Loading...
2002-7391 G '� NGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT A city 0 Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering July 8, 2004 Attn: Gulf Insurance Company 110 West "A" Street Suite 1805 San Diego, California 92101 RE: Henry Ferry, Jr. / IKAIKA, LLC Westerly end of Saxony Place APN 256-330-50 Grading Permit 7391-G Final release of security Permit 7391-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the project. Therefore, a full release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond BE2621381, both the performance and labor and material bonds, in the amount of$124,320.00, is hereby released in entirety. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher )yLembach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Field Operations Financial Services CC Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Henry Ferry,Jr./IKAIKA, LLC Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenuc, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 recycled paper NGINEERINGSERVICES DEPARTMENT city o� Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering .luly 8, 2004 Traffic Engineering Attn: Wells Fargo Bank 5522 Balboa Avenue San Diego, California 92111 Attn: Roland Catabona RE: Henry Ferry, Jr. /IKAIKA, LLC Westerly end of Saxony Place APN 256-330-50 Grading Permit 7391-G Final release of security Pen-nit 5792- GI authorized earthwork, private drainage improvements, and erosion control, all as necessary to build described project. Final, acceptance, and warranty inspections have all been completed to the satisfaction of the Field Operations Division. Therefore, release of the remainder of the security deposit is merited. The following Certificate of Deposit Account has been cancelled by the Financial Services Manager and is hereby released for payment to the depositor. Account# 2550036269 in the amount of$ 31,080.00. The document originals are enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633-2779 or in writing, attention the Engineering Department. Sinc ly, Masih Maher Ainance ck Senior Civil Engineer anage r Subdivision Engineering Financial Services CC: Jay Lembach, Finance Manager Henry Ferry/ IKAIKA, LLC Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue. Encinitas, California 92024-3633 FDD 760-633-2700 � recycled paper �- UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SAXONY PLACE OFFICE E PLAZA ENCINITAS RANCH WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Iq J J C O 1 T E PREPARED FOR CROSS ARCHITECTS SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA I MAY 30, 2002 GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS _ Project No. 05799-42-03 May 30, 2002 Cross Architects 989 Lomas Santa Fe Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 Attention: Mr. Dave Cross Subject: SAXONY PLACE OFFICE PLAZA ENCINITAS RANCH WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Gentlemen: In accordance with your authorization of our proposal dated May 16, 2002, we have prepared this update geotechnical for the proposed new office buildings on Lot 3 of the Encinitas Ranch (West -- Saxony Planning Area) project. The accompanying report presents site-specific grading recommendations and foundation design criteria for the planned new development. The lot is underlain by native terrace deposits and compacted fill soils that were placed during mass grading operations for the subdivision. The lot is considered suitable for support of the proposed buildings and surface improvements provided that the recommendations contained herewith are followed. Should you have questions regarding this update report, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED ED GAO James L. Brown ���t' �,9 ��Yy yi Dale Hamelehle (� HAME�I.EHLE G0 GE 2176 _C m CEG 1760 NO.1760 A No.002176 � CERTIFIED EXP.6130105 * �k ENGINEERING DH:JLB:dIj sctta`Ol��'\� N�' G120L30-02 T (6/del) Addressee TgrFOFCA�-�F �'4FGFCAL�FG� 6960 Flanders Drive ■ San Diego, California 92121-2974 ■ Telephone (858) 558-6900 ■ Fax (858) 558-6159 M TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE.................................................................................................................1 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................1 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS.........................................................................................1 3.1 Compacted Fill (Qcf).............................................................................................................1 3.2 Stability Fill (Qcf)..................................................................................................................1 3.3 Terrace Deposits (Qt) ............................................................................................................1 3.4 Torrey Sandstone (Tt)............................................................................................................1 a 4. GROUNDWATER...........................................................................................................................1 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS..................................................................................................................1 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity .........................................................................................................1 5.2 Seismic Design Criteria.........................................................................................................1 5.3 Liquefaction Potential............................................................................................................1 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................1 6.1 General...................................................................................................................................1 6.2 Grading..................................................................................................................................1 6.3 Foundations............................................................................................................................1 6.4 Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads........................................................................................1 6.5 Pavement Recommendations.................................................................................................1 6.6 Drainage.................................................................................................................................1 6.7 Grading Plan Review.............................................................................................................l LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Geologic Map APPENDIX A RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report has been prepared to provide grading recommendations and foundation design criteria for 2 office buildings situated on Lot No. 3 of the Encinitas Ranch (West Saxony Planning Area) subdivision (Tentative Map No. 96-170) located on Saxony Road and Saxony Place in the City of Encinitas, California. In order to prepare this update report, we have performed a site visit and reviewed the following reports and plans. • Update Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Engineer of Record, Encinitas Ranch (West Saxony Planning Area), Encinitas, California, prepared by Geocon Incorporated dated November 1, 1996 (Project No. 05799-42-01). • Final Report of Testing and Observation Services During Site Grading for Encinitas Ranch (West Saxony Planning Area), Encinitas, California, prepared by Geocon Incorporated dated October 5, 1998 (Project No. 05799-42-01). • Site Plan, Saxony Place Once Plaza, Encinitas, CA, prepared by Cross Architects dated May 14, 2002. Observations during our recent site visit indicated that the lot is essentially in the same condition as existed at the completion of the previous mass grading and as described in the above referenced Final As-Graded report. 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site consists of a large sheet-graded pad situated at the southwest corner of the site in the City of Encinitas, California. The lot was graded during the overall mass grading of the Encinitas -- Ranch (West Saxony Road Planning Area) project. The grading was performed in conjunction with our observation and compaction testing services and professional opinions pertaining to the grading and compaction test results are summarized in the earlier referenced Final Report (Geocon, October 15, 1998). The majority of Lot 3 is a cut lot underlain by terrace deposits. Compacted fill overlies Torrey Sandstone and terrace deposits within portions of the lot. On the southern portion a stability fill was constructed on the southern cut slope to mitigate surficial slope instability due to loose undocumented fill exposed during excavation of the slope. In-place density test results performed during previous grading indicate that the fill soils were compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at the tested locations. Review of the Site Plan indicates that project development will consist of minor regrading to construct two office buildings occupying approximately 7,740 square feet and 5,610 square feet for — Building Nos. 1 and 2, respectively. The buildings are anticipated to consist of single story, wood- Project No.05799-42-03 1 - May 30,2002 frame and stucco structures supported by conventional continuous and/or isolated spread footings with slab-on-grade construction. Grading is anticipated to be relatively minor with fills on the order °~ of 3 to 4 feet. Access to the buildings will be provided via driveways off an existing private road. Paved parking areas and driveways will also be provided. The description of the site and proposed development are based upon our review of the referenced geotechnical reports, observations during our recent site visit and review of the Site Plan. If project details change significantly, Geocon Incorporated should be provided plans for review to determine the necessity for review and possible revision to this report. 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The lot is underlain by compacted fill, dense Quaternary-age Terrace Deposits, and Tertiary-age Torrey Sandstone. The fill, including the construction of a stability fill, and geologic units, are discussed below. The geology as mapped during previous grading is depicted on a copy of the Site Plan (see Geologic Map, Figure No. 1). 3.1 Compacted Fill (Qcf) `- The northern and eastern portions of Lot 3 are underlain by compacted fill soils. In general, the fill consists of medium dense to dense, silty, fine to medium grained sands. In-place density tests performed during the previous mass grading operations indicates that the fill materials were placed and properly compacted in accordance with the recommendations of the project geotechnical report. Approximately 13 feet of fill is beneath the eastern most portion of proposed Building No. 1. Laboratory expansion testing performed on representative samples of the materials within approximately 3 feet of the existing pad grade indicate that the materials possess a very low expansion potential as defined by Uniform Building Code (UBC)Table 18-1-B. Based upon previous in-place density testing and observations during previous grading operations, it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporated that the lot and placement of structural fill soils, in its present condition, is considered suitable for support of the planned structures and improvements. 3.2 Stability Fill (Qcf) During the mass grading within the cut slope on the south side of Lot 3, a pocket of undocumented fill was discovered. A portion of this undocumented fill remained exposed in the face of the cut slope on the south side of Lot 3. The surficial slope stability of the exposed undocumented fill was in question. In accordance with our field recommendations, a drained stability fill was constructed. The -° Project No.05799-42-03 -2- May 30,2002 undocumented fill was removed and recompacted during the stability fill construction. The base of the stability fill exposed undisturbed Terrace Deposits and a subsurface drainage system was -- installed at the toe of the backcut prior to fill placement. The approximate location of this stability fill is plotted on Figure 1. 3.3 Terrace Deposits (Qt) Quaternary-age Terrace Deposits underlie a majority of the site and generally consist of dense, brownish-yellow to reddish-brown, silty to slightly clayey, sands. The central to western portion of Building No. 1 and Building No. 2 lie within cut areas exposing native terrace deposits. The Terrace Deposits are considered suitable for support of properly compacted fill and the proposed buildings and improvements. 3.4 Torrey Sandstone (Tt) The bedrock unit underlying the site is the Eocene-age Torrey Sandstone. The Torrey Sandstone consists of thickly bedded, cross stratified, pale yellow gray, silty fine to medium sand. The formation is very dense to locally cemented, typically has a low expansion potential, and possess high shear strength characteristics. The Torrey Sandstone is suitable in its natural condition for support of fill and/or structures. 4. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not encountered within the vicinity of the subject lot during previous mass grading. Groundwater is not anticipated to adversely impact the proposed development. 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity A review of geologic literature indicates that no known active or potentially active faults are located within the subject site or in the immediate vicinity. In addition, no faults or evidence of faulting was observed during previous mass grading operations. The Rose Canyon Fault, located approximately 3.5 miles west of the site, is the closest known active fault. The CGS defines an active fault as a seismically active fault with evidence for activity roughly within the last 11,000 years. The CGS has included portions of the Rose Canyon Fault within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Based upon a review of available geologic data and published reports, the site is not located within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone for earthquake faults. Project No.05799-42-03 -3- May 30,2002 Earthquakes that might occur on the Rose Canyon Fault or other faults within the southern California and northern Baja California area are potential generators of significant ground motion at the site. In -- order to determine the distance of known faults to the site, the computer program EQFAULT, (Blake, 2000), was utilized. Principal references used within EQFAULT in selecting faults to be included are Jennings (1975), Anderson (1984) and Wesnousky (1986). In addition to fault location, EQFAULT was used to estimate ground accelerations at the site for the maximum anticipated seismic event. Within a search radius of 62 miles (100 kilometers) from the site, 15 known active faults were identified. The results of the deterministic analyses indicate that the Rose Canyon Fault is the dominant source of potential ground motion at the site. Earthquakes having a maximum earthquake Magnitude of 6.9 are considered to be representative of the potential for seismic ground shaking within the site (from this fault). The maximum "credible" earthquake is defined as the maximum earthquake that seems possible of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework (California Geological Survey, formally the California Division of Mines and Geology, [Notes, —° Number 43]). The estimated maximum earthquake ground acceleration from the Rose Canyon Fault is approximately 0.40g. Presented on the following table are the earthquake events and site accelerations based on attenuation relationships of Sadigh (1997) for the faults considered most likely to subject the site to ground shaking. TABLE 5.1 Fault Name Distance From Site Maximum Earthquake Peak Site (miles) Magnitude Accelerations Rose Canyon 3.5 6.9 0.40 Newport—Inglewood(Offshore) 10.5 6.9 0.22 Coronado Bank 19 7.4 0.18 Elsinore—Temecula 27 6.8 0.09 Elsinore—Julian 27 7.1 0.11 Palos Verdes 1 41 7.1 0.07 _. While listing of peak accelerations is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including the frequency and duration of motion and the soil conditions underlying the site. The site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake on any of the faults referenced above or other faults in Southern California. With respect to seismic shaking,the site is considered comparable to the surrounding developed area. Project No.05799-42-03 -4- May 30,2002 5.2 Seismic Design Criteria The following table summarizes site specific seismic design criteria obtained from the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The values listed in Table 5.2 are for the Rose Canyon Fault (located approximately 3.5 miles west of the site) which is identified as a Type B fault. TABLE 5.2 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value UBC Reference Seismic Zone Factor,Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Type S d Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.44 Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient,C,, 0.75 Table 16-R Near-Source Factor,Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor,N, 1.2 Table 16-T Control Period,TS 0.682 Control Period,Ta 0.136 Seismic Source B Table 16-U 5.3 Liquefaction Potential The potential for liquefaction occurring during a strong earthquake is limited to relatively cohesionless soils which are in a loose, unconsolidated condition and located below the water table. -- Since the fills and underlying Terrace Deposits and Torrey Sandstone are dense, and there is no permanent shallow groundwater table, it is our opinion that the potential for the site subsoils to liquefy is very low. 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General 6.1.1 No soil or geologic conditions exist at the site that would preclude the development of the proposed office plaza, provided that the recommendations of this report are followed. 6.1.2 The site is underlain by terrace deposits exposed at grade and compacted fill to depths of approximately 13 feet. The terrace deposits and fill are dense and are considered suitable in their present condition for support of the additional fill and the proposed buildings and improvements. Dense Torrey Sandstone and terrace deposits underlie the fill. Project No.05799-42-03 -5 May 30,2002 6.2 Grading 6.2.1 All grading should be performed in accordance with the Recommended Grading Specifications in Appendix A. Where the recommendations of this section conflict with those of Appendix A, the recommendations of this section take precedence. 6.2.2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the owner or developer, grading contractor, civil engineer and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. 6.2.3 Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation within areas of planned grading. The depth of removal should be such that material .— exposed in cut areas or soils to be used as fill are relatively free of organic matter. 6.2.4 Review of the Site Plan indicates that Building 1 contains a previous cut-fill transition. The Site Plan also indicates that Building 2 will expose Terrace Deposits at grade at the southern end, and will have approximately 2.5 feet of fill at the northern end, thereby creating a cut-fill transition. Building pads should be graded so that foundations bear entirely on compacted fill or native Terrace Deposits. 6.2.5 It is recommended that Terrace Deposits in building pads be undercut to a depth of at least 3 feet and replaced with properly compacted fill. The undercut should extend into existing fill a sufficient distance such that a minimum of 3 feet of fill underlies the entire pad. Overexcavations should also extend at least 5 feet beyond the building perimeter. 6.2.6 Within areas of planned fill and at base of pad overexcavations, the existing ground surface be scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary and compacted. Fill soils may then be placed and compacted in layers to the design finish grade elevations. The layers should be no thicker than will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Procedure D-1557-91; at or -- slightly above optimum moisture content. .— 6.3 Foundations 6.3.1 The following foundation recommendations are for one-and/or two-story structures and are -- based upon the fact that the buildings will be bearing on compacted fill and that the material within 3 feet of finish pad subgrade consists of low expansive soils. Project No.05799-42-03 _6 May 30,2002 6.3.2 Conventional continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent pad grade. Isolated spread footings should be at least 2 square feet and founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. — 6.3.3 Footings proportioned as recommended above may be designed using an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf (dead plus live loads). This bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads such as those due to wind or seismic forces. 6.3.4 Reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 4 steel reinforcing bars, two placed near the top of the footing and two near the bottom. Reinforcement for spread footings should be provided by the project structural engineer. 6.3.5 Building concrete slabs-on-grade should be at least 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 bars spaced 24 inches on center in both directions and placed at the slab midpoint. The slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand and, where moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned or where slab moisture would be objectionable, a visqueen — moisture barrier should be placed at the midpoint of the 4-inch sand blanket. — 6.3.6 Exterior slabs (i.e., sidewalks, entryway concrete) should be at least 4 inches thick and reinforced with 6x6-6/6 welded wire mesh. The mesh should be positioned in the upper one-third of the slab. Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soil should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. 6.3.7 All concrete slabs should be provided with adequate construction joints and/or expansion joints to control unsightly shrinkage cracking. The spacing should be determined by the project structural engineer based upon the intended slab usage, thickness and reinforcement. The structural engineer should take into consideration criteria of the American Concrete Institute when establishing crack control spacing patterns. 6.3.8 The above foundation and slab-on-grade dimensions and minimum reinforcement recommendations are based on soil conditions only and are not intended to be used in lieu of those required for structural purposes. 6.3.9 Footings should not be located within 7 feet of the tops of slopes. Footings that must be located within this zone should be extended in depth such that the outer bottom edge of the footings is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the finished slope. Project No.05799-42-03 -7_ May 30,2002 6.3.10 No special subgrade presaturation (i.e., flooding to saturate soils to foundation depths to mitigate highly expansive soils) is deemed necessary prior to placement of concrete. -- However, the slab and foundation subgrade should be sprinkled as necessary, to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any concrete placement. 6.3.11 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soils (if present), differential settlement of fills of varying thicknesses, and fill soils underlain by alluvium left in-place. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations and slabs-on-grade a placed on such conditions may still exhibit some cracking. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur. 6.4 Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads 6.4.1 Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid density of 30 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) provided that sandy material (Expansion Index less than 50) is used for backfill. Where the backfill will be inclined at no steeper than 2.0 to 1.0, an active soil pressure of 40 pcf is recommended 6.4.2 Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001H at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, an additional uniform pressure of 7H psf (where H equals the height of the retaining wall portion of the wall in feet) -~ should be added to the above active soil pressure. 6.4.3 All retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system adequate to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic forces and should be waterproofed as required by the project �. architect. The use of drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes, etc.) is not recommended where the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely impact the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The above recommendations assume a properly compacted granular backfill material with no hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. If conditions different than those described are anticipated, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for additional recommendations. Project No.05799-42-03 8 May 30,2002 6.4.4 For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly -- compacted granular fill soils. The allowable passive pressure assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. A friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads. 6.5 Pavement Recommendations 6.5.1 The following pavement sections are based upon an R-Value of 45 (obtained from previous R-Value test results for Saxony Place). Pavement thicknesses were determined following procedures outlined in the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans) and the Flexible Pavement Structural Section Design Guide for California Cities and Counties. It is anticipated that the majority of traffic will consist of automobile traffic TABLE 6.5 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN SECTIONS Location Estimated Traffic Asphalt Concrete Class 2 Base -- Index(TI) (inches) (inches) Automobile Parking Areas 4 3 5 Automobile Driveways 5 3 6 -- 6.5.2 Asphalt concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Class 2 aggregate base materials should conform to Section 26-1.02A of the Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 6.5.3 Prior to placing base material, the subgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The depth of compaction -- should be at least 12 inches. The base material should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. 6.5.4 The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the Project No.05799-42-03 -9- May 30,2002 pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent pavement distress. If planter islands are planned, the perimeter curb should extend at least 6 inches below the level of the Class 2 aggregate base. 6.5.5 Loading aprons such as trash bin enclosures should utilize Portland cement concrete. The concrete pavement should be reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars spaced 24 inches on center in both directions placed at the slab midpoint. The concrete should extend out from the trash bin such that both the front and rear wheels of the trash truck will be located on reinforced concrete pavement when loading. 6.6 Drainage 6.6.1 Adequate drainage is critical to the future performance of the project. Infiltration of irrigation excess and storm runoff into the supporting soils can adversely affect the performance of the planned improvements. Positive site drainage should be provided away from structures, pavement, and the tops of slopes to swales or other controlled drainage structures. The building pads and pavement areas should be fine graded such that water is not allowed to pond. 6.7 Grading Plan Review 6.7.1 Grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by an engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to finalization to verify that the plans have been prepared in substantial conformance with the recommendations of this report and to provide additional analyses or recommendations. Project No.05799-42-03 - 10- May 30,2002 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. ^� Project No.05799-42-03 May 30,2002 I I fZ�61 'Q U C v 31 CD I1 CD SIS�,�dN'd 00 d(I�IiI03IIVJ `sdt�ta <J r J {�°'J,r� P�i s u ersCoosB�E B a Re o NV1d 11S I 1 2 =o I= I zI RDHAO U o Ira i'a _ 93 Y Q 1KOX r S P 0 s N Z M M a C_ Z ,n O N F- -j Z a a Wr g Q rn .- 1 U� �u w , U) � a_ 4' z io U-) u. W n 6Q u-j 9 UZ0 as w of a [�, u. O u- g �k' a ' w o oZ pQ 99 "1���{ �µ' Q V 0 Q u s a N Q� J u�I Q X 1Y�`- V� Q u � V sN Q a y 0 o U a R IV 7Q f rrj QQQ�° _ I O a L FQ n a i D[ 5 J W OL U� J a 0. n " '" 3 Z S �! Q ? W w� z °Y �c a Q � a aF X ' ' �- = v a I W tll� yu JQ '4r Z U� Ur �= r w �Q ' O Z V Z 5 n a IZUZK WrU�' . a n. WW w�u 1W2U uW1 .4 �' w X �LL L) g LL u aai� a n y VIII W Q W F7 e Z ) r } u u Z ut W JW1 NJf i- I I a� to HF<17 9 Kim a (L qry ��„3! ya�0� pQ�� 0 Z qY� a 1 O. LU ) wl�pa W Y Q 1 1 % ��) •\o W W W �P V3 ZN U 'n X W W 1 / / / y \ LU N (n Ol dl �9 ".a Z N � al m I i/ �- n � ID Iota o Ln j a Q �, y/• Ao' / Q 1 I W Q 4 Q �m u p Q 8 l •7 �1 \�\� ' ' X19• W Q 'I (M •• • / IL U O a fF 3\ Q / IQ II •• I •i Q W3 J4 Q W Q 1 �r U V Qm U W J0 U 4.u IC _ __. _ —. i I - m m •• g p WJ w U — I 1 _ I I wn Vw- Q U W w _- I ®� I W � ' I EaEr 2 3 ?w X Z --��I v • , m M I I I 1,1 { i Q T OULJ W •9 Y LL �.� J J LLl W • m avoal � 16- 8 / 8/ i �o — I • I I I i`i Ty p B4 rya-�� Z a 1 t • I�o I � - � I � I �delas �- '� 3 • x IL I •�.1_!r m _ - - I _ - _ I � I 1 I Y I � � �K�=G� �li ! r �I ••• I • 'iF� I� I � 1 I III � � m r��' � o I I �� !�7�i•� - � .o � I� — I � � � �_� I i� I i X13? �,r OC w + I I I _ — I I -- _ In _144-- � _- --_ -- � • - / � T � JI --' m ® � m 1 � 4m� _- 13B-- ' i0 ' ••• I I (�'.l® C r _ n) �� \ I ( � a Ij ! I j V � —134- •!• O j-® I e,-6'' OL (L \ 1 - I `fl 00 ID: ��' ,----.Br- � L_; _d --- � ,�✓ ice; � �- �`��:i ��� a ' I I I Q � 'lam-�. a �-��- -i '�!. � s� - II " ° •� rz o ip 421V l 3 1 • ? LL cq u— r I ca / / y o ED IS m z z z� J N N ¢ am li n0 0 r 1 � W Z o� 11 11 - • m_ }.� _._. m =� A\�\ G�g.Cts'` c W O O 0 •Q� m ® / 4C 5 O n� aW Lu L • )49.0 _ \ Ol 8 86,BL.Z N N Q1 ='/ APPENDIX A RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR SAXONY PLACE OFFICE PLAZA ENCINITAS RANCH WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA - ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 05799-42-03 — RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. GENERAL I.I. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom- mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case — of conflict. 1.2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for — substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion,the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and — methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the -- Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result in a quality of work not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject — the work and recommend to the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable conditions are corrected. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading -- performed. 2.2. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3. Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-graded topography. GI rev. 8/98 2.4. Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. -- 2.5. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. ~' 2.6. Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during the site grading. 2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report(including all addenda) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are .— intended to apply. 3. MATERIALS 3.1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or -- imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3.1.1. Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/4 inch in size. 3.1.2. Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 —° inches. 3.1.3. Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. GI rev.8/98 3.2. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. P- 3.3. Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as defined by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Articles 9 and 10; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading —. operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. r 3.4. The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to -- the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping purposes. This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3.5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and, where appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil. 3.6. During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be notified immediately to evaluate the significance of the unanticipated condition 4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and other projections exceeding 1-1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide suitable fill materials. GI rev. 8/98 4.2. Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility. Concrete fragments which are free of reinforcing steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of this document. 4.3. After clearing and grubbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent -- uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 4.4. Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or Y where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Finish Grade Original Ground --------------------------------- 2 Finish Slope Surface .. Remove All Unsuitable Material As Recommended By Slope To Be Such That - Soil Engineer Sloughing Or Sliding `. Does Not Occur I Varies .B J See Note 1 See Note 2 No Scale DETAIL NOTES: (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the key should be graded horizontal,'or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial material and at least 2 feet into dense formational material. Where hard rock is exposed in the bottom of the key,the depth and configuration of the key may be modified as approved by the Consultant. GI rev. 8/98 .. 4.5. After areas to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods. The area should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications. 5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 5.1. Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented-steel wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be -- capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the specified moisture content. ~ 5.2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6.1. Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.1.1. Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. 6.1.2. In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557-91. 6.1.3. When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant, water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range specified. 6.1.4. When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant or too wet to achieve proper compaction,the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within the range specified. �.. GI rev. 8/98 6.1.5. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-91. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the entire fill. 6.1.6. Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6.1.7. Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. 6.1.8. As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slope faces may be back-rolled with a heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4-foot fill height intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least -- twice. 6.2. Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.2.1. Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the deepest utility,whichever is deeper. 6.2.2. Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions,rocks or rock fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated during grading as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. GI rev.8/98 6.2.3. For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for passage of compaction equipment. 6.2.4. For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an "open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant. 6.2.5. Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher windrow. 6.2.6. All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative. 6.3. Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3., shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1. The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-construction infiltration of water. 6.3.2. Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. Placement shall be by rock trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during rock placement. Compaction equipment with compactive energy comparable to or greater than that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable energy to achieve the GI rev.8/98 required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill. 6.3.3. Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D1196-64, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of passes of the compaction equipment to be performed. If perfonned, a minimum of three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes required for the rock fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required number of passes be less than two. 6.3.4. A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to verify that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The -- actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. In general, at least one test should be performed for each approximately 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock fill placed. 6.3.5. Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, -- in his opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be required in the rock fills. 6.3.6. To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of rock fill placement. GI rev. 8/98 _ 6.3.7. All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by representatives of the Consultant. 7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 7.1. The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 7.2. The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion — thereof is below that specified,the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 7.3. During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied to the material. If performed, plate bearing tests will be performed randomly on the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be performed to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The maximum deflection in the rock fill determined in Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the maximum deflection of the properly compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture applied. — 7.4. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of rock fill placement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as -- recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading. GI rev. 8/98 _ 7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains,to verify that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: ._ 7.6.1. Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: 7.6.1.1. Field Density Test, ASTM D1556-82, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. 7.6.1.2. Field Density Test,Nuclear Method,ASTM D2922-81,Density of Soil and -- Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 7.6.1.3. Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-91, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. _ 7.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, Uniform Building Code Standard 29-2, Expansion Index Test. 7.6.2. Rock Fills 7.6.2.1. Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196-64 (Reapproved 1977) Standard Method for Nonrepresentative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible -- Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements. 8. PROTECTION OF WORK 8.1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. 8.2. After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. GI rev.8/98 9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 9.1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of -- subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 9.2. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-graded soil and geologic report "- satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geoteclmical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications. GI rev.8/98 Hudson Management Services 6136 Mission Gorge Road Suite 206 619-584-5580 San Diego,CA 92120 619-584-5584 Fax SAXONY AT ENCINITAS RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION April 30, 2002 Q M City of Encinitas Engineering Services Department 505 South Vulcan Ave. Encinitas, CA 92024 r Ladies & Gentlemen Subject: Letter of Permission for off-site grading and improvements in conjunction with Drawing No. 7391-GR As members of the Saxony @ Encinitas Ranch Association's Board of Directors, we are the authorized representatives of the owners of Lot 4 of City of Encinitas Tract No. 96- 170, Map No. 13481, which is adjacent to the northerly property line of the proposed project on Lot No. 3 of said Map No. 13481. We have reviewed the proposed grading on our property and do hereby grant permission to grade and construct a storm drain pipe as shown on said Drawing No. 7391-G, on the condition that the Owners of Lot 3 repair or replace any landscaping or fencing disturbed in the process. Sincerely, ie Hudson-Blattler Community Manager K&S ENGINEERING Planning Engineering Surveying h IS U V F�" i, Li NG SERvIrt � f3f EN^ HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS FOR LOT 3 OF MAP NO. 13481 -- SAXONY PLACE OFFICE PLAZA IN CITY OF ENCINITAS p�` SS/ o' p��l '� No.48592 m EV.f 7 3 U 0 cmL "Or.cr, JN 02-001 June 28,2002. G- ZY— 02- �AMAL S. IS C.E. 48592 DATE 7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 100 • San Diego,California 92108 • (619)296-5565 • Fax(619)296-5564 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS 3. HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS ..........................APPENDIX A 4. TABLES AND CHARTS .......................................APPENDIX B 5.HYDROLOGY MAPS ............................................ APPENDIX C 1. INTRODUCTION A.THE EXISTING CONDITION THE EXISTING SITE CONSISTS OF A VACANT 1.8-ACRE SITE. CURRENTRY THE SITE DRAINS TO THE NORTHWEST ON A SWALE AND INTO AN EXISTING TYPE `F' CATCH BASIN AND INTO AN 18" R.C.P. STORM DRAIN AS SHWON ON DRAWING NO. 4813-1. THE RUNOFF AT THIS POINT IS 7.5 C.F.S. PER HYDROLOGY STUDY PREPARED BY HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES, JANUARY 27, 1997 AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF ENCINITAS (ATTACHED). B.PROPOSED CONDITION THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO SINGLE- STORY MEDICAL OFFICE/CLINIC OR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDINGS AND - ASSOCIATED PARKING. STORM RUNOFF WILL BE COLLECTED USING PRIVATE INLETS AND CONVEYED USING PRIVATE STORM DRAIN PIPES TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE LOT DRAINING TO THE EXISTING TYPE `F' INLET AND CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING 18"R.C.P. THE RUNOFF FROM THE PROPOSED CONDITION IS 8.9 C.F.S. THE EXISTING 18" R.C.P. HAS THE CAPACITY TO HANDLE THE PROPOSED RUNOFF AS SHOWN ON CALCULATIONS. C. SUMMARY THE INCREASED RUNOFF FROM THE EXISTING CONDITION TO THE PROPOSED CONDITION IS DUE SOLELY TO INCREASING THE "C" VALUE FROM MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT (C=0.70) TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT (C=0.85). THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS WERE DESIGN TO HANDLE THE ULTIMATE FLOW USING THE"C"VALUE FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING. THEREFORE THE EXISTING 18" R.C.P. AND THE STRUCTURES DOWNSTREAM WILL NOT HAVE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS. 2. HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS A. DRUCTN ME711ODS THE RATIONAL METHOD IS USED IN THIS HYDROLOGY STUDY; THE RATIONAL FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS: Q=CIA,WHERE : Q=PEAK DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET/SECOND C=RUNOFF COEFFICIENT(DIMENSIONLESS) I=RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES/HOUR A=TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREA IN ACRES *I ACRE INCHES/HOUR= 1.008 CUBIC FEET/SEC THE OVERLAND FLOW FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS: Tc=1.8(1.1-C)*(I..)-5/(S*100)333 L=OVERLAND TRAVEL DISTANCE IN FEET S=SLOPE IN FT/FT Tc7 TIME OF CONCENTRATION IN MINUTES B. DRUGNCRITF.RTA -FREQUENCY, 100 YEAR STORM. -LAND USE PER SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAP. _ - RAIN FALL INTENSITY PER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1993 HYDROLOGY DESIGN MANUAL. C. RFFF.RF.NCF4 -COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1993,HYDROLOGY MANUAL. -COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1992 REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING. -HAND BOOK OF HYDRAULICS BY BRATER&KING,SIXTH EDITION. 3. HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS APPENDIX A PROPOSED HYDROLOGY J.N.02-001 San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program Rational method hydrology program based on San Diego County Flood Control Division 1985 hydrology manual Rational Hydrology Study Date:06/27/02 -----------------------------------------------— ********* Hydrology Study Control Information'***"••*• ----------------------------------------- K&S Engineering,San Diego,California-S/N 868 -------—-----------------__ _------ Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0 English(in-lb)input data Units used English(in)rainfall data used Map data precipitation entered: 6 hour, precipitation(inches)= 2.600 24 hour precipitation(inches)= 4.000 Adjusted 6 hour precipitation(inches)= 2.600 P6/P24= 65.0% San Diego hydrology manual'C'values used Runoff coefficients by rational method Process from Point/station 1.000 to Point/Station 2.000 ****INITIAL AREA EVALUATION*•'* Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 29.000(Ft.) Highest elevation= 138.400(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 137.450(Ft.) Elevation difference= 0.950(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 1.63 min. TC=[1.8*(l.l-C)*distance(Ft.) .5y(%slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8*(1.1-0.8500)'( 29.000^.5y( 3.276^(1/3)]= 1.63 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(1)= 6.850(In/Hr)for a 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.873(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.150(Ac.) +++ Process from Point/station 2.000 to Point/Station 3.000 '***PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'**' Upstream point/station elevation= 135.950(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 135.450(Ft.) Pipe length = 50.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=l Required pipe flow = 0.873(CFS) Given pipe size= 8.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.873(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 5.04(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 7.73(ln.) Critical Depth= 5.31(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 3.77(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.22 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.22 min. Process from Point/station 2.000 to Point/Station 3.000 •'""SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.22 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.662(!n/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.283(CFS)for 0.050(Ac.) Total runoff= 1.157(CFS) Total area= 0.20(Ac.) Process from Point/station 3.000 to Point/station 4.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)"*'• Upstream point/station elevation= 135.450(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 133.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 132.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 1.157(CFS) Given pipe size= 8.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 1.157(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 4.95(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 7.77(In.) Critical Depth= 6.12(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 5.11(Ft1s) Travel time through pipe= 0.43 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.65 min. Process from Point/Station 3.000 to Point/station 4.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.65 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.330(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 1.076(CFS)for 0.200(Ac.) Total runoff= 2.233(CFS) Total area= 0.40(Ac.) Process from Point/station 3.000 to Point/station 4.000 ****CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS**** Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area= 0.400(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 2.233(CFS) Time of concentration= 5.65 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.330(In/Hr) Process from Point/station 5.000 to Point/station 6.000 ****INITIAL AREA EVALUATION'""* Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 15.000(Ft.) Highest elevation= 136.400(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 136.050(Ft.) Elevation difference= 0.350(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 1.31 min. TC=[1.8•(1.1-C)•distance(Ft.r.5y(%slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8'(1.1-0.8500)*( 15.000^.5)/( 2.333^(1/3)1= 1.31 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(I)= 6.850(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.134(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.023(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/station 7.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'•*• Upstream point/station elevation= 134.510(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 134.170(Ft.) Pipe length = 33.30(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.134(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.134(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 2.47(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.89(In.) Critical Depth= 2.47(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 2.38(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.23 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.23 min. Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 7.000 *•**SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**•* Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.23 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.652(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.113(CFS)for 0.020(Ac.) Total runoff= 0.247(CFS) Total area= 0.04(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 7.000 to Point/Station 4.000 •**'PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'•** Upstream point/station elevation= 134.170(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 133.000(Ft.) Pipe length = 17.20(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.247(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.247(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 2.00(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 4.00(In.) Critical Depth= 3.33(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 5.68(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.05 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.28 min. Process from Point/station 7.000 to Point/Station 4.000 -- *•'*CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS***• Along Main Stream number:1 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area= 0.043(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 0.247(CFS) Time of concentration= 5.28 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.611(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (ln/Hr) 1 2.233 5.65 6.330 2 0.247 5.28 6.611 Qmax(1)_ 1.000• 1.000• 2.233)+ 0.957* 1.000' 0.247)+= 2.469 Qmax(2)_ 1.000• 0.935* 2.233)+ 1.000* 1.000* 0.247)+= 2.334 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 2.233 0.247 Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data: 2.469 2.334 Area of streams before confluence: 0.400 0.043 Results of confluence: Total flow rate= 2.469(CFS) Time of concentration= 5.652 min. Effective stream area after confluence= 0.443(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 8.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'*•' Upstream point/station elevation= 133.000(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 132.320(Ft.) Pipe length = 45.30(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 2.469(CFS) Given pipe size= I0.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.469(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 7.56(ln.) Flow top width inside pipe= 8.59(ln.) Critical Depth= 8.38(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 5.58(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.14 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.79 min. Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 8.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION*•*' Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 -a- Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.79 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.234(In/Hr)for a 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.212(CFS)for 0.040(Ac.) Total runoff= 2.681(CFS) Total area= 0.48(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 8.000 to Point/Station 9.000 "'•PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)•'•' Upstream point/station elevation= 132.320(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 132.130(Ft.) Pipe length = 18.60(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 2.681(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(ln.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.681(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 7.71(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.50(ln.) Critical Depth= 8.43(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 5.02(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.06 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.85 min. Process from Point/Station 8.000 to Point/Station 9.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION«*** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.85 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.191(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.105(CFS)for 0.020(Ac.) Total runoff= 2.786(CFS) Total area= 0.50(Ac.) Process from Point/station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)•*«• Upstream point/station elevation= 132.130(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.860(Ft.) Pipe length = 27.30(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 2.786(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.786(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 8.02(ln.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.30(In.) Critical Depth= 8.59(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 5.00(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.09 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.94 min. Process from Point/station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION'*** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 -° Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.94 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.130(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.156(CFS)for 0.030(Ac.) Total runoff= 2.943(CFS) Total area= 0.53(Ac.) ++++ Process from Point/Station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000 *++'PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)•*•' Upstream point/station elevation= 131.860(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 130.750(Ft.) Pipe length = 20.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 2.943(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.943(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 4.90(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.80(ln.) Critical Depth= 8.82(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 9.74(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.03 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.97 min. Process from Point/station 10.000 to Point/Station 11.000 SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION"'• Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.97 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.107(In/Hr)for a 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.083(CFS)for 0.016(Ac.) Total runoff= 3.026(CFS) Total area= 0.55(Ac.) Process from Point/station 11.000 to Point/Station 12.000 ***'PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size) Upstream point/station elevation= 130.750(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 126.930(Ft.) Pipe length = 69.40(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 3.026(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.026(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 4.99(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.83(In.) - Critical Depth= 8.95(ln.) Pipe flow velocity= 9.79(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.12 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.09 min. Process from Point/station 11.000 to Point/station 12.000 ***'SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 6.09 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.031(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.359(CFS)for 0.070(Ac.) Total runoff= 3.385(CFS) Total area= 0.62(Ac.) Process from Point/station 12.000 to Point/Station 32.000 *•'*PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)*"' Upstream point/station elevation= 124.800(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 123.470(Ft.) Pipe length = 23.70(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 3.385(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 3.385(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 5.29(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.91(In.) Critical Depth= 9.44(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 10.15(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.04 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.13 min. Process from Point/Station 12.000 to Point/Station 32.000 "'•CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS"'• The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number: I Stream flow area= 0.619(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 3.385(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.13 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.006(In/Hr) Program is now starting with Main Stream No.2 Process from Point/Station 18.000 to Point/station 19.000 ••'*INITIAL AREA EVALUATION•"• Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 8.400(Ft.) Highest elevation= 138.400(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 137.820(Ft.) Elevation difference= 0.580(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 0.68 min. TC=[1.8•(1.1-C)'distance(Ft.)^.5)/(%slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8'(1.1-0.8500)'( 8.400^.5)/( 6.905^(1/3)]= 0.68 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(I)= 6.850(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.012(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.002(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 19.000 to Point/station 20.000 .•«s PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)"•• Upstream point/station elevation= 136.320(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 135.870(Ft.) Pipe length = 45.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.012(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(ln.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.012(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 0.68(ln.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.01(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity= 1.22(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.61 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.61 min. Process from Point/station 19.000 to Point/station 20.000 *•**SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION*•*' Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 - Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type J Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.61 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.357(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.027(CFS)for 0.005(Ac.) Total nmoff= 0.039(CFS) Total area 0.01(Ac.) Process from Point/station 20.000 to Point/Station 21.000 •***PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size) Upstream point/station elevation= 135.870(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 134.170(Ft.) Pipe length = 45.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.039(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.039(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 0.87(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.30(In.) Critical Depth= 1.29(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 2.74(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.27 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.89 min. Process from Point/station 20.000 to Point/station 21.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 5.89 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.165(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.026(CFS)for 0.005(Ac.) Total runoff= 0.065(CFS) Total area= 0.01(Ac.) Process from Point/station 21.000 to Point/station 22.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)•••* Upstream point/station elevation= 134.170(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 132.710(Ft.) Pipe length = 38.90(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.065(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.065(CFS) Nomnal flow depth in pipe= 1.13(ln.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.60(In.) Critical Depth= 1.69(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 3.17(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.20 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.09 min. _._ Process from Point/station 21.000 to Point/station 22.000 SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION'•"' Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 6.09 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.031(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.010(CFS)for 0.002(Ac.) Total runoff= 0.075(CFS) Total area= 0.01(Ac.) Process from Point/station 22.000 to Point/Station 23.000 __. ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size) Upstream point/station elevation= 132.710(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.500(Ft.) Pipe length = 32.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.075(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.075(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 1.22(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.69(In.) Critical Depth= 1.82(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 3.33(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.16 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.25 min. Process from Point/station 22.000 to Point/station 23.000 *'**CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS***" Along Main Stream number:2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area= 0.014(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 0.075(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.25 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.931(In/Hr) Process from Point/station 24.000 to Point/Station 25.000 ****INITIAL AREA EVALUATION**"" Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 17.700(Ft.) Highest elevation= 134.400(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 133.780(Ft.) Elevation difference= 0.620(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 1.25 min. TC=[1.8*(I.1-C)*distance(Ft.)1.5y(%slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8'(1.1-0.8500)*( 17.700^.5)1( 3.503^(1/3)]= 1.25 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(I)= 6.850(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.017(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.003(Ac.) _ Process from Point/station 25.000 to Point/station 26.000 *•*'PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)•"' Upstream point/station elevation= 132.280(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.810(Ft.) Pipe length = 45.40(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.017(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.017(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 0.83(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.24(ln.) Critical Depth= 0.86(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 1.39(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.54 min. ` Time of concentration(TC)= 5.54 min. Process from Point/Station 25.000 to Point/Station 26.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION*•** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 - Time of concentration= 5.54 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.409(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.016(CFS)for 0.003(Ac.) Total runoff= 0.034(CFS) Total area= 0.01(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 26.000 to Point/Station 23.000 ***'PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'*" Upstream point/station elevation= 131.810(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.500(Ft.) Pipe length = 29.80(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.034(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(ln.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.034(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 1.13(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.60(In.) Critical Depth= 1.20(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 1.67(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.30 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.84 min. Process from Point/station 26.000 to Point/Station 23.000 ****CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS***• Along Main Stream number:2 in nominal stream number 2 Stream flow area= 0.006(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 0.034(CFS) Time of concentration= 5.84 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.196(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 0.075 6.25 5.931 2 0.034 5.84 6.196 Qmax(1)= 1.000* 1.000* 0.075)+ 0.957* 1.000* 0.034)+= 0.107 Qmax(2)_ 1.000* 0.934* 0.075)+ 1.000* 1.000* 0.034)+= 0.104 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 0.075 0.034 Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data: 0.107 0.104 Area of streams before confluence: 0.014 0.006 Results of confluence: Total flow rate= 0.107(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.252 min. Effective stream area after confluence= 0.020(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 17.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)"•* Upstream point/station elevation= 131.500(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.060(Ft.) Pipe length = 43.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.107(CFS) Given pipe size= 4.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.107(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 2.14(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 3.99(In.) Critical Depth= 2.20(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 2.27(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.32 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.57 min. Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 17.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION***' Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 6.57 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.745(In/Hr)for a 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 1.709(CFS)for 0.350(Ac.) Total runoff= 1.817(CFS) Total area= 0.37(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 23.000 to Point/Station 17.000 ***'CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS**** Along Main Stream number:2 in normal stream number 1 Stream flow area= 0.370(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 1.817(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.57 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.745(In/Hr) imiL ! Mhiiiiaiatitiiiiiiiiitiiie6iitLiiii.�+§ Aiiiiil & 11t11111111111111+ Process from Point/Station 14.000 to Point/Station 15.000 ****INITIAL AREA EVALUATION"*• Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 56.400(Ft.) Highest elevation= 138.200(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 137.580(Ft.) Elevation difference= 0.620(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 3.27 min. TC=[1.8*(l.l-C)*distance(Ft.)^.5y(%slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8•(1.1-0.8500)*( 56.400^.5)1( 1.099^(1/3)]= 3.27 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(I)= 6.850(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.349(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.060(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 15.000 to Point/station 16.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)**•• Upstream point/station elevation= 135.580(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 133.470(Ft.) Pipe length = 80.20(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.349(CFS) Given pipe size= 6.00(In.) -- Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.349(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 2.58(ln.) Flow top width inside pipe= 5.94(In.) Critical Depth= 3.60(ln.) Pipe flow velocity= 4.33(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.31 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.31 min. Process from Point/station 16.000 to Point/station 17.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)sass Upstream point/station elevation= 133.470(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 131.060(Ft.) Pipe length = 92.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 0.349(CFS) Given pipe size= 6.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.349(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 2.58(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 5.94(In.) Critical Depth= 3.60(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 4.32(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.35 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 5.66 min. Process from Point/Station 16.000 to Point/station 17.000 ****CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS**** Along Main Stream number:2 in normal stream number 2 Stream flow area= 0.060(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 0.349(CFS) Time of concentration= 5.66 min. Rainfall intensity= 6.322(ln/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr) 1 1.817 6.57 5.745 2 0.349 5.66 6.322 Qmax(1)_ I.()00 s 1.000* 1.817)+ 0.909* 1.000* 0.349)+= 2.134 Qmax(2)_ 1.000* 0.862* 1.817)+ — 1.000* 1.000* 0.349)+= 1.916 Total of 2 streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 1.817 0.349 Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data: 2.134 1.916 Area of streams before confluence: 0.370 0.060 Results of confluence: Total flow rate= 2.134(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.568 min. Effective stream area after confluence= 0.430(Ac.) Process from Point/station 17.000 to Point/station 27.000 s••*PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)s*•* Upstream point/station elevation= 131.060(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 128.820(Ft.) Pipe length = 88.70(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 2.134(CFS) Given pipe size= I0.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.134(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 5.66(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 9.91(ln.) Critical Depth= 7.85(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 6.71(Ft1s) Travel time through pipe= 0.22 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.79 min. Process from Point/station 17.000 to Point/Station 27.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ) Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 6.79 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.624(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 2.581(CFS)for 0.540(Ac.) Total runoff= 4.715(CFS) Total area= 0.97(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 27.000 to Point/Station 32.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)*•'* Upstream point/station elevation= 128.820(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 123.470(Ft.) Pipe length = 101.65(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 4.715(CFS) Given pipe size= 10.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 4.715(CFS) Nominal flow depth in pipe= 7.69(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 8.43(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity= 10.48(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.16 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 6.95 min. Process from Point/Station 27.000 to Point/Station 32.000 *••'CONFLUENCE OF MAIN STREAMS"'• The following data inside Main Stream is listed: In Main Stream number:2 Stream flow area= 0.970(Ac.) Runoff from this stream= 4.715(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.95 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.539(In/Hr) Summary of stream data: Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity No. (CFS) (min) (In/W) 1 3.385 6.13 6.006 2 4.715 6.95 5.539 Qmax(1)= 1.000* 1.000* 3.385)+ 1.000' 0.882* 4.715)+= 7.544 Qmax(2)= 0.922* 1.000• 3.385)+ 1.000* 1.000* 4.715)+= 7.837 -- Total of 2 main streams to confluence: Flow rates before confluence point: 3.385 4.715 Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data: 7.544 7.837 Area of streams before confluence: 0.619 0.970 Results of confluence: Total flow rate= 7.837(CFS) Time of concentration= 6.951 min. Effective stream area after confluence = 1.589(Ac.) Process from Point/Station 32.000 to Point/station 13.000 ****PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)**'* Upstream point/station elevation= 123.470(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 121.190(Ft.) Pipe length = 43.50(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 7.837(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 7.837(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 9.45(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 9.82(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity= 11.83(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.06 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 7.01 min. Process from Point/Station 32.000 to Point/Station 13.000 ****SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION•*'* Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Time of concentration= 7.01 min. Rainfall intensity= 5.508(In/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Runoff coefficient used for sub-area,Rational method,Q=KCIA,C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 1.077(CFS)for 0.230(Ac.) Total runoff= 8.914(CFS) Total area= 1.82(Ac.) Process from Point/station 13.000 to Point/Station 33.000 "*•PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'••' Upstream point/station elevation= 121.190(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 118.760(Ft.) Pipe length = 13.10(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Given pipe size= 12.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 6.56(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.95(In.) Critical depth could not be calculated. Pipe flow velocity= 20.26(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.01 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 7.02 min. Process from Point/Station 33.000 to Point/Station 34.000 '•'•PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)'••• Upstream point/station elevation= 118.760(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 118.680(Ft.) Pipe length = 4.05(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Given pipe size= 15.00(ln.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 12.05(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 11.93(In.) Critical Depth= 13.83(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 8.43(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.01 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 7.03 min. Process from Point/Station 34.000 to Point/station 28.000 '•"PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)"'• Upstream point/station elevation= 118.680(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 117.710(Ft.) Pipe length = 51.10(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Given pipe size= 15.00(ln.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 15.00(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 0.00(In.) Critical Depth= 13.83(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 7.25(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.12 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 7.15 min. T,r; fTT Process from Point/Station 28.000 to Point/Station 29.000 "••PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME(User specified size)"'• Upstream point/station elevation= 117.710(Ft.) Downstream point/station elevation= 117.320(Ft.) Pipe length = 8.00(Ft.) Manning's N=0.013 No.of pipes=1 Required pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Given pipe size= 18.00(In.) Calculated individual pipe flow = 8.914(CFS) Normal flow depth in pipe= 7.75(In.) Flow top width inside pipe= 17.82(ln.) Critical Depth= 13.87(In.) Pipe flow velocity= 12.27(Ft/s) Travel time through pipe= 0.01 min. Time of concentration(TC)= 7.16 min. Process from Point/Station 30.000 to Point/Station 31.000 ""INITIAL AREA EVALUATION Decimal fraction soil group A=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group B=0.000 Decimal fraction soil group C=1.000 Decimal fraction soil group D=0.000 [COMMERCIAL area type ] Note:user entry of impervious value,Ap=0.850 Initial subarea flow distance = 61.700(Ft.) Highest elevation= 126.080(Ft.) Lowest elevation= 120.000(Ft.) Elevation difference= 6.080(Ft.) Time of concentration calculated by the urban areas overland flow method(App X-C)= 1.65 min. TC=[1.8'(1.1-C)'distance(Ft.)^.5)/(°/a slope^(1/3)] TC=[1.8'(1.1-0.8500)'( 61.700^.5y( 9.854^(1/3)]= 1.65 Setting time of concentration to 5 minutes Rainfall intensity(I)= 6.850(ln/Hr)fora 100.0 year storm Effective runoff coefficient used for area(Q=KCIA)is C=0.850 Subarea runoff= 0.175(CFS) Total initial stream area= 0.030(Ac.) End of computations,total study area= 1.849(Ac.) 4. TABLES AND CHARTS APPENDIX B wlj 00 �1:=1:Ins::,: NO : � : :36 ::: : ::M : :: MEMENEEEM: . : : E : � :_ ■EN■ ■■■■■NM■ ■/OMM■11■E'INI■LEI■■ INE■O►IO■■ ONES:..■■■■■■ ■■MME■7■LMFINViNMIIN■ ,■..■r.■■.■ ■N■■E■■■■■■■■ WIN rl■■ ■NCEE'A■'A..AE■'�■NM■►A■M■■ ■oMN■SM■EN■■■ ' ■TA■E�I.■IA./OI..M/iE.IO.■E/MEMO■ ■E■■■E■■.■■■ ; ■■■u..■.ru/l■a'A■■►i■ommum..■■ ■EN■■M.■Eo■■ ■ I■■►AMMO ■E/.OMEI BOON■■ ■OEEEmm■■M■■ ■/i■/I.� ��/i/jO■//■O lummyAmmalmms N■.■I/O■.O■■ ■EM■■■■■■E■ ■r1N1/M■ l '/■■�.■ ■NEIME■NMM■ ■mmumm■En■ ■►/M'■ENr/■I■ I/ ■M■■■■ ■o■■ ■OON■m/■II■I /NNO/SOME ME■ ■Os.omm■m■ ■I■Ii■.I.E■I■►I ANN F/■E■NOME■ ■EE■■O■■M■ ■n■nMMn■/,E■�/, ErAl • ■ E.M..■■O■ ■■O■■■■NEM■■■■►/.'t■■7N//■/,■'/■I,■ i■■ 'I■■■■■■EE■ MONSOON■MO..O■t/O■/.E/O/I/.■►/M■/E■ % Am■mmmmmm■■ ■.M.■■■■■■■N■OOME■r/E1i■//11■I..a MEN I■■■..E■■N■ • mammon SEEMENSEEN :}I1i:FA:VAEVAAMNMFMM OiMEEMEN::::ii ■■■E■E■■■■NNW■/IE■'///.►IIj■I MOUSE OViNEENEOEO■■II■ ■ME■N■■■EO■■rl■■i!I■'IM//Ii■I,.OUE■o►IMM■■.■E■■PA.EOP ■■M■ENESSE■rl■ME►IIIAWS'IS'/N►I■NO'/ME■ ■/�E■�iMO■ ■EM EM■M■■■E'//1■/SIAM FAY,E/jEIMM■/'EMO■ INN■EIS%ME■p ■M■.s■.■E■■t'/.II■VIII/OI■'I■■I.�MS■ • .M■N/./ss■r/ ■MMMM MMME■IIr/■/A■'11►.IAfaIm■NFIMM■ ` i /■E■nd■S■ • • ■ONE■M■■NI,IEI,M'II,1►.�I.OIi■OI,/■■■ /■ �i • /\■SINE ■M■■M■NNEr1►1■►I/,NA!I■AF...■/%NN■■ AN ;Am . ■�/.■■ ■OONN■NNE/II.■►IId.11�I��O�INEOS�.■►,/■ ` gym■■O■ ■■■■■■■■I�/■IIII/mil i■'INN'I■MMO�iEN.■■/i� • im■■N./i ■■OSM■■■II'III'I�/'1/,III..O'IM■■■�■/%■■I,�S■. ■ ./i.■ ■■NN■.■//■'UPI././I1:/NiN■.I%NI,/NEB■■►I ld.■■■ • • =SO■■■MIDI//,O%//II.•1/INM■/.%O�NM/%■/non ���j O/M ) ■■.■■E'/1'I►/'/%I/IC7%NE./.E/%./DOE,/M■■/� � i/■ or NON mMovaVjdj)!dP!* V% I ■■■I//%'.i/%:/NEE►i1/.EIIYiEN/iO■■,%■■EE■ �■�■■.■ • " ld d■NON o■i//G/.dondol!i.■■onidmmOE■i/!w:/■■Y ■■NNM■■.MEN%iI%/����.�i■■.CS/OOMOS�:: ■■■o■■ SEEN/'/./iP-/:/nim/ti/Omm■/ll!mzkwmmO•!"-- ■■■MEMO moor�':iii!i/•'i■N_■M•!�i■■■!_��•■M■M■■ ■\SEMEN MEN nor or MESON --�.�■E■■■ONMSS■■■■NOSE■■■i■■■SO\E■Himm onsoon • • Uv .... d slow W.Se NOW f �. . ..o Lei cq M ,/ co 4 v Sn r. •CD C/ ^ g• /� zoo cg) 4A w. . N cm Cn LLA C404 0 cz qc v W8 ` M a x 44 a 0 ar _ V. $ z soMg - co O Vi '� M '_ •7 C M Me O I • `•� . t e 1 1:�• . . ' } ' `fit �`� TT-A- • MI •• ' /L / Clk fee i +/• 1 � Z7C, t v 1, � '• ✓ter O •- �+ tit '• m. +- �• .' �", •(�1- r� • o - C* Pft cz cm Ji Q Le s o cz w ••- "i • i ..�.. J O'N � � Q cz: o -- . lid..! VS L`.. 1: (,� • -� ter' -- uj z C.-4 •�` .o ..Q s C O c � , � ✓ I (oQ• � Q ` o AA-J 3 we - •.• _ Cd < x z0 p u �: �-• 06 - ,O tu L10o >+ O v M, A �, .i O L6 ~ C 13 C toil 0 rte'• # - p r 4 > . a C �►d L tp A 401 O AZ qDLCC C07i# L '� CO r Q' C OG —M1 C IM O ti" C r A 4j I�"• 4J •r N d• flo- # d �,1 4► C • •fir• O Z'O 41 4J 0 4A _ O CL 4-11 144 0 d Nr _...• .O. UI C 31-0 r 4-P�C 4j %- o r. t C/ 4j� A Z r CM 6 C V V C0 CIO VC CL _r- �pp C C O. r r r.. �W.QA V w V V L ow-r- a1 w 0- 4J.0 • CL CL A N d C O L`•4 i L L- ~ d N C d Mt0 Q S- 0 C 4+4+ L t-7 L C1. •- C A d Ir O• O. L. L rNOb .CN Z 4O � f-t r� � O 4� v,a to t I- t U .-,O •C V d # e 0 C 4 4J N d .••. C 4+-r-4o?• a to co r0 � N C l.. dA 01 N Nd 4J 4j � 41 N d r 3 r r •rl A CJ O n A O 'r d 4J f• t A d -O t .0 O .-�►- L�- t t •� N d H V 4.N 1-.r_ O C 4J 4+4J d O L] m 1--•4� r•- 3 6-Hour Precipitation (inches) , O in 0 %A o to a to c •n C3 N tD Nfln Qai•M M N N • fill 1 to ov4 o '�? N T. �,,,. 'e ;l; .�• � T- Lam.- = =� - �S ..L. T •r •r-i Y 4-- - ,, - ,_._ it � -,,., ,�.�- 'T �T-T! - ;•�•• 1•.1 1 1 1 i. _ .••.• •tl _ _ _T • _ ice__ I.' z 1 •1 33 ._ .. i �, s a �. •t _ K APPE� A XI ,R Average Values of Roughness Coefficient (farming's n) Roughness Type of Waterway Coefficient (n) I. Closed Conduits (1) Steel (not lined) 0.015 Cast Iron 0.015 Aluminum .021 Corrugated Metal (not lined) 0.024 • Corrugated Metal (2) (smooth asphalt quarterlining) 0.021 Corrugated Metal (2) (smooth asphalt half lining) 0.018 Corrugated Metal (smooth asphalt full lining) 0.012 _ Concrete RCP 0.012 Clay (sewer) 0.013 Asbestos Cement-4 PVL 0.011 Drain Tile (terra cotta) 0.015 Cast-in-place Pipe 0.013 Reinforced Concrete Box 0.014 2. Open Channels (1) a. Unlined Clay Loam 0.023 Sand 0.020 b. Revetted Gravel 0.030 Rock O.O40 Pipe. and Wire 0.025 Sacked Concrete 0.023 c. Lined 0.014 Co Grote (poured) 0.014 Air,Blown Mortar (3) Asphaltic Concrete or Bituminous Plant Mix 0.018 d. Vegetated (5) .035 Grass lined, maintained ' Grass and Weeds .045 Grass lined.with concrete low flow channel .032 3. Pavement and Gutters (1) Concrete 0.01.5 Bituminous (plant-mixed) 0.016 °' ; '_, f :•i .�. ,.,. i ,.; �. k APPENDIX _t • . TABLE 2 \ . RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD) DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN)•-• ,_"_" Coefficient. C Soil Group(I) Land Use Residential: - Single Family .40 .45 . .50 .55 Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70 Mobile homes .45 .50 .55 .65 Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45 Commercial (2) .70 .75 .80 .85 807E Impervious, Industria1 (2) .80 .85 .90 .95 9OX Impervious NOTES: (')Soil Group mans are available at the offices of the Department of Public W (2)Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated impervio Hess values of 80% or 90x, the values given for coefficient C. may be rev by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual imperviousness to the tabulated 'imperviousness., However, in no case shall the final coefficien be less than 0.50. For example: Consider commercial property on O 'soil. Actual imperviousness - 50% Tabulated imperviousness - 8076 Revised C x 0.85 • 0.53 • a r NDI X APiev. El mod,F.Brabr and Horace Williams King -� HANDBOOK OF am EFG�11"G s Table 7-14. 'Values of K'- for Circular.Channels in the Formula KI Q - - d»,s': �c D = depth of water d diat»cter of cbanncl .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .0.5 .06 .07 .08 .09 d .0 .00007 .00031 .00074•.0013&.00222 .00328 .00455 .00604 .(1077' .1 .00967 -0118 .0142 .0167 .0195 .0225 .0257 .0291 .0327 .0366 . .2 .0406 .0448 .0492 .0537 .0585 .0634 .0686 .0738 .0793 .084 9 .3 007 .0966 1.1027 .1089 .1153 1.1218 .1284 1.1352 1.1420 .14:10 .4 .1561 .1633 .1705 .1779 .1854 .1929 .2005 .2082 .2160 .2238 .5 .232 .239 .247 .255 .263 .271 .279 .287 .295 .303 .6 .311 .319 .327 .335 .343 .350 .358 .366 .373 .380 .7 .388 .395 .402 .409 .416 .422 .429 .435 .441 .447 .6 :45* .458 - .463 .468 .473 .477 .481 .485 .488 .491 .9 .494 .496 .497 .448 .498 .498 .496-"& .494 .489 .483 1.0 .463 1 � • . 5. HYDROLOGY MAP APPENDIX C HUN SAKE R &ASSOCIATES S A N D I E G O. 1 N C. PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEYING HYDROLOGY STUDY IRVINE LAS VEGAS for RIVERSIDE E N C I N I TAS RANCH SAN DIEGO (West Saxony Planning., pe,a) _ r in the City of Encinitas Prepared for: D. R. Horton W.O. 1375-41 January 27, 1997 Revised July 29, 1997 OQgpFESS/o OND L.,y �2 U' Z m p', N0.48670 � -- *Rayond L. Martin, R.C.E. Exp.6W/00 Project Manager Hunsaker &Associates San Diego, Inc. OFCAL,VP DAVE HAMMAR JACK HILL LEX WILLIMAN 1. i 10179 Huennekens St. AUG 21 1997 — JUL 30 1997 _ Suite 200 San Diego,CA 92121 _ - (619)558-4500 PH (619)558-1414 F www.hunsaker.com InfoCHumakerlD.com MAU°M-%*C'*rVwV�1 3 7 610 02.000 w 137541 07r2M7 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION References I Introduction I Executive Summary I Criteria and Methodology II Weighted C Calculations Ill 100-year Hydrology Study (Developed Conditions) IV 100-year Hydrology Study (Existing Conditions) V - Hydraulic Calculations VI Hydraulic Calculations (42" RCP along Northwestern boundary) VII Inlet Sizing VIII Headwall Calculations IX 42" RCP Existing 54" RCP Rip Rap Sizing Velocity Control Ring DesignCalculations X Offsite Hydrology Map (pocket) Hydrology Map (pocket) Plans for Existing 54" Storm Drain (pocket) RM# .i.e,A,Me..nr1o,,,.,P,.,eH376Yb2..oc wo 137&41 wry References County of San Diego Hydrology Manual City of San Diego Standards Handbook of Hydraulics, Brater & King Introduction This project proposes to construct 47 triplex structures and create three multi-use pads within the West Saxony Planning Area of Encinitas Ranch. The site is located in the Saxony Road Watershed, which discharges into the Pacific Ocean at Moonlight Beach. Drainage from the site is part of a 110 acre sub-basin located east of Interstate 5, consisting primarily of rural agricultural land. A large portion of this basin is in an agricultural preserve. Section III of this report contains our calculations for a weighted C Value for this area. The high point of the sub-basin is at an elevation of 304 MSL. The low point of the sub-basin is at an elevation of 106 MSL. Run off from this sub-basin crossed the freeway via an existing 54-inch reinforced concrete pipe. A copy of the profile for this pipe is included in the appendix for reference. Executive Summary Drainage from this sub-basin reaches the inlet of the 54-inch culvert primarily from two existing earthen ditches. The ditch that approaches from the southeast travels from the discharge of an existing 36-inch culvert on the YMCA property located directly south of the site. The project will extend this storm drain system across the site, in an improved system that will serve the proposed development. The ditch that approaches from the northeast generally follows the project boundary. The existing ditch shows signs of erosion and deposition of silts during significant storm events. Construction of the proposed 42-inch culvert will stabilize the ditch against erosion, and reduce the amount of siltation reaching the existing 54-inch culvert under the Interstate, while protecting the toe of the' proposed fill against instability due to moving water. -- The hydrologic calculations included herein as Section IV, analyze the drainage basin using both undeveloped and developed conditions onsite. For offsite areas, we assumed area within the Encinitas Ranch agricultural preserve would ultimately have more impervious area due to possible construction of additional greenhouses in the future. Our assumption for other adjacent undeveloped properties used a C factor for multi-family housing, to be conservative. Section III of this report is our weighted C value RM:kk mkwoaWN137SU1-0oe wo 137541 04rW7 calculation for offsite areas. Section V is included to determine peak runoff from at the 54-inch culvert, assuming no development occurs onsite. w_ The existing 54-inch culvert under Interstate 5 was designed by CalTrans using a peak flow of 267.0 c.f.s. (See Plans in Map pocket). Our calculations indicate that the result of the land use change within Encinitas Ranch, and development of the project raises the peak flow by only 3.1 c.f.s., or 1.16%. This increase has no adverse impact on the performance of this culvert, and raises the peak stage elevation by only 0.1 foot. This data is summarized in Table 1, below. Condition Peak Runoff Peak Stage Elev. Undeveloped 259.0 119.2 CalTrans 267.0 120.1 Developed 270.6 120.2 Hydraulic Calculations for each reach of pipe are included in sections VI and VII of this report. Inlets and Energy Dissipaters _. were sized using the results of calculations included in sections VIII and X of this report Conclusions Construction of the improvements proposed herein will convey the 100 year peak storm flows safely through the project and to the existing 54 inch culvert. Development of the site reduces siltation reaching the existing 54- inch culvert, and therefore will reduce maintenance at that location. The existing 54-inch culvert has adequate capacity to convey developed flows under the Interstate. Development of the site does not create adverse impacts on -- adjacent property. RM:kk :11375W02Aoc ro 1375.41 05FJW LEUCAD�A BLVD. ' T PROJECT T m SITE , , r a UNION ST. _ _ Z O _. n X p BOTANICAL 9 r D GARDENS �Z °m Z T N VICINITY MAP NO SCALE FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP ENCINITAS RANCH WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA wo177542 01)24% Drainage Criteria and Methodology Design Storm 100-year storm Land Use Multi-family Residential Soil Type A hydrologic soil group "D" was used for this study. Runoff Coefficient "C" values were based on the County of San Diego Hydrology Manual. The site is multi-family residential, therefore a "C" value of 0.70 was used. Rainfall Intensity The rainfall intensity values were based on the criteria presented in the County of San Diego Hydrology Manual. RM:Mk env+oM,�po�v�elmnMpWnq1375W2340C wo 137642 01124W i HYDROLOGY _ METHOD OF ANALYSIS The computer generated analysis for this watershed is consistent with current -- engineering standards and requirements of San Diego. This report also contains calculations for the proposed storm drain area enclosed in this section. RATIONAL METHOD The most widely used hydrologic model for estimatory watershed peak runoff rates in the rational method, it is applied to small urban and semi-urban areas of less than 0.5 square miles in area. The rational method equation relates storm rainfall intensity, a selected runoff coefficient, and drainage area to peak runoff rate. This relationship is expressed by the equation: Q = CIA. Where: Q = The peak runoff rate in cubic feet per second at the point of analysis. C = A runoff coefficient representing the area - averaged ration of runoff to -- rainfall intensity. I = The time-averaged rainfall intensity in inches per hour corresponding to the time of concentrations. A = The drainage basin area in acres. NODE-LINK STUDY The surface area of the basin is divided into basic areas which discharge into different -- designated drainage basins. These "sub-basins" depend upon locations of inlets and ridge lines. SUBAREA SUMMATION MODEL This rational method modeling approach is widely used due to its simplicity in application, and the capability for estimating peak runoff rates throughout the interior of a study watershed analogous to the subarea model: The procedure for the Subarea Summation Model is as follows: •o 1375d2 01124W (1) Subdivide the watershed into subareas with the initial subarea being less than 10 acres in size (generally 1 lot will do), and the subsequent subareas gradually increasing in size. Assign upstream and downstream nodal point numbers to each subarea in order to correlate calculations to the watershed map. (2) Estimate a Te by using a nomograph or overlaid flow velocity estimation. (3) Using T, determine the corresponding values of 12 and C2. Then Q = C212A,. (4) Using Q, estimate the travel time between this node and the next by Manning's equation as applied to the particular channel or conduit linking nodes the two nodes. The nodes are joined together by links, which may be street gutter flows, drainage swales or drainage ditches. These links are characterized by length, area, runoff coefficient and cross-section. The Computer subarea menu is as follows: Enter Upstream node number................................. Enter Downstream node number............................... SUBAREA HYDROLOGIC PROCESS 1. Confluence analysis at node. 2. Initial subarea analysis. 3. Pipeflow travel time (computer estimated). 4. Pipeflow travel time (user specified). 5. Trapezoidal channel travel time. 6. Street flow analysis through subarea. 7. User- specified information at node. 8. Addition of sub area runoff to main line. 9. V-gutter flow through area. Select subarea hydrologic process.................... The engineer enters in the pertinent nodes, and then the hydrologic process. Where two or more links join together, the node is analyzed by the confluence method described as follows: wo 1375.42 O,QM% At the confluence point of two or more basins, the following procedure is used to adjust the total summation of peak flow rates to allow for differences in basins times of concentrations. This adjustment is based on the assumption that each basins hydrographs are triangular in shape. (1). If the collection streams have the same time of concentrations, then the Q values are directly summed, QP = Q8 + Qb; TP = Ta = Tb (2). If the collections streams have different times of concentrations, the smaller of the tributary Q values may be adjusted as follows: (i). The most frequent case is where the collection stream with the longer time of concentration has the larger Q. The -- smaller Q value is adjusted by the ratio of rainfall intensities. QP = Q. + Qb (la/lb); TP = Ta (ii). In some cases, the collection stream with the shorter time of concentration has the larger Q. Then the smaller Q is adjusted by a ratio of the T values. W_ QP = Qb+ Qa (TJa); TP = Tb In a similar way, the underground storm drains are analyzed. The data obtained from the surface model for the flow rates present at the inlets and collection points in input into the nodes representing those structures. The design grades and lengths are used to compute the capacity of the storm drains and to model the travel time into the adjustment of the times of concentration for downstream inlets. REFERENCE 1. Hydrology Manual, County of San Diego, January 1985. 2. Hromadka, Theodore: COMPUTER METHODS IN URBAN HYDROLOGY: Lighthouse Publications, 1983. WO 137542 01)24197 x* GUEST 54xol9r 16A)CI.t.)1745 96-A" HUNSAKER 8c ASSOCIATES � SAN DIEGO, INC SHEET NO. OF 10179 Huennekens Street CALCULATED BY L DATE :1-15- 9 7 Son Diego, Colijornio 92121 Ph.6191j58-4500 Fax 6191558-1414 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE CTN'rE'D � C', CAlc6LA+iyN�, RasiLls n : _Gou.VrY. ,�/YfJ o4oG1' - _ , ......... 95 S o L D .--- ... .... .. ..... .... G�eo vr� -- ._ ..... ........._... .. ...... .. �Si�ETi, L C , 70 s o v o v ."p, G L� Ni 7-S _._L_ : SAs,,U � q 7 ._ , ..... ............ .........-.............. _ ._...... .... ASv•V -/ ............ .........._.............._............. _ _.._...�_.._...._...._...... -- - 2 9 0 ..._70 T - �. E C.4_ - G ...... _......... .:Q 7_......... __._.�.._ ....... . I -- ..: ._ _.................... ... --- - MW WC M-,4w. a5.1 IP~ WW wu 01471,T,0.MM mu MFE 1400-225im ; Y K� ` _ ^� �i• .'[fitf � � � � �. * SSS���"' M vat r'xwasp t' JJC► a :t a.�c�� 1. �� �' f/ �� ` A•'."?S.'.. l M ply L x, �` \?^'t�l-''�7' �J`�, 111• p/ Z .� d •SQ�• l r1.�i�y fy� i :-Y'/,i •J'1 .; �N.� :."•r" .�iMMP777 - t 1F!". " ', '� ` * "���i@ R ,S j_ ILA i /i • Ss P" f 2' j �'�� �'` �►��= tom' ; l.� � � :' ��,a�, � T i All ` %Cui E&£ Y; may.--� E •I �. Basin High Point Low Point L (ft) i Area (ac) Node No. Dev. Node No. Elev. 0-1 ! 23.1 304 23 181.2 1600 33.8 - 0-2 23.3 , 182 23.2 142.6 600 4.7 O-3 I 28 278 28.1 130 2500 53.0 0-4 1 28.2 188 27 105 1100 4.6 - 0-5 27.1 160 27 105 500 ! 2.2 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference : SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT - 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-93 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1 . 5A Release Date : 7/10/93 License ID 1239 Analysis prepared by: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Irvine, Inc . Planning * Engineering * Surveying Three Hughes * Irvine California 92718 * (714) 538-1010 ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ENCINITAS RANCH (WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA) *- 100 YEAR HYDROLOGY STUDY REVISED 4-15-97 ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: 1375\42\Q100 .DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16 : 14 6/17/1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 . 700 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE (INCH) = 18 . 00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS (DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ . 90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED *USER SPECIFIED TIME OF 10 . 0 MIN. TO BE ADDED TO THE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION FOR NATURAL WATERSHED DETERMINED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL (APPENDIX X-A) . * NOTE: CONSIDER ALL CONFLUENCE STREAM COMBINATIONS -- FOR ALL DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10 . 00 TO NODE 10 . 10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 —INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 179. 10 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 178 . 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1 . 10 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4 . 615 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 32 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10 . 10 TO NODE 11 . 00 IS CODE = 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 178 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 70 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 650 . 00 CURB HEIGHT (INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH (FEET) = 18 . 00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) _ . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) _ . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW(CFS) = 3 .38 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS: STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 30 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 8 .46 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 4 . 05 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = 1 . 20 - STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 2 . 67 TC (MIN) = 12 .45 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 949 - SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 .20 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 6 . 08 SUMMED AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 30 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 6 .40 - END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : DEPTH(FEET) _ . 35 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 11 . 04 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 4 . 79 DEPTH*VELOCITY = 1 . 66 **************************************************************************** _-FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11 . 00 TO NODE 11 . 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. ) = 12 .45 --RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 . 95 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 30 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 6 .40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 13 . 00 TO NODE 13 . 10 IS CODE = 21 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< -SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 189 .40 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 187 . 80 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1. 60 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5 . 003 ---SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 35 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 35 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 13 . 10 TO NODE 12 . 00 IS CODE = 6 =--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 187 . 80 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 70 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 650 . 00 CURB HEIGHT (INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 18 . 00 - DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW(CFS) = 3 . 05 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS : STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 27 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 7 .43 -- AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 4 . 56 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = 1 .25 STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 2 . 38 TC (MIN) = 11 . 01 _ 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 4 . 276 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 -SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 80 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 5 . 39 SUMMED AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 90 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 5 . 74 END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : -DEPTH (FEET) = .33 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 10 . 01 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 5 . 12 DEPTH*VELOCITY = 1 . 67 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. ) = 11 . 01 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4 . 28 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1. 90 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 5 . 74 --** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CPS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 6 .40 12 .45 3 . 949 2 .30 2 5 . 74 11 . 01 4 . 276 1 . 90 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 2 STREAMS . ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** --STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 11 . 65 11 . 01 4 . 276 __ 2 11 . 70 12 .45 3 . 949 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 11. 70 Tc (MIN. ) = 12 .45 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 20 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11 . 00 TO NODE 14 . 00 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 13 .4 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 8 .3 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 145 . 70 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 141 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 280 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 11 . 70 -- TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 56 TC (MIN. ) = 13 . 02 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 14 . 00 TO NODE 15 . 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. ) = 13 . 02 RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 . 84 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 20 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 11 . 70 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 15 . 10 TO NODE 15 . 20 IS CODE = 21 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ------------------------------ SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 60 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 10 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE _ . 50 - *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 896 - SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ .27 ' TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ .27 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 15 . 20 TO NODE 15 . 00 IS CODE = 6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 10 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 144 . 50 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 440 . 00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 18 . 00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW(CFS) = 1 .46 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS: STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 26 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 6 . 91 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 2 .45 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = . 65 STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 2 . 99 TC (MIN) = 15 . 71 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .400 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 00 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 2 .38 SUMMED AREA (ACRES) = 1 . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 2 . 65 END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : DEPTH (FEET) = . 32 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 9 .49 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 2 . 60 DEPTH*VELOCITY = . 82 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 14 . 00 TO NODE 15 . 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. ) = 15 . 71 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3 .40 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 10 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 2 . 65 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 19 . 00 TO NODE 19 . 10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< --------------------------------------------- SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 - INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = .40 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 713 " SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ .26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 19 . 10 TO NODE 18 . 00 IS CODE = 6 _._ ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 151 . 30 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 144 . 50 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 420 . 00 CURB HEIGHT (INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH (FEET) = 18 . 00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW(CFS) = 1 . 83 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS : STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 29 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 7 . 95 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 2 .44 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = . 70 STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 2 . 87 TC (MIN) = 16 . 57 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 285 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 35 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 3 . 10 SUMMED AREA(ACRES) = 1 .45 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 3 . 36 END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : DEPTH (FEET) = . 33 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 10 . 01 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 3 . 00 DEPTH*VELOCITY = . 98 ************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 18 . 00 TO NODE 14 . 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. ) = 16 . 57 ......RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3 . 28 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1 .45 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 3 .36 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) _. 1 11 . 65 11 .57 4 . 140 4 .20 1 11 . 70 13 . 02 3 . 838 4 .20 • 2 2 . 65 15. 71 3 .400 1 . 10 3 3 . 36 16 . 57 3 .285 1 .45 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 . 50 11 . 57 4 . 140 2 16 . 93 13 . 02 3 . 838 _. 3 16 .27 15 . 71 3 .400 4 15 . 94 16 . 57 3 . 285 •_- COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS : PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 16 . 93 Tc (MIN. ) = 13 . 02 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6 . 75 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 14 . 00 TO NODE 20 . 00 IS CODE = 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 12 . 5 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 11 . 3 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 141 . 00 "DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 140 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 35 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) = 21 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 ---PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 16 . 93 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 05 TC (MIN. ) = 13 . 07 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 00 TO NODE 20 . 00 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 26 . 00 TO NODE 26 . 10 IS CODE = 21 -_--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ---------------------------------- SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" -MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 179 . 51 _-..DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 179 . 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = .51 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 912 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 27 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 27 **************************************************************************** ..._.FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 26 . 10 TO NODE 25 . 00 IS CODE = 6 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 179 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION 162 . 00 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 410 . 00 CURB HEIGHT (INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH (FEET) = 18 . 00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 2 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW (CFS) = 2 . 32 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS : STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 22 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 4 . 85 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 3 . 29 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = . 73 - STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 2 . 08 TC (MIN) = 14 . 71 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 546 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 64 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 4 . 07 SUMMED AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 74 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 4 .35 END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : DEPTH (FEET) _ .26 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH(FEET) = 6 . 91 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 3 . 64 DEPTH*VELOCITY = . 96 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 25 . 00 TO NODE 24 . 10 IS CODE = 3 . .-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ------------------------------ ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) INCREASED TO 18 . 000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 6 . 5 INCHES _PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 7 . 6 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 162 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 161 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 40 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) = 18 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 4 . 35 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 09 TC (MIN. ) = 14 . 80 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 10 TO NODE 24 . 10 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. ) = 14 . 80 --RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 . 53 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 74 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 4 .35 r * ************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21 . 00 TO NODE 21 . 10 IS CODE = 21 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- -SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 150 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 189 .40 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 187 . 80 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1 . 60 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 5 . 003 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) _ .35 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) _ . 35 *************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21 . 10 TO NODE 22 . 00 IS CODE = 6 ---------------------------------- -- ---------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 187 . 80 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 170 . 80 STREET LENGTH (FEET) = 660 . 00 CURB HEIGHT (INCHES) = 6 . STREET HALFWIDTH (FEET) = 18 . 00 " DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK = 16 . 50 INTERIOR STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 020 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL (DECIMAL) = . 087 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 **TRAVELTIME COMPUTED USING MEAN FLOW (CFS) = 2 .47 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS : STREET FLOWDEPTH (FEET) _ . 29 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 7 . 95 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 3 . 29 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY = . 94 STREETFLOW TRAVELTIME (MIN) = 3 . 34 TC (MIN) = 11 . 97 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 4 . 051 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 50 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 4 . 25 SUMMED AREA(ACRES) = 1 . 60 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 4 . 60 END OF SUBAREA STREETFLOW HYDRAULICS : -DEPTH (FEET) = . 34 HALFSTREET FLOODWIDTH (FEET) = 10 . 52 FLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 3 . 76 DEPTH*VELOCITY = 1 . 26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 10 TO NODE 24 .10 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- rv'>>>>>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. ) = 11 . 97 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4 . 05 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 1. 60 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 4 . 60 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) - 1 4 . 35 14 . 80 3 . 533 1 . 74 2 4 . 60 11 . 97 4 . 051 1 . 60 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 8 . 39 11 . 97 4 . 051 2 8 .36 14 . 80 3 . 533 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS : - PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 8 . 39 Tc (MIN. ) = 11 . 97 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3 .34 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 10 TO NODE 24 . 00 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ---------------------- ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18 . 000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 6 .4 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC. ) = 14 . 8 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 161 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 145 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 170 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) = 18 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 8 . 39 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 19 TC (MIN. ) = 12 . 16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 00 TO NODE 24 . 00 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 2 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 10 TO NODE 23 . 00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED (SUBAREA) : " MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8700 NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 16 . 16 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 1600 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 304 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 181 . 60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 122 .40 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 338 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 98 . 16 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 33 . 80 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 98 . 16 **************************************************************************** -FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 00 TO NODE 23 .20 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 18 . 6 INCHES - PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 37 . 5 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 155 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 145 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 43 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ._- ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 98 . 16 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 02 TC (MIN. ) = 16 . 18 **************************************************************************** _. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 30 TO NODE 23 .20 IS CODE = 8 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< -------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 3 .335 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 -- SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 5 . 00 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 7 . 50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 38 . 80 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 105 . 66 TC(MIN) = 16 . 18 ************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 20 TO NODE 24 . 00 IS CODE = 3 -------------------------------7------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 42 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 31 . 9 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 13 . 5 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 145 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 143 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 140 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 42 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 -PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 105 . 66 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 17 TC (MIN. ) = 16 .35 ************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 00 TO NODE 24 . 00 IS CODE = 11 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>CONFLUENCE MEMORY BANK # 2 WITH THE MAIN-STREAM MEMORY<<<<< ** MAIN STREAM CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 105 . 66 16 . 35 3 .313 * 38 . 80 ** MEMORY BANK # 2 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 8 . 39 12 . 16 4 . 010 3 . 34 2 8 . 36 14 . 99 3 . 503 3 . 34 ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 95 . 69 12 . 16 4 . 010 2 108 .26 14 . 99 3 . 503 3 113 . 57 16 .35 3 . 313 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS : PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 113 . 57 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 35 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 42 . 14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 24 . 00 TO NODE 20 . 00 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 36 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 25 . 5 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 21 . 2 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 142 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 140 . 00 --- FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 45 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 36 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 113 . 57 „ TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 04 TC (MIN. ) = 16 . 39 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 00 TO NODE 20 . 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 95 . 69 12 . 20 4 . 002 42 . 14 2 108 . 26 15 . 03 3 .498 42 . 14 3 113 . 57 16 .39 3 . 308 42 . 14 ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** ._.._STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 16 . 50 11 . 63 4 . 128 6 . 75 2 16 . 93 13 . 07 3 . 828 6 . 75 3 16 . 27 15 . 76 3 .392 6 . 75 4 15 . 94 16 . 62 3 .278 6 . 75 - ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 109 .26 11 . 63 4 . 128 2 111 . 88 12 .20 4 . 002 3 115 . 87 13 . 07 3 . 828 4 124 . 04 15 . 03 3 .498 5 127 . 02 15 .76 3 . 392 6 129 .43 16 .39 3 .308 7 128 .47 16 . 62 3 .278 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 129 .43 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 48 . 89 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 00 TO NODE 20 . 10 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< DEPTH OF FLOW IN 36 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 26 . 2 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 23 .4 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 140 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 133 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 130 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) = 36 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 129 .43 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 09 TC (MIN. ) = 16 .48 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 10 TO NODE 20 . 30 IS CODE = 3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< ------------------------ DEPTH OF FLOW IN 36 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 25 . 3 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 24 .4 - UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 133 . 00 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 120 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 220 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 --- ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER (INCH) = 36 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 129 . 43 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 15 TC (MIN. ) = 16 . 63 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 30 TO NODE 20 . 30 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. ) = 16 . 63 RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 . 28 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 48 . 89 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 129 .43 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 . 00 TO NODE 20 .30 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< --------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" -SOIL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 420 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 138 . 00 ---DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 120 . 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 18 . 00 *CAUTION: SUBAREA SLOPE EXCEEDS COUNTY NOMOGRAPH _ DEFINITION. EXTRAPOLATION OF NOMOGRAPH USED. 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 4 . 840 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 7 .45 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 20 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 7 .45 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 30 TO NODE 20 . 30 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 . 08 RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 4 . 84 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 20 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 7 .45 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 109 . 26 11 . 88 4 . 071 48 . 89 _._ 1 111 . 88 12 .45 3 . 949 48 . 89 1 115 . 87 13 . 32 3 . 781 48 . 89 1 124 . 04 15 . 27 3 .462 48 . 89 1 127 . 02 16 . 01 3 .359 48 . 89 1 129 .43 16 . 63 3 . 277 48 . 89 1 128 .47 16 . 87 3 . 247 48 . 89 2 7 . 45 9 . 08 4 . 840 2 . 20 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 99 . 35 9 . 08 4 . 840 2 115 . 53 11 . 88 4 . 071 3 117 . 96 12 .45 3 . 949 4 121 . 69 13 . 32 3 . 781 5 129 . 37 15 . 27 3 . 462 6 132 . 19 16 . 01 3 . 359 7 134 . 48 16 . 63 3 . 277 8 133 .47 16 . 87 3 .247 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: - PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 134 .48 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 63 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 51 . 09 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20 . 30 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPEFLOW TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW) <<<<< -------------------------------------------------- -DEPTH OF FLOW IN 30 . 0 INCH PIPE IS 19 . 8 INCHES PIPEFLOW VELOCITY (FEET/SEC. ) = 39 . 1 UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 120 . 00 -DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION = 110 . 00 FLOWLENGTH (FEET) = 50 . 00 MANNING' S N = . 013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 30 . 00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPEFLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 134 . 48 TRAVEL TIME (MIN. ) _ . 02 TC (MIN. ) = 16 . 65 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27 . 00 TO NODE 27 . 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. ) = 16 . 65 RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3 . 27 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 51 . 09 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 134 .48 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 . 00 TO NODE 28 . 10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< --------------------------------------- *USER SPECIFIED (SUBAREA) : COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8600 -NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 19 . 59 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 2500 . 00 -UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 278 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 130 . 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 148 . 00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 2 . 949 -SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 134 . 39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 53 . 00 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 134 .39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27 . 00 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< ------------------------------------------------- -------------- rTOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 2 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 19 . 59 -RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 2 . 95 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 53 . 00 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 134 . 39 r ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 99 .35 9 . 11 4 . 832 51 . 09 1 115 . 53 11 . 90 4 . 066 51 . 09 1 117 . 96 12 .48 3 . 944 51 . 09 1 121 . 69 13 .34 3 . 777 51 . 09 1 129 . 37 15 . 29 3 .459 51. 09 1 132 . 19 16 . 03 3 . 356 51. 09 -_ 1 134 . 48 16 . 65 3 . 274 51 . 09 1 133 .47 16 . 89 3 .245 51 . 09 2 134 . 39 19 . 59 2 . 949 53 . 00 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) 1 181 . 36 9 . 11 4 . 832 2 213 . 00 11 . 90 4 . 066 3 218 .43 12 .48 3 . 944 4 226 . 61 13 . 34 3 . 777 5 243 . 95 15 . 29 3 .459 6 250 . 27 16 . 03 3 . 356 7 255 . 51 16 . 65 3 . 274 8 255 . 60 16 . 89 3 . 245 9 255 . 69 19 . 59 2 . 949 - COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS : PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 255 . 69 Tc (MIN. ) = 19 . 59 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 104 . 09 *************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 . 20 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 8 --------------------------------------------------7------------------------ >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ----------------------------------- -- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 2 . 949 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 5500 _- SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 60 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 7 .46 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 108 . 69 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 263 . 15 TC (MIN) = 19 . 59 ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) 1 193 . 58 9 . 11 2 223 . 28 11 . 90 3 228 .41 12 .48 4 236 . 16 13 . 34 5 252 . 70 15 . 29 6 258 . 76 16 . 03 7 263 . 79 16 . 65 8 263 . 81 16 . 89 9 263 . 15 19 . 59 NEW PEAK FLOW DATA ARE: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 263 . 81 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 89 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27 . 10 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 8 . .-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ---------------------------------------------- -- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 245 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 9500 .- SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 20 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 6 . 78 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 110 . 89 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 270 . 59 TC (MIN) = 16 . 89 ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) 1 203 . 68 9 . 11 2 231 . 78 11 . 90 3 236 . 65 12 .48 4 244 . 06 13 . 34 5 259 . 92 15 . 29 6 265 . 77 16 . 03 7 270 . 64 16 . 65 8 270 . 59 16 . 89 9 269 .31 19 . 59 NEW PEAK FLOW DATA ARE: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 270 . 64 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 65 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 270 . 64 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 65 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 110 . 89 *** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE *** Q (CFS) Tc (MIN. ) 1 203 . 68 9 . 11 2 231 . 78 11 . 90 3 236 . 65 12 .48 4 244 . 06 13 .34 - 5 259 . 92 15 . 29 6 265 . 77 16 . 03 7 270 . 64 16 . 65 __8 270 . 59 16 . 89 9 269 . 31 19 . 59 --------------- END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference : SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1985, 1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-93 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 1 . 5A Release Date : 7/10/93 License ID 1239 Analysis prepared by: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Irvine, Inc. Planning * Engineering * Surveying Three Hughes * Irvine California 92718 * (714) 538-1010 ************************* DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * ENCINITAS RANCH (WEST SAXONY PLANNING AREA) t- 100 YEAR HYDROLOGY STUDY EXISTING CONDITIONS FILE NAME: 1375\42\QEXIST.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 8 : 11 6/ 4/1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -.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 . 700 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE (INCH) = 18 . 00 -SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS (DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ . 90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED *USER SPECIFIED TIME OF 10 . 0 MIN. TO BE ADDED TO THE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION FOR NATURAL WATERSHED DETERMINED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL (APPENDIX X-A) . * NOTE: CONSIDER ALL CONFLUENCE STREAM COMBINATIONS FOR ALL DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES **************************************************************************** `FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 10 TO NODE 23 . 00 IS CODE = 21 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ---------------------------------------- *USER SPECIFIED (SUBAREA) : MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8700 —NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 16 . 16 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 1600 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 304 . 00 —DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 181 . 60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 122 .40 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 3 .338 --SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 98 . 16 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 33 . 80 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 98 . 16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 00 TO NODE 23 . 00 IS CODE = 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 4 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 1 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 16 . 16 RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 . 34 M TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 33 . 80 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 98 . 16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 .30 TO NODE 23 . 20 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< -------------- SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" - RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 13 . 07 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 600 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 182 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 142 . 60 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 39 . 40 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 828 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 8 . 10 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 70 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 8 . 10 _ FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 23 . 20 TO NODE 23 . 20 IS CODE = 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< ----------------------------------------- TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 4 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 2 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 13 . 07 --RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3 . 83 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 70 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 8 . 10 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10 . 00 TO NODE 11 . 00 IS CODE = 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ----SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 15 .30 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 1120 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 182 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 120 . 00 A--ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 62 . 00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 .458 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 21 . 78 -TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 14 . 00 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 21 . 78 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11 . 00 TO NODE 11 . 00 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 4 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 3 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 15 . 30 RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HR) = 3 .46 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 14 . 00 --`PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 21 . 78 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 . 00 TO NODE 28 . 10 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< *USER SPECIFIED (SUBAREA) : COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 8600 - NATURAL WATERSHED NOMOGRAPH TIME OF CONCENTRATION WITH 10-MINUTES ADDED = 19 . 59 (MINUTES) INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 2500 . 00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 278 . 00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 130 . 00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 148 . 00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 2 . 949 -SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 134 . 39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 53 . 00 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 134 .39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 . 10 TO NODE 28 . 10 IS CODE = 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>DESIGNATE INDEPENDENT STREAM FOR CONFLUENCE«<<< >>>>>AND COMPUTE VARIOUS CONFLUENCED STREAM VALUES<<<<< ------------ -TOTAL NUMBER OF STREAMS = 4 CONFLUENCE VALUES USED FOR INDEPENDENT STREAM 4 ARE: TIME OF CONCENTRATION(MIN. ) = 19 . 59 -RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2 . 95 TOTAL STREAM AREA(ACRES) = 53 . 00 PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) AT CONFLUENCE = 134 . 39 ** CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 98 . 16 16 . 16 3 .338 33 . 80 2 8 . 10 13 . 07 3 . 828 4 . 70 3 21 . 78 15 . 30 3 .458 14 . 00 4 134 . 39 19 . 59 2 . 949 53 . 00 RAINFALL INTENSITY AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION RATIO CONFLUENCE FORMULA USED FOR 4 STREAMS. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY -NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) (INCH/HOUR) 1 216 . 90 13 . 07 3 . 828 2 238 .46 15 . 30 3 .458 - 3 244 . 96 16 . 16 3 .338 4 245 . 91 19 . 59 2 . 949 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 245 . 91 Tc (MIN. ) = 19 . 59 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 105 . 50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 28 .20 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 8 _--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< -------------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY (INCH/HOUR) = 2 . 949 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" MULTI-UNITS DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = . 7000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 4 . 60 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 9 .49 -- TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 110 . 10 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 255 .40 TC (MIN) = 19 . 59 ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** - - STREAM RUNOFF Tc NUMBER (CFS) (MIN. ) 1 229 . 22 13 . 07 2 249 . 60 15 . 30 3 255 . 71 16 . 16 4 255 .40 19 . 59 NEW PEAK FLOW DATA ARE: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 255 . 71 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 16 ************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 27 . 10 TO NODE 27 . 00 IS CODE = 8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »>>>ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< ------------------------------------- 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3 . 338 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "D" -RURAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .4500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2 . 20 SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS) = 3 .30 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 112 . 30 TOTAL RUNOFF (CFS) = 259 . 01 _..TC(MIN) = 16 . 16 -------------------------------------- END OF STUDY SUMMARY: PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS) = 259 . 01 Tc (MIN. ) = 16 . 16 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 112 .30 *** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE *** Q (CFS) Tc (MIN. ) 1 233 . 01 13 . 07 2 253 . 02 15 .30 3 259 . 01 16 .16 _4 258 . 32 19 . 59 ------------------------------------------------------- END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS LA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REPT: PC/RD4412.1 (INPUT) DATE: 07/29/97 PAGE 1 PROJECT: West Saxony-Encinitas Ranch,File:1375\42\line& ESIGNER: C. Lilly CD L2 MAX 0 ADJ 0 LENGTH FL 1 FL 2 CTL/TW D W S KJ KE KM LC Ll L3 L4 Al A3 A4 J N 9 1 120.20 - 2 2 134.4 134.4 57.73 110.50 114.82 0.00 48. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 1 3 10 0 0. 90. 0. 4.00 0.013 2 3 129.4 129.4 194.10 115.15 120.70 0.00 48. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 4 0 0 80. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 4 129.4 129.4 126.85 121.00 130.67 0.00 48. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 5 20 0 0. 90. 0. 4.00 0.013 2 5 113.6 113.6 43.33 131.15 135.32 0.00 48. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 6 30 0 0. 75. 0. 4.00 0.013 6 8.4 8.4 162.42 137.32 154.03 0.00 24. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05, 0 7 40 0 0. 90. 0. 4.00 0.013 _2 7 4.6 4.6 43.82 154.36 155.10 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 10 7.5 7.5 3.50 117.24 117.32 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 3 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 20 16.9 16.9 33.06 133.00 133.56 0.00 24. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 5 21 23 24 0. 90. 90. 4.00 0.013 2 21 11.7 11.7 259.74 133.89 139.25 0.00 24. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 22 0 0 45. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 22 5.7 5.7 34.49 139.32 143.20 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 2. 23 2.7 2.7 28.16 133.39 134.70 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 21 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 24 3.4 3.4 10.40 133.39 135.16 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 21 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 30 105.7 105.7 138.98 136.32 137.00 0.00 36. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 6 31 33 0 0. 90. 0. 4.00 0.013 2 31 98.2 98.2 54.00 137.33 137.60 0.00 36. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 33 7.5 7.5 24.37 138.50 138.62 0.00 I8. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 31 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 ?� 40 4.4 4.4 25.24 154.83 165.55 0.00 18. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 7 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 n LA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REPT: PC/RD4412.2 DATE: 07/29/97 PAGE 1 sROJECT: Went Saxony-Encinitas Ranch,File:1375\42\linea :SIGNER: C. Lilly LINE Q D W DN DC FLOW SF-FULL V 1 V 2 FL 1 FL 2 HG I HG 2 D 1 D 2 TW TW r0 (CFS) (IN) (IN) (FT) (FT) TYPE (FT/FT) (FPS) (FPS) (FT) (FT) CALC CALL (FT) (FT) CALC CK REMARKS 1 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL 120.20 2 134.4 48 0 1.61 3.45 FULL 0.00875 10.7 10.7 110.50 114.82 120.20 120.71 9.70 5.89 0.00 0.00 HJ a UJT ­3 129.4 48 0 2.07 3.40 PART 0.00811 19.7 11.3 115.15 120.70 117.22 124.10 2.07 3.40 0.00 0.00 4 129.4 48 0 1.57 3.40 PART 0.00811 25.1 17.8 121.00 130.67 122.72 132.92 1.72 2.25 0.00 0.00 HJ • DJT �5 113.6 48 0 1.38 3.22 PART 0.00625 20.2 10.5 131.15 135.32 132.99 138.54 1.84 3.22 0.00 0.00 6 8.4 24 0 0.46 1.03 SEAL 0.00138 2.7 5.1 137.32 154.03 141.91 155.06 4.59 1.03 0.00 0.00 HYD JUMP X • 24.57 X(N) • 115.16 X(J) • 24.57 F(J) • 4.14 D(BJ) • 0.46 D(AJ) • 2.08 7 4.6 18 0 0.60 0.82 PART 0.00192 2.9 4.6 154.36 155.10 155.63 155.92 1.27 0.82 156.29 0.00 HYD JUMP X • 0.00 X(N) • 0.00 X(J) • 9.75 F(J) • 1.14 D(BJ) • 0.62 D(AJ) . 1.07 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL • 118.97 -'1 7.5 18 0 0.72 1.06 FULL 0.00510 4.2 4.2 117.24 117.32 118.97 119.00 1.73 1.68 119.31 0.00 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL . 132.95 16.9 24 0 1.09 1.48 PART 0.00558 8.8 6.8 133.00 133.56 134.18 135.04 1.18 1.48 0.00 0.00 21 11.7 24 0 0.83 1.23 PART 0.00267 3.8 5.8 133.89 139.25 135.82 140.48 1.93 1.23 0.00 0.00 HYD JUMP °-- X • 0.00 X(N) . 179.96 X(J) • 7.59 F(J) • 3.88 D(BJ) • 0.83 D(AJ) • 1.76 22 5.7 18 0 0.41 0.92 SEAL 0.00294 3.2 5.0 139.32 143.20 141.38 144.12 2.06 0.92 144.55 0.00 HYD JUMP X • 2.33 X(N) . 0.00 X(J) 2.33 F(J) • 2.43 D(BJ) . 0.44 D(AJ) • 1.79 e HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL • 135.43 73 2.7 18 0 0.35 0.62 SEAL 0.00066 1.5 3.9 133.39 134.70 135.43 135.32 2.04 0.62 135.58 0.00 HYD JUMP X • 11.83 X(N) • 0.00 X(J) . 25.70 F(J) 0.55 D(BJ) • 0.51 D(AJ) . 0.76 LA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REPT: PC/RD4412.2 DATE: 07/29/97 PAGE 2 EROJECT: West Saxony-Encinitas Ranch,File:1375\42\linea :SIGNER: C. Lilly LINE 0 D W DN DC FLOW SF-FULL V 1 V 2 FL 1 FL 2 HG 1 HG 2 D 1 D 2 TW TW �10 (CFS) I IN) (IN) (FT) (FT) TYPE (FT/FT) (FPS) (FPS) (FT) (FT) CALC CALC (FT) (FT) CALC CK REMARKS 21 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL - 135.43 4 3.4 18 0 0.28 0.70 SEAL 0.00105 1.9 4.2 133.39 135.16 135.43 135.86 2.04 0.70 136.16 0.00 HYD JUMP X 3.21 X(N) - 0.00 X(J) - 5.02 F(J) 1.02 D(BJ) 0.40 D(AJ) 1.16 6 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL 140.22 30 105.7 36 0 3.00 2.91 FULL 0.02511 15.0 15.0 136.32 137.00 140.22 143.89 3.90 6.89 0.00 0.00 L 98.2 36 0 3.00 2.89 FULL 0.02167 13.9 13.9 137.33 137.60 145.28 146.60 7.95 9.00 149.90 0.00 31 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL 144.58 7.5 18 0 1.50 1.06 FULL 0.00510 4.2 4.2 138.50 138.62 144.58 144.72 6.08 6.10 145.03 0.00 7 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL 155.35 4.4 18 0 0.26 0.80 PART 0.00175 8.1 4.6 154.83 165.55 155.35 166.35 0.52 0.80 166.71 0.00 r V 1, FL 1, D 1 AND HG 1 REFER TO DOWNSTREAM END V 2, FL 2, D 2 AND HG 2 REFER TO UPSTREAM END X - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE HG INTERSECTS SOFFIT IN SEAL CONDITION X(N) - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE WATER SURFACE REACHES NORMAL DEPTH BY EITHER DRAWDOWN OR BACKWATER X(J) - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS IN LINE F(J) - THE COMPUTED FORCE AT THE HYDRAULIC JUMP D(BJ) - DEPTH OF WATER BEFORE THE HYDRAULIC JUMP (UPSTREAM SIDE) D(AJ) - DEPTH OF WATER AFTER THE HYDRAULIC JUMP (DOWNSTREAM SIDE) SEAL INDICATES FLOW CHANGES FROM PART TO FULL OR FROM FULL TO PART HYD JUMP INDICATES THAT FLOW CHANGES FROM SUPERCRITICAL TO SUBCRITICAL THROUGH A HYDRAULIC JUMP HJ o UJT INDICATES THAT HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS AT THE JUNCTION AT THE UPSTREAM END OF THE LINE HJ m DJT INDICATES THAT HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS AT THE JUNCTION AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE LINE EOJ 7/29/1997 8: 2 r LA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REPT: PC/RD4412.1 (INPUT) DATE: 07/29/97 PAGE 1 PJWECT: West Saxony-Encinitas Ranch File:1375\42\lined L ;IGNER: C. Lilly CD L2 MAX 0 ADJ 0 LENGTH FL 1 FL 2 CTL/TW D W S KJ KE KM LC L1 L3 L4 Al A3 A4 J N 1 120.20 2 134.4 134.4 298.00 111.00 117.00 0.00 42. 0. 3 0.00 0.10 0.05 1 3 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 2 3 134.4 134.4 131.02 117.33 127.50 0.00 42. 0. 1 0.00 0.10 0.05 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 4.00 0.013 r LA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REPT: PC/RD4412.2 DATE: 07/29/97 PAGE 1 PROJECT: West Saxony-Encinitas Ranch File:1375\42\lined :SIGNER: C. Lilly LINE Q D W DN DC FLOW SF-FULL V 1 V 2 FL 1 FL 2 HG 1 HG 2 D 1 D 2 TW TW 70 (CFS) (IN) (IN) (FT) (FT) TYPE (FT/FT) (FPS) (FPS) (FT) (FT) CALC CALC (FT) (FT) CALC CK REMARKS 1 HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTROL - 120.20 2 134.4 42 0 2.70 3.32 SEAL 0.01784 14.0 29.3 111.00 117.00 120.20 118.69 9.20 1.69 0.00 0.00 HYD JUMP X 290.96 X(N) - 0.00 X(J) - 290.96 F(J) 123.61 D(BJ) 1.70 D(AJ) 8.52 3 134.4 42 0 1.70 3.32 PART 0.01784 28.9 14.2 117.33 127.50 119.04 130.82 1.71 3.32 134.28 0.00 V 1, FL 1, D 1 AND HG 1 REFER TO DOWNSTREAM END V 2, FL 2, D 2 AND HG 2 REFER TO UPSTREAM END X - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE HG INTERSECTS SOFFIT IN SEAL CONDITION XIN) - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE WATER SURFACE REACHES NORMAL DEPTH BY EITHER DRAWDOWN OR BACKWATER X(J) - DISTANCE IN FEET FROM DOWNSTREAM END TO POINT WHERE HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS IN LINE F(J) - THE COMPUTED FORCE AT THE HYDRAULIC JUMP D(BJ) - DEPTH OF WATER BEFORE THE HYDRAULIC JUMP (UPSTREAM SIDE) D(AJ) - DEPTH OF WATER AFTER THE HYDRAULIC JUMP (DOWNSTREAM SIDE) SEAL INDICATES FLAW CHANGES FROM PART TO FULL OR FROM FULL TO PART HYD JUMP INDICATES THAT FLAW CHANGES FROM SUPERCRITICAL TO SUBCRITICAL THROUGH A HYDRAULIC JUMP HJ 0 UJT INDICATES THAT HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS AT THE JUNCTION AT THE UPSTREAM END OF THE LINE Hi o DJT INDICATES THAT HYDRAULIC JUMP OCCURS AT THE JUNCTION AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE LINE EOJ 7/29/1997 10:10 r ENCINITAS RANCH, WEST SAXONY PA CURB INLET SIZING BASED ON THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO DRAINAGE DESIGN MANUAL INLET# NODE STREET Q(CFS) a(in.) y(in.) L(ft.) USE SLOPE (INLET SIZE) (ft.) _.. FLOW-BY 1 12 5.7% 5.7 0.33 0.29 17.7 18 FLOW-B 2 11 5.7% 6.4 0.33 0.32 18.4 19 FLOW-BY 3 15 2.0% 2.7 0.33 0.28 9.1 10 FLOW-BY 4 18 2.0% 3.4 0.33 0.30 10.7 11 SUMP 5 22 NIA 4.6 NIA NIA 3.7 5 SUMP 6 25 NIA 4.6 NIA NIA 3.7 5 SAMPLE FLOW-BY CALCULATION Q=11.3 CFS SLOPE=4.0% Y=.39 USING EQUATION Q=0.7L(0.33+DEPTH)"312 WHERE DEPTH=Y FROM CVDS SOLVING FOR L L=17' ADD 1.OFT FOR DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS L=18' SAMPLE SUMP CALCULATIONS =3.6 CFS FROM CITY OF SAN DIEGO CHART 1-103.6C H= PONDED DEPTH=101N. h=height of curb inlet=6 in H/h=1.7 OIL=HIh solving for L..... L=5.0 feet :CL EXCELW%1375%42UNLETSZ.x1s W01375-42 6/18/97 i I CHART 1-103 , 6 A CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS ASSUMED 2% CROWN , Q = 0 ,7L (A+Y)3/2 *A = 0 ,33 Y = HEIGHT OF WATER AT CURB FACE (0 .4 ' MAXIMUM) REFER TO CHART 1-104 ,12 L = LENGTH OF CLEAR OPENING OF INLET s *Use A=O: when the inlet is adjacent to traffic ; i .e. , for a Type "J" median inlet or where the parking lane is removed . REV.-F CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE SHT. N0. CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS I ' i CHART 1-104.12 Ls' a zrr,[R - --ZT= WC 3tDC OK7 :t 1 2 "o 'Y.p , I � I I I I I W I/• I I J ' J N r I H •� ' u I o I I it t , � to . IA r LZ I ° I I �.I_ I I I �s i1 I a i I I I I I i t � I nc - r —+— QS I I I I I .1I I I I ! I r 1 tt to 20 30 .o so DISOIAR c (C.E S.) ! I ONE SIDE I EXAMPLE: A, _ Girtn: 0 s ID 3 s LS Chart govtu Depth z Q4, V006ty s 4.4 ipi . REV. I CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE SHT. N0. GUTTER AND ROADWAY DISCHARGE - VELOCITY CHART 70A -=- e �vy 10179 l.uc•/:nckcnsS/rrct CA,;CU«TCDBr � �• DATE--_/_ Scn nieC,O. Cnlifornin 92121 % Ph.6191»S.4ido FCTG19/SSS lala CHECKED Or DATE SCALE X79: . _ T _ i ...... . .... - -- __. .. .--..., _ .......... r -- Y -- --._....._. -- -.. ad v �.S 1... 757 - - -- • __ _.._.. A. L G .� ..... -_..... ... fi 54 e-6,f (p,EVELopEO Cotip1710ti.S) ISO 10,000 CHART 1 O 168 8,000 EXAMPLE (1 ) (2) (3) 156 6,000 D•42 inches (3.5 feet) 6' 144 5,000 0.120 eta S• 6. 4,000 I • tlrr 6' 5• 132 D too 4. 3,000 11) 1.3 8.4 5' 4. 120 Rl 2.1 7.♦ 108 2,000 (3) 2.2 T.7 4. 3. OD in feet 3. 96 1,000 3' 800 84 --� -- 600 500 72 400 a 2. W ♦�� _ u ° 1.5 1.5 = 60 V 7 200 / 1.5 W o S4 c a W 46 0 100 = . J ¢ 80 = a 42 N 60 W 1.0 1.0 ° 0 50 HW SCALE ENTRANCE ° 1.0 40 0 TYPE ac w 9 W36 30 (1) Savors*490 .111% 44 .9 .9 Mod�alt ° 33 20 (2) Greeve and.lft Q ° 30 headvall = .8 .8 (3) Groove end •8 27 projecting 10 24 6 To use scale (2) or (31 ptoioct 21 5 horizontally to scale (1),then 4 use stralght loclined line throuth 0 and 0 scales,or reverse $a 3 illustrated. 6 6 6 18 2 I5 11.0 .5 .s .s t2 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR HEADWATER SCALES 2153 CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS BUREAU or FUSLIC ROAD! dAN. 1243 REVISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL 181 NEST .5,4xoNZ– j5AJ61N1TA.5 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC SHEET NO. � OF 10179 Huennekens Street cALCUTATED BV G �— DATE �'��- 27 San Diego, California 92121 Ph.6191558-4500 Fax 6191558-1414 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE i ; i : i C0 .. i , ' o i : , ;cw)-. ; ; : , , I • �� l i i .Z`E _ E° /2 D Z. ..._ __ ._.._ ........... .. . .. __ .._.... ._.__... ...... r-- _`.._. - - _ _ .... -- - - - — - _ _..� ---- _ _...................... �... .. _ ... _................._........ . . . "'o00l.CT 2041,yp,e Srs1205-,Ih001p1®,�■c.IilMOgn.,AO.0,471.To 0'w nowt TOLL§m i-00.22s-m STjAJ oiv. F/o�vS� CHART 1 O 180 10,000 168 8,000 EXAMPLE (2) (3) I56 6000 0.42 inch" (3.S feet) 6' 6. 5000 0 .120 cfs S. 144 6. S. 4,000 21$ i Nt1 132 D fw 4. 3,000 (1) 2.5 �.� 5' 4. 120 (2) 2.1 7.4 108 2,000 (3) 2.2 7.7 4' 3. to in foot 3. 96 1,000 800 A724000 00 00 / 2. H �t 3 Z � 1.3 I.S Z 0 / I.S O j 48 �/0 8 0 2 a ►_- c� 42 60 W I.O 1.0 U. U. a7 50 HW SCALE ENTRANCE O 10 a0 0 TYPE w W .9 W 36 30 (1) severe ode• mite .9 3 .9 � 33 e•edm•11 O . a at C 20 (2) Groove end m.te 30 p••d..11 z 8 e (3) Groove end •8 27 projecting 10 7 24 8 .7 T 6 To lose $Colo (2) of (3) Project 21 S horizontally H scot• (1).than 4 see straight lociiaod lino thrweh D end 0 steles,w ra•arso as .6 3 illustrated. .6 18 2 15 " . 1.0 .5 .S 1 .5 12 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR HEADWATER SCALES 283 CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS REVISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL eul►e•u or wlrl.lc lto•os JAN. 1943 \ 181 ,. WEST spa xo y r- Env c1Az,;p--+s R4,4-;c HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES _ SAN DIEGO, INC SHEET NO. OF 10179 Huennekens Street CALCULATED BY G DATE - San Diego, California 92121 Ph.6191 58-45 0 Fax 6191558-1414 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE I I i ..—. . ! ! ! : _..... _... - : f i ._ _ i I I ! ! ! ! r : : i- - - - - - - .-.� ! I yJAJ _ ......._......... _ _... _._._. —— -- — — — _..._ ............ - - - �!oou[T ta•t 4qe wm;M1 Mm"'®•k..boa,um 01471 To pa;MW TOLL FRH Id 225-m . r,Lt' (_ Y�� (—AI !TANS C,A �GS� CHART 1 O ISO 10,000 168 8,000 EXAMPLE t (2) (3) 156 6• 6,000 D•42 inches (3.S lost) 6, 144 5,000 0.120 cfs 5• 4,000 ttw G. 5, 132 0 feet 4. 3,000 (t) 1.5 8.8 5' 4. 120 (2) 2.1 7.4 2,000 (3) 2.2 7.7 3. •D is 1«t 3. 96 1,000 3, 800 84 600 / 2' 2 500 72 400 2• W ,,►pb� _ = E*� 1.5 ).s Z N / 60 v 200 / 1.5 W c 54 / � o W 100 = � 48 80 = v 44? u 60 W 1.0 1.0 in G 50 HW SCALE ENTRANCE G 10 cc D TYPE W W 36 .9 W 3 .9 0 (1) s4ear•N4• with 3 .9 uj h•ea.4u c a 33 a G 20 (2) Groove ono v.th 30 hoo4ealt S 8 8 (3) Groevo end •� 27 peisctial _. 10 7 T 24 8 ,7 6 To e•e seat* (2) or (3) Proioet 21 5 horizontally to seat* (I),taem 4 use straight laelino/slint throeth 0 ead 0 genies,or reverse ag ,6 3 illvotrete4, 6 .6 18 2 r Is ,S S 11.0 .5 12 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR HEADWATER SCALES 2a3 CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS REVISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL 1` BUREAU Of►UOLIC ROA00 JAM. 1943 181 k)EST SAXyAvY- Etic1ti.Tas kAiIIC HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC SHEET NO. r OF 10179 Huennekens Street CALCULATED BY L- DATE — 21-9/7 San Diego, California 92121 Ph.6191558-4500 Fax 6191558-1414 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE -- — ._. A T C NS �.C.S j i ; i i j f I E ' e- i : E 1D E { - ----r - -- - - .. ; ; : ; ...... . .. ...... - .. _............... ............... .............-. ..... ■Op1CC 7Dt•t tS1p,t tWroa179f t 1►mfi®e rtc..fwaea 14s OtRt.To Oron RIME TOLL N@ 1400.25 i710 54 " P,G P (pr:::V6Z oPEO Go v j0 Ti o N.S) 180 I0,000 CHART 1 O 168 8,000 EXAMPLE (2) (3) 000 D•42 inches (3.5 tool) 6' 156 6 5,000 0.120 cts 5. 144 4,000 Im w Mw 6• S. 132 0 teat 4 3.000 (1) 2.5 9.6 5' 4. 120 (2) 2.1 7.4 2,000 (3) 2.2 7.7 4. 108 3. e0 in feet 3• 96 1,000 3' 800 84 --� -- 600 / 2' 2- 500 / 72 400 2. N �t 3 u0 1.5 1.5 z = 60 u 200 / W 1.5 _ r 2 j W 54 Q O W 48 W 100 Z > 80 Q S 2 N 60 ~a 1.0 1.0 W C ° 50 HW SCALE ENTRANCE ° 1.0 ¢ 40 D TYPE D: W 9 W 36 30 (1) sNere edge wits 1.- 9 33 heaawell .9 Q a 20 (2) Groove end.ire W 30 headwall 2 .8 .8 (3) Groove and .8 27 1 /rejecting 10 24 e 7 7 .7' 6 To use scale (2) or (3) project 21 S Aerleenteu7 to scale (1),thea 4 •�� straight Inclineilline through D an4 0 scales,or reverse ee 3 illestratea. 6 .6 .6 18 2 1S " 11.0 .5 5 .S 12 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR HEADWATER SCALES 2153 CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS BVRCAV OF►t/2L1C 1tOADS JAN.1243 REVISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL \ 18] K)E57- 5Azc1A11r4.5 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SHEETNO.— OF SAN DIEGO, INC 10179 Huennekens Street CALCULATED BY G — DATE Son Diego, California 92121 CHECKED BY DATE Ph.6191558-4500 Fax 6191558-1414 SCALE :5 1 C..O A91 ...................... . ............................ ... . .......... ............................................................... ........................ ............................................................................ ... ........... ............... ................ ..................................................................... :-27- ................. ............................... ....................................................................... ..................... ................................... .............................. o' ................. 0 : 0 .......................................... ............... ....... ..................................................... . .. ............... .. ................... ........................... ................................. [165. ....................... .......... 16 1:2 0. .................... ............. ............................... ................. .......... .................. .... ---------- -------................ 7 ....... .... .......... ................. .............................................. ......... .................................. L_ __ - _ .......... .......................................................................................... .............................................................................. 7............................................... ....................... .............. ......................... ............ .................. ........... ......................... .......... ........ ............... ...................... ................................ ......................... ........... ............................................................ 7........................................................................................ ................................................. ......................................... ........ ................ ......................-. ........... ....... .............................. ............................ ............... ................................... ..................... .......... ..................................................................................- ............ ......................... ................. ......................................... ..................... ............................ .............. .............................. ............... ................. ......--------------- ............... ............. ......... ...... ........... .......................................................................... ........................ ........... ............... ... ................. ... ... ........ .............. ......................... ............................... ....................................................................................................................... !9mcT 'u"&wa)MI ft am Wt.Gam.M.,01471.10 C'm Mm Mu ow AW254= SUPPLEMENTAL TO REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING ( "D" SERIES } 1 DRAWINGS D-1, D-2, D-3. AND D-4 REQUIRES the use of SDC-110 DRAWING D-12 _-_ NOTES Amend note 3 to read: 'When curb inlet opening height(H) exceeds 8 inch,install inch steel protection bar.' Amend note 4 to read: 'Install additionall bars at 342 inch dear spacing above first bar when opening exceeds 16 inch.' DRAWING D-19 NOTES Add: 3. Slotted drain installations shall be encased with 6 inch PCC (520-C-2500) all around and shall be poured monofithic aly with the curb and gutter. DRAWING D-40 SECTION B-B Amend V2D min,to read: "10 min.' In addition,show riprap and concrete channel drawn even with top of pipe. NOTES Amend note 1.13) to read: 'Filter blanket material.' ' Amend note 3 to read: "Riprap shall be placed over a geotextile filter fabric. Filter blanket material shall be placed under the 1 fabric when specified.' - DRAWING D-40 AND D-41 I Add the following: V tocdy e 001)E z7 Design 17.7 Ic 175 Velocity Rode (PEA YMAUU,C•S )\ (FtiSec), Classification S y / 6-10 No.2 Backing • • USE .Z ' Ls 1,j 10-12 1/4 Ton 12-14- 12 Ton ZIP P.AF 1A_1 1 Ton UL ion SECTION OF RIP RAP T over 18 fps requires special design SHT. 1 OF 2 Reviiion By Aoorovea Dote CITY OF SAN DIEGO - STANDARD DRAWNG CITY OF SAN DIEGO Of;CKAL V.Roll S." STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2-7-" SUPPLEMENTAL TO REGIONAL ` t0" aC..25e02 are F:T STANDARD DRAWING ( "D" SERIES ) DRAWING NUMBER S D D-10 0 h1 c O h > eta pG 0 v �-v O p C i`� t•\ �N m m u E On C •M. N r'1^a M�...a n..�' CL 0C4- = L up^ ~ N Lcoa� o Ix ao a g�i°� v m f 1 8 o 'm L t v0 C oa + ID 0 a' OO Y} M u v r'� \ N / La4- pVLGO o ►t- -Z} o + L L q^ O a 1 s ic +. n n o C4 &+- %0 u 0 gbCp� L. ' J, M� M1 1 N I N 8 C_ ~ Ix V y ZQ� Q G Q N G h cEl— o E V O N u m^ <L� �� \ O o ^N— h l� 10 n h 1 N 1 a h n L O _ 0 ! a O in c O a r _> r� • ho V O �. � u n Z ac n n.-. O 0 o 4-74- u o v a n O .. elf C O t "� 8 O L 0 O y � t C M 'C • u ) an e r $ •e s • o o in p op lr.1N < N `' , C C m N o a '0^ �i I p. LO p Qp _Qu L „ �'� N ~ � O a 00 W \ O ho I o r u0 p „ t > u r L i- u = UO .�.�a Mt V• W „ LL 4 L G O} ~ Ix L O y p O O } ` LG I O >a •n0 N NG p p v o n .0CB g o Y80. o �b 1 v ^ G d� � a ox ~, a a C O N O G 0~ G IV G W FO `0 O tE ►- c8 00'- H v8 E5 — '�'� I i Lie 0 'i �p F L u 4 • pN� �p ^ „ 12 BOO F�q 1 C— e 1 ±_. O I G N �O�e1 O1 ~ 1 _ n too „ g j'D L. $ _4. na -48 O N G G Da h < c` o �L N �4- {a,c1 N 1��- �d_rr= E=o L < tj V C L * SON ♦N.-NeO v1 U11f1.� a Ot < G ��Nner F. L a i. :►SI. H__UNSAKER &ASSOCIATES, SAN DIEGO, INC. 10179 HUENNEKENS STREET- SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 (619) 558-4500 - FAX(619) 558-1414 VE�.OGIT`1 CON" -�L �L1►JG► DzS�G�J vk3-r SAicoa ti SNr�E`r 3 � j2cAG W O Fae s _1rj 00, D Use La 12 •.- __. U se Ld 1 �� R APE L�� a �•{ +2. �Z►a6 t'O,M IN�TI�a�� UPsi'2�1P►M IN6 0.12 - O. t � or Kam = 2 'Ka D 1 Ld = 12- CA I. CULATE �y�rQu.tic cross SCCA�0r. a��,cl e�;�- velcc► J —Ir ( ,i I '%_ (. .), 1. y K Q = 12 4 cars V" � I3. 4 PS o tic . i SC Proceclwe ir% C..,crc-tc !. F PROJECT CALCULATION SHEET ProjectSaxony —PREPARED BY: Ray Martin Proj No: 1375-41 Description: Velocity Control Ring Calculation 07/22/97 i i t I I I . :. Hart I rmaur rlwrcr eo. YI — OCP N=HS 1I S 41.@•vl46. �G / . 1 wdh J/d s&'M Ib '0J-N•65, S� Oram Rue,!Y= L/'Chkra Plole A6ft Intel Chkrd P/efe Cove< O '1 L 150 Carer --y. (Ir[� J/d N✓w ran ISO 5 PC'pt-nm�/.r!' fi 140 OnyrnO/Lru✓nd. _T 4 ➢jl� L=SO• _•.nor � -"�.no _1 130 .r/ �—� / / �" 130.. ... s a rofe</on - _ ~ •• +-`". '? EISt PdI roJD".HH'RCPG� �O0 \ a _. TYPc';["NH M' �_i0/N2•RCPC/G! "e° ad •A' 6C i2C2 RCP C/III Cfor°e/°,/Jiee-� 1 /ZI.tS.J'Th.ck Jkew<d IOY/" LT/R•. 120 :Je<Co+ f.vem, I �.•onf Conrl O<lar/JriJ9 '20 .Pock S/0x R-olec4un 10)"go `..7 Ho• J.•r^ /1 h R,iY =,'an Hr!,SCA B �buonr rnr.rsea JkaIUJJ LI l.f>d p/on O,OJ . Droinoge-- nil NO.ID ,4Rewy Erc,• Droinaoa Unit No. iI I, - OCP"N•1/00 - ,)Hh J/d J>orm s O"'o Rini 4•A6•"fD/leh 130 /-0prnr�,g fit' a @err -/Shan FL/!y ljYhkrd.Pfale Corer ie L°CP•N CO2' R• 130 ISO OCP'H•75� /d <nrng/r2 /!bl-✓or 4prn 120 - /, Jtd NW FOprnrnyo2' p e Cove { RO 140 '// ChNrd F/a/t�' I ea G'�aund fo➢�Sa4 — Ie0 f / uJJk J�Ack cfum` Ongrn4/.Ground 101"0 L10 130 -- - ' i '.iC, t are TP-sa 130 1 — yl A. .y�? 0 t.7B' •1t ! .f ' 120 100 20 S4i27SRCRUI$ 24;10,WRe-I]d. JS66f83 1fCPe-1ZT - - /Si! 110 0 Jkew 2ll°Lf Drainage Unit No. 9 i AS BUILT PLANS Drainage Unit No.8 Contract No. ir-oAxMl- 150 Date Completed_ +'.f0N'ih per.,z: ,if r,0AWtV y3hrm Neffiml 150 ' SSon /Bo/ 140 Document NO- /�� rarYDepr6 140 ys?onP' ; re A4'.. Po'r`- - 140 9 1 V enry[c B-lLiad=-\ I B y//iZ7Y fdd[9E. fOL+Cho"P br1 ed M_r :f X 120 Z 00- �je 's 12 0 110 10 �u '> Z 110 3 � ?� loo `4}i 'I • �'��a' °p°P loo 1 Rc�%s 1 � ,r 1 90 PL t /S[7 00 90 e°g�t? a �°1 :S J[ �35 >• f 4ii �0r: rn°/ Oroinage Unit Na 7 g Drainaae Unit No 8 ✓ ter°°^° at l 70 . 80 RockJlap�e P"Iecfion �!A f dd/JOrf[A^lJhcco Net/,rrg - CJee Oifch Li.rf for /'Aef-/Qerp-/1oeg OaanGfiJf 130 f11YJ/d<J/ 3Q 130 LG=N=3S0 S-.!'-M•JSO JC.°�R• J OCP-Nr7d H 9 O ef» Oiiyino/ �� r 120 I/'O nrn pD HD=,1§p S06E/er•/C01 1/9 Lnrf pp<r q4J Ground !(r•ChkrdP /e . ter` 120 1 ,10 ' MChrrE Pft /11--/2H 1 11 Conf°u/ foreC I{a E ,C ' //litl I .rLr4 Yrekl k C0ee< .,12 ( a . — 0 Groded 110 RCPOIO alp ID 1 ,,.9 �- /J</cc°ff .�`Q - 1 90.-•as-> ee OU/-A 90 ree DU-mss... - ABHDi0' p 9[' ` I YJ ! I � '�i� L➢S.ff � dr 10 e}S. I I �fF 90 /0'BoL ld'Oee RCP GL7 24194 I fBitd a P RCPCJA f RC.'aPl YIS`-' ' 1 RXP :fH/' de J/oPeJ •O /S[ZrSZM p•rry 90 C alf /1[L ZS7rf/" Jee Di/ch 4Jf rke. A WOYZI J /" _ J?O/ lxxr,0d ---� fordaonh/raJ Drainage Unit Na4 Idenh<o1---1 sssl.cs a.Oroirtago Unit NS Jf>N Drginago Unit No. 2 Drainage Unit No.3 30 M"rwa,�fn,enn °°n 6'N'Ld0 fJ'L On, 120 W /b.¢0" 06 , 120 120 /H- Gale Gls+u $-6-k-Jf)'. 120 1 I fn.JhM orode I IN t- = 6 h� I MH17 . An0 PI rafk=IS sm Jnr le j ° II Lbffam ar 4� - � - J/,� � C JCi I2 Jr//Ar// J</.'!�% ,r/1y-/�+ \.� C.••/(/ZGo 9C /+L° _3t;2ts ttL;•'' sJ: 7:IL'� ry RCPC/dl ax .r rePa� sTRUCTe URE DE—1 AILS JYo-- DRkBNAGE PROFILES rainaoe Unit Na on 1 tGt.) Drains 4e Unit Na t ICont 1 ' lYBE ��• o.. - Scote:@`..3 2Ct' Sheet 1 of `5 .-. t _ — I I i id 1997 Z�k k J U �I 7 Y J r A ICI I G J ros, _ %i SD 5 1/465 7' 184 rode Profi/e 6roder�36• 71-� 'Y,.....• xE ` 3 (\\ Jirucf fi-c --r�'• Od>m, a,/vsf Q� ,ftrarl re. 3 .Y" OETAI(,} ROCK SLQkj--t TI N !•,r �. SFau 1••10" 8 2C 'BOTTOM EARTH_OLTCN J —w- pL •On OFTAi OROLK SLOPE PRO�TON o TOM EARTH OITCHI ----_/ i off.. r,Od•.( '. .�,_ ''-. / � 2 (, CR F-;;:npe A P,ofe.4 • Foe SJ k J/o a Prof -I'r e /ion ZS• 1N0.4• \ 4c'• 4J JD'yBGR 'to so..wtrin., _ OCP I � © 74 RCP =„^ --�--_—_ �RQ JET• FYCv j`��ine I.;.: 'Q{- a�� 07 14' J 4 ® 4 RCP J0006" G iJ MK�11YLf r ' i I . ____ ------ AC J,o R/A' _ _ -,�, ,Sfd tjw. , I i f i I AS BUILT PLANS Contract No -- Date Completed Document No Af1d 14l, j 110 .- i _---•� Y ./ �.1. -- -- - - ----- - ' 120 - PrafiYe Groemd , 100 j - LIZ, q so so i sa °A LINE_ 7/6 93/ //04 990 902 866 d4/ ,?33 6r28 0 Z aZ7 027 16 27 BZ7 B67 - /,-}q/C 77// ,12 Z7 ,'J/ t/ ,"q/ 94;,ev - 3723 3996 9df3 -TC-90 .496.^ 44601 1975 3Z6 Z66 142L 2640 4C/I 7037 77 Mr 9137 B_9 ZL 96 ZZ_ 200.5 /693 'J,78T 3?bt 4 93 B316 13572 i5fi5 s T ! ! 1570• 1 — 2 5 4 9575 _ i 7 C 9 - - 1580 -- i� �nt 1997 - ;E HYDRQLIOGY -, �MAP ---- 3,5 A / r I D H�.D C RS x 150,5 / I --" 8 APP TMATE 5800 / � j - 6` j �J /" x 149.? / 9658e i 9 8 0 ti x 166.6 x 150,3 �j� x 256- 330 x I f Sign x 14E9 °DI 1489 �6 S eh O a, j'��'4� `�- x 149.8 Greenhouse A C \\ ! I 0 Berm Berm ISEI:;K O F D x1831 PROP D PRIV DRIVE x 153,1 " 782 12' IDE, 3' OVER ATIVE �j I "? , Gate x 768.9 Ia0 v Berm 0 E F DRAINAGE MA j I Fs x - --- / x 12 x 1443 __ - i 8 19 .2 � c � - 15 12 6 � 1 I � - � 4- - 1 7 .6 0 DT r Xx x 1366 x 138,9/ 134,6 x 133,4 / �y0 ' x 1 il xi T60 17 .5 I I 1 8 I 19 eve s P- 82. 1 I P- 17 8. 6 I _ _ vp I l 1 x x I P x1 83 I P 1 0.2 1 129,1 45, a\*1 9 p 191, x 1 1 �-` 7/ // / P 5 .7 I I 1.9Ac x 187© � BvG / 2 x - 130 126,7 12¢6 x ISI. j I P- 1 7 . 1 / T GBH P- 18 1 . 1283 1 X ( x / 15 :0 68 1 x 186"7 �I vt << I \ 1 1 s49 / x 127,3 She 3.3- x 7864\ J '�+'.� T 'x. 2 \ i x x12 . 145 z 159. i 03 J 9.4 1 Gate 1 / x 127.6 6 40. �D,3 2 �" 1\ \ I x 1246�- / x � .1% 1 g - C �- - She X9091 I 11 s \ x 1270 4 - - G �G x 185 - - / � 47 � o d- I 1 \ Vp� , 1�2 G I � 1 11 \� x 121,9 D C❑N M R 12% , - GB ° 1145 x117,2 x12.. 1 N v I - > I I ° it \\ \ 118,1 / v r G6 ro N - 1B C8 211 I I s OFFS Ln L 0 1 _6.3 o r x 87W- _ 9'1 i I DRA AGE M P -- ---_. � _ x 1849 I I I I 1 1 \\ 115.9 121,2 4 166. 1�1 37 x ( ca p 1 \ 1 x x / 1. �, �U EVC 11 \ \ A 'moo I � 16 �z( - �- P- 17 2.3Ac 22 129,3 11 1 AI -� V 67C.4 ° 4 3 P- 181 .3 Cone, \ ( 5,3 ° G \ - 17 .3 x 1829 L - - x 1866 x - _ - = - 5 c �: - - � �fi_ �' �1 8 � y Gate ' U 1196 \ � - - \ \� 13.2 , x184 23 27 11 , b a. ` I x 191 4 \ I 3 3 34 1 35 I I 36 I I P 0.4 - _ 1, I �, -„ - - - 30 a�? - I _ ' 6.8.8 _ ^J J_ 1 i - -- -- - - ------ - 0 P- 1 6.6 2 I Eyc �7 �� - 17 . 1 �xll 1 _ - 1753 180. 1 x 12 'A .5 .- O I . .- L.1-J P 14 1 \ - 1� 1s9� - -- � I!_ � (I 24 , i) I I � x /�` C� FL I �. it I 9 I 5 v 9, 2 - - \ I - t IBS-�P 179.4 i I / 01 C> \ X101 5.6 I P- 17T ioa > 11 ��o 19B P 14 .5 - _ IBI, x 1 C�.I x 6" x 1 x M 111 127,3 \1 III g y 4 I BV I I / x 183, 176.4��I P- 178.4 , I x 185"3 0 L1 g �' 2 I 3 0 I 2 x 27 6.. - - 7- I � ° P 17 4 ( 792 1. Ac DAs ED ❑r UR 1 cn (J \ 1 x ( 1 72.6 r ARE AP ❑ M TE i 1, ld4 I 1 C 5 �` I I - 1 3. 6 I P- 51�I P/ 175;. j ' 1 6. P'� 77.51 or I 26 I Greenly h x \4 l - Sl - 179.0 gn \ O J ( I I 18 c 1 1 x c l I I U 1 126.7 >K rd 126.8 6 0 to 1 m 1 P 36>' 0 p 52 � � � B i - o- 18'..RC _ - - - - - I rX 4 ? - 96° W Imo.! 1 11 1 3 1 48",R P. P 1 . > -4 - - - - - - - - i I I 182,9 t` nw off; I 5. 0� 26.1 26 I o .Q.. L.Li Q� 1 x 1270 1 1ry9 v 5 - - - - ° o o ice- > % � o I ` - - RCP- , m 2 > I I AC Z. 1 1 11 \ .pA 16 .08 - - � - - - - - - - `= y j ❑ � L>_1 1l 11 11 It 11 59 x 13.95 IL 1 1 )\\\ ...I.x 150,8 x L l� I 'x 1691 f �.� � / 1 � (5) Conc i\\\ \\ x 149"1 8 ' \ /l <\ x IBI ) s I C \ 170,6 X 126,3\x �- \ 1 1 25.6 \\ \ �,g 0 1 \ x 1511 140,2 ~- 1.?4Ac °t &SHED CONTOURS � U7) � 1111 11\I 11 \\\ x \ �I G 760 1664 ARE APPROXIMATE R �L U ° 1 1 1 x 13 ,S os \ t \ 151 \ 0 G� / ! {� PIN x 41 11 \ \ - 1648 xd8 -: -x 140"3 _ _ _ _ � -.- 0._ 1 \ 5 66 2 2,03 140 v� - _ -- -- J U 1 319 2`T 0 Q 1 1 \ \ m MH i 3,5 x x x 165.6 165,5 ,- 166.9 x 1 I, 1 1895 1689 Berm x 0 160 L_I y �5 ;�a3 a* a £ 1s7.4� � _Ft E MAP 165,x' I S,3 - Berm � - {t Ii I 0 2 � 6 80 12 Y 1 \ �- _ _. 1 \ \ x 152,5 153.0 x- - -- - - ,�� 4 / 647 164,7 - _ 2 8 X .125,1 \ l \ 1541 x�'f 155,4 '' *� " X . DI F jDI 18 2- 180,4 AC ;, LO o O x »ai D I 180 I z = 3 - _ ,r o 1 , �/ x 165,1 DT � v _� '< E:\1375\41\HYDRO.DWG ,�- J/q A { ! ! f { t f $ � a E HEAD V L 11 L i F /` J, E t.� EXIST. 54"RCP EXIST. RIP-RAP` yXl4\ IT if f ev Ex N ,' ,w MAP NO,, t3��1 ° ; N r iri6.76TG % ,j 00 EXIST. HEADWALL 1" 'rRN D AIN EA ,i \ cm 105.54FL i ( r EX1ST. ,'f8"�P w \ \ \ EXIST. 48° R.C.P. o r` ` \ STORM DRAIN @ .B6 a ;t XIST. TYPE F' J e \ PER DWG NO. 481 -1 C. EXITE ER M I. r t NLET \ \ 0 1 PE VJGIN Q 11-11 �.. �� \ ( >1 11 4 10 . J XIST. 8" P.V.0 SEWER @ 5.23% \ \ EXI T SSE ER{M 'I I s �\ G E PER DWG UTf NO. 48 13-1 111511281IF F 1 T X67 t SEE ETTER OF PERMISSION I 't + i o BY: SAXONY @ ENCINITA i TWJ32. at I } i ! DATED- APRIL 30, 2062 + F$ D° 7 S T s TW136.a0 31 E 195.06' s E IF 130.62 CI - 3 .7 h o PROPOSED ETAI N 5. 0 2 27 09 L4 K h �� e 3 r - r i s es TW140:00 x WALL PER SLSD C TF130.67 + 124 I a ARK vI ' 31 5-0 'lp u l 24. i. 43 E i t\ 125.07 (TYPICA ) 5% B +J*� 127 1 .5� t 4 1 `4 ,t PROPOSED RETAINING PER z e3c) 31 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS ( u.0a i JA R UL I /PER 34 N r __ ... _ _ _ _ t � SEE SHEET 4 �. s TW12 25.3 1 M DEL SV882 I ' t s� Q 0.23A w°8 127.6 128.12 LOT 6 130.8 131.84 TM1241 3 GRAPHIC SCALE x d t rj EXIST. 8" P.V.C. i TF122. t - SEWER @ 2.32% 20 0 10 20 ao so r5. k TW140.00 s2 � 1 20 28. 0 .06 2% 3 14 TFi32.67. b f r 3 .05 4.82 % 1 t 1 t 3 _ `� EXIST. SEWER M.H. , C;Q 118.48 IE. ADJUST RIM IN FEET EXIST. 48" R.C.P. ELEV. TO NEW GRADE 1 inch = 2a #t. STORM DRAIN @ 9:62% 1` EXIST. 8' P.V.C. EXIST. S.D. C9. /3 X ST. \, 131.15FL IN / 33.62 - 6' - r� M DRAIN PROFILE SEWER @ 9.95% �\ J 12 5F f � i. ! ' 121 O f� I � ON 130.67FL OUT EXIST. S.D. C.O. \ r- \ Z%. S CO 33 68 12037,QF QU y EXIST. SEWER M.H. 137.32FL IN r Ir ,! SEE SEW R AT SHEET 24 r �> 35.32FL OUT ° 140.._, STORM DRAIt�,@ 7.62% 130.00 IE EXIST_ 8" P.V.C. 34.40 -� SEWER @ 9.36% EXIST. SEWER M.H. EXIST. 24" CAU77 f � � � v�� PROPOSED SI WALL 0. a ` � � " � � �� � R=186.00' 135.19 IF � STORM DRAT .2 i \ I S84°5 I I L=40.58' CONSTRUCTOR TO VERIFY \\, % r 29 EXIST. SEWER PIPE ELEVATION 0` l ' ; 33.49 " $ 34.76 ��'��'~~ D=12°30'01 1482 37 00 E PRIOR TO EXCAVATION X)�T. 8' f , 134.40 1' 3. 8" EWER FIRE LAt`--; FjgE HYDRANT ASS'Y � � �- I F.F. 2' W.S. A. 48" 8" S 34.98 C.P _ T \ •✓ r' :�r A !` \ 7.5% I 8„ W EX, 8" WATER Q\ 6 133. RASD G N-6 d � \N I � j PROP SED �ING \ 134.2 VARIES V41 1 .$9' 0 `" 134.01 - 1 134.40 = U1�ALL�ER S �C�,6 �., - 8 W / � , 1 p y J ? 11 29 4-4 M ` '( 4D.S7 {. JIN EXIS r BMP NOTE: 1 1 rl 1% q POST CONSTRUCTION BMP WILL � i (' � 1 ,j -r�J � / � / 135.61 2 13 � "� `\ REMAIN IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP �i TF .3 7 1 44 T G.B. 134. 1 8.5' o <0. . .13 \\ \ \ W_ 1 itI AND WILL BE MAINTAINED BY , 3 ,�AG R TO DRAIN 4.19TC / ° % 4$ PROPERTY OWNER. \ 1 (TYP.) Rj 135.86 136.03 ° TF136.0{} Tf 6:67 T?N14DD 34 6TC 137.18 XI T. -SEWER TFi3 3 �g \ 3 6F� • 6.�3 - z j' "' \13713 Ofi% 137:24 .. ppyy .73432" . ' .1JL,� t - 1..4. 3 - - - -_ - - _ 1 - iH \ + N 1F13 00`, K - RA! 0 DRAB•! \ APE D TH 36.29 37.34 ��}}nnqq qq � R � t \ Q. 3W.4Q` S`k , S' G.B. \ W 1 ! t ry qUL5ADC �L TS (T ) � G� 137.43 \ l , ��� F. P SED RET NG WALL 137. 3 cx` /� 1;1 1 `'Z_ 1 � `i V 7. ST 61 rY PER ST RUC L ALCULA 137.69 I \ SEE SH 13 8 r 13 9 136.7 � , M \N v^l� 7.75 s 1 X I \ ; XBO'" TIN �l 'D TTC F 133.95 {�.:, - . r 13 . S A �STEM wau_ 0.005A 138.40 z7Y A � awl �, w 138.44 T A \ 34.3 g o' ,. SEE SEWER LATERAL 63 I 36.2Y1 �' PROFILE ON THIS SHEET j G LIGHT NOT 38.40 381'QC TREAD PLATES WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE BAS ti4itSC@ A �\ \ \ PRpF DS D tiN Q 1 fiO IVEWAY INTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DURIN TH 38.16 TF1 03 R TASl INti I 7 WALL'(PE 5 �p ` T113 33`; 7 RAMPS AND LANDSCAPE AREAS F.F. y PHASE TO THE SATISFACTION 0 THE WA D SD - t 4, 0 r 40 m ECT PLANS (TYP.) ITY ENT. .20C 138,30 t9 \ �'' 72T �r ROOF DRAIN DRAIN TO i T 91L 6 137.90 38.19 HARDSCAPE AN Q \ \ ,�qt 137.82 X / 138.40 TO INLETS TYP. 8.201 X 1 EX 1 G ` UY WIRE Iy ` t 36.4 : 137.99 y ( 1 73BTJ8fF1 7.33 °\� _889 f1 A- 7°'E `\ \ 30 i X. \� 136.ZSFC 8:19 c . 838 10 1:37,9(1' r.. 9$ d 0 XISTI G oWER POLE 't - T i � 167. 5' 1�7.3TL 43 ; 137.75FL d .'' TW1 67 ,a TW138.a0 TF137, / .00 f � �. � � � fr` TF _. 37.17.33 3L 1 , c �__ - Tffi .3�- - 75TG 37.4570 o i --- - PROPOSE Yp L .'°_. ........�. Rah.. - -. - I e -- - - / KS ENGINEERING !. / s831o'4s° Planning Engineering Surveying R01-/- 44 t J EXISTING BROW DITCH 1t SW Iltl f.W.__�_____-'^-� � '_`°----_._.-W,._...��"�'�, �'�°'�---~` 1"� t J-y'� �,'.i` -°` /.✓ � � +tpn EXI BROW`DFT6d__ (619)296-5565 7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 200 San Diego Ca. 921438 tP DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: wo REVISION APPROVED DATE REFERENCES DATE BENCHMARK SCALE SPECIAL DISTRICT G.M. s.T. K.S.S. APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINIT° ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING N4, �W DESCRIPTION: STANDARD STREET MONUMENT REVIEWED BY, PLANS PREPARED UNDER SUPERVISION OF: RECOMMENED APPROVED PROPOSED HYDROLOGY MAP FOR: zv ELEVATION ON BRASS DISK LQCATION CENTERLINE OF SAXONY ROAD, 325 fi, HORIZONTAL: '.-20° DATE L cno OT �O BY: BY: L O 9 6 1 w SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF 48532 OFFICE UNION STREET VERTICAL: N/A DATE KAMAL S. SWE1S PE. N0. DATE: DATE: Y�cn ELEV; 119.476 DATUM: U,S.C. & G.S. 06-30-2004 WORK PROJECT NO. 02-001 SHEET 1 OF 1 SEE SHEET W ., wNw P § t w e m a 4 L e^ '1 � Pr•� 'dm $ � 3 r y M f ,rt ry F !, r < t , ry - F+ n < � s 1 p$ , <<, ,' �„'+:.of }, �. a„ i,{P•,. e X h' �., ” e ..� .. .. �r. F< x�r a , .:• .>.... .... S� ., x"_ x8 x ,.. fa._ a. t a e ,. s� r .:. ,c, r:, aF c _' < r n - a k p k , } a : ,} •,. g ,. -,. ' f: -:,. _ g -_ rte., F _, - � � 3"^ 3 3r3:- z {. '.r qty, �°• -,: -,,. .1.'. > ' r r n -.. ... -a+ .y } y '.a. - 9aF 1 is a p m r. ' ..•,3 � .. 41„ r.- :., e x. , -, «,. >;< -,� ,. � y _,: .- ?o-r� ,.. - xyA .... 5;1,`;. f a # g s > d i 4 g �a a , Y. r t i r ., s; r ., b• , „ , , � .. °: x , "' 3Y' a,. , � ° g..yam'@ g$ � L fY q. a .:: � '"• yap ay t , 3�xi 33„„ gg n ` g ' t » r ' �a a } tr , j x , f%{ 1 S< , i rtf .4 , , < R' �tt ✓ ' a a kg<' 1`. R t< � R x r f }i i }e 3 a k vy � rt ,1 a .., L , et i l I 3 W k 3 'W C 3"' S a , x 4 h a r <ri b n 3 e r S Y ,.. .. yr q: SS✓. o - a} Ms 1. .- .. , 2. - 'a ,_. i£, ♦ B uAtNy fiw v. ,fi ?''^i: 9,. „r t ro a „ �A 6 wd 3 1 e yg �a n 4F { t 1 I. s rs= ,i '� , -,. ��,. .>. --, , �. -v. � 4.. 1 1 � „yd�r,. a j» y",,,.; a<-ed _ ,.. __ Reap ,,�°J-,`ad•"m #a'P Y &4�` QRw^d Y ry ° > -� p�. ,;\ .:' ,.➢ ffi = a... '` fir .. L 'i a.> v r. Fc+ � Ye yy $ a ..,_ ,✓° ry d a a .•' -.m. , u:p. `L.:.w u,.r ..Ea" 'a "M ' ,''%-A' ti`, !aAr w. v✓ < BASINcarp n: xY q.r S a } e" f 4w 4 > c3 ' .5� l v a. ` q�+,4NOCIllp"ry w..A<A '';�-v"e,, .,. .. „- , € < }: :. °v#.. . .< e � ,Fd 1, z ;>fl ,.., e.+n gry�'¢ , V.' e » n . » _ 55 kw , A 'nai. .. ir. af.. t � w h t .4 t Yk t { V'. 1 W f,. g 1'w✓ i", a n e £ ..n r9wi SEE SHEET 9 Basin High Point Low Point L (ft) Area (ac) __ _ _ _____ <Node No.. Elev.. Node No,,, Elev. O-1, 231 304 23 18'1,2 _ 160.0 33.8 5-2 23.3 182 23.2 1446 60 4.7 i 0-3 28 " 278: 28.1 � ' 25 53.b (3-4 28 2 188 = 27 4 1100 4.6 0-5 1 , 27.1 160 27 50 2.2 if v , a t 400 Soo PAYlHxu "' rAx N 3 EP. QD k _ � G Li ._'� { WORKS DEPARTMENT { ¢ Y i s ° p S SPECIAL � Di ?FV(CMfiS .' hO V 'D c REFERENCES DATE ff PLANS PREPARED UNDER SUPERVISION OF RECOMMENDED APPROVED MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN By; DATE T DA HORIZONTAL POGRAPHY 400- SCALE TO VERTICAL �ti Hr,:.C; �. ffR_,.� . A7�: _. °� � i� - OF I AM 9. C4 40TI,