The URL can be used to link to this page

2004-1600 G ---- CITY OF ENCINITAS APPLICANT SECURITY DEPOSIT RELEASE Vendor No. DepositorName: Phone No. Address: Zip State DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION: 5y I. ME MO PROJECT NUMBER 2. RELEASED AMOUNT: $ 3. DEPOSIT BALANCE: Date v� AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE: Project Coordinator Date d Supervisor Date Department Head Date DEPOSIT BALANCE CONFIRMED: Finance Dept GENERAL PROD. BRIEF DESCRIPTION AMOUNT (25 Characters limit) LEDGER# 101-0000-218.00-00 -- --- - Security.Deposit- ______ TOTAL S I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TI IIS CLAOM REPS TA TS A APPROVED FOR PAYMENT }UST CHARGE AGAINST THE CITY PROCESSED BY FINANCE DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL ptkTE OF REQUEST DATE DATE CHECK REQUIRED Next Warrant _�_ CITY OF ENCINITAS APPLICANT SECURITY DEPOSIT RE LEASE Vendor No. DepositorNarne: f Phone /Z ►��.:/° ��°"� � Address: State Zip DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION: f (� I. MEMO PROJECT NUMBER / �7 Z. RELEASED AMOUNT: 3. DEPOSIT BALANCE: $ S. Note / Date ©� AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE- Project Coordin _ Date Supervisor Department Head Date DEPOSIT BALANCE CONFIRMED: Finance Dept GENERAL PROJ. # BRIEF DESCRIPTION AMOUNT LEDGER # (25 Characters limit) 101-0000-218.00-00 - - - - - - Security Deposit - - - - - - - - - - - TOTAL$ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ENCITIITASTS A APPROVED FOR PAYMENT JUST CHARGE AGAINST T HE CITY OF PROCESSED BY FINANCE DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL DATE OF REQUEST DATE DATE CHECK REQUIRED Next Warrant Jun 15 04 08:25a Bernadette (949) 599-0880 I°• 8 CITY OF ENCINITAS GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT SECURITY OBLIGATION AGREEMENT KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: Lr That Ilwe L Principal, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Encinitas, a municipal corporation,.in the County of San Diego, State of California, in the sum of ^ `\on deposit with ($ in the form of i „/ _ Ua 1 receipt # and to be held by it until this the City Finance Officer (p er p , lied obligation becomes void and if any of the conditions herein are breached, to the provisions pions by the City of Encinitas to satisfy any damages suffered and pursuant recited hereinafter. The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that whereas the above named Principal has agreed to provide certain improvements for the property known as 11� IAZb•Al 1}f, in accordance with Engineering Permit No. dated ��' "t� �' a�— and is required by the City Code to give a security to guarantee the performance and the completion of said improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, if the said Principal shall well and truly perform Eiji the work specified in said agreement, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. In addition, this security shall be conditioned upon the Principal's full compliance with all terms and conditions of the required Engineering compliance Permit including wih all any condition specifying a time limit; and further conditioned upon it provisions of the ordinances and standards of the City of Encinitas3. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the said Principal has hereunto set his hand, this —LrZJ34— day of 20V1 .. Principal 6 12W Business Address 1105 AN CA Oa71 bp65'73 ENCINITAS TOWN CENTER ASSOC II, LLC CITY OF ENCINITAS ,INVOICE AMOUNT- DESCRIPTION •'DATE INVUICENU 6-14-04 061404-29C GRADING PERMIT 1600—G BOND 89904 . 00 89904 .00 CHECK CHECK 318 6 TOTAL> DATE 6-15-04 NUMBER PLEASE DETACH AND RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS 7RgZ4 r;::e= K; THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORED BACKGROUND ON WHITE PAPER "``- Y BANK OF AMERICA ENCINITAS TOWN CENTER ASS0C II, LL 555 SO.FLOWER LOS ANGELES,CA 90071 515 SOUTH FIGUEROA STREET 16-66 1220 d'a SUITE 1230 LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 DATE CHECK NO. AMOUNT 213-533-8100 June 15, 2004 3186 $*****89,904.00 A rc Pay: *************Eighty-nine thousand nine hundred four dollars and no cents n PAY CITY OF ENCINITAS R TO THE 505 S.VULCAN AVE. ORDER OF ENCINITAS, CA 92024-3633 ' �i K E BACK OF THIS D7C:::UMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK—HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW ►''000 3 L86iI' is 1 2 200066 Li: L4 20611- 140 7011' UPDATE LETTER OF AS-GRADED GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS PROPOSED REI and ISLANDS RESTAURANT BUILDING PAD THE PROMENADE ENCINITAS RANCH ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: ENCINTAS TOWN CENTER ASSOCIATES II, LLC 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036 Los Angeles, California 90017 Project No. 940028-027 December 2, 2003 4ft ` rid Associates , rw. ' ',i 4i -t, Cot"+ :N December 2,2003 Project No. 940028-027 To: Encinitas Town Center Associates 11,LLC 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036 Los Angeles, California 90017 Attention: Mr. Sandy Kopelow Subject: Update Letter of As-Graded Geotechnical Conditions, REI and Islands Restaurant Building Pad, The Promenade Encinitas Ranch, Encinitas, California Introduction In accordance with your request and authorization, we have performed geotechnical observation and testing services during grading operations for the proposed REI and Islands Restaurant Building Pad at The Promenade Encinitas Ranch development in Encinitas, California (Figure 1). Leighton and Associates, Inc. previously performed geotechnical observation and testing services during the rough and fine grading operations in this area. This report summarizes our geotechnical observations, field and laboratory test results, and the geotechnical conditions encountered during the rough grading operations for the building pad. In addition, this report provides conclusions and recommendations for the proposed fine grading and proposed commercial development of the site. The 40-scale grading plans used during the rough grading operations were prepared by Mayers and Associates Civil Engineering, Inc. (Mayers and Associates, 2001). Perkowski and Ruth Architects prepared the site plan for the proposed REI and Island Restaurant building (P+R, 2003). This site plan was utilized as a base map to present the as-graded geotechnical conditions and approximate locations of the field density tests within the limits of the proposed REI and Island Restaurant building pad. The as-graded geotechnical map for this area is presented as Figure 2 in the rear of the text. 3934 Murphy Canyon Road,Suite 8205°� San Diego,CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 Fax 858.292.0771 www.leightongeo.com , , SIERRAV►SrA Ms RD , r cp C ,4RRAL , Ro C� 3 7Z CTE x UNION PROJECT D EL E SITE O � AVE ,m m f ,� V 1 ,1 LEUCADIA r c s4e 13LVD s OLIVENH IN , RD , C" - ' - , , , , b6z 5 , NORTH , NOT TO SCALE The Promenade SITE Project No. � Encinitas Ranch 940028-027 Proposed REI / Islands LOCATION Date Building Pad MAP Encinitas, California December 2003 Figure No. 1 940028-027 Project Description The proposed building pad is located in the northeastern corner of The Promenade Encinitas Ranch development, east of the Garden View Road, west of El Camino Real, and north Leucadia Boulevard in Encinitas,California(Figure 1). Site development includes the construction of a two- story structure identified on the project plans as the REI Retail and Restaurant/Retail building. Associated parking and pavement areas,landscaping and other improvements are also anticipated The proposed building pad is situated south and east of a geogrid-reinforced Keystone segmental wall. The wall accomplishes part of a grade transition that extends down to a wildlife corridor that is oriented east to west along the northern property boundary and the northerly trending Encinitas Creek which is situated east of the building pad. The geogrid reinforcement generally extends back from the face of wall a distance equal to 60 percent, or more, of the overall wall height (including the embedded portion of wall). Based on our review of the wall north of the building pad, geogrid extends back 13 to 14 feet from the face of wall. Because of the presence of this grid and the other wall design considerations, deepened footings are recommended where structures are to be situated within 35 feet of the segmental wall to the north. Rough Grading Rough grading of site originally began in September 1996 and was performed by Hazard Construction. Leighton and Associates performed geotechnical observation and testing. The previous phases of grading included an export operation to complete the neighboring Encinitas Town Center Phase I followed by remedial grading and soil import to the site, which was performed intermittently since 1996 (Leighton, 1997, 1998, 1999a, 1999b, and 2000a). Typically, our field technician and geologist were on site on an intermittent basis during the grading operations. Rough grading operations on the site included: 1) The removal of potentially compressible soil to saturated alluvium. 2) The preparation of areas to receive fill 3) The placement of compacted fill soils 4) Construction of the reinforced Keystone retaining wall. Field density testing and observations were performed using the Nuclear-Gauge Method (ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017). The approximate test locations are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Figure 2). The results of the field density tests are summarized in Appendix B. The field density testing was performed was in general accordance with the applicable ASTM Standards,the current standard of care in the industry, and the precision of the testing method itself. As with all ;0 - 3 - 940028-027 field and laboratory testing methods, variations in relative compaction should be expected from the results documented herein due to the differences in operator's methods and in the precision of the test methods themselves. Laboratory Testin4 Laboratory maximum dry density tests and optimum moisture determinations of representative on- site soils were performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The test results are presented in Appendix C. Summary of Conclusions The rough grading operations for the proposed REI and Islands Restaurant building pad are believed to have been performed in general accordance with the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A), geotechnical recommendations made during grading, and the City of Encinitas requirements. The existing at-grade soils on the REI and Restaurant building pads are considered to be similar to those previously tested on adjacent lots and found to have a very low to low expansion potential. It is our opinion that the site is suitable for its intended commercial use provided the recommendations included herein and in the referenced project geotechnical reports are incorporated into the design and construction of the proposed structure and associated improvements. Based on the results of our observation and testing during the rough grading of the proposed REI and Restaurant building pad, the site conditions were judged to be essentially as anticipated. Therefore, the recommendations concerning the fine and post grading and construction phases of the project presented in our geotechnical reports for the site (Leighton, 2000b) are still considered applicable and are presented in the following sections relative to the proposed improvements. Leisffidty The site can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of southern California. The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the California Building Code (CBC) and state-of-the-art seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. The site is located within Seismic Zone 4 as designated by the California Building Code (CBSC, 2001). A soil profile type SD is considered appropriate for the building pad. Near source factors Na and Nv for the site equal to 1.0 and 1.1, respectively, are appropriate based on the seismic setting and criteria of Tables 16-S and 16-T of the 2001 CBC. -4- �--'_ 940028-027 Foundation Recommendations for the Northern Portion of REI Building Pad The proposed building locations indicate that the northern wall of the REI building will be located approximately 10 ft from the back of the existing retaining wall (P+R, 2003). This would place the building within the structural influence of the existing retaining wall. As a result foundation setback/deepening is recommended(Figures 2 and 3). For the preparation of this report the capacity of a 12-inch diameter auger-cast pile was analyzed using the data and information gathered from our previous site investigations (Leighton, 200b), and computer program SHAFT 5.0 (Reese et al,2001). The design tip elevation of the proposed auger-cast piles should extend 5 feet below an imaginary 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical) extending up from the bottom of the existing segmental wall (Cross- section B-B', Figure No. 3). The bottom of the existing wall is shown on the wall plans (Earth Retention Consultants, 2001). At this depth a 12-inch diameter auger-cast pile can be designed to support an allowable downward load of 10 kips, and an allowable upward load of 7 kips. Our analysis did not consider the structural strength of the proposed auger-cast piles which is the purview of the structural engineer. The capacities presented above are for single piles constructed using "strong" drilling methods and according to the design basis of Neely(1991). Actual capacity will be dependent on the contractors' methods and quality of construction. Load testing is recommended and the contractor should provide all necessary equipment and current calibration to perform testing. Piles placed at spacings closer than 8 pile diameters(center to center) should be reduced by the appropriate reduction factors presented in Table 1. Table 1 Axial Pile Grou Reduction Factors Pile S acincy Center to Center Reduction in Axial Ca aci (Percent) 8 vile diameters 1.00 7 pile diameters 0.93 6 pile diameters 0.87 5 vile diameters 0.80 4 vile diameters 0.74 3 pile diameters 0.67 Lateral Capacity of CIDH Pile The lateral capacity of a 12-inch diameter auger-cast pile was not determined for the preparation of this report. This analysis should be performed prior to finalizing the foundation plans for the proposed buildings. - 5- 940028-027 Spread Footing Foundation Recommendations Where the proposed buildings foundations are setback sufficiently from the existing retaining wall (Figure 2), it is our professional opinion that the wall in these areas will not be appreciably affected by the buildings being founded on continuous perimeter footings and conventional interior isolated- spread footings. Footings bearing in properly compacted fill should extend a minimum of 18- inches below the lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, footings may be designed using an allowable soil-bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable soil bearing pressure may be increased by 500 psf for each additional foot of foundation embedment to a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf(Leighton, 2000b). This value may be increased by one-third four loads of short duration including wind or seismic forces. Continuous perimeter footings should be designed as grade beams to accommodate the design settlements,reinforced by placing at least two No. 5 rebar near the top and one No. 5 rebar near the bottom of the footing, and in accordance with the structural engineer's requirement. We recommend a minimum width of 24 inches for isolated-spread footings. The structures should also be designed for the anticipated settlement. Isolated spread footings should be connected by grade- beams to perimeter footings and between individual column locations. Floor Slab Design All slabs should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and be reinforced at slab midheight with No. 3 rebars at 18 inches on center (each way) or No. 4 rebars at 24 inches centers (each way). Additional reinforcement and/or concrete thickness to accommodate specific loading conditions or anticipated settlement should be evaluated by the structural engineer based on a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pound per cubic inch and the anticipated settlements . We emphasize that is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the slab reinforcement is placed at midheight of the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand (S.E. greater than 30) to aid in concrete curing, which is underlain by a 6-mil (or heavier) moisture barrier, which is, in turn, underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand to act as a capillary break. All penetrations and laps in the moisture barrier should be appropriately sealed. The spacing of crack-control joints should be designed by the structural engineer or architect. Sawcuts should be made within 24 hours of concrete placement. Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the concrete cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a high water content,high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size and rapid moisture loose due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of concrete mix that possess a low water content can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. Moisture barriers can retard, but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils -6- 940028-027 up through the slab. We recommend that the floor coverings installer test the moisture vapor flux rate prior to attempting application of the flooring. 'Breathable" floor coverings should be considered if the vapor flux rates are high. A slip sheet should be provided beneath settlement sensitive floor coverings. Footing Setback We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural footings and settlement-sensitive structures. This distance is measured from the outside edge of the footing,horizontally to the slope face (or to the face of a retaining wall) and should be minimum of 10 feet.. We should note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pavement, underground utilities, etc.) constructed within this setback area may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement. Due to the proximity of the proposed building to the retaining wall along the wildlife corridor, we recommend building foundations be deepened along that side. Foundations should be deepened so that they are founded below a 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) plane extending up from the bottom backside edge of the proposed retaining wall footing. Additional analysis of the recommended setback should be performed once actual foundation loading and site configurations are better known along the north wall of the building. Anticipated Settlement The proposed structure should be designed to accommodate static total and differential settlements of 1-inch and 3/4-inch. For seismic conditions the structure should be designed to accommodate an additional 4-inches of total settlement and 2-inches of differential across the building. Lateral Earth Pressures and Resistance Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils,the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance. For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water table and backfilled with very low to low expansion potential soils is provided below. Determination of which condition, active or at-rest, is appropriate for design will depend on the flexibility of the wall. The effect of any surcharge (dead or live load) should be - 7 - 940028-027 added to the proceeding lateral earth pressures. Based on our investigation, the sandier onsite soils may provide low to very low expansive potential backfill material. All backfill soils should have an expansion index less than 50. The passive pressures provided below assume that the setback recommendations are adhered to. Equivalent Fluid Weight(pcf) Condition Level 2:1 Slope Active 35 55 At-Rest 55 65 Passive 350 200 (Maximum of 3 ksf) (sloping down) The above values assume low expansion potential backfill and free-draining conditions. If conditions other than these covered herein are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual-case basis by the geotechnical engineer. A surcharge load for a restrained or unrestrained wall resulting from automobile traffic may be assumed to be equivalent to a uniform lateral pressure of 75 psf which is in addition to the equivalent fluid pressures given above. All retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and waterproofing. As an alternative, an approved drainage board system installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations may be used. Wall backfill should be compacted by mechanical methods to at least 90 percent relative compaction(based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Should structures or driveway areas be located adjacent to retaining walls, the backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Surcharges from adjacent structures, traffic, forklifts or other loads adjacent to retaining walls should be considered in the design. Wall footings design and setbacks should be performed in accordance with the previous foundation design recommendations and reinforced in accordance with structural considerations. Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value provided above. Further, for sliding resistance, a friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. These values may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistance provided that the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. i 940028-027 Pavement Section Desian Because of the variability of materials on site and unknown import soils, it is not possible to know which soils will be placed or exposed at pavement subgrade. In order to provide the following recommendations, we have visually evaluated the onsite soils and utilized representative R-value test results from our previous investigations (Appendix A). The following pavement sections are provided for the interior driveways and parking areas. Pavement design was performed in accordance with the City of Encinitas and Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Utilizing traffic indices provided by the City of Encinitas, and an assumed R-value of 50,we provide the following preliminary sections. Based on the results of our analysis,the following minimum pavement sections may be utilized for planning purposes. It is recommended that representative samples of actual subgrade materials be obtained and tested to provide the final pavement design. Standard Duty Parking Area Design R-Value=50 Traffic Index= 5.0 3.0 inches asphalt concrete(AC)over 4.0 inches of Class 2 AB Interior Driveway Design R-Value=50 Traffic Index= 6.0 5.0 inches of reinforced Portland Cement Concrete(PCC)over 2 inches of Class 2 AB or 3.5 inches AC over 5.0 inches of Class 2 AB Heave-Duty Truck Access Pavement Design R-Value=50 Traffic Index=7.0 7.0 inches reinforced PCC over 2 inches of Class AB or 4.0 inches AC over 6.0 inches of Class 2 AB Class 2 aggregate should conform to Section 26 of the State of California, Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications. We recommend that crack-control joints be spaced no more than 12 feet on center each way. If sawcuts are used, they should be a minimum depth of 1/4 the slab thickness and made with 24 hours of concrete placement. Concrete should be reinforced at a minimum with 6x6-10/10 welded-wire mesh at slab midheight. The actual pavement design should also be in accordance with the City of Encinitas design criteria. Asphalt Concrete, Portland Cement Concrete, and base materials should conform to and be placed in accordance with the latest - 9 - LL _ 940028-027 revision of the California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (Caltrans) and American Concrete Institute(ACI)codes. The upper 12 inches of subgrade soils should be moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 prior to placement of aggregate base. The base layer should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. We recommend that the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks be designed by the civil engineer or structural engineer. We suggest control joints at appropriate intervals as determined by the civil or structural engineer be considered. We also suggest a minimum thickness of 4 inches for sidewalk slabs. If pavement areas are adjacent to heavily watered landscape areas, we recommend some measures of moisture control be taken to prevent the subgrade soils from becoming saturated. It is recommend that the concrete curbing separating the landscaping area from the pavement extend below the aggregate base to reduce the migration of irrigation water in the aggregate base. Concrete swales should be designed in paved drainage paths. Post-Grading Operations The existing soil in the areas of the proposed building pads should be stripped of any vegetation and deleterious material prior to the beginning of any grading operations. The top 12-inches of existing soil should then be and scarified and recompacted to the appropriate relative compaction at a moisture content of at least 2 percent over optimum as determined by ASTM D1557. The recommended relative compaction is at least 90 percent in building pad areas and 95 percent in areas that will be subjected to vehicular traffic. Construction Observation and Plan Review A representative should observe all foundation drilling operations and approve bottom clean-outs prior to concrete placement. Construction observation of all onsite excavations and field density testing of all compacted fill should be performed by a representative of this office so that construction is in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Final project drawings should be checked by Leighton and Associates,Inc. before grading to see that the recommendations in this provided report and our previous reports are incorporated in project plans. Limitations The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the contractor's work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor - 10 - 940028-027 or his subcontractor's work or their responsibility if defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as to the compliance of the results with the project specifications. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES FESSli COL p9�Fyn z w N0.2507 m °C Exp. 12/31/03 7° Sean Q, 25 * G Q" Director of Engineer s�9 Fore C 1A OF CA\J Michael R. Stewart, CEG 1349 ' K10.1349 -r CERTIFIED Princi al Geolo istVice Preside ENGINEERING CECLOGIST Attachments: Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2-Field Density Test Location Map Figure 3 - Cross-Sections Appendix A-References Appendix B - Summary of Field Density Tests Appendix C -Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Distribution: (3) Addressee (1) REI,Attention: Mr. Cesar Jose "CJ"de Leon (1) Mathun,Attention: Mr. Steve Swanson - 11 - t :Id�al�+!i1 i 1.91 NCR ! • � RW 5' �..�� ."J Af grading i fill Pf�ed dur 9 current W 13 Qa j Quatemary AW i . where buried) �m( i Td/ FOf^ation burl" \� 39• � x fi �atxton of cpnPaCle d V 43 RW 56• '�►>roxiMate location Of t B B' was�'l�>d density es ' A-..A cross-ection loon _�LClI \ Foundation 1 0 ,f 20 40 Scale in Feet t " �olect No. 940028-027 tale in i rl r./Geol. t, 9 .____rafted By SAC/MRS KAM ate t Decernber 2003 elghton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGN,,N GROVP COMPANY Figure No.2 CN LL I `rte ------------ ---------------------- ------ Q • C4 co Cb N to C4 9 u ch z LU 0— co LLI 0 x X a. ca + 04 1"Neo tc 0 >,Cl) 1) - mo 110 LLJ M C) cq CL cu:: - 11 cc V 10) ca H. 00 < Ir uj E y��r I I • � ,:- CU 2 uj 0- UJ un �m cl: <lL )Y-36V < O DNI ca W iIX2 t lf—J it c Iv 8 Ois Z NN LL-t r NlHdido:� ds oo§ Pl 009 m i C,)C) LJ L • :J LO 3: ------------- ---- N LO LO M ONINIVi3 jN\b tA Nli o 11 S--IX-3 co• I I v N Ift Cl) z Cl) O _/ "O Zs (B N c LL fQ LL Ift O ♦♦P♦� M N m V W m 0 O U U N U) W - o Zi >_ cu o ♦^ = W U 1� N cn N > N �/♦ � � O w -0 — CO aD _ o �/� Q (0 _� N O E OU �/ O jj C�qq� V c� E O r ff�Y F� Q O 0 � W �o CL co O 2 O O V -C a O p � F- O Z N M < W U -a 2) o LO C J N o a C/) 0 cl w r r O co W u I CD � I I I I I I I � Ic i I N O r O I00 to I a I o I CL I I I I ------ I ' I I I 1 I I I I - w I � 3 I I d c�• I I , 0 M I aid , Y W 1 a 0 I 1 c , d 0 I I *'a J I O.X ' 1 i a U. o d I � I I r I a•a Z d c I I 3 I dob c0 I =n I N== Ow d _- U U 7 C I c� DID y i a.0 a \ o I d 1 I � H _� I �.0. I I---- 1 a ---- 1 I ----- - ____--__ -0,0 00 0 a) I I ".0 I rnrn X Cy W`CD I I I w O m N C O r T O O N O r O co 940028-027 APPENDDC A R F R N . S California Building Standards Commission(CBSC),2001 California Building Code. Earth Retention Consultants, 2001, Keystone Retaining Wall Plans for Plaza at Encinitas Ranch, dated February 2,2001. Leighton and Associates,Inc., 1996a,Geotechnical Investigation,Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2,Encinitas Ranch, TM 94-066,Encinitas, California,Project No.4940028-08,dated May 17, 1996. , 1997, Interim As-Graded Report, Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2, TM 94-066, Encinitas, California, Project No. 11940028-019,dated July 23, 1997. , 1998, Interim Compaction Report, Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2, Encinitas, California, Project No. 4940028-023,dated November 12, 1998. 1999a, Interim Compaction Report, Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2, Encinitas, California, Project No. 4940028-023,dated January 22, 1999. 1999b, Interim Compaction Report, Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2, Encinitas, California, Project No. 4940028-023,dated February 17, 1999. 2000x, Interim Compaction Report, Encinitas Ranch Plaza 2, Encinitas, California, Project No. 4940028-023,dated January 10,2000. 2000b, Update Geotechnical Investigation, The Promenade Encinitas Ranch, Encinitas Ranch, TM 94-066,Encinitas, California,Project No.4940028-027,dated March 28,2000. 2001 a, Update Geotechnical Report, Expo Design Center, Encinitas Ranch, TM 94-066, Encinitas,California,Project No.4940028-027,dated May 7,2001. 2001b,As-Graded Report of Rough and Fine Grading, Expo-Building Pad, Encinitas Ranch TM 94-066,Encinitas,California,Project No. 940028-027,dated May 17,2001. Unpublished, in-house data. Mayers and Associates Civil Engineering Inc., 2001, Grading Plans for Encinitas Ranch, Green Valley unit 2,dated February 20,2001. Neely, William J., 1990, Installation, Design and Quality Control of Auger-Cast Piles, Pre Print Volume of Papers Presented at 1990 15t'Annual Members' Meeting and Seminar, DFI, October 9-13, 1990. 1991, Bearing Capacity of Auger-Cast Piles in Sand, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Volume 117,No. 2,February 1991. A-1 940028-027 APPENDIX A (Continued) Perkowitz+Ruth Architects(P+R), 2003, Plaza at Encinitas Ranch Site Plan, date issued: August 1, 2003, revised: August 19,2003. Reese, L.C., Wang, S. T., and Arrellaga, J. A., 2001, Computer Program SHAFT Version 5.0, A Program for the Study of Drilled Shafts Under Axial Loads, Ensoft,Inc. Austin,Texas. A-2 940028-027 APPENDIX B EXPLANATION OF SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Test No. Test of Test No. Test of Prefix Test of Abbreviations Prefix Test of Abbreviations (none) GRADING Natural Ground NG (SG) SUBGRADE Original Ground OG (AB) AGGREGATE BASE Existing Fill EF (CB) CEMENT TREATED BASE Compacted Fill CF (PB) PROCESSED BASE Slope Face SF (AC) ASPHALT CONCRETE Finish Grade FG (S) SEWER Curb C (SD) STORM DRAIN Gutter G (AD) AREA DRAIN Curb and Gutter CG (W) DOMESTIC WATER Cross Gutter XG (RC) RECLAIMED WATER Street ST (SB) SUBDRAIN Sidewalk (G) GAS Dr SW Driveway D (E) ELECTRICAL Driveway Approach DA (T) TELEPHONE Parking Lot PL (J) JOINT UTILITY Electric Box Pad EB (I) IRRIGATION Bedding Material B Shading Sand S Main M Lateral L Crossing X Manhole MH Hydrant Lateral HL Catch Basin CB Riser R Inlet I (RW) RETAINING WALL (P) PRESATURATION (CW) CRIB WALL (LW) LOFFELL WALL Moisture Content M (SF) STRUCT FOOTING Footing Bottom F Backfill B Wall Cell C (IT) INTERIOR TRENCH Plumbing Backfill P Electrical Backfill E N represents nuclear gauge tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017. S represents sand cone tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test Method D1556. 15A represents first retest of Test No. 15 15B represents second retest of Test No. 15 "0" in Test Elevation Column represents test was taken at the ground surface(e.g.finish grade or subgrade) "-1" in Test Elevation Column represents test was taken one foot below the ground surface B-1 c, a co N N b o a Cd au O O O V1 O vl O O v� O p V1 ►q. y 'fl '""'. �t 00 -Y O 00 °I O� Q\ 00 00 Qi O O O p O p Iii �I — — f^ O O O G O O O O O O G,O O O O O VL+ 9 00 00 V'1 M Vl Vl M M Vl M M k!1 Vl V-) 'r^ v+ .y W ° � ^C � � � O O� M O A N Q- O; 00 00 p� 00 o .� Z V] F 'Cl 1,0 m Vl M V1 M M �l in Mr) Vl M M M vi LU QC' 1r) IC) W) kr) v-i Wn v i o o v V o v) o o as W M, —, kC) O O t} �/1 00 00o0 OO OO 0oO 01 0� O� Q\ U Q 0 0 O 00 O LU W 9 fps LL ° o LL a 0 a LL' Q � A 0 u � U C (U bA I� N N No N N N N U) N M NO as a ° N a° a N° .°a .°N vi N.° -° N� ° N N� a O U C CY) W O O F-4 vcw� vUVVUVVVUUV000 0 00000000000000 . `^ CU ,0� r i i 0000 0000 � � a) cd N N N N N N N N N N � 0', H A N N f\f N M M M fh M fh M M M C(1 O Z Z J ,aD a o. a u a a a 0 0 O, ON D, 01 C1 a\ a � o In V) , � � ow O O o 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a� ° +� 00 M O 00 m N �D D1 N O •-+ M O M O� Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O. O 1� h Vl V'1 V1 V't vl W) W h N Vl to Vl vl h �!) kn V) to Vl m, Vl ^^ '' ��+'1I�rl .N-. .Ni 'N-. � � .Ni � .Ni .N-� .N-� .Nr .Nr � rN-• •N-� N .Nr .N-� .Ni .Ni .Ni .N-� v+ W b O CT N O D\ (� Q M kn O O\ N [- M l� M �--� V'1 Ol M O, �D O A6) .mi mi .mi Vl ,�ti 't O .�-. 066 � m FL, m� ~Nyo ~ � (� a o _ ZC/] F-4 M M (h M M Cl) M M M M M M M M M M M M M '(1 V1 M W p; Q _ O Vl O v'i 0 0 0 0 4,) 0 0 O V) v1 c� w 000 0000 0000 000 CC 0000 QO1 C, ON1 CC � CC 00 O Q� N Cl O 00 00 O .�-i O •V O\ O U O W W 9 � LL O o W, kr) C:) o. o W) 00 00 00 to o ) LL t� 00 M C� O� m p N O' to m al 00 w 00 w 0o cl• �p O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v] V) V] vl rn v] V) cn v/i v�] v�] v�] r� r� C� uo 0 C") C'f) 0 ' u m i0 i0 cd 'C 'ctl id �s as Cd m od m . 74 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa3aaaa U � .� �. c a�ji rxa� adrx wars! rxwn: ar�4 aaa: wwt� wu; war� cG N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 00 "= Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z z Z Z Z z Z Z z Z Z O •U a�i w rn W 00. E-� O m m m m mm mm m m m m mm mm m m m m m mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 00 O., O� O� O� �O �D �O � Qj �r+ �t �t V' �h d' '�h � �t � �t V' � � d• ct 'cY V 'ci' _ (p 0 Z Z J � 00 M .--� N M V' N N N N N m m m V kn kn ,n h n ,n Hz aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,aaaaaaa '� 'a"a.� ..__ xxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxxxx a` a` n`. c� 940028-027 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Sample Finish Grade Optimum Moisture Number Sample Description Expansion o Content Potential 1 Gray-brown silty sand(Qal) 115.8 14.0 2 Gray fine sand(Qal) 112.5 15.5 3 Red-brown clayey sand(Qsw) 125.0 10.5 4 Topsoil-Brown silty sand 121.0 8.5 5 Yellow-brown silty sand with trace of clay(alluvium) 123.0 12.0 6 Brown silty clayey sand(mix of all soil types) 128.0 10.0 7 Tan-white silty fine sand 116.5 11.0 8 Gold-brown silty sand with trace of clay 128.5 10.5 9 Brown silty sand,screened material from channel 120.0 12.0 10 Goldish brown,silty sand/fine poorly-graded sand 111.5 13.5 11 Light brown/orange medium coarse sand 128.0 9.0 12 Light brown/orange silty fine sand 119.0 10.5 13 Gray/white silty sand 117.5 13.5 14 Gray-brown silty sand 117.5 15.5 15 Light brown silty sand 117.0 13.5 16 Yellowish brown silty sand 124.0 11.0 C-1 W - lX r y'' r Leighton and Associates AGTGCompany GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 1 L LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED WILDLIFE UNDERCROSSING, GARDEN VIEW ROAD ENCINITAS TOWN CENTER—PHASE II ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 4� Project No. 940028-026 November 24, 1999 Prepared For ENCINITAS TOWN CENTER ASSOCIATES II, LLC 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036 Los Angeles, California 90017 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, #13205, San Diego, CA 9213-4425 (619) 292-8030 • FAX (619) 292-0771 • www.leightongeo.com Leighton and Associates AGTGCompany GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS November 24, 1999 Project No. 940028-026 To: Encinitas Town Center Associates II,LLC 707 Whilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036 Los Angeles,California 90017 Attention: Mr. Sandy Kopelow Subject: Limited Geotechnical Investigation,Proposed Wildlife Undercrossing, Garden View Road, Encinitas Town Center—Phase II,Encinitas,California In accordance with your request and authorization, we have conducted a limited geotechnical investigation for the proposed wildlife undercrossing improvements at the Encinitas Town Center-Phase II development. Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the site can be improved to receive the proposed improvements. The accompanying report presents a summary of our current investigation and provides geotechnical conclusions and recommendations relative to the proposed wildlife undercrossing improvements. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AN ATES, INC. Sea CE 54033 Michael R. Stewa G 1349(Exp. 12/31/99) Senior Project Engineer Vice President/Principal Geologist �RED GEC R. Y A Fey fry SAC/MRS v N0,1349 9p • CERTIFlED —' Distribution: (4) Addressee ENGINEERING (1) O'Day Consultants,Attention: Mr.Tim GEOLOGIST Carroll � (1) Simon Wong Engineers,Attention: Mr.Jim Frost CF CAL�F� (1) Mr. Larry Dodd 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, #13205, San Diego, CA 9213-4425 (619) 292-8030 • FAX (619) 292-0771 • www.leightongeo.com 940028-026 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section page 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................ I 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.............................................................................................................................. l 2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING..............................................................3 3.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS........................................................................................4 3.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING.........................................................................................................................................4 3.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY.................................................................................................................................4 3.2.1 Artificial Fill Documented(Map Symbol—Afd...................................................................................... 4 3.2.2 Quaternary Slope Wash(Map Symbol—Qsw......................................................................................... 4 3.2.3 Tertiary Torrey Sandstone(Map Symbol—Tr)....................................................................................... S 3.3 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE................................................................................................................................... 5 3.4 LANDS LIDING.................................................................................................................................................. 5 3.5 GROUND WATER............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.6 EXPANSIVE SOILS............................................................................................................................................ 6 4.0 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY.........................................................................................................................7 4.1 FAULTI NG..................................................................................................................:..................................... 7 4.2 SEISMICITY...................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2.1 Shallow Ground Rupture...................................................................................................................... 8 4.2.2 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement.................................................................................................. 8 4.2.3 Tsunamis and Seiches........................................................................................................................... 9 5.0 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................................. 10 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................................... 12 6.1 EARTHWORK................................................................................................... .......•-----........_....._................ 12 6.1.1 Site Preparation.................................................................................................................................. 12 61.2 Excavations and Oversize Material.................................................................................................... 12 6.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction......................................................................................................... 13 61.4 Removal of Unsuitable Soils............................................................................................................... 13 61.5 Transition Mitigation.......................................................................................................................... 13 6.2 CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATION AND SLAB CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................ 13 6.2.1 Shallow Spread Footings Foundations............................................................................................... 14 62.2 Slabs-On-Grade.................................................................................................................................. 14 62.3 Settlement............................................................................................................................................ 15 i Z _ 940028-026 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 6.4 MAT FOUNDATION........................................................................................................................................ 15 6.5 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES........................................................................................................................ 15 6.6 GEOCHEMICAL CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................................. 16 6.7 UNDERCROSSING........................................................................................................................................... 16 6.8 STABILITY FILL............................................................................................................................................. 17 68.1 Deep-Seated Stability.......................................................................................................................... 17 68.2 Surftcial Slope Stabil ity....................................................................................................................... 18 6.9 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND EROSION.............................................................................................................. 18 6.10 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION..................................................................................................................... 18 6.11 PLAN REVIEW................................................................................................................................................ 19 7.0 LIMITATIONS...................................................................................................................................................20 TABLES TABLE 1 —SEISMIC PARAMETERS FOR ACTIVE FAULTS—PAGE 7 TABLE 2—STATIC EQUIVALENT FLUID WEIGHT(PCF)—PAGE 15 FIGURES FIGURE 1 —SITE LOCATION MAP—PAGE 2 FIGURE 2—TRENCH LOCATION MAP FIGURE 3—STABILITY FILL PLAN FIGURE 4—STABILITY FILL DETAIL APPENDICES APPENDIX A—REFERENCES APPENDIX B—TRENCH LOGS APPENDIX C—LABORATORY DATA ANALYSIS APPENDIX D—GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS M— & 940028-026 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report presents the results of our limited geotechnical investigation at the site of the proposed wildlife undercrossing to be constructed at the Encinitas Town Center — Phase II development in Encinitas, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1, page 2). The purpose of our investigation was to identify and evaluate the existing significant geotechnical conditions present at the site and to provide preliminary conclusions and geotechnical recommendations relative to the proposed development. Our scope of services included: • Review of available pertinent, published and unpublished geotechnical literature and maps. References cited are listed in Appendix A. • Field reconnaissance of the existing onsite geotechnical conditions. • Subsurface exploration consisting of the excavation, logging, and sampling of five trenches. The logs of trenches are presented in Appendix B. • Laboratory testing of representative soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration program. Results of these tests are presented in Appendix C. • Compilation and analysis of the geotechnical data obtained from the literature review, field investigation and laboratory testing. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and geotechnical recommendations with respect to the proposed design site grading and general construction considerations. 1.2 Proposed Development The site is located immediately north of Leucadia Boulevard on Garden View Road in Encinitas, California (Figure 1, page 2). The undercrossing will extend from the east side of Garden View Road at Station 45+70 to Station 46+50 on the west side. We understand that the proposed undercrossing will consist of an aluminum or steel arch plate culvert approximately 125 feet in length. Associated headwalls and wildlife corridor retaining walls up to 23 feet in height are planned. To create the corridor west of Garden View Road, the existing hillside will be cut to create 2:1 slope with a maximum height of approximately 55 feet (Figure 2,rear of text). -1- AL �MVARRAORF.ti T IOU!TOS LAG ON sM tY>STA urns aye _. U COST LA goo QSSA ,\ � s .\ \ 35 36 lit VIA ■«a \ 5511'♦ no lFY E"1°J ST++• fC{F Xttll �, m • sc ` T� �$> A �M ° 12S _ w� R� 8 135 — s v � � � \ ��, 1r1►I�E� / 1 �_ .. 1 `\ d -_1}•"-Ply a '•••. rs L I \ �_`r MiS ESTNK_IA ' 14 TF sf, DuE'A IR A^ SINNtirm%1 i r SERM VISTA_ �, Da 1" 3 rlvrUS a�Aari '> p caliesE I bnc A. [B r n j OXF 5p E NDnwror ? - ec►a \� � l�TTANT RD PROJECT NH f • � SITE �, LETICA[IIA .} Zwu L _ > FS K Aw 5T �� '• , UP R rrrr-- 3c Iwo VI ° 2 O Q4 tax UNION EZE[$I E i I 11 m ST IINI X00 q �" 1 r• yAMESSA i.�� N $ R = E CINITA ' �1�� K �j7 :M lJ ♦ � V ~ u Q Q IN FOX i EW aSAO i 5T •rYIIR 4 i+�*" Nn 4FAR rfEV R •OLWlD1L « !S �rRY f, � � pnalo'1 �j - � /AIiC ,s y iE f0U ONA s Ia AIM IT 6409M z � �� 5�.�,• � ,YS � n rt s,Y , yr, _ FILREST YIKIr A MI VC,•s, f V �, RD $ ;z fur sr 1 S;f .o ENCIHITAS" �' T 'e c • �M t �l� p [SWRIFF S/A y _ s • -YI-fIFAT Et B8L — 1 n at .ENCINITAS rrAU BLYDe E 0 ST a j • .. -- �� o lT X110. um E - J« irk o/ro�as! P ■ is oc u e,a a sT_ S r € ; car is I M1rC lfA7A - _ - I I 1 sYtt,,a,a� •Mk} rT" A rACIRIrAl;� ST L 1 I Y �R N O R T H T sx sz DR 5 .. ..-.._._ . .■FST BASE MAP: Thomas Guide,San Diego County, 1998,Page 1147 0 1000 2000 4000 1"=2,000' M � Scale in Feet Encinitas Town Center SITE Project No. Associates II, LLC 940028-026 Wildlife Undercrossing LOCATION Garden View Road Date Carlsbad, California MAP fin November 1999 Figure No. 1 940028-026 2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Subsurface exploration was performed on October 1, 1999. Our subsurface exploration consisted of the excavation of five trenches to depths between 5 to 13 feet below the existing ground surface. The purpose of these excavations was to evaluate the physical characteristics and engineering properties of the onsite soils at selected locations pertinent to the proposed development. The excavations allowed evaluation of the soils to be encountered at foundation elevations, the general nature of the onsite soils that may be used as compacted fills, limited evaluation and measurement of the previously placed fill soils, and provided representative samples for laboratory testing. The exploratory excavations were logged by a geologist from our firm. Representative bulk samples were obtained for laboratory testing. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2. After logging and sampling,the excavations were backfilled. Geotechnical laboratory testing was performed on representative samples to evaluate the expansion potential and Atterberg limits. Geochemical screening of the subsurface soils was also performed. A discussion of the laboratory tests performed and a summary of the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. 1 &N -3- tom 940028-026 3.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 3.1 Geologic Setting The site is located in the coastal section of the Peninsular Range Province, a geomorphic province with a long and active geologic history throughout Southern California. Throughout the last 54 million years, the area known as "San Diego Embayment" has undergone several episodes of marine inundation and subsequent marine regression, resulting in the deposition of a thick sequence of marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks on the basement rock of the Southern California batholith. Gradual emergence of the region from the sea occurred in Pleistocene time, and numerous wave- cut platforms, most of which were covered by relatively thin marine and nonmarine terrace deposits, formed as the sea receded from the land. Accelerated fluvial erosion during periods of heavy rainfall, coupled with the lowering of the base sea level during Quaternary times, resulted in the rolling hills, mesas, and deeply incised canyons which characterize the landforms we see in the general site area today.. . 3.2 Site-Specific Geology Based on our subsurface exploration and review of pertinent geologic literature and maps, the bedrock unit underlying the site consists of the Tertiary Torrey Sandstone. Slopewash and Artificial Fill were also encountered on the site. A brief description of the geologic units encountered on the site is presented below. Geologic contacts between the units are mapped on the Trench Location Map(Figure 2). 3.2.1 Artificial Fill Documented(Map Symbol—Afd Engineered fill soils were encountered during this investigation in trenches T-4 and T-5. Some additional fills are currently being placed on other parts of the site as part of the ongoing import activities for the Encinitas Town Center Plaza-2 project. Observation and testing during placement and compaction of these soils is being performed by representatives of Leighton and Associates on an ongoing basis. As encountered during this investigation, these soils generally consisted of distinct 8 to 12 inch thick lifts of reddish, brown, brown and light brown, damp, dense, silty, fine to coarse sand. Scattered gravel sized clast were common throughout. Artificial fill thickness will most likely vary slightly from what is depicted on the attached trench logs as fill placement is actively ongoing as of the issuance of this report. 3.2.2 Quaternary Slope Wash(Map Symbol—Osw Slope wash was encountered in Trenches T-1, T-2, and T-3 and is likely to be encountered at various locations along the western portion of the property. The westerly portion of the L�k-4- � 940028-026 site slopes down toward the east. This hillside is mantled by a variable thickness of slope wash or colluvial material. The slope wash encountered is an accumulation of poorly to well consolidated silty sands derived from the adjacent hillsides by downslope gravitational creep and sheetflow from surface runoff. The slope wash material consists of a highly variable thickness of loose to medium dense, silty, fine- to medium-grained sand. Based on evaluation of the proposed grading, the near-surface slope wash soils are considered potentially compressible in their present state and not suitable for support of settlement- sensitive improvements or additional fill soils in their present state. The slope wash soils were found to possess a very low expansion potential. These soils should be removed and may be recompacted as structural fills. 3.2.3 Tertiary Torrey Sandstone(Map Symbol—TO The Tertiary-aged Torrey Sandstone was encountered along the western boundary of the site. The Torrey Sandstone is exposed in the natural bluffs and ridges along the western property boundary and was encountered underlying the slope wash and fill materials at depth. The Torrey Sandstone is also a source material for the slope wash accumulations. The Torrey Sandstone consists of light gray to tan-brown, silty, fine-to coarse grained sandstone. This material was judged to possess a very low potential for expansion (Appendix Q and is considered suitable for use as structural fill. In addition, this formation is acceptable support of structural loads and additional fill loading. The Torrey Sandstone was encountered in Trenches T-1 through T-5 at depths ranging from 3 feet to 10 feet. 3.3 Geologic Structure Based on our field observations and the referenced geotechnical reports, the onsite formational units generally consist of massive sandstone, with bedding attitudes within a few degrees of horizontal. Localized steeper bedding which can be attributed to cross bedding can be observed in areas. Based on our field explorations and a review of published geologic maps of the site and vicinity, no faults have been mapped or were encountered on or adjacent to the site. The significance of faults is discussed in the following section on Faulting and Seismicity. 3.4 Landslidine No ancient landslides have been mapped in the immediate proximity of the proposed improvements and no evidence of landsliding was observed during our site investigation. 3.5 Ground Water Ground water was not encountered during our supplemental investigation and should not be a constraint to the proposed development. However, our experience on the adjacent site has shown that seepage conditions can be encountered at the contact between the slope wash materials and ZZZ -5- a�ftta 940028-026 the relatively dense, impermeable underlying Torrey Sandstone. For this reason, we recommend a stability fill be constructed with subdrains .installed along the heel and along the slopewash/formation contact. Should other seepage conditions be encountered, they should be brought,to-the-immediate attentiari of Leighton so that recommendations can be provided on a case 7 by_case-basis. 3.6 Expansive Soils Based upon our laboratory testing on site soils were generally found to possess a very low expansion potential. a -6- _`� 940028-026 4.0 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY 4.1 Faultinu Our discussion of faults on the site is prefaced with a discussion of California legislation and policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with faults. By definition of the California Mining and Geology Board, an active fault is a fault that has had surface displacement within Holocene time(about the last 11,000 years). The state geologist has defined a potentially active fault as any fault considered to have been active during Quaternary time (last 1,600,000 years). This definition is used in delineating Earthquake Fault Zones as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and as subsequently revised in 1997. The intent of this act is to assure that unwise urban development and certain habitable structures do not occur across the traces of active faults. The subject site is not included within any Earthquake Fault Zones as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act(Hart, 1997). Our review of available geologic literature(Appendix A) indicates that there are no known major or active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. The nearest active-regional fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 4.6 miles west of the site. 4.2 Seismicitv The site can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of southern California. Site specific evaluation of the earthquake hazard was performed using a deterministic and a probabilistic approach. A summary of our deterministic evaluation is provided in Table 1. Table 1 Seismic Parameters for Active Faults (Blake, 1996 and 1998,CDMG, 1996) Distance Maximum Credible Earthquake Fault from Fault to Moment Peak Ground Acceleration Site(Miles) Magnitude (g) Rose Canyon 4.6 6.9 0.50 Newport- 11 6.9 0.29 Inglewood Coronado Bank 20 7.4 0.25 Based on a deterministic approach, Table 1 presents the peak ground acceleration that we predict could be produced by the maximum credible earthquake. The maximum credible earthquake is defined as the maximum event that a fault is capable of producing considering the known tectonic setting. Site-specific seismic parameters reported are the distances to the causative faults, earthquake magnitudes, and expected peak ground accelerations. As indicated in Table 1, the �!�I�i�A=,= -7- _tea 940028-026 Rose Canyon fault zone is considered to have the most significant affect at the site from a design standpoint. The maximum credible earthquake is expected to produce a peak ground surface acceleration at the site of 0.50g. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is considered a type B seismic source according to Table 16-U of the 1997 Uniform Building Code(UBC). From a probabilistic approach, the design ground motion for this project (ICBO, 1997, Section 1629) is the ground motion having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years. This ground motion is referred to as the maximum probable ground motion (CBSC, 1998). A maximum probable ground motion of 0.26g is predicted for the site. The earthquake source data used for probabilistic determination of the design ground motion was obtained from the California Division of Mining and Geology(CDMG, Open File Report 96-08). The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the Uniform Building Code and state-of-the-art seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. The site is located within Seismic Zone 4 as designated by the Uniform Building Code (ICBO, 1997, Figure 16-2). The soil profile designation for the building pad sites are estimated to be type Sc per the 1997 UBC, Table 16-J. Near source factors Na and Nv for the site equal to 1.0 and 1.1, respectively, are appropriate based on the seismic setting and criteria of Tables 16-S and 16-T of the 1997 UBC. Secondary effects that can be associated with severe ground shaking following a relatively large earthquake include shallow ground rupture, soil liquefaction and dynamic settlement, seiches and tsunamis. These secondary effects of seismic shaking are discussed in the following sections. 4.2.1 Shallow Ground Rupture Ground rupture because of active faulting is not likely to occur on site due to the absence of known active faults. Cracking due to shaking from distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibility at any site. 4.2.2 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction and dynamic settlement of soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Both research and historical data indicate that loose, saturated, granular soils are susceptible to liquefaction and dynamic settlement. Liquefaction is typified by a total loss of shear strength in the affected soil layer,thereby causing the soil to liquefy. This effect may be manifested by excessive settlements and sand boils at the ground surface. The onsite Artificial Fill and Torrey Sandstone Formation materials encountered during our investigation are not considered liquefiable due to their physical characteristics and unsaturated condition. The Torrey Sandstone Formation, which may be below the water table at depth, is not considered liquefiable due to its very high-density characteristics and cemented nature. 1 -8- �� 940028-026 4.2.3 Tsunamis and Seiches Based on the distance between the site and large, open bodies of water, and the elevation of the site with respect to sea level, the possibility of seiches and/or tsunamis is considered to be very low. -9- _`� 940028-026 5.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation of the site, it is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. The following is a summary of the significant geotechnical factors that we expect may affect development of the site. • Active faults are not known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. • A peak ground acceleration of 0.50g is predicted as a result of the maximum credible earthquake along the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. By probabilistic methods, a peak ground acceleration of 0.26g is predicted as the maximum probable ground motion. • Based on subsurface exploration of the formational materials, artificial fills, and surficial soils present on the site, we anticipate that these materials should be generally rippable with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. However, concretionary and cemented layers within the Torrey Sandstone could potentially require heavy ripping or breaking during deeper excavations (Section 6.1.2). • Based on laboratory testing and visual classification, onsite soil materials are believed to generally possess an expansion index less than 20 (very low). • Laboratory test results indicate the onsite soils have a negligible potential for sulfate attack on concrete and have a low potential for acid (pH) attack on concrete and buried uncoated metal conduits. Chloride content and resistivity tests suggest mild to moderate corrosivity to buried metal pipe. A corrosion engineer should be consulted for recommendations for mitigation of corrosion. The undercrossing supplier should also review the geochemical results and provide appropriate corrosion protection. ■ The existing onsite soils appear to be suitable material for use as compacted fill provided they are relatively free of organic material, debris, and rock fragments larger than 6 inches in maximum dimension. ■ Ground water was not encountered during our investigation. We suspect seepage may develop within the slope west of Garden View Road at the contact between the slopewash and Torrey Sandstone materials. We recommend a stability fill _Niff appropriate drainage measures be constructed along the cut slope. ■ Proposed grading for the retaining walls west of Garden View Road is expected to expose formational materials within the foundation excavations. -10- MENU 940028-026 ■ Proposed grading for the retaining walls east of Garden View Road.is expected to expose formational and artificial fill materials within the foundation excavations. Measures to mitigate-differential -- _.._ settlement that might result are recommended. - - ■ Proposed grading for the undercrossing beneath Garden View Road is expected to expose formational materials at the level of the subgrade excavation. 940028-026 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Earthwork We anticipate that earthwork at the site will consist of site preparation, excavation, and fill operations. We recommend that earthwork on the site be performed in accordance with the following recommendations and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading included in Appendix D. In case of conflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those in Appendix D. 6.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to grading, all areas to receive structural fill, engineered structures, or hardscape should be cleared of surface and subsurface obstructions, including any existing debris and undocumented or loose fill soils, and stripped of vegetation. Removals should extend the competent formational soils or competent engineered fill. Removed vegetation and debris should be properly disposed off site. All areas to receive fill and/or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to near-optimum moisture conditions, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 6.1.2 Excavations and Oversize Material Shallow excavations of the onsite materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. Localized heavy ripping or breaking_ may be required if cemented and concretionary lenses are encountered in deeper excavation. Excavation for utilities may also be difficult in some areas. Shallow, temporary excavations, such as utility trenches with vertical sides, in the engineered fill and formational materials should remain stable for the period required to construct the utility, provided they are free of adverse geologic conditions. In accordance with OSHA requirements, excavations deeper than 5 feet should be shored or be laid back to if workers are to enter such excavations. Temporary sloping gradients should be determined in the field by a "competent person" as defined by OSHA. For preliminary planning, sloping of surficial soils at 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) may be assumed. Excavations greater than 20 feet in height will require an alternative sloping plan or shoring plan prepared by a California registered civil engineer. We anticipate that scattered amounts of oversize material may be generated during excavation of the cemented lenses within the Torrey Sandstone. Recommendations for treatment of oversize material are included in the attached General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading (Appendix D). In addition, oversize material may be utilized in approved surface applications or hauled off site. -12- =�� 940028-026 6.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction All fill soils should be brought to a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on laboratory standard ASTM Test Method D1557-91. All backfill on the sides and within 2 feet of the top of undercrossing should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent. In pavement areas, the upper 12 inches of subgrade and all aggregate base should be compacted also to at least 95 percent. The optimum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Fills placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) should be keyed and benched into competent formational soils as indicated in the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading presented in Appendix D. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with the current City of Encinitas grading ordinances, sound construction practice, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading presented in Appendix D. 6.1.4 Removal of Unsuitable Soils Loose and weathered soils overlying formational materials are not mapped on the Trench Location Map(Figure 2). Where encountered during grading, these soils should also be removed and recompacted prior to placement of additional fills or surface improvements. - 6.1.5 Transition Mitigation From review of the rough grading plan (O'Day Consultants, 1999), we expect that grading will create a transition from cut to fill materials beneath the retaining walls that extend along the wildlife corridor east of Garden View Road. To accommodate this condition we recommend walls be constructed with joints.to accommodate differential settlement of 1/4-inch over 20 feet. 6.2 Conventional Foundation and Slab Considerations Foundations and slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations and the following recommendations. These recommendations assume that the soils encountered within 5 feet of pad grade have a very low to medium potential for expansion. -13- M 940028-026 6.2.1 Shallow Spread Footings Foundations The proposed structures may be supported by conventional, continuous perimeter, or isolated spread footings. Footings should extend a minimum of 18 inches beneath the lowest adjacent finish grade. At these depths, footings founded in properly compacted fill soils may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. Foundations founded in competent Torrey Sandstone materials may be designed for and allowable bearing capacity of 4,000 psf. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by 1,000 psf for each additional foot of burial, to a maximum of 6,000 psf. The allowable pressures may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. The minimum recommended width of footings is 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for square or round footings. Footings should be designed in accordance with the structural engineer's requirements and have a minimum reinforcement of four No. 4 reinforcing bars (two top and two bottom). We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural footings and settlement-sensitive structures. This distance is measured from the outside edge of the footing, horizontally to the slope face (or to the face of a retaining wall)and should be a minimum of H/2, where H is the slope height(in feet). The setback should not be less than 10 feet and need not be greater than 15 feet. Please note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pavements, etc.) constructed within this setback area may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement. Appropriate measures should be incorporated into the project design by the civil engineer to assume that scour of the foundation soils does not occur. 6.2.2 Slabs-On-Grade The slab-on-grade should be at least 5 inches thick and be reinforced with No. 3 rebars 18 inches on center each way (minimum), placed at mid-height in the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 2-inch layer of clean sand or clean crushed gravel. We recommend control joints be provided across the slab at appropriate intervals as designed by the project architect. The potential for slab cracking may be reduced by careful control of water/cement ratios. The contractor should take appropriate curing precautions during the pouring of concrete in hot weather to minimize cracking of slabs. All slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. If heavy vehicle or equipment loading is proposed for the slabs, greater thickness and increased reinforcing may be required. -14- �� 940028-026 6.2.3 Settlement The recommended allowable-bearing capacity is based on maximum total and differential settlements of 3/4 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively. Since settlements are a function of footing size and contact bearing pressures, some differential settlement can be expected between adjacent columns or walls where a large differential loading condition exists. With increased footing depth to width ratios, differential settlement should be less. 6.4 Mat Foundations A soil modulus of 200 pounds per cubic inch is recommended for design of mat foundations. The mat foundation should be designed by the project structural engineer utilizing parameters outlined for above and an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. 6.5 Lateral Earth Pressures For design purposes, the following lateral earth pressure values for level or sloping backfill are recommended for walls backfilled with very low (EI <20) expansion potential. Select materials should be used within the zone defined by a 1:1 plane extending up from the base of the wall. Table 2 Static Equivalent Fluid Weight(pcf) Conditions Level 2:1 Slope Active 35 55 At-Rest 55 85 Passive 350* 150 (Maximum of 3 ksf) (sloping down) Unrestrained (yielding) cantilever walls up to 25 feet in height may be designed for an active equivalent pressure value provided above. In the design of walls restrained from movement at the top (nonyielding), the at-rest pressures should be used. Due to the increased compaction associated with construction of the undercrossing, design for at-rest conditions is recommended for walls influenced by pipe zone backfill. If conditions other than those covered herein are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual case basis by the geotechnical engineer. A surcharge load for a restrained or unrestrained wall resulting from automobile and truck traffic may be assumed to be equivalent to a uniform pressure of 75 psf and 200 psf, respectively, which is in addition to the equivalent fluid pressure given above. For other uniform surcharge loads, a uniform pressure equal to 0.35q should be applied to the wall (where q is the surcharge pressure in psf). Surcharge from heavy moving trucks can -15- MAa 940028-026 be analyzed by this office once design traffic loads are determined. The wall pressures assume walls are backfilled with free draining materials and water is not allowed to accommodate behind walls. A typical drainage design is contained in Appendix D. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations and reinforced in accordance with structural considerations. For all retaining walls, we recommend a minimum horizontal distance from the outside base of the footing to daylight of 10 feet. Lateral soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value provided above. Further, for sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.33 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. These values may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistance provided that the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. 6.6 Geochemical Considerations Geochemical screening of the onsite soils was performed. The screening is meant to serve as an indicator for the design professionals in determining the level of input necessary from a qualified corrosion engineer. Review of geochemical test results by a corrosion engineer is recommended. Concrete in direct contact with soil or water that contains a high concentration of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical deterioration commonly known as "sulfate attack." Soluble sulfate results (Appendix C) indicated a soluble sulfate content of 0.04 percent. Uniform Building Code Table 19-A-4 provides minimum concrete design requirements based on sulfate exposure conditions. Although test results indicate negligible exposure according to Table 19-A-4, we recommend moderate exposure conditions be assumed. Additional testing of the finish grade soils should be performed. ' Our geochemical testing included pH, chloride content, and resistivity testing on samples of subgrade soils(Appendix Q. Based on our results,the site soils are believed to present a mild to moderately corrosive environment to buried metal piping and conduits. We recommend the undercrossing supplier review geochemical test results and provide necessary corrosion protection. A corrosive engineer should be consulted to provide additional recommendations to mitigate corrosion. 6.7 Undercrossint If backfill is to be placed at the inside base of the undercrossing,the backfill soils should consist of granular soils with a very low to low expansion potential (a less than 30 per UBC 18-2). In order to avoid an accumulation of--water,-we.recommrp a subdrain be Installed at the low point of_the structure. `The subdrain should consist of a minimum of 1-cubic foot of clean 3/44neh.. gravel wrapped in Mirafi 140N geofabric or equivalent and outlet into a ston,ndrain or some other collective drainage system. As an alternative, a linear slotted drain may be used at both entrances to the tunnel to intercept surface water provided all tunnel joints are waterproofed. -16- ��`Mm 940028-026 Based on our experience, there has been previous concern over the deflection of the arch(s) that may occur as part of site construction. Therefore, we recommend the implementation of a monitoring program during site construction. This should include monitoring during construction to verify that the observed deflections are within 2 percent the deflections in accordance with ASTM D798-88 (shape control). During installation, we recommend that the contractor implement a deflection monitoring program that can be monitored continuously throughout the construction process by the contractor, civil and geotechnical engineer and representative of the City of Encinitas. In addition, the top of the arch should be surveyed at various locations by the project civil engineer prior to and during backfilling operations. All backfill operations shall be performed to comply with the relative compaction recommendations previously stated. Where manufacturer's requirements differ from those contained in this report, this office should be advised of the conflict so that revised recommendations can be developed. After backfill operations are complete and prior to installation of utilities above the arch, we recommend that load testing of the arch be performed. The arch should be loaded to design loading (H-20) and mondQred_IQ deflection b the Ciiy inspector,�civil and geotechnical,_.�„ -. engineers The civil en ineejr=wjj1 prpvj¢e,t�lerable 1_ut�ior, etiop of theroposed utilities on the project plans Should these deflections be exceeded, additional recommendations 0 protect the p>oposed utilities will be warranted. If measured deflections are within acceptable tolerances, installation of the proposed utilities may proceed after written approval is received. €' During construction of the undercrossing, continuous observation and testing of the backfill mf`' process should be performed. In addition, prior to backfill, the chemical characteristics of the proposed backfill soils should be tested prior to use to assure conformance with the project specifications and the recommendations provided herein. 6.8 Stability Fill We understand the finish slopes up to 55 feet in height are planned at inclinations of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). To mitigate the potential for seepage at the slope wash/formation contact, we recommend a stability fill be constructed to replace the slope wash materials in the cut slope. Figures 3 and 4 show the limits and details of the recommended stability fill with two horizontal back drains. Also provided on Figure 3 are keyway elevations for the stability fill. The elevations assume the keyway is founded entirely on formational materials. If slopewash remains at the elevation indicated, deeper excavation will be required as appropriate. 6.8.1 Deep-Seated Stability The proposed configuration was analyzed for gross stability. Analysis of the proposed slope configuration was performed using the computer program GSlope. Based on our field observations and previous testing of similar materials. strength parameters of 0 _ 32 and c = 100 psf were used for Artificial Fills. Our analysis indicates that the -17- _`L 940028-026 proposed slopes have a calculated factor of safety of 1.5 or greater, with respect to potential deep rotational failure. We recommend that the geotechnical consultant document and geologically map all excavations during grading. The purpose of this mapping is to substantiate the geologic conditions assumed in our analysis. Additional investigation and stability analysis may be required if unanticipated or adverse conditions are encountered. 6.8.2 Surficial Slone Stability Methods of slope stabilization should be implemented as soon as practical to reduce the potential for erosion. Erosion and/or surficial failure potential of fill slopes may be reduced if the measures discussed in the project Geotechnical Investigation are implemented during design and construction(Leighton, 1996). 6.9 Surface Drainage and Erosion Surface drainage should be controlled at all times. The proposed structures should have appropriate drainage systems to collect roof runoff. Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface water away from the structures toward the street or suitable drainage facilities. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing a minimum 2 percent gradient from the structures. Below grade planters should not be situated adjacent to structures or pavements unless provisions for drainage such as catch basins and drains are made. In general, ponding of water should be avoided adjacent to structures or pavements. To help reduce the potential for excessive erosion of graded slopes, we recommend berms and/or swales be provided along the top of the slopes and lot drainage directed such that surface runoff on the slope faces is minimized. Protective measures to mitigate excessive site erosion during construction should also be implemented in accordance with the latest City of Encinitas grading ordinances. 6.10 Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions disclosed by widely spaced excavations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction. Construction observation of all onsite excavations and field density testing of all compacted fill should be performed by a representative of this office so that construction is in accordance with the recommendations of this report. We recommend that cut slopes be mapped by a geologist during grading for the presence of potentially adverse geologic conditions. L��k'-18- 2 940028-026 6.11 Plan Review Grading and foundation plans should be checked by Leighton and Associates before grading to see that the recommendations in this report are incorporated in project plans. Z &W n i 940028-026 7.0 LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained from a limited number of observations, site visits, excavations, samples, and tests. Such information is by necessity incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differing geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. 1 _- -20- ._`= v bD Ne cl: vj _ # at co � c 'O Q co ca j `,\ iJ Im1GOirp� o Z o m C w O a.j LD -o +. w .� d V) w o n J Ale, : Q ?� cq 4, (U two `� , rte.., , Q`.1 1•'t, 1'1. v �n m � 0000 In �� kn U aroma u 4)4) r> C> O 4j=) awro _ 3.O L7 ILD U U 41 Qj TiZ r _ Q v gig �, o i t'^• -. � � 156• � � v as c ' ..�� u) a C CZ CZ- o a�z° H - - "�o q? c� tl ,� C o � T C � c L U C L R �i I ♦ t I a. N W in J 4 IO2 1 ii v w 1 ' R n w� V� .to J V VI f0 L 4.0 is - J000 Lj Q L / I LLL V V R V ar a) R H "��0 ol I 0 R 14 tQ ' °o - . W W o i; 'A HE PIZ 20'MIN. _=====Z ------4— OUTLET PIPES SHALL BE __ 6"�NON-PERFORATED PIPE, ___ —— DISCHARGE TO SUITABLE =———— — _= BACKCUT L•1 PROTECTED OUTLET —_______— - OR FLATTER — _____________y._ .p ———————————— Z=7= — /PROVIDE HORIZONTAL PANEL DRAIN (J DRAIN 302,OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)TO2FEET BELOW _—_—_-----_-----_--- AND ABOVE SLOPE WASH/ _______zr / FORMATION CONTACT AS DIRECTED -------------------- .e_ / BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER r5j 0-17o MI IN I G E/ KEY�� POSITIVE SEAL TOP HO TIED VERY FET SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT FILTER FABRIC THE JOINT o e (MIRAFI 140 OR e J5% o APPROVED OUTLET PIPE \ MIN~ e EQUIVALENT) (NON-PERFORATED _. T-CONNECTION FOR CALTRANS CLASS 11 COLLECTOR PIPE TO PERMEABLE OR#2 ROCK OUTLET PIPE (3f 3/ft)WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION-Subdrain collector pipe shall be installed with perforations down or,unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot. Perforations shall be '/,"to '/"if drilled holes are used. All subdrain pipes shall have a gradient at least 2%towards the outlet. • SUBDRAIN PIPE-6-inch diameter subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751,SDR 23.5 or ASTM 1527, Schedule 40,or ASTM D3034, SDR 23.5,Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic(PVC)pipe. PROJECT No. 940028-026 STABILITY FILL DETAIL DATE November 1999 Leighton andAssoclates,inc. FIGURE No. 4 a 940028-026 APPENDIX A REFERENCES Blake, 1996, EQFAULT, Version 2.2. , 1998,FRISKSP, Version 3.01. CDMG, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, Open-File Report, 96-08. Hart, 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 with Index to Special Study Zone Maps, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997,Uniform Building Code. Kennedy, M.P., 1978, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 200. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1996, Geotechnical Investigation, Encinitas Ranch-Plaza 2, Encinitas Ranch, TM 94-066, Encinitas,California,Project No. 4940028-008,dated May 17, 1996. PLANS O'Day Consultants, 1999, Preliminary Grading Plan for Encinitas Ranch, Green Valley Unit II, City of Encinitas, Sheet 3a, plot dated October 27, 1999. A-1 NoText Ln U W O iZ W CT W Cn W CD 1-4 C`")l--4 CZ) ~ w V) Ile Q¢oo a uj C) Q_ aow� z w z z J U CZ O -i J�C--)U- z CY Ez F¢—CD wU w w ro O:f z Ln z CD C:) m li C3 CD z w U o CD N w J Of U ~ F--4 O 3 w J Z N 4--3 o Of o ZD CDr I— c� 3 CW.'3 a� w •r � C) 4-3 CU r— J Q) LLJ li 4- C= 4 Cll U Q >>U CU 4--) of Y tlD O t3 O C7 CV � i • 1 cnra E (a 3 N O to >>C •• CU N 4-> O -00 N N •r O O L - CU ra 4--) CT> ra U CT ra Or O 1 ) Ind r • JWJ In E �. L 3 -•r - 4--) O f1 cn CD--O 4--) E N in V CU CD :3 ra E - f— --0 O f2O� O L Z rEa-0 � �.� O +•-) o _0 O 70 CU N r i >>L O L _ L U 0- S=Y r 4- W O CO CC O Q) N Q U U L3r X >> U CU ;:I- W (/) _ 4- N 0 0-0 to W •r a--) C-r Z C= Ln 0 O C In > f— O •r Y U) O E Q) M -0 (1) 3 U Q L O N Z 1 4--) ra 3 1] r C Q 3 ra CV 00 N C/) O L I 1p CY) W 4--) CU r- r ro CV o (31 O- C- E �- N o.-C o c) _0 W a) L ra I r� . J r O = Q:� •r- r—CO (n J +--) ra Orf Z a CVO Cu o } o 0 H wrno w Z o Of --4 Cy-, Q Q � Q w p 0 Q o � o� W E E� S � � a ra Z5 • • W Z Z •1--) L V') U U E +� ►U� aj Q) O d O O � OJT + Cif C1 a W W Cr) CO Q 501-A - (10/90) Leighton & Associates a --4- W N U W CT V) Q) LL CT W Cl) \� CV• 4 4 O F- Of ' \ W tnCtle Q�QO Of O a CZ r-,'W C) Z W Z Z J S Z CU C)C J C-) Ez ra Cv JOOL~- W W ra F-�W U CY W Cn to CD CD Q CO H CD Z c/ W V O O ::D c/) c/) W J Fcx�-- V_ CD F- CD Ll•i C7 J Z N 4--) o Cr O ZD CDr F- to ui 3 (D a) W •r CZ CD +-) C a)r- >> (n (U a) C a) r LL ra ra rro C Q m O C3 L O Li LOO N � � +I to ra ra 3 N O to (D ra 4--) O CT> ra U CT ra CT QJ U r to 3 Or O +-) J W J r O d--) N E r; Cl 0-- LO 3 CZ-O N CD--O+-) ECU LO Q) N ra E CZC7t O L Z rEa� CT) �4-) r-1 �• O 1 _O _0 O _0 Q) F- t N r L U CL }) r 4- W O :3 V m 3 O4-J t%7 4- N m 0-0 to W .- •r +-) C•r Z C to r a) ra > O 3 0 O C to F- O S S 3 to (n L-O •r �L Cn O E Q) O :Q N 3 U Q L = N Z 1 +-) ra 3 -0 C Q 3 ra CV CO 'u N Cn O S- 1 t0 Cal W i-> Q)r- r- C ra CV O CT 0 S E >- --0 N O-4 1 O 0) _0 W Q) C M 1 ^ '-•r J 'r O C Of 1- •r r-CO i to J +) ra CY Z a-N a) O O O O L f-A >- F- r W Cal O W Z O F- C)f r--i Q z •' C < W 0 t--i - W L o F- - F- O to CU O Q O of i W N-0'-7 W Orf ra :3 • • C� F- (PD W Z Z +-) LY C to 4--) 4-) Q) U W U U U E ► + QJ O CZ CD� S .� r-,) CD a O Cl- Cl-W W F- CD CD Q 501-A - (10/90) Leighton & Associates r 4- (/7 Q)v W m (•n H �� F'-- L- p of n W to T2 O Q F-C:)� CL •r � O O S3� O a F- oFw-wp Z W Z Z J C3 N pZDS J U Z C1 0 J CC CD�LL W W r Z a O W U F- w C/7 3 O O Q ~ F i W F- Z CO O Z Cn w U E p O V) C/') Cn Z J W CC CD U ~ O�~+ 3 3 cr� O� O w Cu w r Cl- C) N J (3) (1) LL- 4-- I` 4-•3 (1) U mMCD � O L¢ +I cn ra ra 3 to O cn 00 tOtOn a � 0 V) O O L >-)4--) CD ro a--3 O 0 4-j 4 CD> ra O m ro m Q) U - vrDi i 0- O 4-J N ,- W J •r :3 a--) In E O Q) Q) ra E F- -'0 O '0 11 , Q-0 S O 0 r O '0 O -0 Q O >,L (1) L _NL S L U C- r N•r J t O CO O Q) (1) Q <� U U L3� X >> U _ O F� Cn N LLJ 40- N p O_0 to W .�r CD 4-) C ra O 3N S 3 N V) V) oL-O •r -NZ Cn O E Q) p -0 Q) 3 M 3 -a•- C Q 3rru N Cp CO W + 0 Q) to O L ra N O Ol Cl. — E >- r- N O r--•I i O 0) _0 W Q) L M � r� r-i I O C C CC r-DD Ln _J a- M Qf Z CL(V (1) o O L r i >- U o Q) w 00. M w z Of Q z Q w cl) Q `O w N Q) 0 p p w M W E E F- vU � ra O W z z +� S_- V) Of +-)+-) Q) U W U U U E p r� •r O F- CL O O = I L i- 0- O CLaw w� O CO Q 501-A - (10/90) Leighton & Associates N U S-_ d W Ql N N— w Ol W r LL- OO p ~ w V)ae F-w o 0_ Cn ri O a I=3wp Z a o F-w S Z O O O J U �-+ Q O -i O O w w rz ¢c��z� Caf z N w C)CD Lu m LL- C) z N CO W C-) E CZ)V N N O Z J w U ~ CD w 00 Q F- N w N C-'3 w •r d O J O � � "O N (D�O w N LL- N ) L r QJ 00 I�(D CO C N to N L¢L Y 14- O N N (3) O � c) O ONru E N LV L 0 , L ra O rp -0 o � 30-0 O U r 0 � 0 1 N CO a--) +-� Q)> rB 4-3--3 -S-> ru - S O U t/) O 0- 0 a--) r L U _1 w J r r N r- V) N O E 4- L!7 S• U U _ _ 0 ri L Z -O O N >� �� P. ..,U 0- + N E Lil 'O 1-1 d U CO U ri L 4- O U N N LLJ 4- N � Ow 00 rru N W 04- r- Q) Z LO L O v•r 4---- E v ) 3 3 U C ) r- O+N-) O C:) p rB O L 4- U N CO V) 4--) 1 l0 Ol r r l/7 3 rp MNO 0) J -04--) 4 >- O L N O--i J r S 4J N W r- :3 ro I 1-- 121 F--( N E rp af --0 CO O LL Z �r N U O r S- O L .-i J � O U O O Q F- W Q)m LLl U Q < �--� L(7 ' � Q L.i � Q CO Z L m W O F- O af LC-) W � E E Q W O F-- � Z Z 4-) W L N O:f 4--) +, U U w U U U E �- M r- 4J O F- Cl- 00 O J r L L CT O� maw w O CD Q 501-A - (10/90) Leighton & Associates >, r-4-- cn U F- Lf) Q�J LL J 0l CT W p LL- 00 O ~ W 4--)OR W O CD Q O" Q p O 0-F = 3wCm Z a [�f-w S z p O O J V F 0-0 0 0— w w rru QCz� F- Of LLJ z N w OOLUQ LL- c~D O Z N W V p p N z J W (Z' U r-� CD CD C7 J Z 4— QY O C=) p Q W W a_ O a -J lV a N V) N W Q "C3 N Q + CU LL Se O LO N j m 0 CY C\j+1 CU r6 _0 4-) /7 C i ... cn L O w E ru CT if � . -0O O S 03U� 0 E +-)•r0 r", O QJ +J-4-) r CT> rQ r I Y y CT W U v) CU ra -0 to L 4-) n.-a ONE �� • .�• ,�,.� 4-3� z U U p O O (V Cll CU W Igo O [Y1 CV 0) N 4 - J _ V U � ..- O N LLJ p E N X >�. CV O W CO rO w 04-3 i N Z -0 CU Z r In L C O r O � 4 � 4- � E C% 3N -") •r- 3 U) E C) O 3 U (j — O +--) O Z L� CV C O D CU-0� U Q p -.) rII CVO 4--y O L N O r--i J r— Cll to W r r'-CO w r r- z CZ CV CU O r-Cn U O O O L '-i J F— f- Q } Q W CT p w U L < � Q CO Z W w Q C� Iw- Gb Cr Z Z +-y W S_- Of +�+-> N V W U CU N CZ CD O O O Z3 �� a L t. CT O < �CZw Lj O CD Q 501-A - (10/90) Leighton & Associates 940028-026 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg Limits were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D423 for engineering classification of the fine-grained materials and presented in the table below: Plastic Plastic USCS Sample Location L Liquid Limit(%) Limit(%) Index(%) Soil Classification T-1, 7'— 10' - Non-Plastic - SM Chloride Testine: Representative soil samples were obtained for testing for chloride content in accordance with California Test Method 422. The results are presented in the following table. Sample Number Chloride Content Potential for Chloride Attack T-2,7'— 10' 208 Low to Moderate T-2, 1F— 12' 169 Low to Moderate If Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation or approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Compacted Dry Expansion Expansion Sample Location Sample Description Density(pcf) Index Potential T-1, 7'— 10' Light brown, silty,fine sand 105.1 0 Very Low T-4,3'—5' Reddish brown, silty,fine to 115.0 0 Very Low coarse sand C-1 940028-026 Laboratory Testing Procedures(Continued) Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with California Test Method 643. The results are presented in the table below: Sample Sample Location Description pH J Minimum Resistivit=(ohms-cm) T-2, 7'— 10' Light brown,silty,fine 6.2 4 672 to coarse sand T-2, 11'— 12' Yellow brown,fine to 6.2 5,427 medium sand Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by standard geochemical methods. The test results are presented in the table below: Sulfate Potential Degree of Sample Location Sample Description Content(%) Sulfate Attack* T-2,7'—10' Light brown,silty,fine to coarse sand 443 Negligible T-2, 11' — 12' Yellow brown,fine to medium sand 366 Negligible * Based on the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code, Table No. 19-A-4, prepared by the International Conference of Building Officials(ICBO, 1997). C-2 NoText Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Pagel of 6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING 1.0 General 1.1 Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record Prior to commencement of work,the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s)and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings,conclusions, and recommendationsprior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan"prepared by the Earthwork Contractor(Contractor)and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation,mapping,and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations,the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase,the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnicallyobserved,mapped,elevations recorded,and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed,bottoms of all "remedial removal'areas,all key bottoms,and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioningand processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2 of 6 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor. The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, -experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of"spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant,unsatisfactory conditions,such as unsuitable soil,improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction,insufficient buttress key size,adverse weather,etc.,are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications,the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner,governing agencies,and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials(by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered,the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area,and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California,most refined petroleum products(gasoline, diesel fuel,motor oil,grease,coolant,etc.)have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor,punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORKAND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 of 6 2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat,and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s)and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Be n_chines Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units),the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material t.as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas,key bottoms,and benches,shall be observed,mapped,elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas,keys,and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 GeneraL• Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential,or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock,or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials,and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 IuMort: If importing of fill material is required for grading,proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the 3030.1091 Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 of 6 Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours_(2 working days)before importing begins so that its suitabilitycan be determinedand appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placementand Compaction 4.1 Fill Lavers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughlyto attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered,dried back,blended,and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned,mixed, and evenly spread,it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading,relative compaction of the fill,out to the slope face,shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testine Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction(such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrockbenches). 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition,as a guideline,at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPE CIFICATIONS Page 5 of 6 4.7 Compaction Test Locatic ns: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal ;oordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyc-to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum,two grade stal es within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potenti,I test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be insta.ied in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard I-etails. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in sub( rain extent, location,grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over--(xcavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during 1 xading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actua extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field eva uation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded,the cut p 3rtion of the slope shall be made, evaluated,and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope,unless otherwise recommei ded by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall fol':)w all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill, f utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard "I aecifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equiv, lent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the zonduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum c *90 percent of maximum from I foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 The jetting of the beddi ig around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 The Geotechnical Consul ant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made f revery 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates,Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6 of 6 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall _not exceed those allowed in the. Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 3030.1094 / PROJECTED PLANE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GR(XM FILL SLOPE REMOVE NATURAL W TV1PICAL UNSUITABLE GROUND BENCH T—BE14CH MATERIAL HEIGHT KEY LOWEST BENCH LL FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE NATURAL — C TYPICAL GROUND 0 BENCH HEIGHT UNSUITABLE I MIN. MATERIAL T BENCH KEY DEPTH CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PFNoR TO FILL PLACEMENT To ASSURE CUTFACE ADECXATE GEOLOGIC coNDmoNs TO BE CONSTRUCTED pFVOR TO FILL PLACEMENT NATURAL CUT-OVER-FILL GROUND SLOPE OVERBUILT AND TRIM BACK For Subdrains See DESIGN SLOPE REMOVE Standard Detail C PROJECTED PLANE NSUITABLE TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND W TYPICAL MPACTED BENCH BENCH HEIGHT BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPES is,MI ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1 2'MIN. LOWEST BENCH WA4UM1 BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET KEY DEPTH (KEY1 LWA4LIM FILL WMTH SHALL BE 9 FEET KEYING AND BENCHING GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING Tj SPECIFICAMNS REV.411 IM STANDARD DETAILS A FINISH GRADE — --------------- ---- -------4- ------ N. ET ------------ - - ------------ Oversize rock Is larger than 8 inches In largest dimension. Excavate a trench in the compacted fflf deep enough to bury all the rock. BaCMII with granular soil ed or flooded In place to ffN all the voi&, DO not bUrY rock within 10 feet of finish grade. Windrow of buried rock Shan be para"to the finished slope M. ELEVATION A-A' PROFILE ALONG WINDROW JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL OVERSIZE GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING ROCK DISPOSAL SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B NATURAL GROUND REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL 2' MIN. OVERLAP FROM THE TOF HOG RING 71ED EVERY 6 FEET CALTRANS CLASS 11 PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK FILTER FABRIC FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED '4'�COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL EQUIVALENT) BE MINIMUM r DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATEr CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL D PERFORATED PIPE FOR PIPE SPECIFICATION DESIGN FINISHED GRADE 10' MIN. BACKFILL I ,-- FILTER FABRIC 2% (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED 20' MIN. EQUIVALENT) .—NON-PERFORATrEED�q 5 #2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER 6-# MIN. FABRIC OR CALTRANS CLASS 11 CANYON SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS c IS- MIN. OUTLET PIPES -- 4'4 NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY, ------ 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY =_____-- BACKCUT 1:1 OR FLATTER _ 296--_— BENCHING --_ _____ —______._-- — . KEY 1 ± _—___ ---' _ RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL SOIL BACKFILL. COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT;RELATIVE COMPACTION* RETAINING WALL =======-_=_ __--- 0 _- 0 6: ' =='_- FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE' WALL WATERPROOFING ( OVERLAP RLAP PER ARCHITECT'S o 0 0 === (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED SPECIFICATIONS I ___= EQUIVALENT)`** o 1' MIN. =_== 314•-1-1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL** F INISH GRADE O 4"-(MIND DIAMETER PERFORATED E_D_ 0 0 PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT) WITH PERFORATIONS E-a _-` ------ ORIENTED:DOWN AS DEPICTED __ fi .. F w 'e ( ROLOGY & HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 3 or ITAS RANCH fi �i mi as ............ t n� Prepared By: ERS & ASSOCIATES Civil Engineering, Inc. ' PLANNING•ENGINEERING•SURVEYING 19 Spectrum Pointe Drive,Suite 609 it-r Lake Forest,CA 92630 (949)599-0870 office(949)599-0880 fax http://www.mayerscivil.com q rCCE � wE V APR 53 2024 OGY ENGINEERiN% SERVICES HYDROL CITY OF ENCINITAS HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR PLAZA at ENCINITAS RANCH CITY OF ENCI ITAS Q'�'LoFESS/oN PREPARED UND5RTHE SUPERVISION OF: G) Coo Z No. 38474 m Exp.3131/01 ;v Dru J. Mayers, R G.E. 38474 Exp: Date: ��FOF CA01F TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................2 A. Purpose...........................................................................................................2 B. Methodology...................................................................................................2 II. STUDY AREA........................................................................................................3 A. Description......................................................................................................3 B. Existing Drainage Facilities..........................................................................3 III. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS.................................................................................4 A. General............................................................................................................4 B. Rational Method Hydrology Analysis..........................................................5 IV. PROPOSED DRAINAGE FACILITY.................................................................6 V. WATER QUALITY BASIN...................................................................................7 A. General............................................................................................................7 B. Reference........................................................................................................7 VI. 100-YEAR HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS...................................................8 A. Hydrology Area A...........................................................................................9 B. Hydrology Area B.........................................................................................10 C. Hydrology Area C ........................................................................................11 VI1. CATCH BASIN, RIP-RAP & HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS....................12 VIII. HYDROLOGY MAPS.........................................................................................13 INTRODUCTION A. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide a hydrology analysis for the Plaza @ Encinitas Ranch located within the City of Encinitas in San Diego County. This study will calculate the 100-year storm discharges to support the processing of the precise grading and improvement plans for the development site. B. Methodology The methodology used to determine the peak discharges is based upon the criteria contained in the San Diego County Hydrology Manual dated April 1993. A hydrology analysis was prepared for both the existing and developed conditions of the project site. The following work plan and analyses were undertaken in the preparation of this drainage study. All available information and improvement plans were collected. A field review of the project site was performed. The drainage areas within and tributary to the project site were defined. A hydrologic computer model was prepared based on the existing and proposed drainage patterns. The results of the study and the calculations for the hydrological analysis are presented in this report. II. STUDY AREA A. Description The proposed Plaza at Encinitas Ranch is located west of El Camino Real and north of Leucadia Boulevard in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, California. The site is bounded on the west by undeveloped natural land, to the east by a natural drainage course and El Camino Real, to the north by the construction site for a mixed-use development and to the south by Leucadia Boulevard and the Encinitas Town Center retail complex. The proposed development will include construction of three (3) commercial structures, retaining walls, the extension of Garden View Road and renaming of that portion to Calle Barcelona. A wildlife corridor and undercrossing, parking lots, and associated site improvements are also included in this project development. The site consists of approximately 15 acres B. Existing Drainage Facilities The project site presently drains in a northeasterly direction. A temporary desilting basin, located in the northeast corner of the construction site, accepts drainage from the development. This runoff is outlet into a permanent water quality basin constructed at the bottom of the slope. The majority of the site outlets into this basin, which discharges into Encinitas Creek. III. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS A. General The hydrologic studies prepared in this report utilized the rational method in accordance with the San Diego County Hydrology Manual, dated 1993. Hydrology calculations were prepared using the Rational Method Hydrology Computer Program Package" by Advanced Engineering Software based on the 1993 hydrology manual criterion. The rational method computes the peak runoff as a function of area, rainfall intensity, and a coefficient of runoff. The basic formula in the rational method is as follows: Q = CIA Where: Q = Peak runoff in cubic feet per second (cfs) C = Coefficient of runoff I = Average rainfall in inches per hour corresponding to the time of concentration A = Drainage area in acres This formula computes the peak flow rate at all points of concentration. The hydrology analysis is provided in this report. Land use in the study area is a significant factor in the development of the hydrology study in that the coefficient of runoff used in the rational method are partially dependent upon the type of surface development is within the area. The land use used in this study was based upon the development proposed for the Plaza @ Encinitas Ranch. The major factor affecting infiltration is the nature of the soil. Hydrologic soil types within the study area were determined from the Hydrologic Classification of Soils map contained in the San Diego County Hydrology Manual. The soil classification is based on the Soil Conservation Service criteria as follows: Soil Group A Low runoff potential, consisting mainly of deep, well- defined sands or gravel. Soil Group B Soils having moderate infiltration rates, consisting of moderately well drained sandy-loam soils with fine to moderate coarse textures. Soil Group C Soils having slow infiltration rates, consisting of silty- loam soils with moderate fine textures. Soil Group D High runoff potential with slow infiltration rates, consisting mainly of clay soils with a permanent high water table or shallow soils over impervious material. Rainfall intensity is expressed in inches of rainfall per hour and is developed by statistical methods from historical rainfall records. The rainfall intensity data used in this study was obtained from the curves for mean precipitation intensities included in the San Diego County Hydrology Manual. B. Rational Method Hydrology Analysis Approximately 15 acres, of the total tributary area, are being developed for commercial use. The site, after development, will contain three (3) buildings and parking area. Upon completion of the project site, the natural drainage patterns will be altered. Drainage Area "A", after development, will contain approximately 1.29 acres and produce approximately 4.30 cfs in the 100-year storm, respectively. Drainage Area "B" will contain approximately 11.16 acres and produce approximately 48.93 cfs in the 100-year storm, respectively. Drainage Area "C" will contain approximately 0.30 acres and produce approximately 1.53 cfs in the 100-year storm, respectively. The hydrology map for the developed condition analysis contains all pertinent information and is presented in this report. IV. PROPOSED DRAINAGE FACILITY The project site presently drains in a northeasterly direction. A temporary water quality basin, located in the northeast corner of the construction site, presently accepts drainage for the development. Upon completion of the project, a permanent "first flush" water quality basin will be constructed in the northeast area to accept "first flush" drainage only. The majority of the storm water run-off for the site will discharge into Encinitas Creek. The northerly portion of the project site will discharge into an existing earthen channel, flowing easterly and eventually discharging into Encinitas Creek. Drainage Area "A", located in the northwesterly portion of the project site will accept surface run-off and discharge into an existing earthen channel located north of the proposed development. The earthen channel flows in an easterly direction and eventually discharges into Encinitas Creek. The majority of the project site will be affected by Drainage Area "B". This storm drain system drains in a northeasterly direction, accepting surface run-off from the parking lots and eventually discharging into the permanent Water Quality Basin. Anything above its capacity of acceptance will empty directly into Encinitas Creek located east of the proposed project sit. The proposed storm drain system located in the far northeasterly portion of the project site is referred to as Drainage Area "C". This proposed drainage facility will include a permanent "first flush" water quality basin to accept "first flush" drainage only. (Please refer to the Hydrology Map located in Section VIII for details.) The remainder of the runoff will be intercepted by catch basins located throughout the project site. V. WATER QUALITY BASIN A. General A permanent water quality basin will be constructed B. Reference The hydrology study entitled "Drainage Study for Encinitas Ranch Phase II" dated August 20, 1998 and revised September 25, 1998, that was prepared by O'Day Consultants, Inc. is made a part hereto. �. LV l - 51998 j DRAINAGE STUDY FOR ENCINITAS RANCH PHASE II August 20, 1998 Rev. Sept. 25, 1998 J.N.: 981003 Q�pVES/p,y,,l CARpO Cl) �xp.1,.1�11Q0 1`r C j%j 2EOF s�A1.�� Timothy O. Cafrollt RCE No. 55381 Exp. 12/31/00 Prepared by: O'Day Consultants, Inc. 5900 Pasteur Court Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 931-7700 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Vicinity Map • Narrative • Rational Method Description 0 Program Process • Isopluvial Maps • Intensity Duration Chart • Curve Number Table 0 "As Graded" Rational Study • "Future Developed" Rational Study • offsite Drainage • Brow Ditches • Pollution Control Design Direct Runoff Chart • Desilt Basin Design • Desilt Basin Capacity Table • Standpipe Chart • Spillway Design • Dewatering Calc' s . • Hydrology Maps J Introduction This report contains hydrologic and other related supporting calculations necessary to properly design the various drainage facilities, both interim and future, for Encinitas Ranch Phase II mass grading. This report includes sections covering the future and interim runoff, the permanent pollution control basin, and the temporary desilt basin. Project Location The project site is located along Leucadia Blvd. in the northern portion of the City of Encinitas at the southerly boundary of the City of Carlsbad just west of E1 Camino Real . This site is due north of the recently completed Encinitas Town Center shopping center. Description The site area is approximately 15 acres and over 95% of the site is previously graded. The site was used as a borrow pit and is now being brought to grade for a future shopping center. A small area of native vegetation flows onto the site, being intercepted by brow ditches . Runoff for this project was studied to size both the interim drainage requirements for the mass graded condition, and for any future drainage needs after the site is improved. It was assumed the site would be developed per the approved master plan and which calls for the land usage to be commercial . This site will also be used to perform permanent pollution control for this site and a portion of the existing Encinitas Town Center drainage basin, as shown in the Drainage Study for Encinitas Ranch Units 1 and 3 . This study looks into the requirements for a pollution control basing designed to accept the first flush which is taken to be a half inch rainfall . This half inch rainfall will carry the pollutants from the streets and parking lots to the proposed pollution control basin to allow them to settle out before the drainage is released into the environment . Systems 300 and 700 of the Drainage Study for Units 1 and 3 shows 65 acres contributing to this basin. Out of these 65 offsite acres, 26 of the acres are native and don' t require any form of pollution control . It can also be argued that the dense vegetation and soil condition of this native land would retain all of the precipitation from the first flush, i therefor not affecting the design of this basin. i i i SITE r UU= 19 C.? v � m cmin► 8Lti PACIFIC ou OCEAN 9C�r118 qA F, d CMWF a VICINITY MAP N 0 SCALE f Rational Method Description The rational method as described in the 1985 San Diego County Flood Control/HvdroloQy manual, is used to generate surface runoff flows, which are then used to size both permanent and temporary drainage and desiltation facilities. The basic equation: Q = CIA C = runoff coefficient (varies with surface) I = intensity (varies with time of concentration) A = Area in acres The design storm for this project is the 100 year event, the corresponding 6-hour rainfall amount is 2.6 inches. A computer program developed by Civi1CADD/Civildesign Engineering Software, (c) 1993 Version 3.2, was used to determine the times of concentration and corresponding intensities and flows for the various hydrological processes performed in this model. This program also determines the street flow and pipeflow characteristics for each segment modeled. Prosram Process The rational method program is a computer aided design program where the user develops a node link model of the watershed. The node link model is created by developing independent node link models of each interior watershed and linking these sub-models together at confluence points. The program has the capability of performing calculations for eleven different hydrologic and hydraulic processes. These processes are assigned and printed in the output. They are as follows: 1. Initial subarea input, top of stream. 2. Street flow thru subarea, includes subarea runoff. 3. Addition of runoff from subarea to stream. 4. Street inlet and parallel street and pipeflow and area. 5. Pipeflow travel time (program estimated pipesize). 6. Pipeflow travel time (user specified pipesize). 7. Improved channel travel - Area add option. 8. Irregular channel travel time - Area add option. 9. User specified entry of data at a point. 10. Confluence at downstream point in current stream. 11. Confluence of main steams. l- a '� .: .''G. = •�--cam. cm IIAMAM UN LW C6 Lvy O a en IC El O� w o u1 • � / � H c nZ -.. ro 1 j _ ' 1 ' o' s � LLJ D vii i c o O O Z ti J 1 < n U e cn Lt < O rJ� p u O 7 _ � 0= O p , < p i x W OJ O n j Z j F V f � u d CN el ec-- cam•/ .' �\\`' � •la,� _ '/� �_ ate.. L`! � =� __' _, ��•� ;� � c \ 1�` i.�.� \.'��{��_ � 4 ' G rte.,. C � �±► /• � � _ z �• � 'rte•` \`. �• �C �.t cm . O Ld 1 N H 111 D L1\ u1 i Q Oc.,tp u - o < r1.1't � 3 O tat � r U O lr Z 7 H M u 1 ' S! C O O 'L• — S7 r C v9 O + Vp- C p •�•• C) CJ �1 C) L tO L G r0 u O u•1 O t.j O U p X �O GJ U CJ C- I L C C u L-Z C: rC O It CJ CJ 7 C L L C C < C O C C ra ♦J 1 V G V. :..i CTt G C IG � _ !` O L jc i �- -W GJ a ••- C == s-j u CJ u L E— v v r- 0 I v r v r i1+ 77 s, C GH U J CJ C- N N >1 M L C7 IA r C C a C as O^ >, O FO -= CJ G) C (\lw l O QJ ea+� C L C� y ++ _ II S- .^ L C u G G C U CL T \ rJ �— y U L_ u u L C7 -i ^ G rJ v1 G1 C O G�+ O CJ L +.+� •• C ^ C ++ 4+ L L'� L �- L L �► of C" C if +•• C to G G C- GJ tA C GJ T tD C L L G L •r- O of O� � cn .� A �•r T p � � yc y O u c G•--- C r L+.� i L r• GJ sa 4• GI rJ ,O v R %0 L L u r C I s- E_ _ +•� _ CJ C T u C O CJ tA CJ to 0 10 dj r 0 a y :.� I O en 3 O y G +J ++ y +•► In. G7 It 7 0 •'•" O Gt C N •••y r3 O G7 ep O G7 rJ r ++ L C• to G7 .-^ O r V.. L r J. u 0 gO u p I U U-N -A 0- 0 G C }•- +a T N CL 4-J r-•� 0 ,..• L C }-� �•- �� n n n G ra n .-. i. n Q ••- ti M < to C O .— CM M _ 6-hour Precipitation (inches) Cz o In c Ln o In c _L-4 tC v;1•Cf Qc.•� r•7 cV cV . ZI• - ►-• - -•� __ - to • � •[] � G v �� — •� t �. I .1! 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 e,- +•+ F+ C �:. 1 ''1 I •� — :tea.. �. I: •I t I 1''. M I 1 I 11 � i I 1 = •...� - �O• ++ C O _ � I �-�!•'° .t=1'Ilii! I I I i ! x ! 1 1 1 ;!,11!! IM I I I I I E v i.+ � � - - _— — __ - _- -- .11. II•ijl ! 1 1 1 1 I I � G.;_�"-_'•_ =�—III"'==== -�� _/// ..— O I— .,.= - --r- � , I I. III r '••- ` 1--• f_T � t .I I _1 11•,111:: I I I I 1 . ! . r - ! , -� �_ I —_I i -_� 1 I I� ! 1 •• �! •1 1 1 I ! I I l e l l 1 1 I I 1 1 1 '�• I •I!I�I I l i l i 1 1 I I I o 0 RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS FOR HYDROLOGIC SOIL-COVER COMPLEXES (C N) TABLE I-A-1 AMC 2 Ia 0.25 Cover Hydrologic Soil Grouos Land Use Treatment Hydrologi or Practice 3 Condition&' A B C D Water Surfaces (during floods) 97 98 99 99 Urban Commercial-industrial 89 90 91 92 High density residential 75 82 88 90 Medium dens-ity residential 73 80 86 88 Low density residential 70 78 84 87 Barren 78 86 91 93 Fallow Straight row 76 85 90 92 Vineyards (see accompanying land-use description) disked 76 85 90 92 annual grass or Poor 65 78 85 89 legume cover Fair 50 69 79 84 Good 38 61 74 80 Roads (hard surface) 74 84 90 92 (dirt) 72 82 87 89 Row crops Straight row Poor 72 81 88 91 Good 67 78 85 89 Contoured Poor 70 79 84 88 Good 65 75 82 86 Narrowleaf chaparral Poor 71 82 88 91 Fair 55 72 81 86 I-A-5 San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1993 Version 3 . 2 Rational method hydrology program based on San Diego County Flood Control Division 1985 h drology manual Rational Hydrology Study Date : 8/19/98 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ENCINITAS RANCH PHASE II "AS GRADED" CONDITION FOR DESILT BASIN DESIGN F:\ACCTS\981033\EXIST.RSD ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ------------------------------------------------------------------- O'Day Consultants, San Deigo, California - SIN 10125 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100 . 0 Map data precipitation entered: 6 hour, precipitation(inches) = 2 . 600 24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4 . 100 Adjusted 6 hour precipitation (inches) = 2 . 600 P67P24 = 63 .40 San Diego hydrology manual ' C' values used Runoff coefficients by rational method ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 100 . 000 to Point/Station 102 . 000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** User specs ie value ot u . buu given tor subarea Initial subarea flow distance = 125 . 00 (Ft . ) Highest elevation = 162 .50 (Ft . ) Lowest elevation = 157. 00 (Ft . ) Elevation difference = 5 .50 (Ft. ) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method (A p X-C) = 7 .37 min. TC = [1 . 8* (1 . 1-C) *distance 5) 7 (k slo e^ (1/3) ] TC = [1. 8* (1 . 1-0 .5000) * (125 . 00 . 5) / ( p4 .40� (1/3) 1 = 7 .37 Rainfall intensity (I) = 5 .334 for a 100 . 0 yyear storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0 . 500 Subarea runoff = 0 .533 (CFS) Total initial stream area = 0 .200 (Ac. ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 102 . 000 to Point/Station 104 . 000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** TO o street segment elevation = End of street segment elevation = 136 . 000 (Ft. Length of street segment = 375 . 000 (Ft. ) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6 . 0 (In. ) Wid£h of half street (curb to crown) = 42 . 000 (Ft. ) Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 21. 000 (Ft . ) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0 . 020 Slope from grade break to crown (v z) = 0 . 020 Street flow is on [2] side (s) of the street Distance from curb to property line = 10 . 000 (Ft . ) Slope from curb to propert line (v/hz) = 0 . 020 Gutter width = 1 .p00 (Ft . ) Gutter hike from flowline = 1 . 500 (In. ) Manning' s N in gutter = 0 . 0300 Manning' s N from gutter to grade break = 0 . 0300 Manning' s N from grade break to crown = 0 . 0300 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 2 . 134 CFS) Depth of flow = 0 . 228 (Ft . ) , Average velocity = 2 . 077 (Ft�s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel : Halfstreet flow width = 6 . 651 (Ft . ) Flow velocity = 2 . 08 (Ft/s) a Travel time = 3 . 01 min. TC = 10 .38 min. Adding area flow to street User specified ' C' value of 0 . 500 iven for subarea Rainfall intensity = 4 . 277 (In7Hr) for a 100. 0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0 . 500 Subarea runoff = 2 . 566 (CFS) for 1 . 200 (Ac. ) Total runoff = 3 . 100 (CFS) Total area = 1 .40 (Ac. ) Street flow at end of street = 3 . 100 (CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 1 . 550 (CFS) Depth of flow = 0 . 252 (Ft . ) , Average velocity = 2 . 260 (Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown) = 7 . 838 (Ft . ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 104 . 000 to Point/Station 106 . 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** i upstream porn s a ion elevation = Downstream point/station elevation = 115 . 00 (Ft . ) Pipe length = 50 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning' s N = 0 . 013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3 .100 (CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 9 . 00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 3 . 100 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 3 . 63 (In. ) Flow top width inside pipe = 8 . 83 (In. ) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 18.58 (Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0 . 04 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 10 .42 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 106 . 000 to Point/Station 108 . 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** upstream porn station a eva ion = Downstream point/station elevation = 81. 00 (Ft . ) Pipe length = 1000 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning' s N = 0 .013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 3 .100 (CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 12 .00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 3 .100 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 5 .80 (In. ) Flow top width inside ipe = 11 . 99 (In. ) Critical Depth = 9 . 5 (In. ) Pipe flow velocity = 8 . 24 (Ft/8) Travel time through pipe = 2 . 02 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 12 .44 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 108 .000 to Point/Station 108 . 000 **** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** User specified value o given ors area Time o concentration = 12 .44 min. Rainfall intensity = 3 . 804 (In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0 . 500 Subarea runoff = 27 .392 (CFS) for 14 .400 (Ac. ) Total runoff = 30 .492 (CFS) Total area = 15 . 80 (Ac. ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 108 . 000 to Point/Station 110 . 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) **** upstream porn station a eva ion = Downstream point/station elevation = 78 . 00 (Ft . ) Pipe length = 73 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning' s N = 0 . 013 No. of pipes , = 1 Required pipe flow = 30 .492 (CFS) Given pipe size = 36 . 00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 30 .492 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 11 . 63 (In. ) Flow top width inside pipe = 33 . 67 (In. ) Critical Depth = 21 .46 (In. ) Pipe flow velocity = 15 .45 (Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0 . 08 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 12 .52 min. End of computations, total study area = 15 . 80 (Ac . ) San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1993 Version 3 .2 Rational method h drology program based on San Diego County lood Control Division 1985 h drology manual Rational Hydrology Study Date : 8/19/98 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ENCINITAS RANCH PHASE II FUTURE DEVELOPED CONDITION F: \ACCTS\981033\ONSITE .RSD ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ O'Day Consultants, San Deigo, California - SIN 10125 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100 . 0 Map data precipitation entered: 6 hour, preciQitation (inches) = 2 .600 24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4 . 100 Adjusted 6 hour precipitation (inches) = 2 . 600 P6/P24 = 63 .40 San Diego h drology manual ' C' values used Runoff coefficients by rational method ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 100 .000 to Point/Station 102 . 000 **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION **** ser s eci ie value o given or subarea Initia subarea flow distance = 125 . 00 (Ft. ) Highest elevation = 162 . 50 (Ft . ) Lowest elevation = 157 . 00 (Ft. ) Elevation difference = 5 .50 (Ft . ) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method (A p X-C) = 1. 84 min. TC = (1 . 8* (1 .1-C) *distance 5) / (o slo eA (1/3) ] TC = [1. 8* (1 . 1-0 . 9500) * (125 . 00 . 5) / ( p4 .40�k (1/3) ] = 1. 84 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity (I) = 6 . 850 for a 100 . 0 ear storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=K IA) is C = 0 . 950 Subarea runoff = 1.302 (CFS) Total initial stream area = 0 .200 (Ac. ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 102 .000 to Point/Station 104 . 000 **** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME + SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** op o street segment a eva ion = End of street segment elevation = 136. 000 (Ft . ) Length of street segment = 375 . 000 (Ft. ) Height of curb above gutter flowline = 6 . 0 (In. ) Width of half street (curb to crown) = 42 . 000 (Ft. ) Distance from crown to crossfall grade break = 21. 000 (Ft . ) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0 . 020 Slope from grade break to crown (v/ z) = 0 . 020 Street flow is on [2] side (s) of thhe street Distance from curb to property line = 10 . 000 (Ft. ) Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) = 0 . 020 Gutter width = 1 .500 (Ft . ) Gutter hike from flowline = 1 . 500 (In. ) Manning' s N in gutter = 0 . 0150 Manning' s N from gutter to grade break = 0 . 0150 Manning' s N from grade break to crown = 0 . 0150 Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street = 5 .206 (CFS) Depth of flow = 0 . 240 (Ft . ) , Average velocity = 4 . 344 (Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel : Halfstreet flow width = 7 . 266 (Ft . ) C Flow velocity = 4 . 34 (Ft/s) Travel time = 1 .44 min. TC = 6 .44 min. Adding area flow to street User specified ' C' value of 0 . 750 iven for subarea Rainfall intensity = 5 . 819 (In7Hr) for a 100 . 0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0 . 750 Subarea runoff = 5 . 237 (CFS) for 1 .200 (Ac. ) Total runoff = 6 . 539 (CFS) Total area = 1.40 (Ac. ) Street flow at end of street = 6 . 539 (CFS) Half street flow at end of street = 3 . 269 (CFS) Depth of flow = 0 . 255 (Ft . ) , Average velocity = 4 .577 (Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown) = 8 . 019 (Ft. ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 104 . 000 to Point/Station 106 . 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** upstream poi.n station a eva ion = Downstream point/station elevation = 115 . 00 (Ft. ) Pipe length = 50 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning' s N = 0 . 013 No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 6 . 539 (CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 9 .00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 6 .539 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 5 . 66 (In. ) Flow top width inside pipe = 8 . 70 (In. ) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 22 .33 (Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0 . 04 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 6 .48 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 106 . 000 to Point/Station 108 . 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (Program estimated size) **** upstream porn station a eva ion = Downstream point/station elevation = 81. 00 (Ft. ) Pipe length = 1000 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning's N = 0 . 013 No. of pipes = 1 Required ipe flow = 6 .539 (CFS) Nearest computed pipe diameter = 12 . 00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 6 .539 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 9 . 79 (In. ) Flow top width inside pipe = 9 .31 (In. ) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity = 9.54 (Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 1. 75 min. Time of concentration (TC) = 8 . 22 min. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 108 . 000 to Point/Station 108 . 000 **** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION **** User s ecitied ICI value ot U . 900 given tor subarea Time of concentration = 8 .22 min. Rainfall intensity = 4 .970 (In/Hr) for a 100 . 0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0 . 900 Subarea runoff = 64 .406 (CFS) for 14 .400 (Ac. ) Total runoff = 70 . 945 (CFS) Total area = 15. 80 (Ac. ) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 108 . 000 to Point/Station 110. 000 **** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) **** Upstream porn s a ion elevation = Downstream point/station elevation = 78 . 00 (Ft . ) Pipe length = 73 . 00 (Ft . ) Manning' s N = 0 . 013 No. of pipes . = 1 Required pipe flow = 70 . 945 (CFS) Given pipe size = 36 . 00 (In. ) Calculated individual pipe flow = 70 . 945 (CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe = 18 . 52 (In. ) Flow top width inside pipe = 35 . 99 (In. ) Critical Depth = 32 . 03 (In. ) Pipe flow velocity = 19 .36 (Ft/s) Travel time through pipe = 0 . 06 min. Time of concentration ITC) = 8 .29 min. End of computations, total study area = 15. 80 (Ac. ) SAS /A-) OFF�17E � = ZS AC LL, = 3Z8 )4 - 16o Z = 3, 8D (-j D Tc A Fi-o. &.,j (2- w es� _ _. vE o, 7�_ ,►� . 6c r-s ftt,�)-( 7Y f . _ o o � o E3p-ow D,-rCjq c f3poL-i bi7c4 l OK . NdoE lny .Te IIU c. 5 ow ...._...___...,......._...__ . .- --•---- .__ .......... ... ... .. ..�Z ..._... .....�.�7�.f.�.% -��8°fat Z.Y.�`..w�f)E�_. U__=./O.~.._... . OK C•F'S II PC:)(-LU-T, Ov -1 Cc)o%t�.oL L v S 14 � O. S •• R- PA.,.L-L ..C�e'�l�-C �i Y ��S I ►�1 ..ELc V A2EA� � Vol..vi�'► � go Z 4 �'7 SS47 $Z 3 4� � 3 123 � -Ft ..:voL�t�►E f,.�t c acD D►Rcc, 2v� o �r = O.0s, (SELF OFF S ITt dos rtGl'�S —' 2� /`icCf�GS N0. vG - J!'tC °-= '7o-7 g -3 �� 12 i otJ s ETC / S7 Ac-r , s - 2-7 23 ;t-3 12 2-7 23 =- C� 12>0 1 °) OK N m a a x N ei H h dq� O a o a U H 0 O o o O O O O O o O O O O 0 O O O F W W E U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a F C7 W Q Q Ixga 0 o r w �D r o o r m 3 a o o m m ul o o M w m N 0 O m %D m o m o 0 0 H H ri fl M M m m m N ON -zr O M N w H m r N r m m O �D M H O O r-I O O O H O O v v V1 M C13 H N -I m O b m O O %D H l0 r O m b r V ep M r1 E q w N rl rl O O O O H H O v II 11 N U M �j M h O N m O m m O U1 m !j w O w M m 1 N M ]C U dt q m q m O m N r m ON kD m ON m O m O O O O O H I ri 14 H H N m CID er m N m O 10 r-1 m O O 1D H U M O O O M r b O W w O M a U' Q d' V1 m W r N N m ON N m m ON m m O O O O O -1 H H ei H II II O O N -W p m O O ry N F M O b r r a m lD 1p O �l+ a w M — CO m m 4 %D r m 1p ON q m q 01 m m 0 O O O O Z H H H H rl H In V1 00 o r m o o r O o 0 0 �-1 r M N m O N N O r N q F • M H a w H M m Ln r �4 N r r N aw m m m m m o o 0 0 0 O H F u u W N En V1 V1 m O VI m M r O m a h h 7 w to w w w ei M an M M N F Q q .-1 C14 C14 .N r- m m M N ID M N m N V1 N > w M H H t7 V7 M N H r Q m m N N m o IT a M m m m r r m O to li M an m %D M %D a a F m m N Ln W M m O M O .J w lzr .i tl O II O tD H tD H H H N M N O N O w\ m O O O ON rl ON O O O O O O O O O M O O O O O r-1 O H O O O H O 0 0 0 0 U n x >C u n u u II Q W O a F F. a a a r a a pN a a m E a>4 114 O a F rn 4 m rn w F z vl o a a Z E a rt O m O ZO N O 1 O O M J.1 U M M O U m U m U V' U m M H U M •'1 U E .•1 m V1 N r r m m V1 M 11 O z z 0 11 z o u z o 0 0 u z o is U H a _ a a a a a H W ZF W Ln D M m w NZ m to oZ a ADZ U) a, raw q x . x W r� `°. � � m x � w m to x � �x x b aq o 0 o ie'y� o o x o 0 0 0 0 o ro u Ln o 3 N U1 3 z o to 0 CD o C7 o O o 0 O o 0 C7 o O o 0 C7 0 0 b r-I H U U U U U U rH7 p a o H o .H7 O w m p m O m O m m m m ] m H Q N N -4 � H R[ H � rl f!: ri ri '•I FC H E II II (�� 11 II 11 aQ+ 11 W x X to x °o ' �'! x N X x x ].' m o x to X F� E W OI U O V1 rl d' M V. N O r/r U z U h rUi W 0 W H 2 m H ON N Ln H m N m M O � Vl ID O r a q a N N N 14 N N N rl N N [q N ri ri C O v\ W C] 0 co a 0.' o u o a o rn g o F U o F W W Ln a F C9 w � Q a q a u r F L m U m w N F a0 W tn H f1 F q w o a r, 0 � xv ON ON Ln H U o a 0U � x u m 0 a N rn aw m z H FC O (� H r q F a w ri ai 0 E- EO) N in r a > w w 14 LO fn H v a a N > w Ln Q — .i N a -- r m a a F o O W d N W\ ON O H F O H w w m �- o .0 u U oa 0 a a w F F a y z m _ 0 1+ U a -.a U F w U H a _ a W N z F w ri JW4 ro q o 0 N N 3 Z o F � Q >+ ao F •• x Of w � F W U O W (2-7 V 0 H W wQQ az N a w F Q U Q to a 0 N 0 A x A a w x F H w z 0 >4 H m H L4 W za za 0 w H uAW Nax aaH r�� wE [Wp as 0 0 z A w Z H N0Q H x qq z E w a Q z W O w u 5 wags cdc4Ezn H U ] E u 3 DI w h a ] 0A ap a rH) cQiww W E � A E+ FF F H 94 W )qH r- 4 Ux � ,x cp0[4tn0 W W W a W rj F U U E.U) z W x O H W W 000 ]O Cap. HE--E Ex-+ 2 000 £ 6C4oa � Q wgE+ FEhh I acn av� a rH7 H r-4 £ U U E w � � X 0Q 0 a o o o o �3EEiaGaa °gN� a� rF�� wa£ a 3q � rzi) cacE p F4 zggzzggzg xo. 0 HE-000XM W £ HH W W £ £ £ F W W w w 0 0 0 Q a a 3: 99 W w a w a O W W O Q aawwfs. DIC4Pw 4 >I U wC7wxx .i N W W W O W Q F F E N wWwwaa xxwww0WF F+ UFEE zzzWQQx H H H x x 0 U1 U1 VI a w w w ucwiu oowaaa o r1 N 7. ?y Ty o x x w H H H N cD AAOIam: rmiwaaQ z c�v -� H H H x W W U H H H A A A F A A H g a E E w W u w h iN zhhmQQ h w 0 O Q O Figure III-A-2 o c°7 ui ° o w !— lU F— O oC F— Z 1 Q � z CL Z O Q W Q J V v Ln o Ln u. O a) Co m ti W (DD Lo LO —• - —— --- - ------- I— -- -{— - - - — — -- - —A-A. rh tp LO 0-�T— op L p L to O U O "n M N N — — O sayoui ui jjouna !Dada O O III-A-5 DCS ��' T3ArS i� DESK G� C),UA NT D i=S t21 S �'RO M C�*-i R�T> C S C—Y c�p�c TY 13 A,S N ( BA-SED oN v O LU M C .. 100 Z4 X03 CDK ;3-s r�vER�co w � �a ors 4RP7 -97 I°`I- sE-r��E Z 10Z 2 � IDO "I O.$7 r--1 Y cc = 1.-7 CL -`r1I1X Q. o. �� l.�� Z{32z) I.s \0. 4 ��s DESILTING BASIN CAPACITY TABLE ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF SILT AND DEBRIS (Cubic Yards) DRAINAGE TRACT AREA SOIL CONDITIONS AVERAGE STREET SLOPE (Acres) 2% 5% 8% 10% 12% 15% 10 Loose Granular 270 350 370 400 450 500 Compacted 100 170 200 240 270 300 15 Loose Granular 400 420 460 600 675 750 Compacted 1 255 300 360 400 450 20 Loose Granular 540 700 740 800 900 1000 Compacted 200 340 400 480 540 600 40 Loose Granular 1080 1400 1480 1600 1800 2000 Compacted 400 680 800 960 1080 1200 80 Loose Granular 2160 2800 2960 3200 3600 4000 Compacted 800 1360 1600 1920 2160 2400 100 Loose Granular 2700 3500 3700 4000 4500 5000 Compacted 1000 1700 2000 2400 2700 3000 150 Loose Granular 4000 4200 4600 6000 6750 7500 Compacted 1500 2550 3000 3600 4000 4500 200 Loose Granular 5400 7000 7400 8000 9000 10000 Compacted 2000 3400 4000 4800 5400 6000 NOTE: Always use the value for granular material unless the project is finished and the utility trenches are filled with soil which has been compacted to .. 90% relative compaction. The capacity required by the above table shall be in a pit or basin. At t'ie lower end of the basin there shall be constructed an outlet dike with dimensions as per instructions. The size of the desalting basin may be reduced by constructing more than one basin. However, the total volume of basins constructed shall be equal to the estimated volume of rx)of: solids. 128 7". DESIGN OF SMALL DAMS a: T— \x \V s P rs 2 0.... �P :015 i NOTE Dot ttd lines ore nosed on eorapoiction 2.2 1.5 100.0 04 oll 16 20 —rs CJ-V% Fijpre 223. Relationship of circular crest coefficient C. to H'For different approach depths(aerated nappe). R. in tables 22, 23. and 24. These data are based circular crest springs farther only in the region on experimental tests [13) conducted by the of the high point of the trace, and then only Bureau of Reclamation. The relationships of H, for ' values tip to about 0.5. The profiles to H. are shown on fia-V ure 225. Typical upper R, H, wid lower nappe profiles for various values of become increasingly suppressed for larger — R, C R, values. Below the high point of the profile are plotted on figure 226 in terms of and -L H, H, the traces cross and the shapes for the higher P heads fall inside those for the lower heads. Thus, for the condition of w-2.0. H, if the crest profile is designed for heads where Illustrated on Y figure 227 are t pica) lower nappe exceeds about 0.25 to 0.3, it appears that sub- profiles,profiles, plotted for various values of H. for a atmospheric pressure will occur along some 0 given value of R.. In contrast to the strai-lit portion of the profile when heads are less than the 0 weir where the nappe springs farther from the designed maximum. If subatmospheric pressures crest as the head increases, it will be seen from arc to be avoided along the crest profile, the crest M figure 237 that the lower nappe profile for the shape should be selected so that it will give support I ►`, c�, o v-r'L�`T l o o % QM/!1[ F"V�vr"C — Q�CI4K �.N � VTVTZE j1 I.Ow �Lt��1 N AT o o Da 1 oa QPChK O 3G`SRC P _ -71 C'F S DE-p TH Or- Ft,ov✓ = 18• S �� • ;,.Fc,'�uRC «`� Fl1�W•• SO�r�T W ��-� M�TGH �C,o�.v�...11V� TH ER.E r-o2e T t l C w �3 E 1 $ . S •. LOw PLOW" V25 1 1,1A ;,; Coy►F�,E = o. � • a-- 0.+'*N!6 ;;;Wogs i C ^-Cb. PL-ovJ Ies. ► V- cR I M DES It -r �3 Pis I )J rrL-o w = ►C1. C4 1' es CAP, 3z 9� C� = IO.4c4-s cb mil-4 c� w -"V(O 4 .:i i i DEwN7E?-- 0JC1 CALLS 'FROY"� Tt r en .oS 1 01.1 AQ lt� S EL>t w,E T c0►.TTto L- AID -M s 2 N 3er.,0 o C,T)C I V C' Ao S= 3hs I U H E P,,.D O r w N'Te 2 = 4.0 l=T G 40 "R �•M�*J> ► Co � t:;-Pots_ U..-r 1 o As 374 s r- Z X41 0.0 2 I 5� A o 3&Oo 00) O•G 3Z,Z k-ko L.ES ' 8Z 0 " . y � ,yt ...«.y� � ' T.i #r9T $ •�*�f�v° r[j�� +�� . i�r _ Fyne, IIM . t 1 � A,"►•� �1 is sexy k 'fe' y'�_�„.r r _�'� � °"�� '�° .ar �'-. � y K +d! r w- k Y ' 4 All Awsp Pall" 4 Is • 1 .. IN ,s Fir ""�t• h- . L 'fig_K,A rA y,•i:j ^'� t ti +4t L .r A 's _ �" �^'il ��. � r. � « •. �, 1 ,,� � °fit u.lHtr;�;�36\�:�:U186\S8C1f'\�� drN1[f@6 'Otl�ff86 '9[[86 s)ajx 1S3 ud 86-S2-6 (IAHEE86\EEOi86\SBDf\i.1 I I 1 J ' I � _ I � // Jw i 1� I � / I'• /�11 fl 4� -- _ A. Hydrology Area A NoText 1 **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2000 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1.5A Release Date: 01/01/2000 License ID 1472 Analysis prepared by: Mayers & Associates Civil Engineering, Inc. 19 Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 609 Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 599-0870, (949) 599-0880 fax ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * Plaza @ Encinitas * * 100-YR HYDROLOGY AREA A * FILE: PLAZAA.OUT * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: PLAZAA.100 TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 11:46 12/15/2000 ------------- ------------------------------------ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ------------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2 .600 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 8.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *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) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0-018/0.020 0 67 2 .00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 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 = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE. * **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2 .00 IS CODE = 21 --------------------------------7-------- »>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 87 2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 250.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 139.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 120.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 19.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 9.410 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4 .556 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.64 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0 .31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 2 .00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ------------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 120.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 114.00 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 25.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 8.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 8.0 INCH PIPE IS 1.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 10.62 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 8.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.64 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.04 TC(MIN.) = 9.45 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 4.00 = 275.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 4.00 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. ) = 9.45 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.54 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4 .00 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<« COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 90.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 114.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 114.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 0.70 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 4 .642 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.62 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.62 ' 3 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4 .00 TO NODE 4. 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. ) = 6.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.09 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0. 62 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 0.64 9.45 4 .544 0.31 2 0.62 6.00 6.090 0.12 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 1.10 6.00 6.090 2 1.10 9.45 4 .544 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.10 Tc(MIN. ) = 9.45 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.43 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 4.00 = 275.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4.00 TO NODE 4 .00 IS CODE = 81 -------------------------------------------------------- »>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.544 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.21 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.81 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.64 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.91 TC(MIN) = 9.45 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4 .00 TO NODE 4 .00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.544 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.54 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.78 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .45 4 TC(MIN) = 9.45 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 4 .00 TO NODE 5.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- .»>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ---------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 114.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 113.20 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 7.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .70 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.28 Tc(MIN.) = 9.73 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 5.00 = 355.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 5.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< -------------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4 .458 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.80 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .53 TC(MIN) = 9.73 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 5.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ----------------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 113.20 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 112.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4.84 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .53 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.26 Tc(MIN. ) = 9.99 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 6.00 = 430.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 6.00 TO NODE 6.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.383 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.82 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .60 TC(MIN) = 9.99 5 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 6.00 TO NODE 7.00 IS CODE = 31 -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 112 .40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 112.20 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 20.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 7 . 9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .74 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .60 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.07 Tc(MIN. ) = 10.06 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 7.00 = 450.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 7.00 TO NODE 7.00 IS CODE = 81 --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.363 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.84 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.68 TC(MIN) = 10.06 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 7.00 TO NODE 8.00 IS CODE = 31 -------------------------------------------------------------- »>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 112.20 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 111.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 60.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 8.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4.78 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .68 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.21 Tc (MIN.) = 10.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 8. 00 = 510.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 8.00 TO NODE 8.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4 .306 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0 .86 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .75 TC(MIN) = 10.27 6 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 8.00 TO NODE 9.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ---------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 111.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 110.80 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.75 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.28 Tc (MIN.) = 10.55 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 9.00 = 590.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 9.00 TO NODE 9.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ------------------- - 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.232 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.88 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.82 TC(MIN) = 10 .55 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 9.00 TO NODE 12 .00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ----------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 110.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 110.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.82 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.82 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN. ) = 10.72 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 12 .00 = 640.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 12.00 TO NODE 12.00 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.) = 10.72 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.19 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.88 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2 .82 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 11.00 IS CODE = 21 7 ----------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC 1I) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 440.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 140 .60 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 114. 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 26.60 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 5. 182 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.12 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.12 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11.00 TO NODE 12 .00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------------- » -COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< »>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 114-00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 110.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 60.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4 . 9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8.73 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .12 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.11 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.11 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 12.00 = 500.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 12.00 TO NODE 12 .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. ) = 6.11 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.02 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2 . 12 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 2.82 10.72 4 .188 0.88 2 2 .12 6. 11 6 .016 0.41 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY 8 NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 4.30 1.29 16.414 2 4 . 09 6 .11 6.016 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4 .30 Tc(MIN. ) = 10.72 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.29 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 12 .00 = 640.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.29 TC(MIN. ) = 10.72 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4 .30 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS 1 B. Hydrology Area B NoText 9 **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2000 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1 .5A Release Date: 01/01/2000 License ID 1472 Analysis prepared by: Mayers & Associates Civil Engineering, Inc. 19 Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 609 Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 599-0870, (949) 599-0880 fax ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** • PLAZA @ ENCINITAS • 100-RE HYDROLOGY AREA B • FILE: PLAZAB.OUT ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: PLAZAB.100 TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:23 12/15/2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2 .600 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 8.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS (DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *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) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0. 020 0.67 2 .00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 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 = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 22.00 IS CODE = 22 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< --------------------------------------------- COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 10 USER SPECIFIED Tc (MIN. ) = 5.000 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.850 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.22 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.21 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.22 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 22 .00 TO NODE 23 .00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 114 .70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 3.49 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.19 Tc(MIN. ) = 5.19 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 23.00 = 40.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 .00 TO NODE 23 .00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.687 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.19 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.40 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.30 TC(MIN) = 5.19 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23.00 TO NODE 24 .00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 114 .70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 114 .60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 15.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 8.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 3.94 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .30 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.06 Tc (MIN. ) = 5.25 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 24 .00 = 55.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24.00 TO NODE 24.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.635 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 1 ] SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.45 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.48 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .75 TC(MIN) = 5.25 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 .00 TO NODE 25.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 114.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 113 .50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 7.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .99 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.75 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.33 Tc(MIN. ) = 5.59 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 25.00 = 155.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 25.00 TO NODE 25 .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. ) = 5.59 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.38 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0 .48 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2.75 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 26.00 TO NODE 25.00 IS CODE = 21 ----------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 140.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 114 .70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 113 .50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.20 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 5.605 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2. 07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.40 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2 .07 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 25 .00 TO NODE 25.00 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: 12 TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 6.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.09 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.40 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2 .07 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 2 .75 5.59 6.376 0.48 2 2.07 6.00 6.090 0.40 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 4.73 5.59 6.376 2 4.70 6.00 6.090 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4 .73 Tc(MIN.) = 5.59 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.88 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 25.00 = 155.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 25 .00 TO NODE 25.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< -------------------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.376 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.19 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.10 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.92 TC(MIN) = 5.59 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 25.00 TO NODE 27.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ------------------------------------------ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 113 .50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 113.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15 .0 INCH PIPE IS 11.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5.69 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.92 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.12 Tc (MIN. ) = 5.71 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 27.00 = 195.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27.00 TO NODE 27.00 IS CODE = 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< 13 TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 5.71 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.29 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.10 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 5.92 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28. 00 TO NODE 29.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 87 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 110.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 140.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 135.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 5.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 7.408 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.316 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.38 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.38 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 29.00 TO NODE 27.00 IS CODE = 31 -------------------------------------------------- »>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 135.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 113 .10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 40.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 8.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 8.0 INCH PIPE IS 1.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 12 .37 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 8.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0 .38 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.05 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.46 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 28. 00 TO NODE 27.00 = 150.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27 .00 TO NODE 27.00 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. ) = 7.46 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.29 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0. 16 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.38 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** 14 STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CPS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 5 .92 5.71 6.291 1.10 2 0.38 7.46 5 .291 0.16 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 6.25 1.26 16.665 2 5.37 7.46 5.291 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 6.25 Tc(MIN.) = 5.71 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 27.00 = 195.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27.00 TO NODE 27.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.291 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.18 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.48 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.42 TC(MIN) = 5.71 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27.00 TO NODE 30.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 113.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 111.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 120.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.18 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7 .42 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0 .32 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 30.00 = 315.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 30.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.071 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.46 15 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.57 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7 .89 TC(MIN) = 6.03 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 31.00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 111. 90 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 110.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12 .1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.25 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.89 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.27 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 31.00 = 415.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 31.00 TO NODE 31.00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< -------------------------------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.904 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.65 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.70 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.54 TC(MIN) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 31.00 TO NODE 32 .00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< > >>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ----------------------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 110.90 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 109.70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 120.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12 .8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8 .54 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.32 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 32.00 = 535.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 32 .00 TO NODE 32 .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. ) = 6.61 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5 .72 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.70 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 8.54 16 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 33 .00 TO NODE 34 .00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 87 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 270.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 140.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 116.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 24 .00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 9.281 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.597 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.33 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.33 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 34 .00 TO NODE 32 .00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ----------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 116.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 109.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 20.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 8.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 8 .0 INCH PIPE IS 1.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 9.61 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 8.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.33 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.03 Tc(MIN. ) = 9.32 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 33 .00 TO NODE 32 .00 = 290.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 32 .00 TO NODE 32.00 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. ) = 9.32 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.59 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.33 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 8.54 6.61 5.721 1.70 2 0.33 9.32 4 .586 0.16 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. 17 ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 8.80 1. 86 12 .963 2 7.18 9.32 4 .586 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 8.80 Tc (MIN. ) 6.61 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 32 .00 = 535.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 32.00 TO NODE 35.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 109. 90 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 109.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13 .1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.37 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.08 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.69 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 35.00 = 565.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 35.00 TO NODE 35 .00 IS CODE = 81 ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.677 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.63 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.99 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.43 TC(MIN) = 6.69 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 35.00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 31 ----------------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 109.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 108.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 120.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 14 .0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.43 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.31 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 36. 00 = 685.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 36.00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 1 18 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 7.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.51 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.99 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 9.43 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 37.00 TO NODE 38.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 87 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 110.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 113.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 111.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 2.90 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 8.883 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.729 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.77 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.36 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.77 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 38.00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ----------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 111.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 108.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 8.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 8.0 INCH PIPE IS 3 .0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.31 ESTIMATED PIPE. DIAMETER(INCH) = 8.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.77 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 9.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 37.00 TO NODE 36.00 = 160.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 36.00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 9.02 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4 .68 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.36 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.77 19 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 39.00 TO NODE 40.00 IS CODE = 22 ---------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< -------------------------------------------- --- -------------------------- COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 USER SPECIFIED Tc (MIN. ) = 5.000 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6. 850 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.04 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.04 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 40.00 TO NODE 41.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< »»>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 112.70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 230.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 6.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4.51 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2 .04 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0 .85 Tc (MIN. ) = 5.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 39.00 TO NODE 41.00 = 280.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 41.00 TO NODE 41.00 IS CODE = 81 ------------------------------------------- »>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.191 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.53 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.79 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.88 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.83 TC(MIN) = 5.85 --FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 41.00 TO NODE 42 .00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------- ---------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) 112 .70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 111.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 155.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 9. 9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5.60 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4 .83 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.46 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.31 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 39. 00 TO NODE 42.00 = 435.00 FEET. 20 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 42 .00 TO NODE 42 .00 IS CODE = 81 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ------------------ 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5 .895 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.23 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ 6.58 TC(MIN) = 6.31 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 42 .00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 111.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 108.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 60.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 9.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 10.00 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.58 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.10 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.41 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 39.00 TO NODE 36.00 = 495.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 36.00 TO NODE 36.00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 3 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 6.41 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.84 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.23 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 6.58 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 9.43 7.00 5.513 1.99 2 0.77 9.02 4.684 0.36 3 6.58 6.41 5.836 1.23 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 3 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 16.30 3 .58 8.498 2 16.11 6.41 5.836 3 14.06 9.02 4 .684 21 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 16.30 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3 .58 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 36.00 = 685 .00 FEET. **************************************************************************** -FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 36. 00 TO NODE 43 . 00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------- -------------------- >>>-COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< -- -USING (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 108.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 106.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 210. 00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24 .0 INCH PIPE IS 15.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 7.51 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 16.30 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.47 Tc(MIN. ) = 7.47 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 43 .00 = 895.00 FEET. FLOW-PROCESS FROM NODE 43.00 TO NODE 43 .00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< -------------------- __ TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 ---__ CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 7.47 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.29 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 3 .58 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 16.30 **************************************************************************** --FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 44 .00 TO NODE 45.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------ -------------------------------------- »>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< OMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 330.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 106.90 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 8.10 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 6.060 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.051 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3 .75 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.73 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3 .75 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 45 .00 TO NODE 43 . 00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------- __ >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >-USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 106.90 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 106.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 60.00 MANNING'S N = 0. 013 22 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8 .5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5 .24 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3 .75 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.19 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.25 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 44 .00 TO NODE 43 .00 = 390.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 43 .00 TO NODE 43.00 IS CODE = 1 ----------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 6.25 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.93 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.73 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 3 .75 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 46.00 TO NODE 43.00 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<« COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 290.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 111.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 108.60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 2.90 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 7.663 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.201 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.64 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 43 .00 TO NODE 43 .00 IS CODE = 1 ------------------------------------------------ >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 3 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 3 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 7 .66 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.20 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 1.64 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 16.30 7.47 5.289 3 .58 2 3 .75 6.25 5.931 0.73 3 1 .64 7 .66 5.201 0.37 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO 23 CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 3 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 21.26 4 .68 7. 149 2 19.72 6.25 5.931 3 20.96 7.66 5.201 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 21.26 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.47 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4 .68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 43.00 = 895.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 43 .00 TO NODE 47.00 IS CODE = 31 -------------------------------------------------- »»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< »>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 108.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 108.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 10.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 7.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 21.26 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.02 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.49 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 47.00 = 905.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 47.00 TO NODE 47.00 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. ) = 7649 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.28 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 4.68 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 21.26 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 48.00 TO NODE 47.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------------------------------ >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 220.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 118.40 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 107.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 11.30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3.869 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 24 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.45 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.45 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 47.00 TO NODE 47 .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. ) = 6.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.09 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.28 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 1.45 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 21.26 7.49 5.279 4 .68 2 1.45 6.00 6.090 0.28 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CPS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 22.51 4 .96 6.886 2 19.87 6.00 6.090 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 22.51 Tc(MIN.) = 7.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.96 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 47.00 = 905.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 47.00 TO NODE 49.00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 107.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 106.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 60.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27 .0 INCH PIPE IS 17.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8.14 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 22 .51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN. ) = 7 .61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 49.00 = 965.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 49.00 TO NODE 49.00 IS CODE = 1 ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE<<<<< 25 TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 7.61 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.22 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 4 .96 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 22 .51 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 50.00 TO NODE 49.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------------------------------ >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 170.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 113.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 107.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 6.60 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 3 .733 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.78 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.78 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 49.00 TO NODE 49.00 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. ) = 6.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.09 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.15 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.78 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 22 .51 7 .61 5.224 4.96 2 0.78 6.00 6.090 0.15 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 23 . 18 5 . 11 6.755 2 20. 09 6.00 6.090 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 23 .18 Tc(MIN. ) = 7.61 26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 5.11 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 49.00 = 965.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 49.00 TO NODE 51.00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< -------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 107.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 105.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 200.00 MANNING'S N = 0 .013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27 .0 INCH PIPE IS 18.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8.19 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 23 .18 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.41 Tc (MIN.) = 8.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 51.00 = 1165.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 51.00 TO NODE 51.00 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. ) = 8.02 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.05 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 5.11 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 23.18 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 52.00 TO NODE 53 .00 IS CODE = 21 -----------------------------=---------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 380.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 108.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 101.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 6.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 7.335 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.350 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.93 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.23 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 53 .00 TO NODE 51.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<< ------------------------------------------------ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 101.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 100.80 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5.39 27 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15. 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4 .23 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.22 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.55 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 52 .00 TO NODE 51 .00 = 450.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 51.00 TO NODE 51. 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. ) = 7.55 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.25 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.93 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 4 .23 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 23 .18 8. 02 5.051 5.11 2 4 .23 7.55 5.251 0.93 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 27.25 6.04 6.064 2 26.53 7.55 5.251 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 27.25 Tc(MIN. ) = 8.02 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.04 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 51.00 = 1165.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 51.00 TO NODE 54.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------- ------------------- >>-COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< »>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 100-80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 100.20 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 55.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27. 0 INCH PIPE IS 19. 8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8.72 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 27.25 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0. 11 Tc (MIN. ) = 8 .12 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 54 . 00 = 1220.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 54 .00 TO NODE 54.00 IS CODE = 1 ------- ----------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< 28 TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN.) = 8.12 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.01 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 6.04 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 27.25 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 55.00 TO NODE 54.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 540.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 103.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 11.30 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 8.176 *CAUTION: SUBAREA FLOWLENGTH EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.988 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2 .66 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.28 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 54.00 TO NODE 54 .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. ) = 8.18 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.99 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2.66 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 11.28 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 27 .25 8.12 5.009 6.04 2 11.28 8 .18 4.988 2 .66 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 38.41 8.18 4 .988 2 38 .48 8.70 4 .792 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 38.48 TC (MIN. ) = 8.12 29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.70 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21. 00 TO NODE 54 .00 = 1220.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 54 .00 TO NODE 56.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------------------ >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 100- 80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) 100.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 20.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 30.0 INCH PIPE IS 24 .3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 9.04 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 30.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 38.48 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0 .04 Tc(MIN. ) = 8.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 56.00 = 1240.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 56.00 TO NODE 56.00 IS CODE = 10 --------------- ---------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK ## 1 <<<<< **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 58.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------ ----------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 480.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 104.10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 10.90 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 7.501 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.273 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.84 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.84 --FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 58.00 TO NODE 59.00 IS CODE = 31 ----------------------- ---------------------- >>»>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< > >>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 104.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 103 .30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12 .0 INCH PIPE IS 6.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 .39 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1 . 84 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0. 30 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.80 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 59.00 = 560.00 FEET. 30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 59.00 TO NODE 59.00 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 .80 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5 .14 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 1.84 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 60.00 TO NODE 59.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 430.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 103.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 11.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 6.723 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5 .659 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3 .80 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.79 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.80 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 59.00 TO NODE 59.00 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. ) = 6.72 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.66 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.79 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 3.80 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 1.84 7 .80 5.140 0.41 2 3.80 6.72 5.659 0.79 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 5.47 6 .72 5.659 2 5.29 7.80 5.140 31 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5 .47 Tc(MIN. ) = 6.72 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.20 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 59.00 = 560.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 59.00 TO NODE 61.00 IS CODE = 31 ------------------------------- -------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< »>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 103 .30 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 102. 10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 120.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 5.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.47 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.35 Tc (MIN. ) = 7.08 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 61.00 = 680.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 61.00 TO NODE 61.00 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. ) = 7.08 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.48 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1.20 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 5.47 **************************************************************************** --FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 62 .00 TO NODE 63.00 IS CODE = 21 ------------- ------------------ ----------------- »>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 430.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 115.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 103 .60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 11.40 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 6.742 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.649 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4 . 75 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.99 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4 .75 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 63 .00 TO NODE 61.00 IS CODE = 31 ----------------------------- -------------- >>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< > >>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< 32 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 103 .60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 102.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 6 . 9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 10 .17 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.75 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.05 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.79 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 62.00 TO NODE 61.00 = 460.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 61.00 TO NODE 61.00 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. ) = 6.79 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.62 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.99 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 4.75 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 5.47 7.08 5.475 1.20 2 4.75 6.79 5.622 0.99 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 10.10 2 .19 11.667 2 10.08 6.79 5.622 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 10.10 Tc(MIN. ) = 7.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2 .19 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 61.00 = 680.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 61.00 TO NODE 56.00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<« ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 102.10 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 101.60 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 6.70 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.10 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.12 Tc(MIN. ) = 7 .20 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 56.00 = 730.00 FEET. 33 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 56.00 TO NODE 56.00 IS CODE = 11 ---------------------------------------------------- »»>CONFLUENCE MEMORY BANK ## 1 WITH THE MAIN-STREAM MEMORY<<<<< ** MAIN STREAM CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 10. 10 7.20 5.414 2 .19 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 57.00 TO NODE 56.00 = 730.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK ## 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 38.48 8.16 4.994 8.70 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 56.00 = 1240.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 45.60 7.20 5 .414 2 47.80 8.16 4 .994 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 47.80 Tc(MIN. ) = 8.16 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 10.89 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 56.00 TO NODE 64.00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 101.60 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 99.70 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 185.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 33. 0 INCH PIPE IS 25.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 9.73 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 33 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 47.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.32 Tc (MIN. ) = 8.48 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 64 .00 = 1425.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 64 .00 TO NODE 64 .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. ) = 8.48 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4 .87 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 10. 89 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 47.80 **************************************************************************** 34 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 65.00 TO NODE 66.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 170.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 105.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 101.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 4 .00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 4 .411 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.40 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.40 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 66.00 TO NODE 64 .00 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ----------------------------------------------- ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 101.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 101.20 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4 .01 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.40 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 6.12 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 65.00 TO NODE 64.00 = 200.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 64.00 TO NODE 64 .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. ) = 6.12 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.01 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 1.40 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 47.80 8.48 4 .873 10.89 2 1.40 6. 12 6.010 0.27 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) 35 1 40. 15 6.12 6. 010 2 48.93 8.48 4 .873 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 48 . 93 Tc (MIN. ) = 8 .48 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 11. 16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 64 .00 = 1425.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: - TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 11. 16 TC(MIN. ) = 8.48 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 48 .93 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS 1 8 NoText C. Hydrology Area C NoText 36 **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2000 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1 .5A Release Date: 01/01/2000 License ID 1472 Analysis prepared by: Mayers & Associates Civil Engineering, Inc. 19 Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 609 Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 599-0870, (949) 599-0880 fax ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * PLAZA Q ENCINITAS * 100-YR HYDROLOGY AREA C * FILE: PLAZAC.OUT *************************************************************************** FILE NAME: PLAZAC.100 TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:52 12/15/2000 ----- --------------------------------- ----------------- USER-SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ----------------------------------------------------- 1985 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 2 .600 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 8.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED *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) 1 30.0 20.0 0 . 018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0_167 0_0150 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 = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE. * **************************************************************************** -FLOW-PROCESS FROM NODE 71 .00 TO NODE 72 .00 IS CODE = 21 ------------------------------------------------- »>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 37 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 160.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 105.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 102 .50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 3.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 4.616 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.14 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 72 .00 TO NODE 73.00 IS CODE = 31 --------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 102.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 101.20 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 130.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 5.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3 .86 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.14 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.56 Tc(MIN.) = 6.56 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 71.00 TO NODE 73 .00 = 290.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 73.00 TO NODE 73 .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. ) = 6.56 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.75 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 1.14 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 74 .00 TO NODE 75 .00 IS CODE = 21 ----------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS< << COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 92 .00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 105 .00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 104 .50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MINUTES) = 5.289 TIME OF CONCENTRATION ASSUMED AS 6-MINUTES 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.090 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.41 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.41 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 75.00 TO NODE 73 .00 IS CODE = 31 38 ---------- ----------------------------------- >>-COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ->>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 104 .50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 104 .40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 10 .00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 8 .000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 8.0 INCH PIPE IS 3.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 3 .04 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 8 .00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.41 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN. ) = 0.05 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.05 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 74. 00 TO NODE 73 .00 = 102 .00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 73 .00 TO NODE 73 .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. ) = 6.05 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.05 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 0.41 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 1.14 6.56 5.749 0.22 2 0.41 6.05 6.055 0.08 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 1.50 6 .05 6.055 2 1.53 6.56 5.749 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.53 Tc (MIN. ) = 6.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 71. 00 TO NODE 73.00 = 290.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0 .30 TC(MIN. ) = 6.56 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1 .53 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS 1 39 35 VII. CATCH BASIN, RIP-RAP & HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ,o z ERS & ASSOCIATES Civil Engineering, Inc. PLANNING•F.NGIN[ERING•SURVEYING Catch Basin Type B Inlet Calcs for Plaza at Encinitas Ranch Phase II Given Q/L = 1.28 (per Chart 1-103.6C) Inlet No. Q at Inlet Req. Len. Len. Pro. 8 2.1 1.64 4.00 16 0.8 0.63 4.00 19 1.5 1.17 4.00 20 0.8 0.63 4.00 22 11.3 8.83 9.00 (4'basin + 5'wing) 25 4.8 3.75 8.00 (2 4'basins) CHART I—103-6C 1.0—12 to 11 s 8 4 10 Ole .• H S 3 >i v 4 .7 = 3 2 8 .- J p 2 I.S T W d z '0000, Z ` Z .3 6 = O ID a CL i O / 0 / � .9 z z i -� ° .i s z Z s = e d W CL / J tD O �i 3 = .T � ° H �'►�� F O .6 cD CC W U. 00!!If. W 4 z /� / �� t~ H 3 a A9 W .4 d o V .06 c .OS W 0 D4 °a .3 2 D3 2 l "eight of Coro $efface of •.2 of""Water 7— Loeu Ioor000ion (g) IS ELEVATION SECTION REV CITY OF SAN DIEGO — DESIGN GUIDE SHT. NO. NOMOGRAM - CAPACITY , CURB INLET AT SAG �lllt��L�W1'C/ I .�.�. A lei ; -c 10 y I e a 6 t` s � e 3 � 2 E W ' 1� t 0.6 0 � 0.6 o 0.5 CURe 0.4 C� T w a3 Q' • O 1 L _..y 0.2 A•CLEAR OrE ING AREA '+ 2w+ L (WITH Cute) •2(W+L) (WITHOUT CUlte) 0.1 1 2 3 4 3 6 A 10 20 30 40 s0 60 0liC![AJtC>E Q (fT3/21 GRATE INLET CAPACITY IN SUMP CONDMONS (Table assumes no clogging. ) 5-51 Figure 5-18 Rip — Rap Calculation To determine the class of the rip-rap the velocity of the flow must be considered. The velocity is compared to a table from the Los Angeles County Hydraulic Manual to obtain the required rock weight. This weight is converted to a class by means of table 200-1.6(A) in the Standard Specifications manual. Results are tabulated below. Line Velocity Class By Outlet to Encinitas Creek 11.34 5001b N'ly Outlet to Graded Channel 4.2 501b / Facing Outlet Into Encinitas Creek (for Rip-Rap Sizing) Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Rectangular Channel-1 Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.015 Slope 0.040000 ft/ft Bottom Width 9.00 ft Discharge 48.90 cfs Results Depth 0.48 it Flow Area 4.3 ft' Wetted Perimeter 9.96 ft Top Width 9.00 ft Critical Depth 0.97 ft Critical Slope 0.004296 ft/ft Velocity 11.34 ft/s Velocity Head 2.00 ft Specific Energy 2.48 ft Froude Number 2.89 Flow Type Supercritical Project Engineer:Martin Miller untitied.fm2 Mayers&Associates Civil Engineering,Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614k] 04/02/01 06:50:37 PM ©Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Outlet Into Graded Channel (for Rip-Rap Sizing) Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Rectangular Channel-1 Flow Element Rectangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.015 Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Bottom Width 4.50 ft Discharge 4.30 cfs Results Depth 0.21 ft Flow Area 0.9 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 4.91 ft Top Width 4.50 ft Critical Depth 0.31 ft Critical Slope 0.005770 ft/ft Velocity 4.62 ft/s Velocity Head 0.33 ft Specific Energy 0.54 ft Froude Number 1.79 Flow Type Supercritical Project Engineer:Martin Miller untitled.fm2 Mayers&Associates Civil Engineering,Inc. FlowMaSter v6.1 [614k] 04/02/01 07:03:50 PM ©Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 raua r->.) LEVEE CRITERIA Material and Structural Requirements Rip-Rap Levees (2: 1 max. side slopes) l (Ungrouted) Rock Size Levee Thickness - T Filter Velocities (D50 Size) Straight Reach Curved Reach Thickness 0 - 7 f.p.s. 50 lb. (10") 15-inch 20-inch 6-inch 7 - 9 f.p.s. 100 lb. (12") 18-inch 24-inch 6-inch 10 f.p.s. 150 lb. 0 5") 23-inch 30-inch 9-inch 11 f.p.s. 300 lb. (18") 27-inch 36-inch 9-inch- 12 f.p.s. 1/4-ton (2111) 32-inch 42-inch 9-inch 13 f.p.s. 1/2-ton (27") 41-inch 54-inch 12-inch 13 - 15 f.p.s. 1-ton (3411) 51-inch 68-inch 12-inch 16 - 175 f.p.s. 2-ton (43'x) 65-inch 86-inch 12-in, 18 - 20 f.p.s. 4-ton (5411) 81-inch 108-inch 12-inch (Grouted) Can be used only with special District approval 16 - 20 f.p.s. 1-ton (34") 51 -inch 68-inch 12-inch Gabion Levees (2: 1 side slopes) Levee Thickness (Straight or Wire Gage Velocities Curved Reach) Rockfill of Baskets Apron Length 0 - 7 f.p.s. 12-inch Baskets 4" - 8" 12 ga. 12 feet 8 - 10 f.p.s. 18-inch Baskets 4" - 8" 11 ga. 18 feet 11 - 15 f.p.s. 18-inch Baskets 4" - 8" 11 ga. 21 feet Gabion levees not permitted where velocities exceed 15 f.p.s. 86 200.1.6.1 i+ 200.1.6.3 87 Cobblestone shall not be used on slopes steeper than 1 vertical Contractor shall notify the Agency in writing of the intended to 2 horizontal. Flat or elongated shapes will not be accepted source of stone at least 60 days prior to use. To ensure the unless the thickness of the individual pieces is at least one- required quality,stone may be subject to petrographic analysis third of the length. or X-ray diffraction. Unless otherwise designated, for application greater than The material shall conform to the following requirements: 180 tonnes(200 tons), design parameters including filter. foundation, and gradation with supporting calculations by a TABLE 200-1.6(B) registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Engineer _ Tqy ,,,,,� -- -Test'Metttod No. Requirements for approval. Apparent Speck Gravity ASTM C 127 2.50 Min. Stone shall be sound, durable, hard, resistant to abrasion Absorption' Calif.206 0-.2%Max. al. free from laminations, weak cleavage planes, and the Durability' Calif.229 52 Min. unaesirable effects of weathering. It shall be of such character { percentage wear ASTM C 131 45%Max. that it will not disintegrate from the action of air, water, or I. Based an the formula below•absorption may exceed 4.2 percent if the Durability the conditions to be met in handling and placing. All material Absorption Ratio(DAR)is greater than 10.Durability may be less flan 32 if DAR is shall be clean and free from deleterious impurities, including greater than 24. alkali,earth,clay,refuse,and adherent coatings. DAR=Coarse Durability Index %Absorption + 1 200-1.6.2 Grading Requirements. Stone for riprap shall I be designated by class and conform to the following 200-2 UNTREATED BASE MATERIALS gradations: 200-2.1 General. Materials for use as untreated base or TABLE 200-1.6(A) subbase shall be classified in the order of preference as Percentage Larger Than follows: Rock 225 kg(500 lb) 170 kg(375 lb) 90 kg(Light) 3S kg(Facing) Crushed Aggregate Base or Crushed Slag Base sin Class Class Class Class 450 kg(1000 lb) 0-5 ! Crushed Miscellaneous Base 320 kg(7001b) — 0-10 Processed Miscellaneous Base 225 kg(son lb) 50-100 10-50 0-s Select Subbase 90 kg(200 tb) — es-too 50-100 0-5 When base material without further qualification is 35 kg(75(b) 90-100 95-100 90-100 50-100 specified, the Contractor shall supply crushed aggregate base 10 kg(25 lb) 95-100 95-100 90-100 or crushed slag base. When a particular classification of base 1 kg(2.2 lb) 95-100 material is specified,the Contractor may substitute any higher Note: e amount of material smaller than the smallest sin shown in the table for I classification, following the order of preference listed above, Th mal any class shall not exceed the percentage limit as determined on a weight basis.cam of base material for that specified. All processing or blending pliance with the percentage limits shown in the table for all odor sizes of the individual Of materials t0 meet the grading requirement will be Pieces of any class of rock slope protection shall be determined by the ratio of the number of individual pieces larger than the specified size compared to she total n0 the performed at the plant or source. The materials shall compact of individual pieces larger than the smallest size listed in the table for that class. to a hard, firm, unyielding surface and shall remain stable 200-1.6.3 Quality Requirements. Visual evaluation of when saturated with water. the quarry, including examination of blast samples and diamond drill core samples, suitable tests and service records may be used to determine the acceptability of the stone. The ' N 2 O H r-1 C O O C\ 0 O ° \\ O F w w a F c7 Q o• a A a M o a � o a a ° M o a + o a a 0 o 0 w o H N a ° a a °o H z ° a o F A to M F a $ O O Q F N O a oD o UO a ° N m H a m H W m .Q U ON .] o @ W m iJ q � � a z Lf, W W r ro a x a m $ N N OD U -4 14 er £ Or m F E ?6 m a o r"), a r' `' U ., H o w a W� q m N N [J1 N a V' O a � w A m a a o U H 0 a o rl 0 3 SC F u o F W W a E C7 wad a q a N U In a m U ON m N 1 N W In H O F Q W rl N U m a 'A � a x U N m Ln a m xu m M O o-7 N 01 a w o, w m z H Q O A E .] w o £ W — m 0 E y N fq Ul P, W ao F V Q r1 fn r1 a r1 7 W N R1 N N Q O N [- a �l E rn W m o H E O H W W fA O U a .4 a w E E a rn z ro o _ 4-3 U m rl u E N G: A W w + z N U H 0 0 W w z F ❑w o SwG rt A r. rC o 0 N v z u O ro 1 H u U H a•.a a a E A z t) ID W H �a M a E E q �n x m E. F W a U v U z o w U 1] H W Q, a W H Z H N a w H 3 U a O 0 O A q a w x F H W z o � H Lp Nx a w Z. 0 W yrzia uq uaw Paz H uwia F [a�Go Z x H 7 + o H w x A z E azw oa0a cl) a a a m U � Hao ww a ] A a s aH U w W z a F H F F U1tg QHC4u � FC xamx Na, O � zz W W W W F m 0 0 xW xWxW 0E, UU 3 3 3 a F w 4 n E En Q h 000 °0 W �EiEE a a a a £ £ Fw.�P qF qH qF yy awp; p; K W 2z2. UU � .4 ,7a Wa �a w H w ] p ]q F oo£ o U o E 9F Q waa z q U FFE C L a� w F3 0 t n n F H z 0 0 x x W £ H H ag Q a Q Q H E H a u �a W W £ £ £ H W w r.C � ww000Rtaa 3 wwaaa 0 w w 0 0 aawwwwwEWa >. >- E+ E-FH aiM W 4C7wxx r1N W W W o stFEF- M w w a MM UM wwu xx 0E+ E FFF H zzzwaaa Q N H H .'� Q W b1 w cn awww ryUy u U £ O O w Q o Q M E E U E H E Hq Hq H rq v) mmwaa. N N Q Q H F X r4 p W H z H H qq ££ EE+ v w w H D D A h -4 N zhhwaaQQ ° ® h ° » xxxwcacacw» 5axx w ri M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M H ri 1-1 ri .-1 ri ri H H ri r♦ ri ri H ri r-1 ri H ri '-1 r-1 H ri H N ',Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . . . . . . . . O O O O O O 0 O O O O. O O O O O O O O O O O O C\ Q m ix o 0 0 0 o O o O o o O o O o 0 0 o O O o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 0 0 Ow 0 r-1 M M M M O O O N O O O O dr WQ 0 0 0 o O o O o m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 aQa . . . . . . . . . . . . . M O in o O O 0 in in 0 0 C; 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 Q rn r m rn r w m r1 o in o O o in o in o M o 0 0 o O o 0 in o 0 0 o Vr o F7: r O) r-1 dr M 01 V) M a o 0 o O O o o r o 0 0 0 0 o O o o O o 0 0 o O o a ry M r m r-1 N O O M 'dr O O O O 0 O O O m O O O O O O O a i H N N N N N ri M dr In %D r m O\ O r-{ N M Vr Ln W O O m O O O O O in W a ri If H H ri r-1 H ri N N N aH O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M v O O in W ON O O H r m o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 O ri O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O o o O o 0 ri ri ri r-1 ri r♦ r-i r•i ri ri r-i ri r-I ri N N r♦ ri N N N N H H . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Ft 1-3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 zz O o 0 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H Q v W M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ri ri M M H ri H ri M M .� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E VI Q b lD �D O O O O m m m m m m m m dr d' m m m m m m M M M M M M M M r4 ri ri H r-1 r-1 H H N N H r-1 ri r-1 H ri F r1 3 m o 0 0 o o 0 o 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O o 0 Q E r-I 0 0 O 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N a N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O O 0 O 4 E ON N U w o O O O N H O O O O O O O O O O O O N v O m 0 v N -0 M N Ol O r♦ w L 1 r N r dr O M L 1 M O �D r r dr O1 b H a 01 H a w m OA a% O H In In lD r r t0 M m m m r ri kD r H W CO 01 V1 01 m 0) ON O O O O O O O O 01 O1 a% Ol 01 ai O O O .0 ri H ri H ri r-1 H H r-1 ri ri U C o 0 0 0 o m o r o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o o r o 0 �ro ri M w r M M Ln In r r In m M m In H m r M N m O N N Cl a M m ri v In m Q\ 1 l O H w In 1l1 %D r O\ ri M m U) r ri N r N W m m O\ ON ON 01 (Il O\ O O O O O O O m 01 Ol m 01 m O O O ro ri H ri H ri r-1 H ri 'A r-1 1) .i 0 r ri w %D O% M H o O O 0 %D ri m O m m O o r N O -4 r %D r r in H r O v O O 0 T Vr in Ln In in O O 0 %D O O fi z O 01 1n M m d' O N O O ri r O N H N in N M m ri W W ri m ri to O1 to ri M M O O 01 N -0 N V' N m r In U) W a H ri N r 1 Cl) 4-1 ri H ri r 1 ri x (o ord N a O1 m m M N Ln M M m m in m r m Ln ri M in m N ri m %D m 3 N U) i'7 m r m r M N H ID m m m r dr N O r1 O; in ri r-I d M �O dr U ri ri M N N N N ri ri 'i 93. -,1 £ 0) a O\ m In M N in M M m m In m r m In dr H in m M N m %D m F £ m r m r M N H - m m m r dr N O ri O in H ri Vr M lD er w V. M N N N N ri H ri �H •• a Wz rN� r♦ N M Vr iJl %D r m Ol 0 ri ry M w in W r m 01 0 ri N M " in U H r+ -1 ri ri ri H ri 11 ri ri N N N N N N 0 O [q R.' W Q m N N N N N N N N N N N ry ry ry ry N N N N N N N N N CL Q U H M M M N rl rl rl O O O O O Vq OD W O O O O O O O U r� W O N O O O F W W a Q o w 0 0 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 a M O O O a a o 0 0 U o o rn £ 0 0 0 a4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 N N N O O p O O O O O O H Z O O O ri .i O 4 O O O F A m ao m F Q o o 0 A 0 0 o N F o 0 0 U p O N O N W O UI H a Co WD W H W O O 01 4 r1 1 U �+ O 0 O a H r N (� rd W O Ol H 11 .H x o 0 U F o m m z W W 14 ro ix d o m Wo 3 N . �] N O cM U ,-rai fF�C w d o co ao A F •• x FSt h0 a N N N 0 En W Q U N N N N U) £a£ a F a W £a H H y 1-3 h A\W x U a a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o ri o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X F W W U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 a q F 0 a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e M g a O O O O O O O o O O O O O O M H E U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o H N -4 Ln M D\ � N N m N O N t0 N In m H b b W Ul Ln O In n to N O w q " N N N N H H r-1 H H H 11 H p r m r H O lD M 01 ON O to O N O M m N 01 H H to H H Ot M O tD Oi ID u H H m Ot to m N N V' H m N H tD O tD N V� q W N N M N H N H N H O H H N H H ry II It II II tl N U H to h H h to to o h W m m tD r-t w to to tD a N to !� N A H ID a H 1 O a� r n v O N M OGt xU N M q %D q r m o q r1 N N q to to n m m m m q m rn rn rn m o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 o m M .� H H r♦ H H H H H H m ri M � l0 m O O m N r H N ri Ot M O tD Ot tD H r-I U H M ri N ri H In m H Ol Ot N O O Ot O1 m H M N . a N O U N N to r tp O O H N N to tD n m ry x U Ol 01 Ol 01 Ot O O O O O O O O O m o Ol H H H r-t r-1 H H H H r-f II II 11 11 11 O o O O fry H o O O o O O O O O p m o ri h to tD to h n N n v o M to h 7y a w 01 r.1 d� Vw m ch 0% O -1 v 1n In t0 n n Lp Qi w -- CD °t q Ot q ON rn D+ q m p p q o o p o 0 o m q z H H H H H ri ri H H N O M r-4 H O O O O Ot O O m In O n O v o o O O O O p w q H F M v 01 r M M lfl to r r to m M m o r a W 01 Ot ri H H ui m Ol 01 O M H a to to tD t` O1 m m m m rn m 0t rn o 0 C. 0 0 0 0 m 0 H H H ri H r--1 H E" n n 11 u 0 N tq H v m tD m m d• N h a > W n m w n w V t0 m ID N M h tD w V' N H O M H v H r-4 w Q q H m o m r w H ON m m 0 to W O r tD o In r tD M m V� cl a . M - r ry N m .'1 W r 1p r N O M Ot a n M to M w V� N H t7 p N to r•1 v N N H m to a H n a M m O ri Ow a F M H M ri O m N N to tD O r1 N N m N O n to O O to to O o O H 'J W N Ul In II M II H M M II N r-I r 11 r to N N O O N O II W\ Ot O O O O 0 O O O O O O o o O O Ot p H w W O o o o O O O O O O O O O O O p t] h h m - 11 0 0 o 0 0 o h o 0 o y o 0 0 0 0 0 �C k u 3 w a F F a F F F F N a F a a a a F a a ro O a O 0.: o p a Iz w E F a a o y ° p^ a Ot o PC Q w o w o w o �1 a w cro on ZO o p p' • a a u) - a cn W W u) a . 0 o p N u) 0 m L U m tll H m M H 1D tD on 1n M O\ M M 1D 0 V' H q W W N N O b 1D b In M H r-1 H O m tD N Vi •u "' H N N It N 11 r-1 H H II H H H II H H II r♦ O O 11 O W C.' a H O 11 UJ J.J q [y O\ m r N N M k N w N - to to to m tp 'Iv. N W H Z a ro -- H H O H H H H H ri o H H O o ?: o O k 3 croi Chi U o •-1 O 0 0 o n m N C7 ro H 3 H U O r O O 0 0 O O O to O o H O O O a 0 O N U H H H O O O Ln d• H M a -H m q ,7, to tO tD W O o 0 o m rH-1 m m m m co m to m H !r M M M M M M M M r-1 ri ri ri --1 ri r-1 WWW r..1 N F v q u u 01 q n •• m V1 M N In 11 M M m 11 m Ul 11 Ot r m 11 m •• a a W m n x m X r M N x H W m x m m x r V. ry x 0 Uz U a V' M N N N N H U� h 1�1 W I 0 W H 0 M to W n m Ot O ri N M v Ln t0 M r r'-SI a q a r•t r-I r-1 r-� .-1 r� ,-t ,..1 M M M M M H H ri H H N O O O O O H r+ d O O O O O O C A m D o 0 0 0 0 0 o o O o 0 U a o w w v o 0 W q < o 0 0 0 0 M O O O O O Ch ri O O In O O a o 0 0 0 0 M7 kD O O 0 O .H7 M a vi o o fU-1 H O O O M o O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O Q O O O O O uO O O O O z Z O O O O O LW^G H A U1 M M M r-I r.{ OS O O O O O F A CD DD cD DD DD r-f H r♦ H H N b F o 0 0 0 0 0 b H o 0 0 0 0 p N U H ri w O O o o M N C1 N O % r m O1 01 O O O O O H ri r-1 r+ ri U 0 0 0 0 0 ari %D OD M O m m w o o r 0 �O a+ r-i o O o x M O N r+ OD U Ln O 0 1p 2 m H r a u) W W r+ a Ln M �p co .7 N a 0 rd 4/ M 03 tll 1n U1 N (D Qh d' N N N ri U r+ r+ A W a M W m Ul r-4 � . F E •• x O W z (N N M V' m W U 0 H O to N N N ri 0 N £ C O W q a co U o O O o 0 a 0 ri O O O O p ax . E U o 0 0 o p a F C7 a q a 0 0 o r m 3 U o 0 0 o co E U o 0 0 o m o r4 C) U) N w F Q o 0 0 0 0 N N v r \D co Ln ID ° rl O b CD O F kD m Q w o ri o 0 0 n u n N ,U� V' O Ln O 'D Q W r rq ai m Diq O O O p p U) L M VI b r-1 %D m M rl U m co O N O l0 10 O a U N r co ON I� x U o 0 0 o p II 11 II Q N F r N 17 at 17 N 0 O 17 a w %D r- PO y P4 (•Q D4 o 00 o Q o o Q z ri .i H rI H N rI O O In O O p Q H lD CO O Ln o h 0 0 M l0 P4- 0 0 0 0 0 O F II II II CO) N a h In M u rt b r-I m r r-I r-I N co M O r a .1 In M� W H N N O1 M N 01 O O N N M m ° m ri .] O w ri r r %D O a a E %D r In D w v r•+ C) u o u o 0 o u w� o o o 0 i O O 0 FH-1 r -� O O ri O 11 O O O O O h U x x II E E F E f] F w F E a a a • a E p, M ro zz o In %D z m +J U a\ M o p U M N -� U F r 1p ID Ln q Q w w , U H O O II O II O 11 w Z O 11 W O M r7 Q w W M In z L N z w z W M z w u o ox ox x • C> p se Oa rd l4 S b S H U o o ° o ° 0 0 0 0 U r-1 1-1 — F-1 p � O U y a .41 .H7 0 00 00 co d in x "' °. x v. x n x ?+ E W a U r. [M N N N 'T' x N U z U (n 0 w o U] z o r-1 N M In 1,.1 b �FY7 a Q a z x w F a U Q W a 0 0 0 Q a w x F N W z O >+ H fA F a W ow 1-3 z a M uca uaw aaz awF uawi 04 0 zozH � 0Q H x Q� z H x Q W D4 0 ru O a O E- a x Ell En w Ha u 6() vwlw U '] ] Cl x �a U W W FOP EElPE- z Ix L1 �Q0. L)pq � x3 Hu3ODzz w W W EP) ££ Ftn00 xxx r� 40 EH- F W. w a n x �z a0oHww 000 ]qw �E+ FF qz a a a a a x U F E W faEFO Sa0au7v) � Wfaqq a � a x Qwa wW WaarUiw £ Uu uFia �a �a �ax ] � H °xoo coiaawx �aqQ1% E, waSa Cl U) EnvFixx � � wh � AS+ x a F F o o x x w £ H H W0mQFEx0 .a4( rsl W £ £ £ F w F w U a' W wk. 002Qxx 3 wwxxx 0 wcn0Qq a a w w w w w F w a ?+ uwwzuwxx HW W W OQQ N r•CrF� rH� rP xauIT4N04 ExUEFF 0 qzp zzzwaas N 44 w E- Hol ol V U U £O O O U U V o �a �a �auxxwHHH N QQmviviwaa � z2 �Z r� N Q Q Q E Q Q H H H H \ h H N z?-.) h � o » xxxwQQuw) w I LEGEND CITY of cARLsBAD MAJOR DRAINAGE BOUNDARY SITE - - - - - - MINOR DRAINAGE BOUNDARY Lamm 9 %s 100 � NODE NUMBER n t t , A AREA DESIGNATION I v 1.0 AREAACREAGk(W ACRES) ` Nkw PROPOSED STORM DRA W A SOIL GROUP BOUNDARY e ULD I �N �rcm fi ! i \, - _ \ aX MIFF ffi�Q 0� �CfS - - / 4-1 m - S t=10 _ VICINITY MAP -i._. { _. 'rs,.s ,i 'i. ;'-E°5:-:GQ •F2L6 " 91 _ --"._ AET ,.. r -' -, I --�'_ - SHE - <n- ---- -- - - - \,` \ NO SCALE t Q700� J r• _ T 112 f" c _ _ _ _ _ - cJ= ra �.�, : a„uJ, r- I ,� e ,cq:' I r"(v OE/•,:" '. �c' � -i ' vY/�4I�I� 1- /' -i ro i I ,g ,,G• � ' _.� c��; s�y ixa/:o _ - ," - " rE 'ys ,4 '�' `' .o«} "I ,x'•c` -0 _ 's�o�.� ,y - - �Q �2 CTS In /a �. � F wx6 f y ©vtl `�k�,a? 6�R F_^b /' .y .v ', ' • � h:/I ft \ i II �.s,i n,r�f..3 si'. d�!I' .5�-v,</3`��,�:1 F,', "{,'H y 7 i�.\l'h>r O r i l /l/:/92/,-0, 'r' k 4#/t,;;e:..i , ,.'s.,.r. �.,r� A:_,`;r\o. ,.,r.o.,,? ,,.«..+„i,. i...''0.r 0"nv w.4 j,N i,r.�, 00 r,,y. �2' ,/'./h.:b,,. 0A,0.4Q,4' ti';<�g;_ �-6 U,, ",^R!<,..•+v.C,�-.. �,`',I '.`.•.? r._�i!';�- ':i '._\'F`f'-`'C,4 i{X,y4L q,/,/c4: 1, ._ r '' `y '/ •-7 4 r 10Y 7 r lt \ }\ t { - HYDROLOGYD ATA XAA 5 \ 7� Q1oo- 1.5 cfs � StBAREA NODE AREA Tc Q100 QSLM COMMENTS ' • (ac) (min),. EQ100= 2.8 cfs 81 A4 ' , 1 Al 1-2 0.31 9.4 0.7 INLET#1 � 1 { i41 -� A2 U 0.12 4.6 0.6 IN�f#Z t-1U,3 0"' a COIF. 4 0.43 9.5 1.4 F Q100= Z.$ lo. ° , -{I , F ) t-10.6 // -r - A3 4 0.21 1 9.61 0.8 1.9 ROOF DRAIN o k `•'r . I 21 5, - . 39 ^�i � - - ` A4 4 0:14 9 5 0 5 2 5 ROOF DRAIN . 9 "'I' � � 8_ 72 %��jq A5 5 0.02 9.7 01 25 INLEI"l13 28 . ,''F ^"> � A6 6 0.02 10.0 0.1 26 INLET#4 F, + { 'I' hi;fi. Mpt. - < ,. ,: 5' ., o ✓," _ �t✓-c, .,,., {F. €3:.'v O.G/ r A7 7 aE _ iYF, .,..i , ' _ _ b, 1 m 6 _ 1I, i ° '. V '{ , 3d\• j^ F� e;Pi a„ y ' i ll6. JY. 0.02 10.1 0.1 27 IN-Ef#5 �� T ��v° <� , �« r° �� ,�' G I 64 r � � g 'a T - ' ry ,rr.' k. is ' �Q 100= 48 Q Z:'. ..F. ___" 17 :.. .. .. i ,.... ��y , -- � 'rte ,.^ � �>f., _C.;f r+o /4 9i^,f �':t�(,`, r� _ „ 100 - „ _ ... stir ,'�: �. . ✓ ,� , I ; . , � .,� s l� „/ , � �' , i t-8.5 .9 A8 8 O.Q2 103 01 28 INLET#6 . I 0.1 28 INLET#? O 0.02 10.6 / r i�I/;+f/•,.!.;,•I: I, �a .y a ;..S,,. 0v0}- I 2--.8 l -:''•«" /.>�£,;C,4,,'<':I :'�--y..;","-. „,a i^ -�:, -- �-- I I , �'',''I i I/.i,�a>s✓ic�a y G,�,>oF��;j',��C,/.>fi i� �I', t.�-Io Q 1-- 0 0-1- - ,4/, i a\� ,_/�%i �F?',s u�r..te"r.�,-1 i,i°;.r�a-2��:,qo.',:r Ba,E v7.n€N'.mi.�...l e �1',•/'✓'i-��f/_`�" .-- _� _._i._ '°.. _3U x, --6'-6-' \.� A�1,0 101 1 0. 41 55.2 2 1.1 1 23 INLET#8 MAJOR A p ,3 CONE 12 1.29 10.7 4.3 , B1 1NrS 'F +i B1 21-22 0.21 5.0 1.2 ROOF DRA I N N XPESiGN C I F � _ I ION fF�T i4.&( r . aral 0 rUC c ,�, " 5.3 0.5 28 INLET B4 1 26-25 0.40 5.61 2.1 IN.ET#10 � 11 � OOF 25 0.88 5 6 4 7 d �b ..11 fQtc a av 1 n zi f f _Q B5 25 0.22 5.6 1.2 5.9 ROOF DRPJN •(.6L jl 4 V ...t<, I iL� / NFI"#11 _F ✓ I B6 28-29 0.16 7.4 0.4 ,0 C ,.r:a, F = ne - y, -�, , . r' / i .3��' �� . f / 67 27 0.22 5.7 1.2 7.4 � r,' X nj �.. I ,oi& i � � 84 -` •, � � � � / �� B8 30 Q09 6.0 0.5 7.9 IN.ETDRAIN 't :.�i',i <`r !'.,;xG •.XO : , Y i ., � - { - _ _ er'S f / :I !, ;' / 1 _? B9 31 013 63 Q7 8.5 INET#13 t ? ° J • - j I� /a. ! a I �Q, cfs 5 ! 1 \s r< j l t �!` `: ! i < a � B10 33-34 0.16 9.3 0.3 IN ET#14 27 R7 81 0 ,r� 3 ✓/ ' t=6.3 .yl y�%4 ' C„ C`€�" t `,.' s�- 4ic r � rem \AA`r. .7:G 1.86 6.6 8.8 I / ix/G a. L s i I � `^. I '� !. s,-.a' Q - cfs 0,2 0 35 SS ! n a �. > U t 611 35 0.13 6.7 0 6 e a „a 9.4 INFf#15 �"',.^ r. ► ' r C>vF 1 • .., 0.36 8. 9 08 INLET #16 L!i7S Or yiCc i,:1 r rr e4•+`° i G - .4 2 _ ,a/ rr., 1' 1: Y'y... � F ' .. ^1r ,� i:Jfl;:�`- ��j' i?OPiSTRJ '!v^N 1� ''r� , I : I �,l. ' `.2ril o '�Y / B13 40 c Q 9 cfs \ !4 os p ROOF DRAIN .F 0.35 5.0 20 i '% " �5`ry T\... x'___ C;"..GF _„ s• __ -. -_ - ___ -_ _ ({7'�"LY..S'eCsf$-_.-_ � i 9/ l „�..nf 1 '`C�A �I<,. I + b G,.• 1 x �7 / .3 _ T ? T - ., s / B14 5.9 28 4.8 ROOF DRAIN ' � '., ` .,, $' �, _ .� •,'� n IQ - 8.8 CTS s. '<! j a,e3� J;r: ,-� /� �., ,f6'y 100 � \ ! rF e x 615 42 0.35 6.3 1.8 6.6 ROOF DRAIN -. i ' � , ,-°'_"`. --"°-•.,_, "'^,,..^., ' t ...`• -.. `^«.,� _ �_ ;�iY� - � ,r-!` I?;4. '. .,.,. ' 2 •. zs i'6 r+1 .�,f / .ac ,,C ..<'h { i ' j - i -"_�------ ____ 4i.-a`•'_-_.___._. _-.i:,s.,S*'_M1C.c'.,-G.>G~--`_-^-`5,-r.F5..C f-__:._.^^,'``--_-_'c_ <-, "�`-'.i. : ''4 •"°,-., ,,3,e^",6y"v>^_x tib'rg,`./:n,:N.',..',,-`>k�._.-✓r,'^6.a n-v-.eVr?1,,.�.r. '�j_'_.. .,H_,_\s._ :,-,:nn_s,^,mm_.m`c_.s_,\.'.r._-...__.__--_,..-.__r._a_o _i ± _ ,. .__. _.,i_„k,:�W.. _..a-- t• ',/ ..t..',,-,.. ....%_'..3 <^ar,•rz,r o-:>�r 4 r',\1,I i .I;; I i .<«.a.1.`=.{Y+,.�F`?z,..�,,.., -o-F` 1!+-r,,,3,r;i . s,,r9 r� ,�N, r- ' .a�1 r<. ;S;° .- l! 1f.! e .o 4�F - ", "/,'G✓i°b"C<U� �i 1 � 1 61r 7 316 3.561 70 16.3 Li 1 46 0 4 13 INLET#18 ._ �. _ 43 4,68 7.5 21.3 1 _.__ �,E' e•.., ' ' ` _- : i° �„° { '6 __ CS:fr - � ,'`T~ £°y r rt,h- �.r. 'w CG rGYS I 'S I 1 f/ l� L CONE 818 487 028 3 9 15 .4 INLEf#19 OONF. 47 4.96 7.5 225 C 1 0.15 3.7 0.8 IN..Ef-#20 � B19 50-09 r� "'-•-' OONF 49 511 7.61 '{' I ' __ _`- Sa2- _ __-- -_ _ - .- _- 'v'-• `,°:w_... _...._ - ...` ' , Sy`6, , , .,C� oLx C'3 � /`� , ,.,, I � ' � ' � i t � � Q93 7.31 4.2 INLL 1 �1 , _ - 51 27 3 3 6.04 8,0 -, yr >. - J . 8121 5554 266 8.2 11.3 - r i _.._ _ - _ `°„,. - cc. V ._ TgpF _ 1%` ,1�f /• /C Ir, IN =U -. . - _ -. I E _ " ._ \� -\q �, °„`3; 1.,2. _ - FTJS err�,. ` •C Tj ? .. 0 �� r.s.Y ,: 1 ' .a' ../ //l -7'.,. I I ^g . .5 CODE 54 8.7 8.1 - - +U. B22 57-5 N Fr#23 B23 6059 4 079 6.7 3.8 INFT� _ J b �cA � CONE 59 1.20 6.7 55 { , it .'�.__ A .• »';• ._.. , ( _ �...,� _ 4 -t�a.� 0,;, iC -, ; li `° ., - _ i B24 62-3 0.99 6.1 48 INFT 5 ° >; ,�<, �� + � �� ' >8 CON F. 61 219 7>1 10.1 D1 _ i �i1 47.8 � B � � � � /� � � 1 ,�� CONF. 56 10.9 8.2 r ` J % 9 1 B25 1.4 0 COIF. 64 V.41 .6 8,5 48,9 z r Cl 172 4 1.1 IN.ET#27 _ 7 0.71 C2 74-75 0,08 5.3 0.4 INLET#28 uj Lu I a �_ ti` „ \ y GRAPHIC SCALE w r. M 50 0 25 50 100 ' U _ (iN FEET) o SCALE.•1"=50' OQ ro OCO CO U� Q REVISIONS APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE BENCH MARK SCALE PLANS PREPARED BY: DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY g QgoF ESS,, RJ,G. I R.J.G. D.J.M. APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO. m DESCRIPTION: TOP OFBRASS DISK e` P°' MA MFR,, PLANS PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF IN WELL MONUMENT. HORIZONTAL: AS SHOWN m Q z RECOMMENDED BY: APPROVED BY: HYDROLOGY PLAN FOR TM 94-066 0 YERS&ASSOCIATES p No aea7a m LOCATION: STA. 81+72 EL CAMINO REAL Civil Engineering,Inc. 0w,f n DATE: BY: S.D. CO. VERTICAL p r pII?� � 5'��G - O RECORDED FROM: VERTICAL: AS SHOWN 19s BY: PLAZA AT ENCINITAS RANCH 6850-G CONTROL PAGE 105 (Lake o-0 90 CA 97630 TgTEOCIVp"FOPrP DRUJ. MAYERS R.C.E. NO: 38474 DATE: DATE: o W 79,72 M.S.L. ` REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER ExP: 3/31/05 HYDROLOGY MAP SHEET 1 OF 1 p 2 ELEVATION: DATUM: (9a91 s99-oaso ap,� 2 ://www. erstivil.com m U' _ �W