are progressing adequately to meet 5-year success standards set by project permits. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 1 August 2004 �._._.—. .---•—• SAN FALLBROOK ONOFRE� e. WARNER SPRINGS ,E Lahr ,a n( ^ Hrmharr ba 7 VISTA OCEANSID La kr R'ah(/ord I oaect Sit ESCONDI00 as�rhrr.�d tJ s}q+S LEUCAOIA H.Q1. �. JULIAN Q e~ RAMONA » C1 DEL MAy i . POWAY San Vlcrerr > ' LN u Z /5 EI Caanan to Lrar r i LAJOLLA SANTEE ALPINE i •L EL CA-JON ��Loudand LA MESA Rrrncoi. U� M SAN �� .. DIEGO JAMUL POINT' LOMA`. NATIONAL omrrmrorrr �rr CITY ii+! CHULA VISTA DULZURA •f -�i.. Omy y � WAr 0 e IMPERIAL! BEACH -L ES _ i N VS e0 0EAUNE _°°... � i - 'I F I G U R E Regional Location of EC Project 6 1 G S 0 N Y . - V. \ BA IQ�11 TO �. Carlsbad State Beach .,iVE , y COSTA ZfP etention Basin AreJ ��,�: ,��.,` �. . '��.! �•�'a �'`"Nn'' � �� .�.:,•..�i':,I �/• i. .tea,: T� •4- ,y� ,• �J�•``• '�. �/ � _.� ;. ill •u,• , .,;1 w:'_, �' t � � ,. } .. 3 ��/.;�• Jog f :. of: r •. •;t(' ; ti :.f / \ ! -' 'Y. ;,• .��� ti.1• of- ' J• -.s` ^✓�'�•' ler ik Vk ON I ;4• Leucadia O. •,• a. :, ?ti'v • `'~� ON MEN '�' ` :t' fit. � •.�,` � ' :,1 .-,.`,•r` � � � �f! \' \ \ 1 �1'� t., $ •• •+f •t Wale raiFF .' a Tank \'• ! a \ s. \�� ' En[inibl BeacA• '� •" •i i�,. s Cour Park 1 i •��� �; En \ \\\ v ,� •\ ,� �; •; car i ' ,••/ ; \ . Nw Cal k 1. Seas de Gardens.. ' c o ® w'• ' Etke t \ 5C0'nty Park � ;� ` � '\r ( ... eW � S GHT Band< 16 • '', _ a ,, .` , tT' 3 ! .. in taS ' • F I G U R E Detailed Project Location �B EC 2 3 lub Property A x o La" Costa Beach C _ p Of / \oak eD Ow o � � D A '> O O \ fD n \ J .� Sol Cr " CL o \� in mol CD r � o � d R rn 2.0 PROJECT INSTALLATION MONITORING Installation monitoring began in October 2002 when the general contractor, Vadnais Corporation began grading activities to double the size of the existing detention basin located at the southeastern corner of the Carlsbad State Beach Parking Lot. The following section details installation period monitoring while the subsequent section covers the first year of the 5-year post-installation monitoring period. 2.1 CHANGES TO ORIGINAL PLAN These section details minor changes made to project design during project installation. 2.1.1 Water Meter Location The water meter/valve location was moved from near the bottom of the eastern slope of the detention basin to the top of the slope along Highway 1 to make it easier to read the meter and service the valves. 2.1.2 Basin Water Level & Standpipe Height Although not a change to the actual engineering plans, it was discovered after installation that the outlet elevation of the detention basin had been set about a foot higher than the inlet elevation. This changed the anticipated water level on the bottom of the basin leaving about a foot of water across the bottom of the basin inundated on a permanent basis. In the narrower "panhandle" portion of the basin the open water area is about 15 feet wide. In the lower northern end of the basin near the outlet, open water is up to 25 feet wide in areas around the island of vegetation left there. In addition, it was found that the standpipe installed at the lower end of the basin would quickly clog with debris after any rain event making it impossible to drain. Initially, larger holes were cut in the standpipe but eventually it was decided by the City to remove it altogether to assure water levels remain consistently low enough to support the intended riparian willow scrub cover in the basin. 2.1.3 Planting Because the Mexican rush intended for planting on the basin bottom was not adaptable to permanent inundation, and the City did not want the basin to be invaded by cattail (Typha spp.), Olney's rush (Scirpus americanus) were used to replace the Mexican rush container plantings in the Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 6 August 2004 basin bottom. It is anticipated this species, which is lower and does not block storm flows, will eventually dominate areas normally invaded by cattail. Initially a test group of 100 1-gallon Olney's rush was installed during the Plant Establishment Period but most of these were eaten by a resident pair of mallards. These were replaced by 200 bare root plants in the summer of 2004 just before this report was completed. In addition, 25 additional container plants of arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepsis) were planted along he edges of the upper basin to add to the mule fat already planted there and 6 western sycamore(Platanus racemosa) were planted around the basin edges to assure vegetation would eventually cover the unanticipated open water areas of the project. Mexican rush (Juncos mexicanus) originally intended for the basin bottom was relocated above the level of permanent inundation at the base of the side slopes. Seeding was also abandoned in the permanently inundated portions of the basin since it would not establish there. There were no modifications to the seed mixes used for the remaining riparian and coastal sage scrub portions of the project; however, the contractor hand seeded additional Douglas wormwood (Artemisia douglasiana) in the riparian woodland areas of the basin slopes when it was discovered he had miscalculated and applied only 10% of the required seed initially. 2.2 INSTALLATION & 120-DAY PLANT ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD 2.2.1 Grading and Surface Removals The initial phase of project installation involved the removal of all existing cover from within the limits of work;however, care was taken to preserve the vegetation on the small island in the middle of the northern end of the basin. This work was completed according to plan in early November of 2003. The only minor modification to original grading was to slightly soften the slopes around the island at the northern end of the basin to better integrate it into the habitat. 2.2.2 Erosion Control During the Plant Establishment Period, erosion control became a major issue when seasonal rains in early 2004 and through April of 2004 initially caused significant slope erosion gullying especially on the steeper eastern and southern slopes of the site. One of the first rains filled the basin to its top and slow drainage caused by clogging of the standpipe kept it full for several days before it finally drained. No slope erosion control measures had been required in initial plans; so, the City took the position they were the contractor's responsibility, if he needed them to protect his plantings. As a result, it was difficult to get the landscape contractor to install them or to make erosion repairs. Finally, the general contractor used his own crew to make erosion repairs and the } City authorized the contractor to plaice erosion control netting over the slopes until planting was Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 7 August 2004 implemented. On his own, the general contractor also installed several levels of straw wattles on the eastern and southern slopes which were successful in stopping additional erosion after gully repairs were made new plantings became established. This was the first of several issues that the landscape contractor, Tarcian Landscape, Inc., was uncooperative in implementing and which the general contractor had to use his own crews to complete. 2.2.3 Irrigation Installation & Operation Irrigation system installation went according to plan with the only change being to the water meter and valve locations mentioned in the previous section. The system operated well once installed, however, the landscape contractor had to be encouraged several times to apply sufficient water to the new plantings to assure seed germination and plant establishment. 2.2.4 Container Planting Most plants were in excellent condition when delivered to the site. A few lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia) were found unhealthy and were replaced by the contractor before planting. The contractor initially laid out all planting locations using pin flags;BEC then adjusted the locations of those flags to assure the proper ecological locations of each species. No staking or caging was initially used with any plantings. Container planting was completed in early February of 2003. Their completion had been slightly delayed because of winter storms flooding the basin. 2.2.5 Seeding Seeding for the mitigation site proceeded immediately after container planting and was completed during the first week of February 2004. Initially, it was speculated most of the seed had was washed away with storm flows, but this later proved not to be the case. 2.2.6 Weeding The landscape contractor was responsible for weeding during the 120-day Plant Establishment Period but his crew did a poor job. At one point BEC personnel were pulling out weeds during site monitoring visits. Eventually, the general contractor used his own crews to complete the work of the landscape contractor before the project could be certified as complete. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 8 August 2004 2.2.7 Site Fencing To discourage entry into the mitigation areas, 4-foot split rail wooden fence, consistent with existing fencing at the park, was installed per plan along the new boundary of the site with the State Park parking lot. 2.2.8 Inspections The BEC/GFH construction monitoring team closely inspected grading, standpipe operation, irrigation installation, planting and seeding activities conducted by TarLian Landscape Inc. and Vadnais Corporation at the site. In early February 2003, at the end of installation, BEC prepared a final installation checklist for the contractor to complete before the beginning of the 120-day Plant Establishment Period. However, several measures called for on this checklist were not immediately implemented and therefore the Plant Establishment Period dragged on 2 additional months until the City signed off on the completion of these items in early August 2003. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 9 August 2004 3.0 POST-INSTALLATION MONITORING Post-installation monitoring and maintenance for the mitigation site began in August 2003 after the 120-day Plant Establishment Period was certified by the biological monitor as complete and continued through the first year of monitoring, ending in August 2004. The following section discusses monitoring methods and results for this first year of monitoring. 3.1 METHODS y 3.1.1 Horticultural Monitoring Horticultural monitoring consists of regular visits to the site to review the maintenance needs of the mitigation plantings. The frequency of these visits is high at the beginning of project establishment and then decreases as weeds become less competitive with the intended native plantings. Site visits are conducted monthly during the first year of monitoring. One visit is scheduled to prepare a list of dead container plant replacements for the year. In years two through five 6 visits (approximately bi-monthly) are required. Written memorandums are issued to the contractor after each maintenance visit making recommendations for future maintenance activities. 3.1.2 Botanical Monitoring Botanical monitoring focuses on quantitatively measuring the development of mitigation plantings and is conducted concurrently with horticultural monitoring annually for five years after installation is complete. Monitoring is conducted at the end of the active growing season in July or August each year. Sampling times are consistent from year to year. Botanical monitoring consists of the following elements: Annual Container Plant Survival Assessments Annually, dead container plants are evaluated to ascertain whether container plant success standards are being met. Annual Botanical Transect Monitoring Two 25-meter transects are used to sample vegetation development at the mitigation site. These transects are placed in such a fashion as to representatively sample the site. Both ends of each transect are marked with a metal T-Post and the location of each permanent transect is shown on a map of the site(with the primary end numbered) in each annual report(see Figure 3). Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 10 August 2004 Understory Species Assessment The original mitigation plan specified that understory species data be collected from a 4 meter wide belt transect centered on the line transect. All plants less than 1 meter in height including volunteer species were to be included;however, because of the small size of the project and the relative low species diversity of the site, it was decided to develop the species list for the project each year from a survey of the entire site. In addition, the plan specified a visual assessment be completed for non-native weed species dominance each year and compared to native species occurrence in the understory. For this purpose each 5 meter segment of the transect was evaluated for percent cover of native, non-native, and bare earth and then these values average together over both transects to obtain an overall cover assessment. Analysis of this data is then used to judge standards for weed control. A separate visual assessment is also made to determine if any invasive exotic weed species occur within or up to 100 feet from the site each year. Canopy Cover Assessment Along the line transect, data is collected on the percent overstory cover for all species over 1 meter in height. Total overstory cover is calculated annually based on transect assessments to determine if canopy cover success standards are being met. Container Plant Height Assessments A representative sample of container planted trees divided by species (20%) will be tagged in the third year of monitoring to assess tree height growth standards for Years 3 and 5. Tagged trees are evenly distributed over planted areas to reflect overall vegetation development. Analysis of this data is used as a means for measuring progress towards meeting project height success standards. Annual Photo Documentation The primary end of each transect is used as a permanent photo point to document vegetation growth. These photos are included as an appendix to each annual report along with other representative photos of the site. 3.2 FIRST YEAR HORTICULTURAL MONITORING RESULTS This section provides a summary of observations and remedial measures implemented by the landscape contractor during the monitoring year based on recommendations made by the biological monitor after each monitoring visit(BEC &GFH 2003-2004). Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 11 August 2004 3.2.1 Erosion After erosion repairs were completed for storm damage by the installation contractor during the winter of 2002-3 and vegetation cover established, no major additional erosion has occurred on site. The rice straw wattles installed on the eastern and southern slope areas have been left in place where they will eventually degrade. Areas left bare from the La Costa Beach Club drainage work, while still reestablishing vegetation cover, nevertheless remained stable against other than minor erosion gullying. 3.2.2 Seeding Understory seeding was slow to develop on site due to the rainstorms that initially caused flooding over lower bank areas and subsequently caused erosion gullying on the banks after basin levels subsided. Additional seed was applied during the 120-day Plant Establishment Period but it did not really start germinating until the late spring of 2004. Parts of the southern slope area were also redisturbed later in the year when the adjacent La Costa Beach Club Project (more later) installed a new drainage connection to a manhole on the southern slope of the project above the inlet structure. In the riparian areas of the project all three of the primary understory species have established, Douglas wormwood (Artemisia douglasiana), western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), and yerba mansa(Anemopsis californica). The most dominant of these species is Douglas wormwood but both other species are also present in significant numbers. As all three of these species are clonal in nature, it is anticipated they will continue to spread; however, as riparian woodland canopy cover increases canopy shading will diminish the vigor of the first two species. Only the yerba mansa will eventually thrive in shadier understory areas of riparian woodland. In addition to intentionally seeded riparian species, there have also been several species that have volunteered in the riparian woodland areas of the project including arroyo willow, mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), and western sycamore (Platanus racemosa). These volunteers have added substantially to the riparian woodland canopy mainly at the bottom of the slopes throughout the project. Although not a part of the wetland mitigation project, the upland coastal sage scrub slopes surrounding the wetland areas of the detention basin have also shown excellent establishment of seeded species. In these areas the dominant species are coast golden bush (Isocoma menzeisii), California sunflower (Encelia californica), and California sagebrush (Artemisia califon*a). Coast golden bush has also reseeded in significant numbers. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 12 August 2004 3.2.3 Container Plants Container planted species established well and were often supplemented by additional volunteer seedlings. During the 120-day Plant Establishment Period, the majority of container plant loss was due to uprooting by storm erosion. The only species that did not do well the first year were the Mexican and Olney's rush. Mexican rush was unexpectedly not adapted to final site conditions • (because the areas where it was to be planted were permanently inundated after project completion). Most of these plants were moved to higher elevations but were still not well adapted to shaded understory conditions which developed where they were moved. For this reason Olney's rush was substituted for this species. Olney's rush plantings were initially nearly eradicated by a resident pair of mallards in the basin who preferred them to cattail, which was also sprouting at the time. These plantings were replaced a second time by bareroot cuttings in August 2004 after the mallard pair had seemingly departed. In general the growth of riparian overstory species was above average by year-end and in many areas all overstory species had probably already surpassed their year-3 height requirement. 3.2.4 Weeds After installation, the focus of the maintenance contractor was weed control around container plantings the goal was an 1 8-inch diameter vegetation free zone around each container; however weed control broke down at several times during the Plant Establishment Period because of disagreements between the prime and landscape contractors. In addition, mulch placed around plantings at the tops of the basin to control weeds was largely washed away when winter storm flows filled the basin. Nevertheless weed control was adequate by the time the maintenance contractor took over in August 2003 and remained satisfactory throughout the year. No major invasive exotic species were present or invaded the basin during this period. The only major weed control problem that emerged during the year was when it was discovered the basin would be permanently inundated on its bottom and the City decided they did not want these areas dominated by cattail. It was concluded cattail created a maintenance problem because it blocked the flow of water through the basin during storm events and it was too supportive of mosquito breeding during periods of lowflow. Because this species easily seeds itself into shallow slow flowing areas of inundation, it became an immediate problem in the basin bottom. The contractor was instructed to remove all volunteering cattail including any rhizomes that were formed. By year-end this process had been about 95% effective in removing cattail from the basin. The contractor was helped in this control effort by the formation of a thick algal mat on the ponded Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 13 August 2004 areas of the basin that prevented further seeding of cattail and shaded out any reemerging stems below the water surface. The algal mat appears to be result of high nutrient loads being carried into the basin from upstream drainages, possibly from greenhouse runoff. This algal film was then raked off the surface waters before planting the bareroot Olney's rush in August of 2004. Several other minor weed problems were also dealt with effectively by the contractor. Just north of the east slope planting area a large myoporum (Myoporum laetum) was intertwined with an old existing willow. The contractor girdled and killed this mature exotic to prevent it from reseeding into the mitigation site during the course of the year. At the northern edge of the basin, several bottlebrush trees (Calistemon citrinus) were found and eradicated before they matured to create seed. In general, the contractor did a good job of ridding the site of undesirable species and allowing understory to be dominated by the intended native species. Nevertheless, maintenance will need to be kept up during the remaining 4 years of monitoring to assure the long-term success of the project. 3.2.5 Irrigation Irrigation of mitigation plantings has generally been sufficient to promote robust and healthy growth of all planted species after the maintenance contractor took over the project. It appeared that the installation contractor was initially not providing sufficient irrigation to germinate some seed. In late July 2004 the contractor was instructed to reduce watering significantly reduced since most areas were displaying above average growth. However, several small areas at the southern end of the project were left on irrigation because they still had sparse cover. Most of these areas had been replanted in the spring of 2004 after they were disturbed by the installation of a sewer connection from the adjacent property owner. Irrigation was also reduced during the winter months (December through late March) when winter rains supplied sufficient moisture for plant growth. There was also a break in the park waterline that crosses the basin in the spring of 2004 that caused minor erosion gullying on the western slope. Repairs to this line and erosion were completed by the installation contractor who was still within his guarantee period for the installation. The break has no significant impact on vegetation development within the project. 3.2.6 Trash & Debris After the initial removal of storm flow debris from the basin during the installation period, there has been an only minor accumulation of debris within the site during the first year of monitoring. Most of this debris is thrown into the site from the parking lot edge probably from inconsiderate Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 14 August 2004 beach users. There has also been a tendency for debris to accumulate at the south end of the project where an informal path has developed between the parking lot and Highway 1 above. Efforts have been made to block this path using orange safety netting and metal t-posts installed at the end of the existing split rail fence, but users have often broken this fence down. Additional vandalism has also occurred adjacent to this informal path. Graffiti was paint on a utility pole adjacent to the path and someone tried unsuccessfully to pull the solar controller for the project out of its footing. Problems with this illegal path will probably clear up this next year when the La Costa Beach Club resort is inspected to install a new access path between Highway 1 and the beach parking lot. 3.2.7 Adjacent Construction Impacts The La Costa Beach Club resort is being built on the property at the top of the slopes on the southern edge of the mitigation project. As part of their agreement with the California Coastal Commission they were required to install an interim parking lot for handicap access to the beach bluff this last year. This parking lot will eventually be torn out and replaced by another one closer to the beach and a new beach access path will be constructed from the present lot location to the State Park parking lot(anticipated in the fall of 2004). Construction of the handicap access parking lot adjacent to the southern edge of the mitigation site required regrading the upper south slope and installing a new drain pipe connection to a manhole there. These activities cleared all vegetation cover from a small portion of the southern coastal sage scrub slope. The La Costa Beach Club owner agreed to hire Habitat West to restore this area after their work was complete. Damaged irrigation lines were repaired and it was reseeded with the project coastal sage scrub mix after this construction was complete. In addition, the owner installed jute and plastic mesh erosion control netting over the bare slopes around the new parking pad to prevent any erosion from entering the mitigation site. There will be a need for further coordination with the second phase of this project because the resort's landscape and irrigation plans overlap the mitigation site plantings. However, all impacts for this project are anticipated to continue to be outside the limits of wetland mitigation acreage. 3.2.8 Pests and Diseases In general, plants were quite healthy throughout the monitoring period. Animal herbivory was not observed nor did any plants appear to be infected by disease. Mammal herbivores that set up home within project limits caused no significant damage to vegetation cover. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 15 August 2004 3.3 FIRST YEAR BOTANICAL MONITORING RESULTS Quantitative botanical monitoring was conducted during late July 2004. A summary of this information is presented below. Appendix A contains transect data collection sheets from which the tables in this section were derived. Appendix B contains a site species list. Appendix C contains representative site photos. 3.3.1 Establishment of Seeded Species Table 1 below shows the species planted from seed and container plants at the site with a notation ~ about their present establishment status (X = established or?= not detected to date). In addition, a list of significant native trees and shrubs volunteering at the site is also provided. Species are divided between riparian and coastal sagescrub covers. Coastal sagescrub species are included although they are not apart of the wetland mitigation requirements for this project. 3.3.2 Container Plant Survival Table 2 shows the numbers of riparian woodland species planted and their estimated survival rates by the end of the monitoring year. Overstory species container plant survival and health were very high during this monitoring period except for Mexican elderberry. Of 303 overstory plants planted, 236 or 79% were alive by the end of the monitoring year. The only overstory species with significant losses was the Mexican elderberry with a survival rate around 40%. All other overstory species had survival rates above 80%. Understory species fared less well as the two types of rush plantings have not established at rates above 9%. Of 732 wetland plants (except for Olney and Mexican rush, no more than 1% were replaced during the entire first year of monitoring. 3.3.3 Canopy Cover Assessment Along the line transect, data was collected on the percent overstory cover for all species over 1 meter in height. The results of this data collection are summarized in Table 3. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 16 August 2004 Table 1 Species Established Riparian From Seed Ambrosia psilostachya X Artemisia douglasiana X Anemopsis californica X Vulpia myurous (nurse crop) X(gone after first year) From Containers Baccharis salicifolia X Juncus acutus X Juncus mexicanus X Platanus racemosa X (added) Salix exigua X Salix lasiolepsis X Sambucus mexicana X Scirpus americanus X (added) Native Tree/Shrubs From Volunteers Baccharis salicifolia X Platanus racemosa X(one) Salix lasiolepsis X Coastal Sage Scrub From Seed Artemisia californica X Encelia californica X Eriogonum fasciculatum X Eschscholzia californica X(rare by year end) Isocoma menziesii X Leymus condensatus X Lotus scoparius X Festuca.megalura(nurse crop) X(did not persist) From Containers Artemisia californica X Rhus integrifolia X Native Shrubs From Volunteers Isocoma menziesii X Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wettand Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 17 August 2004 Table 2 Container Plant Survival Species Size No.Pltd. No. Alive %Alive Baccharis salicifolia 1-gal. 160 128 80% ** Leymus condensatus 1-gal. 14 5 36 % Juncus acutus 1-gal. 5 5 100 % Juncus mexicanus 1-gal. 110 10 9 % Platanus racemosa 5-gal. 6 6 100 % Salix exigua 1-gal. 25 25 100 % ** Salix lasiolepsis 1-gal. 54 54 100 % ** Sambucus mexicana 1-gal. 58 23 40% ** Scirpus americanus 1-gal. 100 8 8 % Scirpus americanus bare root 200 (just planted) TOTAL: 732 264* 42 ** Overstory Species Only: 303 236 79 * not counting last group of Scirpus americanus just planted Table 3 Canopy Cover Transect Number r96 or Cover 1 2 AVG accharis salicifoli 68 53 60.5 Platanus racemos 3 0 1 .5% No Canopy cove 0 9 J4.5% Salix exigu 0 16% Salix lasiolepsi 100 41 Sambucus mexican 0 0 AL OVERSTORY: 1719% 120% 3.3.4 Tree Heights Although not required to be formally assessed until the third year of project monitoring, riparian woodland species tree heights were visually estimated this year to have exceeded Year 3 standards by the end of the first monitoring year. Many willow trees appeared to be over 15 feet in height by year-end. 3.3.5 Exotic Invasive Weed Species No invasive exotic weeds were found to occur within 100 feet of the mitigation site borders. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 18 August 2004 3.3.6 Understory Weed Cover A list of all groundcover species (all plants less than 1 meter in height including volunteer species) was collected and is provided as Appendix B to this report. It is notable that there are only small numbers of annual weed species on this list. To visually estimate understory weed cover each tr nsect was divided into 5 meter segments and percent cover of native and non-native species visually estimated for each 5 meter X 4 meter wide segment and then averaged over by transect and between transects. A summary of this data is shown in Table 4. Table 4 Percent Cover of Weeds Transect Number 1 2 AVG. % nativ 99 90 94.5 % bare earth 0 < 10 < 5.0 %non-nativel < 1 I < 1 I < 1 .0 3.3.7 Transect Photos Included as Appendix C to this report are the two transect photos as well as several other representative pictures of the site at the beginning and end of the monitoring period. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 19 August 2004 4.0 DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF PROJECT SUCCESS STANDARDS 4.1 SUCCESS STANDARDS The success standards established for this project are from those set in the Conceptual Wetlands Mitigation Plan(BEC 2000). They are shown in Table 5 below: TABLE 5 PROJECT SUCCESS STANDARDS Type Standard 1. Erosion Control No significant erosion of soils within basin 2a. Establishment of Seeded Species Establishment of all species seeded (excludes annual nurse crop species) 2b. Establishment of Container Species 100% survival during Year 1 80% survival in rest of monitoring years 3. Overstory Canopy Cover 65% at 3 years 80 % at 5 years 4. Tree Heights Attain tree heights shown below Species 3 Year Height 5 Year Height Baccharis salicifolia 4 6 Sambucus mexicana 4 5 Salix exigua 4 6 Salix lasiolepsis 6 12 * Given in feet 5a. Weed Cover- Invasive Exotics None within site and 100 feet from site 5b. Weed Cover-Non-natives Not above 30% in any year 6 Wetland Functions and Values Slight increase 7 Hydrological Regime Replace and expand existing hydrology to support additional wetlands 4.2 DISCUSSION 4.2.1 Erosion Control By year end all significant erosion within the project had been adequately repaired and revegetated . Thus the project met this success standard this year. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 20 August 2004 4.2.2 Establishment of Seeded Species All seeded species had established within the site by year-end. Most seeded species appeared to be thriving and, if clonal, actively spreading within the project. The seed mix appeared well adapted to both the full sun and shade conditions found within the riparian woodlands and uplands on site. As anticipated, several nurse crop species did not persist. Therefore the project met this success standard. 4.2.3 Establishment of Container Species The first year success standard calls for survival of 100% of container plantings or they are to be replaced. Only the willow and sycamore planted within the project had these levels of success. Mule fat was a close second at 80% survival followed by Mexican elderberry, the last overstory species at only 40%. Understory species planted were much lower, indicating that they were poorly adapted to site ecology. Most of the understory species lost were Mexican and Olney's rush. The first of these was not adapted well to the elevated water table that unexpectedly developed on the bottom of the basin after construction. Olney's rush while better adapted to these conditions was initially eaten by a resident pair of mallards. 200 new bare root Olney's rush were planted to replace the other lost rush plants in mid-July 2004. It is too early to tell if they will successfully establish during the coming year. Thus the project failed to me this success standard this year; however, substantial recruitment of volunteer natives of the same species planted more than made up for container plant losses in all but the open water areas of the project this year. 4.2.4 Establishment of Adequate Overstory Cover No specific goal is set for canopy cover during the first year of the project. A 65% cover level is required by Year 3 and 80% by Year 5. Based on transect cover studies conducted this year canopy cover has already reached 137% within riparian woodland areas of the project (Table 3). This reflects the fact that there are several layers of canopy existing simultaneously. Willow species form the taller overstory, while mule fat and Mexican elderberry form an understory canopy layer. This layered canopy appears to be the main reason for the loss of 20% of the mule fat container plantings the first year. They were shaded out by the taller growing willows. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 21 August 2004 However there is still a substantial amount of open water through the middle of the project. Currently, it is hoped either the new Olney's rush plantings will begin to dominate these areas or, especially in the narrower southern "panhandle" area of the basin, willow and sycamore canopy will eventually cover them. A third trend is for the yerba mansa currently growing along the basin edges to runner out over the algal mat on the ponded areas of the site eventually forming a continuous cover. This has already begun to happen in several of the narrow areas of the basin channel. It remains to be seen whether these yerba mansa mats can persist through next winter's storm flows. 4.2.5 No Invasive Exotic Weed Cover Invasive exotic weed cover is non-existent either within or up to 100 feet of the site; therefore, this success standard has been met. 4.2.6 Non-native Weed Cover Under 30% Non-native weed cover is estimated to be under 5% currently throughout the project site and in most areas under 1%;therefore this success standard has been met. 4.4.7 Increase in Wetland Functions & Values It is clear that all the original wetland values have been replaced on the site. In addition the preexisting values have been enhanced by project construction; therefore, this success standard has been met. There is now more riparian woodland and an open water habitat component that did not exist prior to project installation. 4.4.8 Replace & Expand Former Hydrological Regime It is clear the original hydrological regime has been replaced and enhanced by this project; therefore, this success standard has been met. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 22 August 2004 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 WEED CONTROL 5.1.1 Continued Focus Weed Eradication • Maintenance personnel should continue removing all non-native weed species from project areas. 5.1.2 Continued Clearing of Undesirable Aquatic Species • Continue to eradicate all new and resprouting cattail. • Remove algal mats on water surface to degree necessary to allow for spread of Olney's rush in the lower open water areas of the basin; but, allow algal mats to serve as areas of spread for yerba mansa in the southern portion of the basin. 5.2 REMEDIAL PLANTING Container Plant Replacements • Although the mitigation plan calls for replacement of all container plantings which fall below 100% survival during the first year, volunteer species within the project have more then compensated for lost container plantings this year, except in open water areas of the project. Therefore, except for the Olney's rush, which was just replanted in open water areas, no additional remedial container plantings are recommended this year. Anticipated La Costa Beach Club Impacts • Proposed new construction work at the club should be closely coordinated with the project biologist to assure minimal impacts to project vegetation cover. • Any areas disturbed by club landscaping/grading activities should be immediately reseeded with the appropriate project seed mix after construction is completed. • Container plantings from the club landscape plan appear to be compatible with project revegetation goals and should be allowed in any areas of the club plans that overlap the project site. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 23 August 2004 • No impacts from this project should be allowed to riparian mitigation areas of the site. • An agreement should be worked out with the club owner as to whether Habitat West or the clubs landscape maintenance contractor would be responsible for plantings within the project site. It is recommended that Habitat West be responsible for controlling irrigation of these new plantings. 5.3 IRRIGATION • Discontinued irrigation to all areas of project except southern slope areas where cover is still developing. • As necessary work out an agreement with the La Costa Beach Club to use existing project irrigation lines to water any of their container plantings which are placed within the project site. 5.4 TRASH & VANDALISM • The contractor should continue to remove all debris and bottles thrown into the mitigation area or deposited by storm flows in the basin. • State Parks should be encouraged to fix several broken rails on the split rail fence separating the site from their parking lot. • Until the new slope pathway is installed, attempts should continue to be made to block or limit access along the southern border of the project site. Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 24 August 2004 6.0 REFERENCES Beauchamp,R.M. 1986. A Flora of San Diego County. Sweetwater River Press. 241pp. Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC) & Gary F. Hoyt Landscape Architects (GFH) 2003-2004. Project Horticultural Monitoring Memorandums:Leucadia Lowflow Detention Basin Wetland Mitigation Site. Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC). 2000. Wetland Mitigation Plan for Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain System Project.Prepared for the City of Encinitas. California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit No. 00-235 CDP California Department of Fish and Game(CDFG). 2000. Streambed Alteration Permit No. 5-291-00 and subsequent amendments. Hickman,J.C., ed. 1993.The Jepson Manual-Higher Plants of California. University of California Press. 1400pp. Holland,R.F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California,State of California,The Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game. United States Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District. 2001. Department of the Army 404 Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit 43(No. 200100198-MAT) Burkhart Environmental Consulting Leucadia Lowflow Basin Wetland Mitigation Rpt. GFH Landscape Architecture First Annual Report Prepared for the City of Encinitas 25 August 2004 APPENDIX A Transect Data Sheets BURMART ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING Leucadia Lowflow Storm Drain Project TRANSECT DATA SHEET• West Bank Transect No.: DATE: 7/29/04 (B) Baccharis (SE) Salix exigua OverStory Cover (P) Platanus (S) Sambucus (SL)Salix lasio. Groundcover %Bare Earth se ment %Weeds %Native (IN METERS) 0 to 5 <1 % 99 <7 % 5 to 10 <1 % 99 <1 % 10 to 15 <1 % 99 <1 % 15 to 20 <1 % 99 <1 % 20 to 25 <1 % 99 <1 % Total Totals: <1 % 99% <1 % 100% Overstory Cover in end Total Cover ies °16 (IN METERS) (IN METERS) (IN METERS) B 1.0 3.0 2.0 B 3.4 4.2 0.8 B 4.5 8.1 3.6 B 9.7 11.2 1.5 B 13 14.1 1.1 B 15 19.7 4.7 B 20.6 21.2 0.6 B 22.3 25.0 2.7 Baccharis Subtotal: 17.0 68.0% Platanus Subtotal: 0.2 0.9 0.7 2.8% No Canopy Cover Subtotal: 0.0 0.0% S. lasiolepsis Subtotal: 0.0 25.0 25.0 100.0% Salix exigua Subtotal: 0.0 0.0% Sambucus mex. Subtotal: 0.0 0.0% Total Overstory Cover: 42.7 170.8% BURKHART ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING Leucadia Lowflow Storm Drain Project TRANSECT DATA SHEET: West Bank Transect No.: 2 DATE: 7/29/04 (B) Baccharis (SE) Salix exigua OverStory Cover (P) Platanus (S) Sambucus (SL)Salix lasio. Groundcover segment %Weeds %Native % Bare Earth (IN METERS) 0 to 5 <1 % 99 < 1 % 5 to 10 <1 % 54 46.0% 10 to 15 <1 % 1 99 < 1 % 15 to 20 <1 % 99 < 1 % 20 to 25 <1 % 99 < 1 % Total Totals: <1 % 90% <10% 100% Overstory Cover species begin end Total Cover % (IN METERS) (IN METERS) (IN METERS) B 0.0 3.8 3.8 B 4.0 4.2 0.2 B 4.3 5.2 0.9 B 6.8 7.5 0.7 B 8.6 10.2 1.6 B 10.6 11.1 0.5 B 12.5 15.2 2.7 B 1 18.7 1 21.6 2.9 Baccharis Subtotal: 13.3 53.2% NC 5.6 6.8 1.2 NC 7.5 8.6 1.1 No Canopy Cover Subtotal: 2.3 9.2% Platanus Subtotal: 0.0 0.0% SL 2.1 2.8 0.7 SL 4.3 4.5 0.2 SL 4.7 5.6 0.9 SL 8.6 8.7 0.1 SL 11.6 13.4 1.8 SL 14.2 18.5 4.3 SL 19.9 20.9 1.0 SL 21.4 22.7 1.3 S. lasiolepsis Subtotal: 10.3 41.2% SE 10.2 1 11.5 1.3 SE 22.2 1 25.0 2.8 Salix exigua Subtotal:1 4.1 16.4% Sambucus mex. Subtotal: 0.0 0.0% Total Overstory Cover: 27.7 120.0% Appendix B Plant Species List Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Wetland Mitigation Basin 7/29/04 STATUS * Non-native (weed or cult.) ! Classified Sensitive ANGIOSPERMS (DICOTS) Anacardiaceae - Sumac or Cashew family Rhus integrifolia Lemonade berry Asteraceae - Sunflower family Ambrosia psilostachya Western ragweed Artemisia californica Coast sagebrush Artemisia dou lasiana Mugwort Baccharis Rilularis var. consanguinea Coyote brush Baccharis salicifolia Mulefat Encelia californica California sunflower Tocalote Isocoma menzeisii Coast golden bush Pluchea odorata Marsh fleabane Caprifoliaceae - Honeysuckle family Sambucus mexicana Mexican elderberry Chenipodiaceae - Goosefoot family * Chenopodium ambroisioides Mexican tea Fabaceae- Pea family Lotus scoparius Deerweed Onagraceae Evening-primrose Family Oenothera elata ssp. hookerii Marsh evening-primrose Popaveraceae - Poppy family Eschscholzia californica California poppy Page i of 2 Plantanaceae - Plane tree or Sycamore family Platanus racemosa Western sycamore Polygonaceae - Buckwheat family Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat Primulaceae - Primrose family * Anagallis arvensis Scarlet pimpernel Rosaceae - Rose family Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Salicaceae - Willow family Salix exigua Sandbar willow Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow Saururaceae—Lizardtail family Anemopsis californica Yerba mansa ANGIOSPERMS (MONOCOTS) Cyperaceae - Cyperus family Cyperus eragrostis Tall flatsedge Scirpus americanus Olney's rush Scirpus robustus Prairie bullrush Juncaceae - Ruhs family Juncus acutus spp. leopoldii Siny rush Juncus meicanus Mexican rush Poaceae - Grass family Leymus condensatus Giant wildrye Typhaceae - Cattail family jypha latifolia Broad-leaved cattail Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX C Representative Site Photos V-'-'.---1--i I 10 m -p-.W9 919-9 I a� CONNECTION#4 CAUDOR \2A Fan CONNECTION _L_ 10 MAIN LINE 1 Lymea 9B 9 CON ECTION# (PUM STATION 9A "LIN G" 8 "LINE ON ECTION "LINE 6 LINE C" 'l I I OF CARLSBAO I � a/1�� I I //� ?�- '. '�„�"• I ij ` I I `L' 1 i d s i r r ;I II'�I Iil!II`r I.!,III;it f al O h. Sta tJe l W7Dd Irjifl{; ij �<^w+ll l' III II NI N E ti I Hill I ! I mI`I I,I D ' �Itia'"j! , 'JI11�11 I:' it III;'JJIII�fI m�Z 1 `II I I Ir�yl N` I � Fit ±r jl'lil �' (18 � Cil l I I A r�,$ ' li�l i III,I✓�,$ f •�- .I;I. I� I A O �f Phi 'T'm "+ I �,11 III' i r I I: 11,ri III IIj�I� 1' I II I ' �. I Ii. I I•: I 1 � / a•' � '� ' tall I r �fit it lilt t I,1 n I �II n I I, i I I' r I I i I I m I IIII I III VII 'I III III r I ! I,I 1 I; ,1!:It If III IIII 7111 III '�I'Ili III t.c 'rl 1 I .I iII .I'1: II I!III n; v o° iw r 1! .I'lll r l it -.t ! -n 1 r I rl.r ij 0 Oil II dill :IIII II..i 'I II I 1 I �, 11111 j' - :'III Iri11 pro A2,L1 II II I.I I III,I �.,,it I IIi I III rl _ I II I,p III I; 14 ¢IESa J C/�� _/. _.- - � '� rn I �� u-�p3 _ 1 a. .!/ •r 511 T III I I'II J _GS I. 9 3d� �E4{�u a.✓'� QO I I i t III IL! I ���WS .�1 ..�• .iJ�li ..>• _ - .. � I•I;j!I'IIi'I 'I JI, Ir y Y lJ�lyl±. ,tamely-. -, I I lfllil I I I'1 lqi I III r r 1 Ir_ .11 it r'I 'IIIII FIJI• _ I 1 I 1 it II iG ! I - ✓ .czN J_ , �"� I ; Ilt I :I "��' M•V� s.. �..� IIII!{.I I` I I I;I I 'I i ` ' -w..-•: m � 'i,S -r' '.N �' _ 1, 1 r M - „�rf� aY- - •�� 1--.+- .,� + �' i I I IiL1 I 'iII I '�J .;1 Iq rl�I I I s,;.='„� .`"••.\^”" A_ ��.- �•_.:� �� '�`^,1 1 '`�'r '' I Q , I,!f+I I; 'I I I�'i I I I. !.V IITLLI^Iwh.II II—I Iil` Q 1111 d ,I 1 1 l i III II II, I I I Itl;; ��L�^,,,,:w'+"'�•� ,: l.•"„r-l--•'_` I 5' or� I I I I� � III I I li i 111(1j+1 !: y rr ��„ - '-�. � � I �7�•• �, g� I II a+YG:r''Irl I I_I:I H 7 I�� � I �II Ill r r.l,,. II I rr..`�I 1 nr.., I I srQ ZaZ 8rCC I 1 I I!lfl I ! lul I I a va ;te. !'gVClm7 II'Ir f l ll 11 1' * R=G7S �.m nr*i. V-+S,.yi� r I f i I II {) I I I f Il..r lul { I Ili I I .y I r-� I ICI { I EU.IIII ( II.II I IIII'{-I I IIII III 1 I IIII 3V. h� ��a .: I t nh1 tiTa 'E" 11111.LII II: Irl I i. I :T IIII. , _ i�� I ! gN� L t:1, II � rl' I 0 k � 7 N1...• a � '�d, � � I'' I l i ll� � �' �" I^I�-�I--•�''-�f—' c !'111 ,I I Ii l I I'�I I�`• �y I .1111 ! 1 1',111 '' ^T11r, 11' I�,i I I �I111111.II II' 111111 y ! ��_ r P- _- �"•. "� IjII II I�{) I III Illi 111 III.;_I I 1 I i;1 IIII t ,il hI h+ I, 11,a w .$t l 1 IlI!�' It!!III Q 1`I y` Iw i 1 II l r I ':I I.I I IIr1 I+ I ,Ii Ill III O .$g kM fi O: III Ilil II11 IIII ✓ Irp , I j?Y °i PI ;ITI ke. I,. :�111IR I , f,I r I m�Z '• .:.° i 111 . .17 .,! I I [ 1. t0 .� •—� ,' yr II r;^ :"�I � IIII I 1'__,1.1,1121. 1 1 ,I _�,�I 11..1;! ,III 11 I it °� �,ro.` .: ��� -_.. � ;� i I I •. �' I1 I I 'I'Ijrl II L�1^ ,I ,�� f` t II^ I- I :I:4'I 1 ES.'`Es 4 ' NUH I litHfY RAILWAY I ! T I I i T7 T k I :I �L� I I o O �' sta Rk79731MaIN I till HW3'..f81 fI + p 5x� I ! I r� I o -i -7 _'i..��L i I_'lT_ –7 1 u" i I 4 � I O 8, O. I I 1 o -- {� �_ •�".' !^",2+59 32_25'RT ��— " I i IS1 HM 5(93 -1 • ' 7x59.39 :_ T. I -I I aSr7t YrLYc -; I f2 PYC � � t Sf ci i~\ � ' I I I I ,. I I 11 I ' j•.�. I I.! I I I i=* - kI -F• O 41,.11 X1.1 i •'i.�m y CTR. Sf'B_2 IK.ET� ,)I M/BM CS FIL TER......V i c� I r I I. . II 11 I I 1 -"'- PEF7 CMJ SM'.f -- .I ' n k.." ' 'f. i �kd I 1 I To FEL Ten w x. r ti.✓^' x 1 BY 051£ i, ;�� 1 _'.✓v f � I I I•I i' 1 lid I I'1 I ' ��,aA. '4' t';I I I �II � II �' II 1! bl. 4 I I I I I I r I I UL 01+AKXYT' o f I I :I I �+ *n ir {III ,�- it ! LII I 1 1jll.III 1 II I(T ' -I� iH i z rif���-'�-as •. f ;j i I I ;..,' I, I 111' I k 7'I� I I i� r �' 11 It! IIII k I r t r h I J III I I' `I Il Iy11': !\ I I ' N DIEGO ' o+ ' " �I I � T v �� ,^.- � r w ,i.r 3N RAILWAY - — — — — — — `" ' �} °I. ilLa 117 .. IU r � / 26 .' a`,III. 9 N\ I 11 I:Wit- E r t / v p P � W n• '!I OI,III Q I I QI I, lu III I I'I I 1 I'I�"1 � I.j I II I I I;; I I II•`j II; C)� .IIII i ;I 1 I` I'jj1.11!Ilii I II II .I I _ tC� ;i j /'' I I O I.I.L III 1111 I IIII f .11, ! 1 II 1 I co I y�y -F`jh lip OI I� (I 111 111111.i11wi1 oal I'a O "''11T k+-8�.i. tj r 11 I ste aT I r-,fir.—'^'� I`� !-��.: .-1 L-r•�-�..+..+ I-r�l:.I 11� :� ! ,�I I I.II�.91ALQidtB�#Ar"�9A.-I 1 oQ &' .. Rz I .1..„ �r`,"•+-I_.Ll II IL III It 11 I I I I tl nl j'I III tl i m� ' ? .III . ti.j11111 II Irl II'T,11 II I.II UII II!. II �j III .I' .5 n I I .III I I JI I D .•I� - a r-ur -+'� I .L 1 II I � I r I . �I I 'I I ; I I I a>Ilyll �—�.—I ,�- a,J �T! �, k -I.,Y,--�"•-,I I:� I I I ; 1 - t I �i_li l II I.. 11 II I I 1 rt II I Iy CD Ir,I ( I l 1 1 l -'I �• I !} I I':'I I ..� .I II �' I i i _ i -IT�I 4� / l al rTrn E LEI 1 Ili 1 I' . I I I I 1 11 — t'- �I _T-i" k t"�dt ..__— .. / � �' / I N ..III I Jai !4 '� � •F'- 1�.�'� � �r t i!,� V � �r -4", ' 'z h �;,� f7s�cdaa�Yr', a�nY�araNr,+�aaw�a�earre�r.�:'nrr�aa'w�rw.M,+++w I I Q IEGO SAND ;--r— I I ! I I I I I 1 ! r NORTHERN RAILWAY I. -Ut21621 M41N — -- — D�d0-t1>`LL'Sj•_ I. I �� I I;� I I .., :j�. D I .___ lot o o pl Tin I I T p mW �I Yi: I' I t MLL 77777—T7 'I: I I. CD r y C _ III I I, I I , --1_L C25 p I I I': I 'h PMS,SC IRM 5f9 ":1 I I 1 I "1E'n amdSo� '�1 r�i.a.I n' I ' I: I LSMtiC F _ cfirj�� �T aS� I k I I ' �J b S • m yJ! `'G ti��$ P w 1 i '' I II II I !I I 11 I I � I I II 1 i I ' ,' o I ' m � :j Filit 'f ! SAN DIEGO ! I I R NORTHERN ,q I ( .jib"{ f 'II !I'Th. ,i''' I it ii ""f I GD I i I II I I II 131 I Y p I ill I ;31 _ — � ..- _ j' � � •_- I I 1 I 11 .III IU Nj IOU I "Nfi i N p I yo it p I:I: ' ' 11 , I J I I, �-.,.,I�•u„'_�_I ,'+(I I I I -1 xa �a1y ��' I �' -�:.—__Y }�. �� I i I l I.I ,I J I �tJ.:�•-� �r (I I' ' i '� ti_ D ` A. �$w III I I �� I L - ; ��p M `�FOa '• '�� �!� :Jb 1 II 'i � Ra C _L I 'I I Ll' I 111 III I I ' I 1 .-+-•�L-+-�,r- 1 a !' _ �' � /// �+�m �- .I_� I I I' �-,I�III I11, II�:I 1 I �..� I--� I I ;T•--1-� t. � 1tl I, + W -LI�j �_ fa.' II I fml�'rcls6 ''II '!I Ijii IIt t wli .� I �.ti _ -_- - '� y✓� � �11 '+-��' �IIII i �IIIIII I�I'I I,I,I 1 II� G74752l4id$7� f� 1 '' .�II I Il I; •` � I.i I�r� i,'!Iq II. III „ 1 ,I I I, I I I II I I �j � I '� ', - \ '+17" T /+l-1 K++!+�dMrxVfNlaMrxkAyni9pr .A.m:+�tW /1 ;+.i'o'w,r t��' 3 .., sfi/T �1�17V .. ... -.,_, f,..amt�tws m v .nlw," I w I v .,.'s "..I� •+�Y. e u�,j,.yn •r„_,_ i. NOR7!- PAIL AIAY I! I I I z I i I i —i—•r-�=-. r___ y„�1 I' I I I I:: r I r• I `li I I --- -- - I � !li , 1 I I I I• i I , I I •:i0 ,,,m11 mim Si ,�iqq :• aI I �. I .I. 1 I :.,�I I ,•I.: I I is �� � ..t 1 ✓ .,i ro , /� •. � I .-1. I I I I fl I '�. i TEIAt� I �I: I ,1 L!]YF>< I I •r m� 1 I I rn 8 I _ '�3fffi� �I �'6vi�51�� � II L! IJ 1111 III '.JJ I I � Ijl VIII II' I I�•v+��f. !I1C1 1+1` I- >a c�s� I'r tl as II 1' I I I ilil II I i �vmv3� i�" �^ I�*f� I ' ,I I It II{iI !IIII, IIII IIII !111 rl ,,I 11 :IIi II � 1I f I II I I 11� a rrs��a.,r�agg Yf u'm$cnao ' I o '�' n �. 0 � II I II I i I IIII lil'I 1 III'' I 'I III III I I 17 I 'I z I II1 ills 11 i ;. I! i II I,I I,I II. I I r g �� � III II III I�1 II III III ll i r fi •I ll I I I,i i I II.III I I I L' I � I'ii II�� IIII ,r I I;I II I Itr I II I1fl I II i!.. r"IT(1 I 111 I VIII II I ,!J ,I I I I I .111111il (' I 'I, I II ,' I,I 1111 I it I,II II I II II I 11 Ili II rl I I II I � 1 I I t I i II I I I 11 I I.it I I I,I 1 1 I I I'I I''-If I I I Iil Ill II _.:II ;11 II{IIII ',III III i II III {�I,. I rI11 I I i IrI I I, III !'IIIr" li:III' III " ' r I I ,✓; r II I '1 I �I�' �'. .�•.'.a.,a. �� I-i 1 ��I'W 1j11 Ir i 11 ' I 1 II . �, 'ti•�'y� ��� 7r�, -rj�� II i—..,-I... �����I 'I�I�il i(`I 111 ,, d �`A .H�ir-'Uiy,`,,."tl' , I 1 I li.-d-�.i I IIi, {ll 11 ; :1:III II,I•��.IIY Y'`, Q�i m i'f n`v -._-1. ■I�� '' 1/����I• � t I'I i' i 1._.!,� 1 I : J ' � (ii�f�11 p p i i 'I j}Imit I I ;, ! I I. ^'�I' li CI II dr �{ I x�j, I EXSSIR6- f I� ACT LI Arj i7AY 70 dg - I PI$ICI I O I I I ' .i 1,"-��,'�{--� .•!'.I I r I / PNMfA7 T fO• I it N AWN E P47;. I i i IitI1 = I I I i 1f bl I I Ili li I• •t 1 I.II:'1 1 aI I' It 14 A aC cfi``,fit r 'I i. (C/L'f!'I Sf'MEA II I I L$aa I I I� - ._' I I -� .• I I , ♦ Z g� > a` 3I. I� 3977'•103'L r � I I C✓L 114 A2 ghFA I I o I'I it s 51 2� m m c71 IF S N.3Pfi9y2:5J'4fEC .., I i��l f a s a s 1 ICTL�1< PVC SFA$i I o�f $$� ±;T 3741.161111144 LIT PFL' I „,ewC I4�PYC ep 1� r ° `.I I •.r;[ 117i 0.t2 (� f/L 14'Pic y `IEA R �d•I O Y W I I I r i IIII t I,; CD �► I I ' � ;� I� I I l— I O I'I I'I , u l I I I '`.�_'_-.�--_ . l V `' l� I/� ��! .r �/• Jx" ry{ R� � c!MI IL-�\�,, i,'... r I• :' .�, j ,1'2 ub 1 I .', LD I I (C—n < 3sazalfaaireclll '8 `� 4 ` —� Y _p. WL � , --��.5•': _ o�n�rl.n'Lr ax/ �I I ,I �I �� O ' I I I I �I:'.� -rots I i�a I r„I I!I If ' ,i � i I I., :,I I i..��,�,,r �i`"U '•`a, Ay 1 r i i Y B naswaBlLf I I N^I �j OHOCyBF E rr -•-r-r-� S gr-' O I I I II I iYoaWenf _� ! �• lir SO Cll 1250 6T. _I (I'.J� ' AIi c5=Fm71GS PEA '. 11, LE00 `-'�.LT BC E1of ' t ' ---..1-.- I III h j I I.FS F - e2eY J c2 4 \I I: 147579 CA 1< F5f S91EA SIER/f5- .�• ' 1 I L--a_.. Ju.vo 11T it- + 11 IIII. Ir401125�9.A96,L7!✓C I F$ "PVC-gn.9i - j� t a 1 I1 S a< i •►��� I I?� / I- I I I _ is I� II I ,� -n L1 I I .; III II .�. 1h. 11 I ) (' -✓..` .:I 1 I t—� O ;' n„I y I I I i!I it I I •i I II i II li J�'i'. O I I'f� i') l I'•11 I I•'I r ,I I I IL 1!, i I ,I' n i I �i. I o � N r'i I I -} .,.,.;L,-+..,I I i Id,I I •i I I I ' ! jl I � 'I 9iii i i i 1 r�• I Q I' I r y�II I I I I ""�"'I'� ii r it� � I r In 1 j1' , '� O o �' ,nt IIII II I I I I 1 I ,II II II II RcGI �, I`TZ i � m1 I it l; 11 I II II I I t II I I � I 1 1 1 1 III 1't I I I 111 I I I I a I :� � I; I ('• $ I I� I JI I + I:.:I I � 111 I! I �,I I Ills I I. O`' (`, ; .� I.I 'I `I `T� •. .. li, r., i I_I ' I I 1 IIII'. ' ..II.! I i l , I r- a Ij I .FV l ✓s33�1J� u !.. t I i I( it � , , I ';IIII 1 I fI I ' ,_ I I II I V j I II tl I II i i t I I i I i-:111 I I'I ,?` o l* I 4 Wt 1<•pV ,gyp n, I I I I ! (— I I I I I I I r f91p1LT '�- CA 1•Y PYC SEAFfi n I U I I 4x11 O ro l l 4 �! I I 1 / 'I q I 41378 W.CV. malur sa m r ,; IN15.7d17.7T� CT M' 6 'CA 14'p�{ I i% ,� I 44cM2Tfwc;LiRYc n1I •� I \11 II. � �I -1 I -:; I I i� I I i ' ��•I I 6�.-. L.IIU u,Il,�i I A...'�.,�. mr -2,7-u .Z 0 /V ouT(k, 0/h-T of 2,7_u2 Uv ell sr� �y`` p V6 /-2fro jL � T S �P r�' f i � t a M g1 _. ✓1� 1 � t f' .0 4. f I 5�4 G�l�h D9.�fl- G LAN P11'C a — 4. a lk c u-r r�-o s7f7C gOIci pipe- Cq) 2-60 , 1 s t r ~ 'r "t i kr Al Orr, � r 4 _ TT fjaIll aev�/��; P14 = log iv 4 1 1 G'�091 A 23 � rcr��NG- s7r� it (f p/ZlOT c�i476-0- Asw jf or U t` Y £_ Nay !' �.,•. 'ti a - _- — 4L4* arc o 9��- sh�-�f GI-Up �z NotbZ IF 5 N � 4:X., Pool 3 0� Z Dr' Tl+l L 4 Gl ac L& e �b r. 1: sW Ji \ Ilk Nk if t i. k A w i \. wkl 4 / � --_. ��7P *"�. '- . _. '� ts• 1� "' - tii �{ ra _a � �_ . A f �9 ov yi i i C441 9S- - b3 LY 1 y1 q i9 07 i - } a • POW .. " ♦ 'ter°��Lr_"w„�". t4 / �-v !) U. w Ff - A4 lip W _ y - Vii. 1 1 .. .�,, l _ y' Ott ►for' 1 ow �3 i r r� � _ _ __ �I t 1 _.__' ,e �' i � n _ A � �� �,,� r 1. .� ''. �,. �.�.: ,� �.;_� � .. L+f .. �': .. i r - .� 4 - _- i �' ,�- -- ; _ ,,, � ._ p - - � ,... -- - - ,! irr.r � i � / 1 1 �y8 1 fy Fit e■ /. .�-, �Tj `'a �.1 y X44 ate- 7WW x r �C� J 1 ' W � 1 '.I f it R, }; I`w Q V Ne V� N� �J i � �� v �� : � ;` a; .r jE �� -_�_ '�'�- � i - -.�.._-rte-:., -f .: '�` ' j - ��.. v �� _- �� -J ' i �=� .; � � .� `' �` � r � ; + n � ��� ��, � : s i r kit A" t 1 r P • � y F •.;. _ ,�` r �:� � a * � � 5+r':,� � _ _ �_,:� _ z f ��. .� _ _ w�r;; 'i„r �� - _ 1 � `, -- .�! p�� _ja -,.' ass; ... '-�F `>t_► v.,r � � �'', � � r �. X.Y' yy � _ P'�+ � �a. .. :R� 1 [ :f R� r��� � \ is � _�� �`} � �, r � vy '� �� �'� t `y�, i �`'•" ;!1� 371'°• l+F,�4�'•�� '� Y. i r �r SO am . �,am J J J a►k a Q c� O cz 0 C L a � (v '� _ �_ a �� _ _ .- v v� � . � F �'` �.� .� :�,��� '_� � r � I 1 _` I. 3,��! 1, ��� � � S� ,. �� �'��± �ti � _. �-- - F - - �. f-� �'�` - �. ,i I �i i '.w �,� ~ y - �. ;���. R ��. _ 4 � ` i ur q � t 4t t _ `tea r 2j. t � ry:• r 41'x,• "�•.,.rw- _ - r �� �'- �` - � ,'�gam• �' !,: t - - - /� TXl 1 LW4 i 1 y`.;�. .rte- � _7; r. y.. � y r ` .. '�• -t' .• y 016 r_�it 4� -I'v . imp lk- j 1. -o a! p.. • l� i _._ q- /7-02-- D 9fit A �• ii. i p&i�- -�rZ /V _ •.. '� !� -- � __ - ; _ y n - ' .� ;� �� i f7 i A a 1 _.. 4. ,qw 3JB�'695 a 1C a�� D �, :r �.� �� t�, �., 0 0 � . � `� r: � y �.,�, �_ � � � '� ���; �. a,.4 i z x :�� �,� _. .3.r, _ .� .i.. 1 ,�,., '�? r� ,� � . ' V b '\ h c� 1 � , M Al t � 1 Z u � o N � 0 tb J � a { �v\ o �J\ _ _ l 0 ��� �� � � a � � � � �. � � � v m� ���� ��� , ; , � � � J �-- � � � J J �.. '° a � � h 1 ��-- - �. f �, r , �� 1 � I' , V,��' �.s r 'I \ �`, r � _ r'. __�� ,44 �` ��. _� . r6+aia 4;�' �• K t�� � TN i ��r { �a�.,.. .# tM1. r 6 N �r lJ .��• r� "1 �' b c� O o - 0 o INI O M ,JA 2 1 a` CLO J � 7 O - J lJ J `1\ `V Z a� ML r, + t 1 ' 1 C� N � 0 J J 3 _ Z � 4 y CN- sk- Vj �J � C� .NWIW'* MLLJ 's LL Q .-. p cJ I� J , Tot Id- �`. � ..-.'i-� ,,,�. '♦may, '�1 N O I� m « ;. �41 dr c` l _ 4 ° �r' .+' �. ` �'► A ��� -.: � � �� ��� y _ _ \ -, '` c '.� - ! , �., t� r� f .".` -' � ' t � � : � � �,r � --- r-,. 1�V. _ ' '�� \ r - _� , ; S ♦� '0 M M I . - - o �r r 0 * , 4 f A.. 1 II 114 z --z -0 *Wco WL Wow.! s fill `f T ►• lL �•�. ,� ;�, -� `� � is �- .4;r a ~ �r y a ' • 4 ` ,�s 1 a 4 t! (`f I Q, (J tQ �C i (� O �C� 0 N O `J QIQ i N + n t.. i i a�cS� �, �� �� �_ �', � � � 1 �D . . -_ �� � � I �� �J� �` �� ���y v 1. � V �� �\ � - f�'^� 1 �... . � _ -.., �� � -._ �.,. rJ�:_.•r�"f��. t - '`� - . . _. _ _. _ _ .: ` � .. - T__ � u � 4' V �" r _�' $�. �. •. r'�l 1� ^� 1� 1� ,�\ `v �\ � �\`\J LJ VvJ � , > V f f� AklA I ■■ '� 1 � � _ C t 1-i LL a O rn 73 s •M n — - o �J�J -,� . -*'� � �, +Iri � ,�. ._ err. � � - t ti •, ".o ' ���. ,�;. � � `� .� � �. ,. _ � �l � � I �( y I - ,. :,,� . h, f 1 O N r r �.L O Alk S- t /-2 q-O 2 F NOVO SN ' "T ID of 2 ( ti NX 41 Ilk Jo- Ai JL J6 Alh 1fall, AOL 1 - _ XVE Si/q -,� 0 z h I J. t STj4- SCE + SZ t a5� �� /Ze12 lo •i 4q@dql-4W 144 �y ! t'L `7 -C...s SM• gCo f S-0 ± a clikon 0 Mao Tee,:" k _ i' T •. __ y1� -der" IN 4 S 1'* 5 f Al, k j 4 r � •� � �3 �,� , � �y +4'� �)���f. 4rK ,f 1 �'` �1"a �' tr �_ �' 4 1Z-o3 f ?v�� I- I r -,° 3 pit 10 : 30 F y� �— o� CMD f r#t 2 -11-03 A•rh IL_ . ar �, y } - 10 A•rh• S ■ / . � \r: . . . � �_ .�_�� . . . . , . � .. , , , �. � . � . - . . � �- � ' � \ ^� ^\\ � 3���' : `\e»«\\ . � . . � f �5�� . � � zy��q�����m\\�\ - . . �f . . ������ . : . . ��v >� �� � z , do -.-Rp ol � Y t I 1 WORK- TNT- ',-:• _ r . ' ,," l � 'ry 3t: 1 i a S PI CTuATS 2 *41 -03 _ _ ��'� r ,�; , ;> .5� , f .. �• ,� -. K�/ \ « �¥f� � z �¥ . . . . � . d � � ' � , �, - �&�. y� +��/ \ � _ ,�\�. �E - . / :. % ¥; ; - , . . . . . . . . � . . . �� < : �� %® \ �. �: ©© - ` �f , . . �? ^` , . �/%1 \ © / . . ��\ . % . � - z wy � ` �\ dw , \�! �-� �. �* ` � © y � - © ~ >° . ��. � � , . I41 �� d . lot ,. RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY San Diego Riverside Orange Phoenix Tucson 6Fnter Res(mrees Di►=ision September 27, 2004 Mr. Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024-3633 SUBJECT: HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSES OF EXISTING STORM DRAIN ALONG LEUCADIA BOULEVARD TRIBUTARY TO THE NCTD RIGHT-OF-WAY (RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY JOB NUMBER 14413) Dear Mr. Hefner: Pursuant to your request, Rick Engineering Company has prepared hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the existing storm drain system along Leucadia Blvd that discharges into the North County Transit District(NCTD) Right-of-way at Vulcan Avenue. Hydrology A rational method hydrologic analysis was prepared using the Advanced Engineering Software (AES)Rational Method Program to model the existing 100-year runoff into the existing storm drain system from Fulvia Street to Vulcan Avenue along the Leucadia Blvd. The watershed areas were delineated from 2-foot contour digital topography flown in July 2001,which was provided by the City of Encinitas. The total watershed area tributary to the NCTD right-of-way is approximately 17.2 acres. The rational method analysis shows that a peak flow rate of 38.5 cubic feet per second(cfs) discharges to the NCTD right-of-way at this location during 100-year storm event. Approximately 31.7 cfs discharges from the existing storm drain system and the remaining 6.8 cfs drains from the surrounding street area to the NCTD right-of-way. The Rational Method analysis assumed 100% flow interception at each existing inlet/catch basin and is based on the San Diego County Hydrology Manual dated June 2003. See the enclosed rational method analysis and hydrologic workmap for detailed information. Hydraulics The Advanced Engineering Software (AES) Pipeflow hydraulic analysis program was used to analyze the existing storm drain system along Leucadia Blvd. The AES Pipeflow hydraulic computer program performs gradually varied flow and pressure flow profile computations. The 5620 Friars Road • San Diego • California • 92110-2596 • (619)291-0707 • FAX: (619)291-4165 • www.rickengineering.com Mr. Kipp Hefner September 27, 2004 Page 2 of 2 program accounts for losses due to friction,junctions reaches of bends. ressure flow and open channel flow. incremental and summarized form, and indicate p The Pipeflow analysis was based on the"Woodley Blvd from known Woodley Road),R.S the Vicinity of Encinitas"plan and profile for Leucadia (formerly b the City of Encinitas. 1799-2, sheets 3 and 4 of 5, as-built dated September 28, 1973,p Y The soffit of the existing 24-inch pipe outlet was Aa�men as roughnesscoefficient of 0 013 wa at water surface elevation the downstream end of the storm drain system. Manning 's for the Alternate Pipe Culvert and all junction structures were assumed to be four feet in length. In addition, an 18-inch culvert was assumed to be connected to the existing storm drain system at Hygeia Avenue. This assumption was based on a site visit to the area on September 20, 2004 which identified some additional catch basins not reflected on the as-built plans. The pipe flow hydraulic analysis result shows that the hydraulic grad pipe functions the storm rain system remained under the existing ground;however,portions flow. The anticipated velocity at the storm drain system outlet(at the NCTD right-of-way) is approximately 10.1 feet per second(fps) during a 100-year storm event. Please refer the enclosed Pipeflow analysis and workmap for detailed results. If you have any questions or need any additional information,please contact me or Roberta Cronquist at(619) 291-0707. Sincerely, Q�aF....... t RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY �o:�Gpy VIN eo'''•�2 LO 'w No.32838 m ° Exp.6130106 Dennis C. Bowling,M.S. R.C.E. #32838, Exp. 06/06 qTF OF CP��F� Principal DCB:MK:nd.004 cc: Mr. Leroy Bodas—City of Encinitas (with enclosures) Mr. Peter Cota-Robles—City of Encinitas (with enclosures) **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003, 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2003 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2003 License ID 1261 Analysis prepared by: RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 5620 Friars Road San Diego, California 92110 619-291-0707 Fax 619-291-4165 ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** • NTCD - LEUCADIA BLVD AND VULCAN AVE. J-14413 * • 100-YEAR EXISTING HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS OF AN AREA ALONG NORTH SIDE OF • LEUCADIA BLVD THAT DRAINS TO NTCD R/W AT VULCAN AVE FN:4413NTCD.RAT/RES ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: 4413NTCD.RAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 07:33 09/27/2004 _ _ ------------ ---------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC-MODEL-INFORMATION: - - ---------- ------------------------------ 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2 .500 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12 .00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS (DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.85 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) _(FT) _ (FT) _ _-(n) __ 067 2 .00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 1 30 0 20 0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.50 1.50 0 0100 0.125 0 .0180 2 30.0 20.0 0.020/0.020/ --- GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2 . (Depth) * (Velocity) Constraint = 0.5 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21-- - - - ----------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA-ANALYSIS««<------------ USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 98 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 75 .00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 179.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 177.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.30 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2 .828 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 67.33 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0 .57 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ 0.10 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102 .00 IS-CODE _ -62--- --- -------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA-<<< >>>>> (STREET TABLE SECTION ## 2 USED) <«< ---------------------------- UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 177 .70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 113 .00 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 1105.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30 .00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20 .00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) _ -0.02020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) - SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 Manning' s FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0180 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) _ 3 .78 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.29 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.04 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4.19 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC. ) = 1.20 STREET FLOW TVEL RAINFALL INTENSITY)(INCH/HOUR) =Tc5.193) 7 23 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5600 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 98 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.574 11, 6 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 .10 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 6,56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2 .20 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) _ END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.33 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.32 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4.79 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC. ) = 1.59 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100 .00 TO NODE 102 .00 = 1180.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102 .00 TO NODE 102 .00 IS CODE _ -1 -- --- - ------------------ -->>>>>DESIGNATE-INDEPENDENT-STREAM-FOR-CONFLUENCE<<«<--------------------- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 7.23 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5 .19 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2 .20 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 6.56 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103 .00 TO NODE 104 .00-IS-CODE _ -21- -- - ------------------------ >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA-ANALYSIS««<------------------------ USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 89 70 .00 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) _ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 145 .00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 144 .00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.00 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 5.720 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GRE�A�T2R9 THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = Manual) (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH I O USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY( CH/HOUR) _ SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 40 0.40 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0 .10 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ **********************************************102*00*IS*CODE****51********** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE - __ ---------- >>>>>COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW-<<< >>>TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<<<< _= 144 00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 113 .00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 710.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0437 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA00(FEET� FACTOR = 2 .000 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 0.50 MANN YEAR RAINFALL OINTENSITY((IINCH/HOUR)H�FE4.023 *USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA) : USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5300 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 89 2 .87 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) _ TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED 0.05 VETRAVEL(TIME(MIN.) = 5 .02 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) _ Tc (MIN. ) = 10.74 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4 .69 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 .20 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = O.536 FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.96 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2 .30 PEAK END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: 2 87 DEPTH(FEET) = 0 .07 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) _ 780.00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 103 .00 TO NODE 102 .00 = FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102 .00 TO NODE 102 .00 IS CODE _----- --- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<«< --»»>AND-COMPUTE-VARIOUS_CONFLUENCED_STREAM_VALUES<«<__------ TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 4.02 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2 30 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 4.96 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** AREA STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 6 .56 7.23 5.193 2 4 .96 10.74 4 .023 2 .30 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 9.90 7 .23 5.193 2 10.04 10.74 4.023 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES 0ARE S FOLLOWS: 10.74 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4 .50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ 100.00 TO NODE 102 .00 = 1180.00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 0 IS CODE 31 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102 .00 TO NODE 105*0 ---_------ »»>COMPUTE MA U ED PIPESIZE (NON PRESSURE-PRESSURE «< >>>USING CO PIPE-FLOW UTERESTIT ----- _00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 113 ) = 108.50 = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE 1� 8.0 INCHES 96 PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 12 .00 NUMBE IO04 R OF PIPES = 1 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) - PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 03 TC (MIN. ) = 10.77 0 . PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 100.00 TO NODE 105.00 = 1210.00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 105*00*IS*CODE****81********** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE- - 105.00-TO NODE --------------------------- ------ -- ---------- >>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK_FLOW<<«<-_-_---- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.016 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 76 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.5519 0.61 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.30 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.64 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.80 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ TC(MIN.) = 10 .77 108*00*IS*CODE,r***41 - ********** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE ____------- __ -------- _ - >>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA« << »>USING USER -SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<«<--_-- _= 103 .00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 95.18 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM MANNING'S N = 0 .013 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) _ DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18 .0 INCH PIPE 12 .868.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) _ GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.64 0.18 Tc (O N.) = 10.94 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 1346.00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 108*00*IS*CODE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE >>>>>DESIGNATE-INDEPENDENT-STREAM-FOR-CONFLUENCE««<-__-- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 3 97 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4 80 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 10.64 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE _ 107*00*IS*CODE****21********** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE --------- ---------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA-ANALYSIS<<«<--------- USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = •8700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 98 70 .00 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) _ UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 179.00 177 70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) _ ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 1.30 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN. ) = 2 .789 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 68.57 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.10 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 62 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>> (STREET TABLE SECTION # 2 USED) <<<<< ----------------------------- UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 177.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 100.00 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 1250.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6. 0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20 .00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0. 020 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0180 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 4.65 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.30 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.71 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .52 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC. ) = 1.35 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 4.61 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.40 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.117 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 98 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.870 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.80 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.01 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.90 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 8.46 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.35 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 12 .38 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5.22 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC. ) = 1.84 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 106. 00 TO NODE 108.00 = 1320. 00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 7 .40 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5 .12 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.90 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 8.46 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 10.64 10.94 3 .974 4 .80 2 8 .46 7 .40 5.117 1.90 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS- ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 16.72 7.40 2 17 .21 10.94 3 .974 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES 2ARE AS (FOLLOWS: 10.94 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 6.70 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ 100.00 TO NODE 108 .00 = 1346 .00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 108*50*IS*CODE****4i********** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108 .00 TO NODE ----------------------------- -- -- ---- -------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<«<������_��_______ _= 95 00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 89.20 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) _ FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE 15.780 7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) _ GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 17 .21 0.08 Tc (O N. ) = 11.03 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 100.00 TO NODE 108.50 = 1426.00 FEET. LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108 .50 TO NODE 108.50 IS CODE = 81--------------------------- _ ------------ ---------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE-PEAK_FLOW<«<--_------ 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .954 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 76 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.5994 .45 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 3 .20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 23 .66 . TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 9.90 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ TC(MIN.) = 11.03 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.50 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 41----------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA«<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<«<-_-_---- -----------------=----89 20 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 72 .15 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) IvIANNING'S N = 0 .013 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) _ DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18 .0 INCH PIPE IS 13 .4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) 18 0106.61 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) _ PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 23 .47 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.24 TC(MIN.) = 11.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 109.00 = 1664.00 FEET. ************************************ 109*00*IS*CODE****81 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO-NODE ----- -- --- ----------- _ ---- ------------- ------ >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE-PEAK-FLOW<«<-----__----- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .900 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5100 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 76 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0 .5919 r t SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.79 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 10 .80 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 24.93 TC(MIN. ) = 11.27 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 81 ------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .900 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 89 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.5979 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.90 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .35 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 11.70 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 27 .29 TC(MIN. ) = 11.27 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 41 ------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 72.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 61.00 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 688.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8.69 PIPE FLOW VELOCITY = (TOTAL FLOW) / (PIPE CROSS SECTION AREA) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 27.29 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 1.32 Tc (MIN. ) = 12 .59 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 111.00 = 2352.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 81 --------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW«<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .631 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 84 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.6110 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.60 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.33 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 14.30 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 31.73 TC(MIN. ) = 12 .59 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 112 .00 IS CODE = 41 ------------------------------------ >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING USER-SPECIFIED PIPESIZE (EXISTING ELEMENT) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 61.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 60.15 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 90.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ASSUME FULL-FLOWING PIPELINE PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 10 .10 PIPE FLOW VELOCITY = (TOTAL FLOW) / (PIPE CROSS SECTION AREA) GIVEN PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 31.73 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.15 Tc (MIN. ) = 12 .74 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100 .00 TO NODE 112.00 = 2442 .00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 112 .00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW«<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .604 USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6700 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 89 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.6210 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 .90 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 17.20 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 38.49 TC(MIN. ) = 12 .74 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 17.20 TC(MIN. ) = 12 .74 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 38.49 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS P,/, "A G DATE -4- SURVEYED By INDEX PAGE SURVEY OF r7 'Z 7- —A" "A hl) 7760 (3 t<1 T) ct 7 4 Z5,�o4 ly/6/8 7 1974 2-P 9 r'42,14-, Z-;:78 40, 71 -1`3'7641,6 7 �73 6'-- Ali Get pufmc/ d//53 7-/,E/) 19742670 Q (Z3 7848.4z. /oe I U- N LLS Z cJ `_ W Cl) cam- S W C W � O ? W O c*J U C N c N N 0 tt� W O W O W 4 rr V a dc LL: CO a H 0 V S n O df U W W O cn p to �i. S F- l� W O S V Z Q �y Z W J 1 Z U W O O W Cr Z r r Q = !i > Q U O O J -cr CD N O H O F- V S LL. . W S O � 2 W CL J U Z = o 7 j C U J U. W r O H Zv W cn F- T J 1i G. H Z O \n N O '� •l, a Z f W N it u: Q r,(1 = D W O W m O 0 3 ? - a Cl) WrJ O O O Q CO u: �j IL W WIN O N O Q U W W � W o a d d d- > L) V n U = �( Z W J r C W W Z Q � � a z o � c J m m mo �: o a L) W > c z 4 W d O Z W W W 0 J CL cr 0 O Q p Z � o Z 00 cr ? p ~a Z l J a v . SURVEYED BY ' ' "7 DATE t U 1,NNE INDEX PAGE % v F I SURVEYOF �/�/UN `" AU&/JMC.n1T Rim tL= 13y,59 x347, 601 19�a/o374, 6t85 617215 321 6 +00 c�+3v,77 1910345, 7/05 T IPS G � S ��-' SS -� !0 1o24r881• u872 1 a2 I TYpE G !A/GGT l Rim EL- 137, $8 /NS1DE 7YA FACE l9�v�34�o. X705 t9(o/034� �io5 X241881 , 88'72 �Z41E3aO.3i37Z U t 29 . 8 I v 321 27 A- 3,3 AL /3!0. 35 3 d- /t-= /34. 73 1-17-3.40 1 0 9 r = /-3 7a 10241733.6 184- / -�8 3,40 13,,/0355 0 30 CO241'731, &9E34 12 C,0 i t8i.40 R `4 1 � ZZ-oZ --D By W.M DATE PAGE ! U F Z r+'VEY OF UljlorU INDEX j�BEI: 1�032 C- 3.71 � alvE C o.73 A/M _ C o, 35 k/M n C 3. 59 />t our Nub Zt/39,94 !o' o� 908 CL_ 139 (z i-1015 EG- 9'90 v. 31 RIH _�7 01/24/2002 09:02 8565501477 VADNAIS EST rout nl • Memo YADNAIS CORPORATION 9164 Rehco Rd San Diego,CA 92121 (858)550-1460 Fax(858)'550-1470 To: Kipp Hefner CC! JeffAtderson Greg Shields Ron HradY Fran Alex McCI room Date: 1/24/02) Re: Leucadia Drainage and Sewer Force Main(Request For Proposal 01 &02 RFP#1 does not require any additional cost or change in schedule. RFP#2 does not require a change in schedule;the cost proposal is auache& 1 01/24/2002 09:02 8585501477 UADNAI5 E51 roar n� Project Info C -actor V.adnais°CO oration' Prc,�ect Luecadia'Drairi e'and Se�nrer..Force Main Owner CRY Of Encinitas.. : ' Contract RFP 42 1328 Uadnais Corporation fl� Labor Surcharge 2U Labor Markup 1 fr % Material Markup 15 Equipment Markup 5 Subcontrator Markup Inc, % If O.H. Is Included in pricing,type"inc."in cell B11 Dverhead ina off, If profit is included in pricing,-type"Inc..'in cll B12 Profit Page 1 01424/2002 09:02 8585501477 UADNAIS EST f✓�ut e4 Attachment A Vadnais corporation City Of Encinitas Luecadie Drainage and Sewer Force Main Contract -- Vadnais.lob 1328 Labor Task Name Hours Rate Total Labor $35.23 51,127. 6 Labor. 32 $35.23 $1,127.36 Operator 32 $53.30 $1.705.80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Labor Subtotal $3,960.32 Labor Surcharge C 10% $396.03 Subsistence $0' Labor Subtotal $4.35 6 27 Labor Markup 0 20% $5.227.62 $5.227.62 Total Labor Material Unit TQeK Dbojoli O Units Price Total 47 onerete 10 CY $73.00 5730.00 $0 $40.00 4R 5 Reber 200 LB .20 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $770.00 Materiel Subtotal $115.50 Matedal'Markup a 15% $885.50 $885.50 Total Material Equipment unit Task Descrivtion fit., Unit Price Total 418 Be'Ckhoe 32 HR $25.50 $816.00 Shorir►g Box 12 EA $50.00 $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 ._�- Equipment Subtotal $1,416.00 Equipment Markup(ID 15% $212,a0 $1,628.40 Total Equipment 1,628.40 Subcontractors Total Task Description Subcontractor Subtotal $0.00 Subcontractor Markup @ 5% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Subcontractor $7.741.52 Subtotal $0.00 Overhead is Included with.above prices $0.00 Profit is Included with above prices $7,741.52= Worksheet Total �"'� &36 AM A-1 of 1 1/24/02 Jv, Trench Width Ground Line I 560-C-3250 Concrete A Existing undercut ewer pipe I i I i I 3„ 15 barl LIM—A 6 ii cle na 3" I, Undisturbed soil ii tee note fee note PI to be constructed TYPICAL SECTION Outside Diamew of Pipe 6' T- 2-0 5 bars required when 1* 8 "along waterline only. 4 � 3"- LEGEND ON PLANS 15 bars I Maximum 12" c. to c. Additional 15 bar NOTE as required. 1 For water line construction encasement shall extend SECTION A—A to first joint beyond 2 feet at both sides of trench or to a distance of 4 feet, whichever is less. I RECOMMENGEO 1Y THE SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING Revision By Approved Date REGIONAL STANDARDS COMMITTEE Conc. 4s .11,75 °°'"°°'°' R`E "°°' —TS-19 CONCRETE SUPPORT - DRAWING S-12 FOR UNDERPUT SEWER PIPE ant by: GEOPACIFICA INC 17607215539; 03/04/02 4:46PM;JetFax—#901 ;Page 2/2 trl✓i 11YWHICA G t 2 T F. C II N f C A i. March 4, 2002 C: N $ U I. T A N r S City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Attention: Mr.Kip Heffner Subject: GeoteebnicalOpinion Request for Alternative Subsurface Boring Method Leueadia Drainage Project Encinitas,California Dear Mr. Heffner: In response to your request 1 have reviewed the subject plans and specitlications in relation to a request by the contractor, Vadnais Corp. their request was to utilize a modified jack and bore operation instead of the contract requirement of directional drilling. EA meeting was held to discuss this alternative. The contractor plans to jack and bore a 40-inch (4pprox.) shaft to install the storm drain pipe. The contractor has stated that if problems were encountered during the operation that goes under Coast Highway and La Costa Avenue it would be easier to identify and fix than with the directional drilling. Also, for the other portion of the required directional drilling that is at a very shallow gradient the contractor has stated that they+ can meet the required gradient with the modified jack and bore operation. Based upon my review of the plans and contract along with the meeting with the contractor I would approve the contractors request for the alternative to the directional drilling with the following conditions: 1. if any problems are encountered at either of the required areas for this operation the contractor will agree, in writing, that they will be fully responsible for the correction of the problem at no cost to the City of Encinitas. 2. In the area of the pipe installation where there is a very shallow gradient the contractor will be required to video the modified jack and bore:operation aftpr it is finished and to verify that the gradient has been achieved and maintained along the entire stretch of pipeline. if the gradient is not maintained or constructed properly the contractor will be responsible for the correction and repair of the line at no cost to the:City of Encinitas. If you have any questions,please call. am es F.Knowlton R.C.E. 55754 C.E.G. 1045 3 0 6 0 INDUSTRY ST S U I 1 E 1 0 5 0 C E A N S I D E C A 9 2 0 5 4 Sent by: GEOPACIFICA INC 17607215539; 03/04/02 4:46PM;Jet& #901 ;Page 2/2 77 LrEi )1 N'1I ICA C_tOtF. C11NI CA1. March 4, 2002 ci N S U 1. r A N r s City of Encinitas 505 South Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Attention: Mr_ Kip Heffner Subject: Geotechnical opinion Request for Alternative Subsurface Boring Method Leueadia Drainage Project Encinitas,California Dear Mr. Heffner: In response to your request I have reviewed the subject plans and speciOCations in relation to a request by the contractor, Vadnais Corp. their request was to utilize a modified jack and bore operation instead of the contract requirement of directional drilling. A► meeting was held to discuss this alternative. The contractor plans to jack and bore a 40-inch (�pprox.) shaft to install the storm drain pipe. The contractor has stated that if problems were encountered during the operation that goes under Coast Highway and La Costa Avenue it would be easier to identify and fix than with the directional drilling. Also, for the other portion of the required directional drilling that is at a very shallow gradient the contractor has stated that they+ can meet the required gradient with the modified jack and bores operation. Based upon my review of the plans and contract along with the meeting with the contractor I would approve the contractors request for the alternative to the directional drilling with the following conditions: 1. if any problems are encountered at either of the required areas for this operation the contractor will agree, in writing, that they will be fully responsible for the correction of the problem at no cost to the City of Encinitas. 2. In the area of the pipe installation where there is a very shallow gradient the contractor will be required to video the modified jack and bore: operation after it is finished and to verify that the gradient has been achieved and maintained along the entire stretch of pipeline. if the gradient is not maintained or constructed properly the contractor will be rtsponsible for the correction and repair of the line at no cost to the:City ofEnciaitas. If you have any questions, please call. i Jaws .. awes R.C.E. 55754 C.E.G. 1045 3 0 6 0 INDUSTRY ST S U I ) E 1 0 5 0 C E A N S I D E C A 9 2 0 5 4 _ l Gary F Hoyt +"B EC Burkhart Environmental Consulting P.O Box 42035E i Son Diego,CA 92142 landscape MEMORANDUM architecture, i n e. Project: Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project #00-235 CDP CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement #5-291-00 ACOE Nationwide Permit #NW43 Gary F. Hoyt,ASLA To: Tamara Spear, California Dept. of Fish & Game PrineiPal Terri Dean, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Kipp Hefner, City of Encinitas From: Gary F. Hoyt, ASBE Brad Burkhart, Landscape Architecture Date: February 11, 2003 Land Planning Subject: Completion of Wetland Mitigation Landscape Installation This memorandum is to acknowledge that GFH Landscape Architecture (GFH) and Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC) have inspected the wetland mitigation landscape installation at the Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project and found it to be substantially complete and installed in accordance' with the landscape construction documents prepared for the project. These documents were based on the design parameters specified in the Wetland Mitigation Plan for 13625 Adman Street the Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain System Project (BEC Poway CA 92064 October 2000), as required by resource agency permit conditions. 858.486.4931 taX: 858.486.1457 RLA #25-i7 It appeared from the flood line around the western basin that flood levels had dropped about 3 feet pp from peak levels. Thus water level had dropped at the rate of 1 foot per day in the western basin and at about half that rate in the new project basin. Thus storm fl w l the in the newly constr putted eastern basin was not able to flow fast enough into the standpip e through with the drop in western basin levels. A second monitoring of the western basin on the 18th showed that it had not dropped substantially further from the day before, suggesting that ground water infiltration This rate was estimated sfrom the fact were fairly slow perhaps on the order of 6 inches p Y Pp road had dropped about 6 that the level of water in the culvert opening west of the park entry inches from its top and was full the day before. At this rte it t will take abut eo culvert. The days to bring the water level in the western basin to the invert level in t level at the bottom of the project basin standpipe is slightly Friday than the unless invert ground infiltration project basin lowflow levels should be reached by this Y or Saturday rates slow. in BEC has asked Danny the site manager for Vadnais to monitor m p how fast water levels are dropping heck the new basin to see how long it will take for the basin Y to lowflow levels. W with him again on Friday about this matter. If basin lowflow is reached by Friday the new basin plantings will have been under water for 7 days total which is probably their limit of submersion endurance. Conclusions 1. It is recommended that larger slots be cut in the new basin's standpipe so that it may empty at the same rate as the existing eastern basin. 2. BEC will continue to check this week hoe decreased to low in the new conditions in he new basins, all 3. About 1-2 weeks after flow levels have plantings submerged during the recent storm events should be evaluated to determine if they are still p should be replaced. alive. If found dead,plantings 4. Reseeding of the lower basin levels if required is not recommended for at least a month to assure additional storms do not wash it away again. Page 2 of 2 E C Burkhart Environmental C,onsultin San Diego,CA 921 6 4709 Biona Drive E-mail:b.buftart@att.net MEMORANDUM PROJECT: Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project From: Brad Burkhart,Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC) Gary Hoyt, GFH Landscape Architecture To: Kipp Hefner, Project Engineer, City of Encinitas Date: February 11, 2003 , RE: Final Landscape Installation Inspection BEC visited the site today to perform final installation inspection. Although there were several small problem areas, it was felt the installation was sufficiently complete to certify the site ready to start the 120-Day Plant Establishment Period. BEC concluded the problem areas could best be addressed by the contractor during the Plant Establishment Period. Items noted which require either completion, remedial work, or possible modification include the following: Container Container plantings & Seed& Seed 1. All container plantings were properly installed and mulched; however, due to heavy rain today the basin has filled with water to the top of the basin riser pipe (grate elevation is set at the 10 foot contour level). This level is also slightly above the headwall of the inlet pipe at the southern end of the project. Inundation of most of the bottom slope areas prior to the establishment of any plant materials may create problems with seed establishment since the hydroseed mix has probably been washed off the slope before it has had a chance to germinate. Likewise, if container plantings remain under water for more than a few days they may die. Therefore inundated areas will need to be reevaluated after the basin empties to determine whether reseeding or replanting are required. BEC requested that the contractor monitor the amount of time it takes the basin to drain back to lowflow levels after the current storms cease. 1. The contractor confirmed that the Artemisia douglasiana seed applied was ten times less than the plan specifications. He confirmed by phone that he had obtained the missing seed and hand applied it to the wetland seed areas of the site. He has agreed to provide a written verification of the quantity of seed applied within a week. Again, because of basin flooding this seed is likely to have been washed away by the recent storm event. 1. Plant mulching was generally adequate;however, some mulch near the inundation line may need to be replaced during the plant establishment period. Page 1 of 2 r - Erosion 1. Generally, the physical methods used for initial erosion control (hydromulch and straw wattles installed on contour) are working to stabilize site slopes above the basin inundation line against erosion until the seed mix can germinate. Two small an than steeps lope first is on the slope directly behind the inlet structure Several areas o sluffed off, leaving erosion gullies. It is not clear whether the sluffing is due to the current storm event or possibly was caused by initial site irrigation. The second area to watch closely is where the runoff enters the cul-de-sac at the top of slope at the southern end of the project• sandbag sandbags are placed here to direct storm flows off to the west of the project. However, this system needs to be cleaned frequently since s over the call o�a event sandbagadiversion strulctures,oitf its up to the top of the sandbags. If runoff run p likely to cause severe erosion on the slope at the south end of the basin. 2. Erosion of the lower slopes of the basin needs to be reevaluated after the current storm cycle has ended. Some regrading/reseeding may be necessary. 3. It appears the riser at the north end of the basin is working effectively to isolate sediments in the sedimentation basin since the outflow water to the west of the park entry road is relatively clean of sediment and there is little sediment accumulation west of this road. The current storm event has begun to fill the basins west of the entry road but so far the inundation level has not been high enough to reach the level of the overflow outlet (set at 9.5 feet) installed by this project under Highway 101. Irrigation 1. The irrigation system appears to be working well. However, the heads at the bottom of the basin slope are under the permanent water level in the basin. It may be necessary to add taller risers to these heads. This situation should be reevaluated during the Plant Establishment Period after the basin has drained back to its lowflow condition. 2. Due to the storm today and anticipated storms the rest of this week, irrigation is currently shut off at the project for the next 7 days. Page 2 of 2 ..... .. . ... .... ... ..... BEC Burkhart Environmental Consulting P.O&T.420358 Son Diego,CA 92142 MEMORANDUM PROJECT: Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project From: Brad Burkhart,Burkhart Environmental Consulting(BEC) Gary Hoyt, GFH Landscape Architecture To: Kipp Hefner, Project Engineer Date: February 4, 2003 RE: Seed & Container Plant Inspection BEC visited the site today to review numbers and health of container plantings as well as the seeding effort. Container Plantings 1. All plantings received were in correct number and in good health. 2. Twelve additional Artemisia californica and ct ddit onal Rhu the earl er BEC were ordered and received in 1-gallon containers to fill the additional impa 3. Four 5- gallon Rhus integrifolia were missing from the delivery. The nursery agreed to deliver these tomorrow. BEC will inspect to assure they are planted during final inspection. Seeding 1. BEC reviewed the acreages the contractor had calculated lculatedthe acreage o determine e site.they 16,245 sq. plan values and found that the contractor had properly ca _ was ft. (0.31acre) of coastal sage scrub seed was applied anwas 4125-sq. ft. of not seeded becauriparian s anticipated to applied. As agreed previously the bottom of the drainage be under water most of the time due to nuisance runoff. 2. There appears to be a problem with the Artemisia doua ana seed v applied fled of this t discrepancy PS d on the seed slip was 0.5 % not 5% as specified. The contractor will rectify it if necessary by hand applying additional seed. It is recommended that after the contractor has finished(some ime next week) even though the splitnrail fencing the City allow for final installation inspection has still not been installed along the edge of the parking lot.would is will then e n allow the plan establishment period to start. It should be agreed that the fencing signoff. `BEC Burkhart Environmental Consulting So Bdx ,CA 7��{t;+l�ROj]SNDUM Son Diego,CA 92142 1�'1L1�1 i�-�+ PROJECT: Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project From: Brad Burkhart, Burkhart Environmental Consulting(BEC) Gary Hoyt, GFH Landscape Architecture (GFH) To: Kipp Hefner,Project Engineer Date: January 29, 2003 RE: Landscape Review & Recommendations BEC visited the site today to review flagged locations container made to th plantings.con actor adjustments the final were made in container plant locations, and recomm endations were limits of seeding. Also discussed with the contractor and planting t the d1C Ty tional disturbed areas of the project for erosion control. The following recomm endations are 1. Add to the container plant order four 1-gallon Rohue areagr1foli southwest end o f he projectmisia californica for planting in the additional disturbed slope 2. Install two rows of 6-inch diameter straw wattles along contour ve etation ePlace straw et 20 fee 101 to mitigate any erosion prior to establishment of slope g and 40 feet from the top of slope before seeding. 3. Add coastal sage scrub seed sufficient to cover 1200 square feet more than is shown on the plan. seed mix. Extend the coastal sage scrub seed mix 2 feet further down between the two types of seed wetland By This results in a change of approximately 1600 square Friday, January 31, 2003,the contractor should fax the quspecies quantities and pure be ordered content)(after 521-0333). Provide BEC with the seed tags (verifying seeding is completed. 4. Several of the top-of--slope irrigation heads along the t d t at th eeeheads could parking be adjust d to wat r 12 inches away from the curb. Z'he contractor mdica then he should adjust the heads closer to the curb prior all areas designated for vegetation end of the plant esgtablishment period. 5.5. It appears that the bottom of the basin will be permanently wet. The Juncus species antirigpated ly intended to be planted there should be moved up the side slopes, j ust waterline. Gary Hoyt, GFH Landscape Architecture, will be on site Friday, January 31, 2003 to conduct a review of irrigation coverage after sprinklers are installed. BEC c e lthe to the site on Tuesday, from the seeding effort.If he 2003 to review container plants before planting, and g contractor wishes to change these dates, then he should contact Brad Burkhart at 619-521-0303, or Gary Hoyt at (858) 486-4931. c: Steve Tarzian,Tarzian Landscape, Inc. RONALD R. BALL CITY OF CARLSBAD • CITY ATTORNEY � JANE MOBALDI 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE �~ • CARLSBAD(60) 434-2891 CALIFORNIA 92008-1989 ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CINDIE K. McMAHON FAX: (760)434-8367 • DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RANDEE HARLIB SECRETARY TO CITY ATTORNEY JULIA L. COLEMAN ARDIS SEI DEL DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY June 26, 2002 LEGAL SECRETARY/PARALEGAL Glenn Sabine, City Attorney City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, California 92024-3633 RE: STORM DRAIN EASEMENT Dear Mr. Sabine: Please find enclosed a copy of the City of Carlsbad's agenda bill and resolution regarding the above referenced project, for your files. It was a pleasure assisting the City of Encinitas with this project. Very truly yours, CG� r LEMAN y Attorney afs Enclosure c: John Maashoff, Associate Engineer CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL Lf �# �1:6,795 TITLE: APPROVAL OF A$TORM DRAIN EASEMENT DEPT. HD. TO THE CITY OF ENCINITAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY ATTY. MTG. 6/18102 CITIES OF ENCINITAS AND CARLSBAD CITY MGR. DEPT. CA RECOMMENDED.ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 2002-178 approving a storm drain easement to the City of Encinitas, which easement will benefit both the Cities of Encinitas and Carlsbad. ITEM EXPLANATION: ty The City of Encinitas has formally requested � drain t portion of Carlsbad to accommodate placement of a s drain system underneath a and Carlsbad Boulevard. The storm drain system will 1 benefit both the cities Boulevard.of'Encini ThetCity of Carlsbad by copecting runoff along Highway Encinitas will install, operate and maintain the storm drain system, at its own risk and expense, along, west of, and east of Highway 101, beginning at Athena Street and extending rlsbad through to La Costa Avenue. An existing catch new storm drain.of This cat h basin colects Carlsbad State Beach, will be connected to this em - - runoff from Carlsbad Boulevard near Carl{of Carlsbad mits. The storm drain of La Costa Avenue. will affect approximately 3423 square fee ing on An overflow pipe will be installed at Carlsbad State detent on Beach, bas ns will athelp Carlsbad StatedBeach Carlsbad Boulevard due to overflow from the during larger storm events. Finally, a combination which will trap sedimentation and trash, wilgl at the storm drain outlet, and an outlet structure help improve water quality at the discharge point at Carlsbad State Beach, and will satisfy. NPDES requirements. FISCAL IMPACT• Because the City of Carlsbad owns the parcel of land burdened by the storm drain easement there is no fiscal impact on the City from the recommended action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: W In early 1999, the City of Encinitas prepared an Initial Study, and routed plans through the pState Clearinghouse. The review period for State Agencies closed on May 14, 1999 without o: any comments from the State Agencies. On June 9, 1999, the City Council of the City of CL Encinitas adopted a Negative Declaration for the project. The City of Encinitas has obtained Q all of the necessary permits for the project. EXHIBITS: 0 1. Resolution No. 2002-178 H 2. Storm Drain Easement a H U z 0 U 2002-178 RESOLUTION NO. t 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A STORM DRAIN ITY OF ENCINITAS AND FOR THE 3 EASEMENT TO EN BENEFIT OF CE ES OF ENCINI AS AND CARLSBAD 4 • WHEREAS, the City of Encinitas has formally requested that the City of 5 g Carlsbad grant the City of Encinitas a Storm Drain easement that would allow the City 7 of Encinitas to install a storm drain system through a parcel of land owned by the City of 8 Carlsbad; and 9 WHEREAS, the storm drain system the City of Encinitas is installing, 10 .. operating and maintaining at its own risk and expense, will benefit both the Cities of 11 Encinitas and Carlsbad by collecting runoff along .Highway- 101 and Carlsbad 12 -- ; = 13 Boulevard, and preventing flooding on Carlsbad Boulevard due to overflow from the < oo o g 14 detention basins at Carlsbad State Beach during larger storm events and; 0 0 15 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California has O Z U v N 16 determined it necessary and in.the public interest to grant a Storm Drain easement to 17 the City of Encinitas for installation of storm drain improvements along Ca 18 Boulevard near Carlsbad's southern City boundary. 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of 29 21 Carlsbad, California, as follows: 22 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 23 2. That the attached Storm Drain easement is hereby granted to the 24 City of Encinitas for the purpose described therein. 25 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Carlsbad is authorized to sign the _ 26 attached Storm Drain easement on behalf of the City Council. 27 28 1 PASSED, APPROVED .AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 2 3uNE 2002 by the Carlsbad City Council held on the 18th day of 3 following vote, to wit: 4 5 council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Finnila, Nygaard, Hall AYES: 6 NOES: None 7 i ABSENT: None / 8 9 r 10 11 ATTEST: 12 m > m .13 _ RAI E M. WOOD, City Clerk a o 8 (SEAL) Ow cog > ¢ o � o 15 2 W m c ¢ ss0 16 O U am Cn ya Cr 17 � � a U U 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Page 2 of 2 of Resolution No. 2002-178 RECORDING REQUESTED BY WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad.CA 92008 Space Above This Line is for Recorder's Use Assessor's Parcel No: 216-04 STORM DRAIN EASEMENT The City of Carlsbad hereby grants to the City of Encinitas a Storm Drain easement for the purposes stated hereon: over, under, across and upon the real property described in Exhibit A"" for the benefit of the property referred, to in Exhibit "C". this easement is granted -to the City of- Encinitas :effective immediately and in perpdtUity. The.property.burdened by the Storm Drain easement,-is described in Exhibit °A which includes a ..plat labeled Exhibit "B% and is attached hereto and incorporated.herein by this,reference. - The property benefited by the Storm Drain easement is.-described in Exhibit "C", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: The Storm Drain easement provides access to the parcel described in Exhibit "A" to the City of Encinitas for installation of a storm drain which will serve the Cities of Carlsbad and Encinitas. The storm.drain will run over, under, across and upon the burdened property for the benefit of the property benefited and any benefited b successors in interest to the property Y this Storm Drain* easement. The storm drain will drain areas west of Highway 101 from Athena Street to Carlsbad State Beach, a North County Transit District right of way in Northern Encinitas, Highway 101/Carlsbad Boulevard from Athena Street to Carlsbad State Beach, Vulcan Avenue from Orpheus Avenue to Basil Street, and areas east of Vulcan Avenue. This Storm Drain easement shall run with the land, and the burdens of the easement shall be binding upon and the benefits of the easement shall inure to the benefit of all successors in interest to the real property. The City of Encinitas shall, at its own risk and expense, install, maintain and, if necessary at any time, upon the request of the City of Carlsbad, relocate the above-described storm drain facilities. The City of Encinitas shall, in addition, indemnify and hold the City of Carlsbad free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, damages, or expenses resulting from the construction, maintenance, use, repair or removal of the storm drain facilities, including any loss, damage, or expense arising out of (1) loss or damages to property and (2) injury to or death of any person. Dated: June 24 2002 By, ain , City rk N R R TZ, stant Cfty" Cler r Is ayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL City Q;ey ity hom ey"y" T-099 P.002/006 F-994 May-28-OZ 01:18am Fram- EMIBIT ^A^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 216-04 VESTING: THE CITY OF CARLSBAD THAT PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERN nim MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OLLCARSLSBAD,_ COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESCRIBED AS - SAID PORTION LYING WITHIN T STATE HIGHWAY PLANCSRXI—SSD--B S�D RIGHT-OF-WAY OF. (OLD HIGHWAY 101) AS SHOWN ON S 8 OF 29 APPROVED DECEIOER 26, 1933, COMMENCING AT A POINT ON THE A CENTER LINE OF N T HI ENGINEERING ERINGS STAT POINT BEING A ON 132+000 PER'PSAZD STATE CURVE OF THE B LINt, LINE BEARS SOUTH 660.09' 39" HIGHWAY -PLANS, FROM .SAID POINT A gp,I?L?3I• r a THENCE ALONG SAID RADIAL :LINE 5©_00 WEST {SOUTH 65° 29 47 REC. ) : �-W Y LINE O$' .CQA T FEET TO.AN ANGLE POINT ON THE .y WESTERLY RIGHT-OF. A' : _ _. H-IGHWAY I03 PER SAID HIGHWAY PLANS 1 e �4$" WES3'R67 8 EFET NORTH 3444115 6" WEST 679.28 FEET ( NORTH 43°44'S0" REC.); THENCE NORTH .43° 04' S8" WEST 30.47 FEET ( _ WEST REC.) BEING THE INTERSECTION F. L RIGHT OAF--WAY TO L FCARI.SBAD THE CITY OF CARLSHAD OF =Guu4wGF THENCE CONTINQING EC)VI�EVP�RD BEING THE TRUE POINT NORTH 430 X 4 4' W ALONG SAID RIGHT—OF WAY NORTH 43 04' 58"S WEST E. _ WEST IEC. ) 64.30 FEET THENCLEAVING 4 016' 52IG�T 66.05 NOFEET 42043'08" EAST 13.66 FEET; THEN TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY CITY LIMITS OF SAID CITY OF LIMITS TO A THENCE SOUTH 48° 41' 50" WEST 18 THE TRUE POINT OF POINT ON SAID WESTERLY RIGHT—OF—WAY AND BEGINNING. HAVING AN AREA OF 1,045 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART OF THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS A PLAT LABELED EXHIBIT B THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PLAT WERE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. _ ND E. SOS D/ J V 0 9 CECIL E. RYALS •L L.S• 3997 Exp. . 0 No. 3997 9,�OF CAL r 0 U N. La LAJ C '� 0 F— c r� j � Q Q Q = _ m in cn uug •C J . V O Q N y z ? a� j a" W Z to C) p p Z sNJw W V— a Z My L'i o to U- N L L- r , C C 0 Ln co 0 O C W_°iQQ� W m ,, O W I W/J Q WOM (/! to l4 V 0 3 �p� a N a Co LLI - 4 ui A �y v) S W W \ ♦fir ro Q pZ co W a > JF, b�N s Z o d' W �-lP oo �, Zoc gai o� F o C)) Q o� �- "U m r z W CN PO C) nSW°d<6 LU O % a z z 0 � bllc llb o �s �.��W 0 �� N.� UJ o o��pN O w N � � O Opp O\ OU C In s ` LLJ M I v^ Q W ! o 3 3 (oft b9 w CL cn .u°a Z �— J m W-o; ! n. ,gy p =U vla'~Cha V o IC4 a Lead 1 e(DD ? 4i N Nf U �o W `< V w �_ U m 1 to J _ � �'�',� LL O x z go C coVnco Q O• p O v J W .� O w o z<!2 Li W W �J o v n L l } N 1 � .r �o� _ Q I_ l \ y.J \ °� yl a V w V c� 1 �O v a o r, to CD r- -7e 06 ,nX z V; .4c tiIle w � re c� W�a♦ I \c d '( M W . \ 00.\ k r' d• I � OOx\ I `� �•G0 \ / i' `�' G O C� ( w " r \ ` 1 00x6; 1 / °Xo �� O6� `� T-089 P.005/006 F-934 I�ay-29-01 OT:29am Froe- BXFIImIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 216-04 VESTING: THE CITY OF CARLSBAD THAT PORTION OF LOT 20, SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLS.BAD, . COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE 'OF CAL DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS- _ - Y A STRIP OF LAND 20.00 OLD ' HIGHWAY 101)I AS SHOWN N STATE HIGHWAY OF CARLSBA.D BOULEVARD t 26, .,19_33, PLANS FOR XI-SD-2-B INTERSECTION F OF 9 THE CENTERLII`1E�OF SAID -2 0.-0.0 COMMENCING AT AND THE CENTERLINE OF. CARLSWO .SOMEVARD • PER FOOT STRIP OF LAND POINT SAID STATE HIGHWAY PLANT SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING NEERING ON A CURVE OF SAID CENTERLINE OF .CARLSBAD: _ E BEARS SOUTH . STATION 147+84.39 TO WHICHC, AEC. )�ATHENCE .ALONG THE CENTERLINE. 53°27' O1" WEST . (52°47' 09" �' SOQTH' 35 27!W'. 'WEST 60;29 FEET TO'' OF SAID 20.00 FOOT STRIP OF LAND THE TRH POn'1T OF BEGI WMgG; THENCE. RETRACING ALONG LAST OBSCRIBED COURSE NORTH 35027' 30" EAST 118.8 8 FEET T9.A POINT OF TERMINUS. . HAVING AN AREA OF 2,378 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS- ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART OF THIS LEGAL DESCI,RIPTION IS A p AT LABELED EXHIBIT B - THIS LEGAL- DESCRIPTION AND PLAT WERE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION- .9 LAND S(� E. y jq�L�L CECIL E. RY , P.L.S. 3997 1 V� l� 9 Exp.6� *. cp No.3997 OF CA�tFG?, EXHIBIT "g19 DENOTES EASEMENT AREA \ A O Al IE EL CAMiNO REAL SCALE 1"=30' 2,378 SO. F I IACDON AP VICINITY M -off n �� PROPERTY ¢► ! LOCATION POINT O O QF- TERMINUS �0 C, S53'27'01`W RAID. , f 4i POINT OF `s- COMMENCEMENT. 147+84.39 ry Cb cJ T.P.�.B. °p LAND \X, E. Exp 0 2004 s� No. 3997 CITY OF ENCINITAS _ qrF OF C PL� AT EASEMENT PL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE DERIVED FROM RECORD DATA A.P.N.: 216-04 Right—of—Way Engineering Services, Inc. land Surveying VESTING: CITY OF CARLSBAD 4967 AVENIDA DE LA PLATA, SUITE 114, OCEANSIDE. CA. 92056 ,��� -71l)_l-Aaa nrlAn CKln►Ac. cn C'Ck EXHIBIT "C" The benefited property for the storm drain project is the City of Encinitas, a municipal corporation, and the City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation. GRAY DAMS,GOve"w 'ATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY ADM DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME South Coast Region 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego,California 92123 (858)467-4201 June 18, 2002 Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Hefner: Re: City of Encinitas Leucadia Low Flow Storm Project, SAA#5-291-00 Amendment and Extension No. 1 We have reviewed your request to amend and an extend our Streambed unnamed stream channel, Agreement, 5-291-00, to alter the streambed within, tributary to Batiquitos Lagoon in San Diego County. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 t. seq. This letter, when countersigned by you amends our agreement S. The Operator shall implement all installation, monitoring and maintenance aspects of the Wetland Mitigation i h has been submitted and Storm Drain System Project, dated October 2 000 wh approved by the Department. All mitigation shall be installed no later than March 15, 2003. This letter, when countersigned by you, extends the period during which activities termination f the otherwise authorized by the agreement may continue. Weement 5 291 00 oremain agreement is March 15, 2003 Be advised that all terms of agreement said agreement AND THIS in force throughout the p TENSION LETTER must be kept on site and be shown upon AMENDMENT AND EX request to Department personnel during all periods of work. GNED Two copies of this letter are being sent to at 4949 Viewridge Avenue, SanlDiego, ORIGINAL to the Department of Fish and Game, CA 92123. Page 1 of 2 If you have further questions,please contact meat(858)467-4223. Sincerely, Tamara A. Sp Environment I pecialist III CONCURRENCE: ATE:. �— Page 2 of 2 06J19/2002 10:09 8584674299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 01 - GRAY DAVIS,GOWMDr STATE OF CAUFOR"-TFIE RESOURCES AGENCK DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME South Coast Region 494.9 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, Califomia 92123 Telephone:(858) 467-420114202 Fax:(858) 467-4299 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL TO: Kip pHefner City ofEncinitas FAX#: (760)633-2627 FROM:Tamara Spear South CoastRegion 4949 Viewridge Avenue SanDiego,CA 92123 Telephone:(858)467-4223 FAX:(858)467-4299 RE: Amendment/Extensiou SAA 5-291-00 Date:6/18/02 Number of pages, including cover sheet: 3 CONAffiNTS: Hard copy to follow in mail. Tamara O&P IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES 'ND1CAT-ED, PLEASE CALL THE SENDER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 06119/2002 10:09 85846 74299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 02 GRAY OAVIS,"VW7W STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY ldeffmh DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME South coast Region 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego,California 92123 (868)467-4201 June 1 S, 2002 Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Hefner. Leucadia Low Flow Storm Project, SAq#5-281-00 Amendment Re: City of Encinitas and Extension No. 11 We have reviewed your request to amend an our Streambed stream hanneltion Agreement, 5-291-00, to alter the streambed within, an tributary to Batiquitos Lagoon in San Diego County. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et. seq. This letter, when countersigned by you amends our agreement as follows: 5. The Operator shall implement all installation, Plan for monitoring and a Low Flow maintenance aspects of the Wetland Mitigation Storm Drain System Project, dated October 2000 which has been submitted and approved by the Department. All mitigation shall be installed no later than March 15, 2003. This letter, when countersigned by you, extends the period during which activities otherwise authorized by the agreement may continue.erms ofna new termination 5i 291 date -00 remain agreement is March 15, 2003 Be advised that al said agreement AND THIS in force throughout the new term of the agreement. A copy of AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION LETTER must be of kept ork. site and be shown upon a request to Department personnel during periods Two copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE RETURN ONE SIGNED ORIGINAL to the Department of Fish and Game, at 4949 Viewridge Avenue, San Diego, CA 92123. Page 1 of 2 06f19f2002 10:09 8584674299 DFG SOUTH COAST REG PAGE 03 If you have further questions,please contact me at(858)467-4223• Sincerely, Tamara .Spear Environmental al' t ill CONCURRENCE: DATE: Page 2 of 2 i GRAY DAVIS,Governor TATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME South Coast Region 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego,California 92123 (858)467-4201 June 18, 2002 Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Hefner: Leucadia Low Flow Stone Project, SAA#5-291-00 Amendment Re: city of Encinitas and Extension No. 1 We have reviewed your request to amend an unnamed stream channel, Agreement, 5-291-00, to alter the streambed within, an tributary to Batiquitos Lagoon in San Diego County. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 t seq. This letter, when countersigned by you amends our agreement 5. The Operator shall implement allinstallation,Plan for monitoring a Low Flow maintenance aspects of the Wetland Mitig ation Stone Drain System Project, dated October 2000 which has been submitted and approved by the Department. All mitigation shall be installed no later than March 15, 2003. This letter, when countersigned by you, extends the period during which activities otherwise authorized by the agreement may continue. agreement w t i ti 291 to of the agreement is March 15, 2003 Be advised that all t erms of said agreement AND THIS in force throughout the new term of the agreement. A copy o AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION LETTER u t be of work. site and be shown upon request to Department personnel during a periods GNED Two copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE Viewridge Avenu�, San(Diego, ORIGINAL to the Department of Fish and Game, at 4 9 - CA 92123. Page 1 of 2 If you have further questions, please contact me at(858)467-4223. Sincerely, Tamara A. Sp Environment I pecialist III CONCURRENCE: ATE: bZ- Page 2 of 2 S GRAY DAVIS,Govemor TATE OF CALIFORNIA-TM RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME South Coast Region 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego,California 92123 (858)467-4201 June 18, 2002 Kipp Hefner City of Encinitas 505 S. Vulcan Avenue Encinitas, CA 92024 Dear Mr. Hefner: City Encinitas Leucadia Low Flow Storm Project, SAp#5-291-00 Amendment Re: City and Extension No. 1 We have reviewed your request to amend and a echanneltion Agreement, 5-291-00, to alter the streambed within, an unnamed stream tributary to Batiquitos Lagoon in San Diego County. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1 0 et seq. This letter, when countersigned by you amends our agreement as fs: and 5. The Operator shall implement all installation,(Plan for the 'Leucadia Low Flow maintenance aspects of the Wetland Mitigation Storm Drain System Project, dated October 2000 which has been submitted and approved by the Department. All mitigation shall be installed no later than March 15, 2003. This letter, when countersigned by you, extends the period during which activities y continue. The new termination date of the otherwise authorized by the agreement ma 6-2911-00 agreement is March 15, 2003 Be advised that all terms d of AND THIS in force throughout the new term of the agreement. A AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION LETTER must b of work. site and be shown upon request to Department personnel during all periods Two copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE 9 Vi a AvenuONE SIGNS ORIGINAL to the Department of Fish and Game, at 494 9 CA 92123. Page 1 of 2 R If you have further questions,please contact me at(858)467-4223. Sincerely, Tamara A. Sp Environment I pecialist III CONCURRENCE: ATE: /0--7 Page 2 of 2 _ 1 Val BEC Burkhart Environmental Consulting San Diego,CA 921 T6 4709 Biona Drive E-mail:b.burkhart@att.net MEMORANDUM PROJECT: Leucadia Low Flow Storm Drain Project From: Brad Burkhart, Burkhart Environmental Consulting (BEC) Gary Hoyt, GFH Landscape Architecture To: Kipp Hefner, Project Engineer Date: February 19, 2003 RE: Storm Drainage From New Detention Basin BEC visited the site on February 17 and 18, 2003 to assess the rate at which the new detention basin was draining after the last heavy storm event that occurred last week (Feb. 11-13). BEC was concerned about the survival of new container plantings at the bottom of the slopes along the basin since such plantings usually will not survive without exposure to air within a week of being submersed by drainage water. On Monday February 17th 4 days after the last rain, detailed observations were made about detention basin functioning: 1. At the time of the last visit for final landscape inspection on February 11 rain had filled the new basin to capacity (10-foot elevation). This meant that storm water was draining over the top of the standpipe installed at the north end of the site as well as through the drainage slots cut into its sides. The standpipe top is set about a foot above the inlet headwall at the southern inlet structure. At storm-full basin level the small willow-covered island in the outlet part of the basin is covered by about a 6-12 inches of water and all plantings up the 10-foot contour were completely submersed. 2. On the 17th the basin water level had dropped to about 18 inches below the top of the standpipe approx. 8.5 foot elevation) and basin water was only entering it through the slots cut into the sides of the standpipe. Water inside the standpipe was about 12-18 inches below the top of the riser (approx. 7-foot elevation) indicating that outflow through the pipe is faster than inflow through the slots cut into the standpipe. 3. The existing basin west of the park entry road had also filled up during the storm sufficiently to overflow into the new standpipe directing overflow water under Highway 1 into its median. However water levels in this basin never reached the top of the standpipe (9.5 feet). All overflow into the standpipe was through the relatively inefficient slots in its sides. By the 17th the water in this western basin had dropped to about the invert level (7.13 feet) of the western basin's standpipe. This is consistent with the observations in the new basin standpipe. Thus further water level drops in this basin were dependent on ground infiltration and evapotranspiration. The water level in the western basin outflow pipe passing under the park entry road was at its top at this time. Page 1 of 2 MPUTER*PROGRAM*PACKAGE **************** PIPE-FLOW HYDRAULICS CO (Reference: LACFCD,LACRD, AND OCEMA HYDRAULICS CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1982-2003 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 8.0 Release Date: 01/01/2003 License ID 1261 Analysis prepared by: RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 5620 Friars Road San Diego, California 92110 619-291-0707 Fax 619-291-4165 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** ************************** J-14413 • NTCD - LEUCADIA BLVD AND VULCAN AVE. • PIPE FLOW ANALYSIS DURING 100-YEAR STORM EVENT (EXISTING CONDITION) • STORM DRAIN ALONG NORTH LEUCADIA BLVD. & VULCAN AVE. FN:4413NTCD.PIP OUT ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: 4413NTCD.PIP TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 14 :48 09/22/2004 ****************************************************************************** GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW ANALYSIS FOR PIPE SYSTEM NODAL POINT STATUS TABLE *,, indicates nodal point data used. ) (Note: DOWNSTREAM RUN UPSTREAM RUN FLOW PRESSURE+ NODE MODEL PRESSURE PRESSURE+ NUMBER PROCESS HEAD(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) DEPTH(FT) MOMENTUM(8O09D6 112 .00- 1.97* 813 .13 } FRICTION 1.89 Dc 809.36 111.00- 2 .90* 993 .05 } JUNCTION 1.57 663 .01 111.00- 4 .11* 1068.57 } FRICTION 3 .65* 979.57 1.58 661.23 110 .50- } MANHOLE 3 .65* 979.29 1.56 665.01 110.50- } FRICTION 1.35 723 .63 109.00- 3 .18* 886.36 } JUNCTION 805.98 1.06* 835.73 109.00- 2 .58 } FRICTION 1.48*Dc 686.13 108 .50- 1.48*Dc 686.13 } JUNCTION 0 88 557 .24 4 .17* 702 .43 108 .50- HYDRAULIC JUMP } FRICTION } 405 .34 1.44*Dc 405.34 108.00- 1.44 Dc } JUNCTION 0.70 285.27 3 .53* 430 .79 108.00- } FRICTION } HYDRAULIC JUMP 195.78 1.25*Dc 195.78 105.00- 1.25 Dc } CATCH BASIN 1.25 Dc 56.59 105.00- 2 .10* 149.03 ----- - -------- --------- ------ ----- - - - --------------- MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ENERGY BALANCES USED IN EACH PROFILE = 25 -------------- NOTE: STEADY FLOW HYDRAULIC HEAD-LOSS COMPUTATIONS BASED ON THE MOST CONSERVATIVE FORMULAE FROM THE CURRENT LACRD,LACFCD, AND OCEMA DESIGN MANUALS. ***************************************************************************** DOWNSTREAM PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA:FLOWLINE ELEVATION = 60.15 NODE NUMBER = 112 .00 PIPE FLOW = 31.73 CFS PIPE DIAMETER = 24 .EET 00 INCHES ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM CONTROL HGL = 62 .120 F ---------- ------------------ ------------------ ------'------ •FLOWLINE= < 60.150> NODE 112 .00 : HGL = < 62 .120>;EGL= < 63 .714>, ****************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO ODE 1 .00 (FLOWDUNSEALS IN REACH) TI UPSTREAM NODE 111.00 ON = -------------- CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) : PIPE FLOW = 31.73 CFS PIPE DIAMETER'S N24�000I013ES PIPE LENGTH = 90 .00 FEET ___> NORMAL PIPEFLOW IS PRESSURE FLOW -------------- ----------- 1.89 NORMAL DEPTH(FT) = 2 .00 CRITICAL DEPTH(FT) - __ ----- -DOWNSTREAM-CONTROL-ASSUMED-FLOWDEPTH(FT) 1.97-=--------- GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION_ ------- -- PRESSURE+ DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGYFFT)MOMENTUM(POUNDS) CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) SEC) 3 .564 813 .13 0.000 1.970 10.128 3 .564 813 .25 0.073 1.971 10.126 565 813 .38 3 , 0.147 1.972 10.125 3. 565 813.50 0.222 1. 974 10.123 813 .63 1.975 10 .121 3 .566 0.299 3567 813 .76 . 0.376 1.976 10.119 3. 568 813 .89 0.455 1.977 10 .118 3. 568 814.02 0.535 1.978 10.116 3. 569 814 .16 0 .617 1.980 10 .114 3 .570 814 .30 0.700 1.981 10.113 3571 814.45 . 0.784 1.982 10 .111 3. 571 814 .59 0.869 1.983 10.110 3. 572 814 .74 0.956 1.984 10 .109 3. 573 814 .90 1.044 1.986 10 .107 3. 574 815.05 1.134 1.987 10 .106 3. 574 815.21 1 225 1.988 10.105 3 .575 815.38 1.317 1.989 10 .104 103 10 . . 815.54 1 3 .576 1.411 990 3 577 815.71 1.507 1.992 10 .101 3 578 815.89 1.604 1.993 10.101 3579 816.07 . 1.704 1.994 10.100 3. 580 816 .26 1.805 1.995 10.099 3. 581 816.45 1. 908 1.996 10 .098 3. 582 816 .65 2 .014 1.998 10.098 3. 583 816.85 2 .122 1. 999 10.097 3 .584 817.07 2 .235 2 .000 10.097 -__> FLOW IS UNDER PRESSURE 4 482 993 .05 90.000 2 .898 10.100 __ - ----------------------- ------------------ ---------- NODE 111.00 : HGL = < 63 .898>;EGL= < 65.482>;FLOWLINE= < 61.000> FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11ELEVATOONO= 611000 (FLOWDIS UNDER PRESSURE) UPSTREAM NODE 111.00 ------------------------ CALCULATE JUNCTION LOSSES: pipg FLOW DIAMETER ANGLE FLOWLINE CRITICAL VELOCITY (CFS) (INCHES) (DEGREES) ELEVATION DEPiH$iT. ) (FT8.687 UPSTREAM 27 .29 24.00 0.00 61.00_ 61.00 1 89 10.100 DOWNSTREAM 31.73 24 .00 0.00 0.000 LATERAL #1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 LATERAL #2 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Q5 4 .44===Q5 EQUALS BASIN INPUT=== LACFCD AND OCEMA FLOW JUNCTION FORMULAE USED: DY= (Q2*V2-Ql*Vl*COS (DELTAl) -Q3*V3*COS (DELTA3) - Q4*V4*COS ((MANNING) S/N(A10.01300;1) FRICTIONNSLOPEES 0 .01455 UPSTREAM: FRICTION SLOPE = 0.01967 DOWNSTREAM: MANNING'S N = 0 .01300; AVERAGED FRICTION SLOPE 4I JUNCTION ASSUMED AS 0.01711 JUNCTION LENGTH = OO ENTRANCE LOSSES = 0.317 FEET FRICTION LOSSES = 0.068 FEET JUNCTION LOSSES = (DY+HV1-HV2) +(ENTRANCE LOSSES) .481) +( 0.317) = 0.798 --------------- JUNCTION LOSSES = ( 0 ------------------ ------------------ -- ------------- -- < 65.107>;EGL=- < 66 .279>;FLOWLINE= < 61.000> NODE 111.00 : HGL FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11 ELEVATION TO NODE 660460 (FLOW IS UNDER PRESSURE) ELEVATION = - UPSTREAM NODE 110 .50 --------------------------- CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) PIPE DIAMETER = 24 .00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 27 .29 CFS = 0.01300 344.00 FEET MANNING'S N PIPE LENGTH = 226 224) ) **2 = 0.01455 SF= (Q/K) **2 = ( ( 27 .29) / ( 5.006 * 344.00) * (0.01455) _ ------------ HF=L SF = ( -------------------- = < 70.113>;EGL= < 71.285>;FLOWLINE= < 66.460> NODE 110 .50 : HGL FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.50 TO NODE 660520 (FLOWDIS UNDER PRESSURE) ELEVATION = ------------------- UPSTREAM NODE 110 .50 ------------------- CALCULATE MANHOLE27OSSECFSACFCD) : PIPE DIAMETER = 24 .00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 9 VELOCITY HEAD = 1.172 FEET FLOW VELOCITY = 8.69 FEET/SEC. HMN = .05* (VELOCITY HEAD 05* (- - 1.172) = 0.059 ------- ---- --------------------------- -------- - .FLOWLINE= NODE 110.50 : HGL = < 70.172>;EGL= < 71.344>, FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.50 TO NODE 29000 (FLOW IS UNDER PRESSURE) ELEVATION = ----- UPSTREAM NODE 109.00 ---------'- CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) PIPE DIAMETER = 24 .00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 27 .29 CFS = 0 .01300 344 .00 FEET MANNING'S N PIPE LENGTH = 226 224) ) **2 = 0.01455 SF= (Q/K) **2 = ( ( 27.29) / ( 5,006 HF=L*SF = ( 344 .00) * (0.01455) _ ---- ------------------ .350>;FLOWLINE= ------------------- NODE 109.00 : HGL = < 75.178>;EGL= < 76 109*00*IS*CODE****5 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10ELEVAT0IONODE 72 .15 (FLOW IS UNDER PRESSURE) UPSTREAM NODE 109.00 (NOTE: POSSIBLE JUMP IN OR UPSTREAM OF-STRUCTURE) - -- --------- CALCULATE JUNCTION LOSSES: FLOWLINE CRITICAL VELOCITY PIPE FLOW DIAMETER ANGLE (CFS) (INCHES) (DEGREES) ELEVATION DEP1H(F8T. ) (FT/SEC) 23 .47 18 .00 15.00 72 .15 1.81 8.687 UPSTREAM _ 72 .00 DOWNSTREAM 27.29 24.00 74 .15 0.51 3 .421 2.17 24.00 90.00 0.00 0.000 LATERAL #1 0.00 0 .00 LATERAL #2 0.00 0.00 Q5 1.65===Q5 EQUALS BASIN INPUT=== LACFCD AND OCEMA FLOW JUNCTION FORMULAE USED: DY= (Q2*V2-Q1*V1*COS (DELTAl) -Q3*V3*COS (DELTA3) - Q4*V4*COS ((MDp.NNING?S/N(A10A01300;1) FRICTIONNSLOPEES 0.06881 UPSTREAM: FRICTION SLOPE = 0.01455 DOWNSTREAM: MANNING'S N = 0 .01300; AVERAGED FRICTION SLOPE IN JUNCTION ASSUMED AS 0 .04168 JUNCTION LENGTH = 4.00 FEET FRICTION LOSSES = 0.167 FEET ENTRANCE LOSSES = 0 .234 FEET JUNCTION LOSSES = (DY+HV1-HV2) + (ENTRANCE LOSSES) JUNCTION LOSSES = ( 1.390) + ( 0.234) - -- _ ---- --- = 1.624 ____ - - ----- --------- - --------- - NODE---109.00 HGL = <---73 .214>;EGL= < 77 .974>;FLOWLIN = < 72 .150>IS FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 898200 (FLOWDIS SUPERCRITICAL) UPSTREAM NODE 108 .50 ELEVATION = ------------ CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) PIPE DIAMETER = 18.00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 23 .47 CFS = 0.01300 238.00 FEET MANNING'S N PIPE LENGTH = ------------------- ----------- CRITICAL DEPTH(FT) 1.48 NORMAL DEPTH(FT) = 1.05 __ ----- UPSTREAM-CONTROL-ASSUMED-FLOWDEPTH(FT) 1.48 -=------------------------------------ GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATIO __ --- SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) 4 .233 686.13 0.000 1.482 13 .306 4.237 686.57 0.149 1.465 13 .358 4 ,248 687.71 0 .528 1.448 13 .424 689.44 430 13 .504 4.264 1.093 1. 4 285 691.70 1.827 1.413 13 .595 4.310 694 .44 2 .723 1.395 13 .696 4 .340 697.64 3 .783 1.378 13 . 807 375 701.29 4 . 5 .012 1.361 13 .928 4.375 705 .38 6.421 1.343 14 .058 .457 709.90 4 8 .023 1.326 14 .197 4.457 714 .85 9.839 1.308 14.345 720.24 291 14 .502 4 .559 11.893 1. 4.617 726.07 14 .216 1.274 14 .669 4.680 732.35 16.849 1.256 14.845 739.09 1.239 15.030 4 .749 19.844 4.823 746.30 23 .267 1.222 15 .225 4.904 753 .99 27.208 1.204 15.431 4 .991 762 .17 31.788 1.187 15 .647 5 .084 770.87 37 .178 1.169 15 .874 780,11 1.152 16.112 5.185 43 .629 5 .294 789.89 51.532 1.135 16 .361 5.410 800 .25 61.541 1.117 16.623 5.536 811.21 74 .882 1.100 16.897 5.671 822 .79 94 .317 1.082 17.184 5.816 835.03 128.702 1.065 17 .486 5.824 835.73 238 .000 1.064 17 .503 ------------------ ----------- FLOWLINE= < 89.200> NODE 108 .50 : HGL = < 90 .682>;EGL= < 93 .433>; FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108 .50 TO NODE 898200 (FLOWDUNSEALS IN REACH) UPSTREAM NODE 108.50 ELEVATION = CALCULATE JUNCTION LOSSES: ANGLE FLOWLINE CRITICAL VELOCITY plpg FLOW DIAMETER (CFS) (INCHES) (DEGREES) ELEVATION DEPTH(FT. ) (FT/SEC) UPSTREAM 17 .21 18.00 0 .00 89.20 13 .309 89.20 1.48 DOWNSTREAM 23 .47 18 .00 3 .542 9.20 0 .97 0.000 LATERAL #1 6.26 18.00 90.00 80.00 0.00 LATERAL #2 0.00 0.00 0.00 Q5 0 .00===Q5 EQUALS BASIN INPUT=== LACFCD AND OCEMA FLOW JUNCTION FORMULAE USED: DY=(Q2*V2-Q1*V1*COS (DELTAI) -Q3*V3*COS (DELTA3) - Q4*V4*COS ((MONNIN ) / (A10.01300;1) NFRRICTIONSLOPEE= 0.02684 MANNING'S N UPSTREAM: FRICTION SLOPE = 0 .04573 DOWNSTREAM: MANNING'S N = 0.01300; CTION ASSUMED AS 0.03629 AVERAGED FRICTION SLOPITN JUNCTION LENGTH = OO FEE ENTRANCE LOSSES = 0.000 FEET FRICTION LOSSES = 0.145 FEET JUNCTION LOSSES = (DY+HV1-HV2) +(ENTRANCE LOSSES) 1.414) + ( 0.000) = 1.414 --------- JUNCTION LOSSES = ( -- ------------------------ -- -- ----------- _ < 93 .375>;EGL= < 94.847>;FLOWLINE= < 89.200> NODE 108 .50 : HGL 108*00*IS*CODE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.50 TO NODE 95 00 (HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS) UPSTREAM NODE 108 .00 ____________ ELEVATION = _________________ _____ CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) PIPE DIAMETER = 18.00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 17 .21 CFS MANNING S N = 0.01300 PIPE LENGTH - 80.00 FEET= ------------ ----- -- - - ------------------- ----HYDRAULIC JUMP: DOWNSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS RESULTS---------- -- ________ ----------------------------------------- 1.44 -------- - CRITICAL DEPTH(FT) _ NORMAL DEPTH(FT) = 0.84 -_-_ _ UPSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED FLOWDEPTH(FT) 1.44-=------------------------------------ GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMAT - -- -- SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) 2 .953 405 .34 1.442 9.861 405.61 9 947 0.000 2 .956 0.052 1.418 2 963 406.41 0.202 1.394 10.048 407 .68 2 .975 10.162 0.445 1.371 2 992 409.42 783 1.347 10.289 41 323 1.61 0 1. 10.429 3 .013 1.218 3 .039 414.26 1.757 1.299 10.582 417 .37 275 10 .747 3 .070 1. 2 .408 3 .106 420.96 3 .180 1.251 10 .926 4 227 25.03 1. 11.117 3 .148 4 .089 3 .195 429.61 5 .150 1.203 11.323 434 .71 179 1. 11.543 3 .250 6.386 3 .311 440 .36 7 .822 1.155 11.779 3 .380 1. 446.59 132 12.030 9.491 3 .458 453 .42 11.437 1.108 12 .298 3 .544 460.91 1.084 12 .584 469.08 13 .713 12 -890 3 .641 16 .395 1.060 1. 3 749 477 .98 036 13 .215 487 .66 19.581 3 .870 23 .412 1.012 13 .563 4.005 498.17 28.094 0.988 13 .934 509.59 964 0 . 14 .331 4.155 33 . 949 4 .323 521.98 0 .940 14 .755 535 .41 41.514 15 ,209 4 .511 51.800 0.916 4 720 549.99 67 .081 4 .827 0.893 15 .696 557.24 80.000 0.881 15.936 HYDRAULIC JUMP: UPSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS RESULTS------------------------------- -- _____ __ ------------------------ 4 .17 DOWNSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED PRESSURE-HEAD(FT) -=------------------------------ PRESSURE FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION: - ________________ ---------------------------------- PRESSURE+ PRESSURE VELOCITY SPECIFIC DISTANCE FROM HEAD(FT) (FT/SEC) ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) HEAD CONTROL(FT) 5 .647 702 .43 0 .000 4 .175 9.739 2 .973 407 .50 58.579 1.500 9.739 ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM PRESSURE HEAD(FT) 1.50-=-------------------------------------- GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATIO _ -------------------- --------------- SPECIFIC PRESSURE+ DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) CONTROL(FT) (FT) (FT/SEC) 2 .973 407 .50 58 .579 2 .971 1.500 9.736 9.737 407.28 58 .623 1.498 2 .969 407 .09 58.660 2 .967 1.495 9.739 9.741 406.91 58 .694 1.493 2 .966 406.75 58 .725 2 .965 1.491 9.744 9.747 406.60 58.754 1.488 2 .963 406 .47 1.486 9.751 406.34 58.804 1.484 2 .961 58.780 9.754 2.962 406.22 58.826 2 .960 1.482 9.758 9.763 406.11 58.847 1.479 2 .959 406.01 58.866 2 .958 1.477 9.767 g 772 405.92 58 .883 1.475 2 958 405.84 1.472 9.777 405.76 58.913 1.470 2 .956 58 .899 9 783 2 .957 405 .69 58.927 2 .956 1.468 9.788 405.63 9.794 58 .938 1.465 1. 2 .955 405.57 463 9.800 405.52 58.949 9.806 2 . 955 58.958 1.461 1. 2 954 405.48 458 9.812 405.44 58.966 9.819 2 .954 58 .973 1.456 2 954 405.41 1.454 9.825 405.38 9 58.979 2.953 58 984 1.451 832 2 .953 405.36 58.988 1.449 9.839 9.846 2 .953 405.35 58 .990 1.447 2 .953 405.34 58 .992 2 .953 1.445 9.854 9.861 405 .34 58.992 1.442 2 .953 405 .34 1.442 9.861 __ 80.000 -------- I --END OF HYDRAULIC JUMP ANALYSIS BALANCE OCCURS AT T, UPSTREAMFCONJUGATEEDEPTH = 0.932 pFEET DOWNSTREAM DEPTH _____-__ --------------------------------------- _ ----------------- INE= < 95.00 > NODE 108.00 : HGL = < 96.442>;EGL= < 97 .953>;FLOWL FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10ELE TO NODE 958180 (FLOW DUNSEALS IN REACH) ELEVATION = ___----- UPSTREAM NODE 108.00 _________________________ CALCULATE JUNCTION LOSSES: PIPE FLOW DIAMETER ANGLE FLOWLINE CRITICAL VELOCITY (CFS) (INCHES) (DEGREES) ELEVATION.00 DEP1H2(5T•) (FT/6S(FT/SEC)45 10.64 18 .00 95.18 9.864 UPSTREAM _ 95.00 1.44 DOWNSTREAM 17 .21 18 .00 95.18 0.99 3 .718 6.57 18 .00 90.00 p pp 0.000 LATERAL #1 0.00 0 .00 LATERAL #2 0.00 0.00 Q5 p•pp===QS EQUALS BASIN INPUT=== LACFCD AND OCEMA FLOW JUNCTION FORMULAE USED: DY= (Q2*V2-Q1*V1*COS(DELTAI) -Q3*V3*COS (DELTA3) - Q4*V4*COS ((MDANNING)S/N(A10A01300;1) FRICTIONNSLOPEES 0 .01026 UPSTREAM: FRICTION SLOPE = 0 .02342 DOWNSTREAM: MANNING'S N = 0.01300; AVERAGED FRICTION SLOPE IN JUNCTION ASSUMED AS 0 .01684 JUNCTION LENGTH = 4 .00 FEET FRICTION LOSSES = 0 .000 FEET RICTION LOSSES = 0.067 FEET JUNCTION LOSSES = (DY+HV1-HV2) + (ENTRANCE LOSSES) 1.321) +( 0.000) = 1.321 _____ JUNCTION LOSSES = ( ------- ------------------ -------------------- NODE 108.00 : HGL = < 98.711>;EGL= < 99.274>;FLOWLINE= < 95.1 > 105 .00 IS CODE = 1 ************************************ODE***************************CCURS)*** **FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TI N 103 .00 (HYDRAULIC JUMP ELEVATION - ----------- 105 .00 -- UPSTREAM NODE __________ --------------------- CALCULATE FRICTION LOSSES (LACFCD) PIPE DIAMETER = 18.00 INCHES 10 .64 CFS MANNING'S N = 0.01300 PIPE FLOW = --------- _ 136.00 FEET --------- PIPE LENGTH --------------------- HYDRAULIC JUMP DOWNSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS RESULT - -- ---1.25 ------ -------------------------------- ---- ------------0.68 CRITICAL DEPTH(FT) ___________________ NORMAL DEPTH(FT) _ ______ ------------- 1.25 UPSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED FLOWDEPTH(FT) -=_____________________________ - --------------- GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED INFORMATION_ - ----PRESSURE+ --------------------------- SPECIFIC DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) (FT) (FT/SEC) 1,960 195.78 CONTROL(FT) ( 2) /SE 195.88 0 .000 861 1.961 6 . 1.229 1.964 196.18 0.021 1.207 6.982 196.68 7 .1 0 .087 11 1.969 0.202 1.184 1.977 197.40 1.161 7 .248 1988 198.34 . 0.370 1,138 7 .395 199.52 0 .598 551 2 .001 1.115 7 , 2 017 200.95 0.892 1,092 7 .716 202 .64 1.261 893 2 .037 1.714 1.069 7 2061 204.61 , 1.046 8.080 206.87 2 .263 80 2 .089 2 .922 1.024 8 .2 2121 209.45 . 1.001 8 .492 212.35 3 .709 19 2 .159 4 .644 0.978 8 .7 2202 215.61 . 0.955 8.960 219.25 5.755 218 2 .252 7 .075 0 .932 9. 2309 223 .30 . 0.909 9.493 227 .78 8 .649 786 2 .374 0.886 g 2 .449 232 .74 10.534 0,863 10 .101 238 .21 12.810 10.438 2 .533 0.841 2 .630 244.24 15.588 0.818 10.800 250.88 19.032 11.188 2 .740 0 .795 2 .865 258.18 23 .398 0.772 11.607 266.21 29.112 12 .058 3 .008 0.749 3 .172 275.04 36.977 0 ,726 12 .546 284 .76 48.799 13 .075 3 .360 0.703 3 .370 285.27 70 .374 13 .103 0 .702 ----- 136.000 ------------------------------ ---------- HYDRAULIC JUMP: UPSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS-RESULTS--------- 3 .53 -----_ DOWNSTREAM CONTROL ASSUMED PRESSURE_HEAD(FT) -=--- PRESSURE FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED-INFORMATION: --------- PRESSURE+ ------- SPECIFIC DISTANCE FROM PRESSURE VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) HEAD(FT) (FT/SEC) 4,094 430.79 CONTROL(FT) 3 ,531 6.021 206.85 1.500 0.00 00 6 .021 2 .063 - 42 .989 --------------- 1.50 ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM PRESSURE HEAD(FT) _________________________________ GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW PROFILE COMPUTED-INFORMATION: --- _----PRESSURE+ ----------------------------------- ------- SPECIFIC DISTANCE FROM FLOW DEPTH VELOCITY ENERGY(FT) MOMENTUM(POUNDS) (FT) (FT/SEC) 2,063 206.85 CONTROL(FT) 1,500 6.019 205.87 6 .02 42 .989 5 2 .054 1.490 2046 204.99 . 43 .176 1,480 6.035 204 .17 43 .343 6 .048 2 .039 43 .498 1.470 43 .643 1.460 6.063 2 .032 203 .40 2 .p25 202 .68 43 .779 1.450 6 .080 2019 202 .00 43 .908 1.441 6.100 2. 013 201.36 44 .029 1.431 6.121 2 007 200.75 44 .144 1.421 6.144 2 002 200.19 44.251 1.411 6.168 1 997 199.66 44 .353 1.401 6.194 1. 992 199.16 44.448 1.391 6.221 1.381 6 .250 1.988 198.70 44 .537 1. 984 198 .28 44 .620 1.371 6.280 1.980 197.88 44 .697 1.361 6 .312 1 977 197.52 44 .768 1.351 6.345 1.974 197 .20 44 .832 1.342 6 .379 1.971 196.90 44 .891 1.332 6 .415 1 968 196.64 44 .943 1.322 6 .452 196.42 1.312 6 .490 1.966 44 .989 1.964 196.22 45 .028 1.302 6.530 196.07 1.292 6 .571 1.963 45 .060 1.962 195.94 45.086 1.282 6.613 1.961 195 .85 45 .104 1.272 6.657 1.960 195.80 45.115 1.262 6.702 1.960 195.78 45.119 1.252 6.748 1. 960 195.78 136.000 1.252 6.748 ______ ---END OF HYDRAULIC JUMP ANALYSIS---------- PRESSURE+MOMENTUMDEPTHCE2O209RFEET, UPSTREAM FEET CONJUGATEUPSTREAM DEPOH = 0.703 0FEET - DOWNSTREAM GAGA------GATE-- --------------------------- NODE 105.00 : HGL = < 104.252>;EGL= < 104 .960>;FLOWLINE= < 103 .000> ****************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 105 .00 IS CODE = 8 UPSTREAM NODE 105.00 ELEVATION = 103 .00 (FLOW UNSEALS IN REACH) _ ----- CALCULATE CATCH BASIN ENTRANCE LOSSEPIPECDIAMETER = 18 .00 INCHES PIPE FLOW = 10.64 CFS FLOW VELOCITY = 6.75 FEET/SEC. VELOCITY HEAD = 0.708 FEET CATCH BASIN ENERGY LOSS = .2* (VELOCITY HEAD) _ .2* ( 0.708) = 0 .142 ------------------ ------------------------- ------------------ NODE 105 .00 : HGL = < 105.101>;EGL= < 105.101>;FLOWLINE= < 103 .000> ****************************************************************************** UPSTREAM PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA: FLOWLINE ELEVATION = 103 .00 NODE NUMBER = 105 .00 ASSUMED UPSTREAM CONTROL HGL = 104.25 FOR DOWNSTREAM RUN ANALYSIS END OF GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW ANALYSIS BY 0ATE t PLAN SURVEYE : DESIGN ENGINEER ,17 NoTC e00K FRO,ECT ENGINEER 0.T.OF WAY CHECKE - NO. _.-- ' - 1 W illl IIII�I III D ImvmD_o c xx - -n -0 ill f ' I lrnlr�ci ro n 11 IjI l I;! Jill IjI !i I I l C7 M -4 QD Q• o C' D -V D �Um m,� I I L -z I m,.c rn m 'i�s -FFl-O I 1111 l � ' 11•I 1 i ,I ll.' 1 , i i 1 ' v 4, m o w ! I illl r i I l' j IjI Ili lil I lil I II I I I Ij _- _�_ �- Z III' ll!I I I � I' ! ' I I i!I � .t•��f? I w r�- ,1� ; 'l I ) ' � ! j �i ° ��-�'`�-•_-- ' .____-------' �' �__�`�,A7�8�:-5 F�Y_R/W. �' • i - ZI ILl ! II lij ! I 1 � II( !! II i ' i li iI 1: — 3 _ r� fR _ 3 m - - z t°W t4'- ' VULCQ.�H=SAVE= 67Q`—v blMi ISTIPAF3i J f h IiI u A!I I I I 1 lfi!I{tj . . I 1 l IIIi 1. iI III !! !III i II I ! II it r - 4 }3ECR_ /l ?Di 1 I N pJ �J GO N, QR-W I �II !! D DD c lyti i r 'r ,___._z p. t; � II i�, 1 � `� II 1 I I i .� mm !:� � �, ��-I. �� ti�.+ �', IIiI III i 'q ! !_ ;Ii I�I! !►!I II IIIi�iIi1 !` I!j !1 II ! m00 � I >rn w 9 _ i 1 � 'D°M ''N- ? 1 DRI\ e - N z N,c, m -,r-! °z li j! I i; 1111 II; I li I!II! il!) I'61i ili III !ii III! Li!! III' !Ij 111 Ii `s a_J \ r A o a II11! IIiI I ml'II I, 11 II I - 'I 1 iil # , s. z p D r �I- I'I 11 ! I 35`DRWY B�Iliil �i ' jl I. I. I1. 1 ) 1 '4!!" rat.1i r- wmflIll 'Il ! !Ili i ll ii ! II II I IIII ! 111 1y! y �{ (11_IIIiI � u2- DW �- IIII w' - I - II! Y��nn is s w .,i! II'i I I i i I III! II I y 1111 II`' illi iII l I!!, IIi II I i ;;11 I!I I ! _! °ICI to y Qz '!_ � I I 11. III i Q 1 ,i l !'! "�{t � �1• I FO; A �4a-� l 1�.!I I I I I j I I , I I ! ! l i , 1 lCo',C72tVE Z.. _ �,•v �n" 1 0R L I.I 11F! L 7QRdA I i ce, E iyl l l i -�.:' F I '.�-sg I, ( I' i j L S 'y '�T ) �wk;•? I i 1I I II >! I Ii!I; i I�1 i j I i 11 JIM 11.�III' Il.�il i 111 LI I I i ila'z l ! I B II 1 Iii �ii'll iII i i'1!. 11 7➢+,d6`Hill, I 1' i1! I►i!I1; Ij I. 1! I i 1�1 I 1 1 0 Y _ A -:}` - - 1w � I 1 liI II ;� I 11 II _ )�'11c,11I�-ll.li I I IIII '�{!O�( 1 ilt III? f�ll I!b j?I IIII I �!I{E�tl I i lli�l � mew)� �, �, �,, _ •'�c�'��i �„i �•.. �n 1(I I 1� 1!I� j i I I I I I I I{ � I 1' i 1;f♦���''_:; I,�+ti-_"T I I !1 (I —+ _ .__ - �• n� �y .1' lI' 1 jl e " iII I !III Ii`' II i Ij III II III 1111 -� - f 43sEC I i ! 1 i{ !(I iII --.,�� I,!i' li!..I I! -L4. I +DR E pl 1 I Ilil I I ilk; I I la !I lil I!IIiLI ! I Illi! I I III II IIII ill{IIIIi Illil'I�i,jil �vel �. i I I +1I� oci 32 069 fjJ , ml,it 1 I1!I i1 1I I 1IlIIi - i gt' 8623.073+t9� ilii I!!iI!sI) Il III �I .ol 1 - 1 L-�� �I I i 15QBLV€ �n 117'- I I i I I I I I {ry :* `: 112'4D RIVE-- �NMI .!)I;i I I I! � }I n "� --'-•�.. rn m'.>t.�--- 11I v m , I I -G: NIIIIIl'11 ,1 II m m �. a rn I l IiI IIt4 ( I I I illll IIiI Ill 1 l I IIII ai p,i I I I l l l f i l l 1 i �I i l r 1 I I t T I :I i i 'i i l'i I !' 1 11 1 i.Ilj. IIII I i CI!I 11 II I II ,jil( "{I! �nZro n-41 F111,11I1 9rn�aDm I I I:Ii III ; _ i LI1�Ii!,' 'll I!I- ;11 `i l iif' i iII 1 II ! I 1 jli Pill i �iIII II,1!I�ii p-1 z ���L2k7iD� ?- t _ . Il;i I iill.' -.III I1111i E II:I II( IIII i j Il, -1 y -I m r - re." f _ d Oo lD "•...- i I j ,I 1 i i e im.001 I' VIII 1 ' i ,,!) III! 1 I II fprv�D N �Y l I i t I W I• °O d rF) m i I' It ii 1111 li!{ IIi N y. .III 1.. r T'I 141 ! 1 'I 'I = N :1fA D I+ t . 1 1 Iii a ,o !I I 'Ii � !i' ill q NwII ;.I 1 Ill�jlll i�181:9i1 1 Iiil j I! jI,IIIII Will. Iw o ;l_ � Wn I 0 Cc<m Hill I 1 11i i` ` ' _ 'f - �-� � +s`� r s 'i�.'�.i 1* '-a t IE•�`i I 1-- + . , I .,. .. ,: i I I I ,b (•lI' f,i I 1 111 1 I I I (I!I• I j l _ __._____..'_�-—`'-- ! ?:�.- t � D to O . �-_P-7' <�,-.,.o m G).-a Will 11! ' 1 1 1 < - -t- ! to Ill - Hill I trJ A z:- I t L~ I IiI !i 1( , IiI; z l �D c�y0 �] Il 1 IIII. 1!l 1 111..1 I 'I51CF'!III�!I i'I III s. °-I t �j \. ED i N fD ^• � C I I ,, ! ti111, (11 <,, '1 ,1 !I II I "Iii I:II - _ I _t� --i-'"- --------.�- ' tiy; 1 1.1 �1! ' 1 S N O Am � �1 !I I j O 01 O t 11, I,I + 1 {_ �ncm or m rn=T.� o m w o 3 c A I 11 iI �9 i'I oo�w �iyz rm?z p K ObN�{ rte_ I) IIiI l , !IIII !11 I iI I�tI 111 1 Iji 1 _l ', rN^ � 2Z <fill -' m C Oi Iw O Fr• v, �! II .!i1 it jil Ili ! '1 ! Ii'11111c+ y m m m �Z f i i II ! i z z Z D y {I '; { jl 111 't Ii1111' I!I'!.I i; i i,, .!iI� m < 0 z ++ m ^~ 1 j i ! I IIII I 1. I,l! iI I I,! I C, a s # Z 002 � �, � � l 1 ( , 11 i ; I1 .I ll,l�lll) I 'f', r,.. < m < � a E� O i O I 1 i I I! l ' 1. Hilt tl,I ii .I!! m :1 d % 3o r m r z m " D m*,r, c ° M 1 !''I i t i 1 11 , i 'Li (( N t4, :I I I l ° z m m j m m m A tD m 20 n 0 °r Ji' {Intl I' I Ilj I `n I 1111.°; c Z °_ m O m I (111 i I ! II i .I I {It,.l I. o �. m m °+ w - p o-� r -c C/] G-! A� S !'� "l"^" !1 z Z c w ro ?.< c o I I1 �! y Z _ -tom l l t I 1 1 I !,I I I I y ;� ° " m - n�,:U o >v � 0.0 ;II i ,,IIIiII I i III I lla I 1 ! ii , �, y-I-I 4l 1 I'�I �Illi { i;Il,lillil �( il'Il Hi ° f I{ n I !11 It{} I ',II ! M �► fD A� n ..: I' i�.I, Il �I 'III.Itlii�ii,I'1;HH !IiIil�tEii�j PLAN SGRVEYE SY D✓/7 DESIGN ENGINEER. _ noieeooN_PROJECT ENGINEER No RT.OF WAY CHECNE ' !TI m K !N r � ` 'A -� '�" �i41 a jl I ri i i i I ' ! ! I I A nNi OJcNir '<m �\ + ?�. m', tr !lI �I!i III I!I ! !11 ,!: it I pDaop rA I I I ' !t ! I ' �! ! i! I i I a.00A r mm m y T�}'• .1,12 .w. �' 2 I � ,I!i ;! ! 111!i Ij- , _ I � i �I I � II - � t�,^,F, , , - _ �'=•-:•.- �� O ✓ t ii -�p3 I I III .! �I I i�: .I I. I I ► .J'- --- � � - �� I I ! � i! I �i' �i ( I I �; !1�{ i I i -:-..-----------i�---�„�_-�'-'�” c ��. � a,r-r\� -o•� �3�_.�-. A454. - i< 1 I j7 Sra7b X i a _ I I I I II i III IEVDiII i lii II I' IiI -- k-S4 C. p `w� 94-7� i ( i I I !) I I 1 1 �l i ! E g 8'^��t73g '' � ,\r ..alp?9n� � 4 ��..,�y, II II (D I i I irEC.pR- � •''� •• � - " � ,- {� + 1 ( _ II Ili I I•I O ' - i I I IIII I. I 1 �I I,-, ! I �/ s � � �p/!��• ' �� 4,. !�< DAD:' A 1k, •� nj� r' � � '� Vs D . �, O--� °0�", Jill E i I• I l I I !' I i I! III R�H I LE'� ; ,I! ' ', 1 D' .,- > 9. t"SZ '.--".o N r I I 11.I I' I _ i. tom cn u v_ �• ,l o �/,, _o I -� v1 _ _ itI'iII1II! I I!I' lI I!I ! i °!' iII II i LEA IOP!OF!C0�/. !I # I I( IIII I m l 1`' �.• 'L. /'r N Ii IlI'I i!' II If oi Hn I 11 �r 1 1 23' �-i--- �,-1-'I' ! I! ;I I l , i i:f 1 i - .. I•C y ,✓;,,.i m-uj OR. � f I!' `1'I II I I! !I ! !� I I i I I ( IiI I I I� ! II I I `y LEA_•_ Y' m. =IiI i I{I!II 1 ► ,iII - •e,. ° � I!{' I! ! � I �� III +I I I I I► I D I ' ! t ►I � ' I I I I I I ��,J � ..._ \9 N �..._�:;' � ^C.. �.' D D FV ' m o Aar•-- W`: IIII !I'! Iili Ili{ iIII ill' I I !III it-i IIo,I 1 ,r !!I �i +I� I I FsA\o '- m OF i !, II !' lil! III Ili 1�1 I I iI I!III i `E`T,\C F rO( a0i �0�5J O cO l i .: e_ 1 l i ji i, li II Iillill; Ii 11 ! '!' EI i '1 II i!IIi I I iI111! iI II 1 -�`�:.,� �� yD- , !� STA:r4•t4► r� � - 1!I ( 1 I�! I 1 !•!'�Ij1.1 !i i 1 I I II l!!`Ii II .•^ \\ � ° � �^E367r$44.22ly"� F�, �:. A�.I I �+ A; ..^ O I IOIIIIiiI 11 !1 1 1! :iII IIi:Q !I !, Il:i l I 60g66t CD i — _� ~ li i lIi E{III��±1� I!iiiIIil Iili!I�li ii Il II}! ! H iI I ( jIIIII I! Ifl I e �\ (�' I I I I .11 i l I1t -' li' t I I.I I,! iII IIII \ <. i - �II 1:'I ,!I II I IIII 1 I IIIi ! II;iII �i O ./ ~'1 Ul �.! i!!! I. ! IIII i!11 it 1 "I� '! Ili ill1 ll�i I ,�! iii II i I' !; a !,'1 I!! 1 IIII i ! if m t g!!+I III �1 !I'j iII ' 1! !it1 li, .II I;Ii , I!!;!' lI i Nail I! a Ii I I !IiI; I) ,1 \.� :1: •.. t {�m �. Jill iIi; Iii' I;'i� 1-iII! it l�l I li 'I; II ► ii_ III iIII, III I i �� � �. � n _ :t J� ''Iii � R t i' Ili loll iI I iII 1y tl! I ! III \� bO i� 0 Co IIII I' I�W i?1 1 1 I 1'i 1 l 4 l 3'8I5II 1 1�M!1 l i l I I 'i i l l IIiM l,i I l l l llt!iii1j ll;�II !'l�i!1 1lIiIlI l lI i IIi�IIIll , i j E Hill _� I ',Iii it i ! ij'il III !I I ii'' !jI iII 11! Hit Ii l; Ili :i i I,! Ili' iIII I iI I Ili iIII 11 I i I� I I if!II a III ( !!li; ;!I50 6 !III I!IIIIIIi I!i1 III1111i1,Ii!Itlll! I i�l. !II n• .-� N m.., I�--.-! .,. I I , of °'Tj!, i j!! I !i+i!,I !, j I I I'! I ! lil !! ill 11�) II i II (1 ( �I( �� '; '� Viµ• O i - I!til;ill'11 ! V !i^'ll{ , 1 l'Ij-I I�i .I IIII. 4.Fm E• .. �'.t 1 .. - ! t , .I � i i) 1111 i'!I ItTil Ili '!! !Ililll - _ IIII I II;I 1!tl1j111! iI(Iilllli L!51.3 57i 1111ll�:l! CO' tl! ILI ii, . !I. . ! III• fiI 1 ' 1 1 'i Ill 1 11"ls l 1!,t!I 1, i'1i556„O!9 •s l I I II!'I IIIi 1 i i!I,I u I!L! II I !II l! Il II II{{I I IIiI 1 r il iI'Il�iI II Ij1l1l 1 l i a I I I I;I' I I! ° ; l D ° will L9sz•` rr 1 1 IT,�!1I 1-1 1 i' IiI t 1llll t 1I11 �1II I1 'I 1 \�....--%�°b'�-\�_•'i-°'"� �"' \�"' � 6� ,q'-'..r ��` ' �►Ii il' !!1.�_iiT!, .1���_7�., .,� 't'i�z Jam,{!, �+ :(,f�'_ ' r'''- t V -�ii (� j11 '1 I!iil I'll 'I;fi!i:l II, Iljl'tlliii:l !il iIII CD� 1,680,000 11 11 1 'E! i 1 { +! tIE I'i; ; I, 1 'I ,!) ,. - �_ !!i11 lll!II!+ !I!i L{i'l�li'I IiII I I! !I,_. _ -- °�'! i I�Illfl 1111;0 I!, il!`I+IiII ail IIIIIII!III ! ! IillllI.IIII!I1 ( II I!Iil i y�l �\`__ ;- � O ` ..•�` •'i j! 1 I! ! !� ��..r••^x; it III ',I iI! iii ! I l 111! !I!I I `\ ro It I!lLMill O (n II b 1 I 1! 1 I !+,I i I ' r~. ICI -++ k ! ✓ A !�I�' '�,,,,.,....--�y � '�� ��,>.-�-:.-�'t }--�- J�•--_ .�� -gill / - f• i '� }. °i � C aq �Q r i ' ! I!i� I,!I>I I��! I!I I I I i i I I t�;i 1 i t)_�,--�;I I I I i i I+ � �,.1'� ,s:�'�- ���-f Y` � ,�" _,� r i��„}r•:-•�+1.�--'"' ! � �• y 0 � ,t ' l 11!I 1'IIIII115Ii-1�li-� 1i ,l1'1 4 'Ii'i t �,,� `� � ���� � ��'r�}il� ���TL 111 ! ,,!111111 1111 if C 70 yy b d ( " 'llt !I I ( ili!!Ifli i I i` { o m Q s �m c'o c°-o ""x Z o `o g a O ' ^ `I , I1!li, ill I 1 t il' 1, ; +r -'yg o�i o� ? ° ° # ° m O til l l ��r, c r� r z a e 3 a o C V I ;-tP-�'i"i+—c'"-1("'f ! :I 1,t'--.-"_t""'� ,I I HIM !1!I ^'o vmi rn a o <= o -�c� z Aj O I 1 t ,'I ! ,; ZO �Zy �1mSi 0 2 < GD; I� ! I I I i I ,. { 1 I I -� i•� < m R'r ° W R i !! II' 111.'I 111 1 ! I ,;T--{..,I li I f Nw Cz z < mT ? y v j "O 0Q Tin r I IIII I I ?i11 (IIII 11111!1 I,i I ,II!I I.! I i m m o ~ t I 1! I I s o s -, o II !' I Il I IiI z i m czi< o ��Z' �. O a IE j ,01., A II I it (!Iii.IIIIIIIIIIII !I,II 00 z ° It ° s O 1 �` "� T` 1 o m r v z o 6 m� o v C LI 1 Ili It III ! 1 I!!li 11; z z � z r w D f- - I c m n m s a ° o Z Z t0 zn a m 11111(1 Ilrlll 111j { I iII I !, e z ^' o N " _ ?� c \ ! f~D i� �+ YC 1..1!1i' ji -Illllil iIII l'IIIItII!II llli,!II !n ! O w m W AvIiO- II I *" III �I hI I� 111 ,!IiI'IIIiI !11l I; I! ! m j y o ''. >✓. C/) MI 11S '! IIII 1 !1 I ! p °_ ° '}1 D o n +I I { ! 1 to I l > b z r <O a I I r ry a _ Iv II iII III II Ilii l i o •t p A O Il I! II''ItI !I!I �, 11-Ili ('i.!! ll'11.�- lT i ®�; 1 i I �mL I►� o \ a M �t ~ O N ci a o ti CIO - i RA R •, 1 - O , N _ fff RPH IS AV AV. Hd r V w N HIll s Ali LP - - �0 i i 1 r �i i • I " _ : I J� / , , r H ESSJ i f / _.' _._. a "°*,_ _- a_�-• a ]i ( PR V / � Y 3:a / 11 _ _ i - i Q t H P ci P 3 H - r 6 oww, H E P a tP � _ , 1 _ , i \ n " i _ W / RM . : i / , _ r ' V, _:.�- N i " A _ - IN, ;a tA VA P S H , u _ " / R /