The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAttachment 3a-13 - PDP SWQMP redactedCTTYOFCHULA VISTA PDPSWQMP PRIORITY DEVELOPMENTPROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITYMANAGEMENTPLAN (SWQMP) P . N Shinohara Business Centerro1ectatne ___________ _ Assessor's Parcel Number(s) _6 _4_4 _-0_4_0_-0_1 ___________ _ PermitApplicationNumber _D_R_-_2_1_-0_0_3_2 __________ _ Drawing Numbers _____________ _ CIVILENGINEER NAME: Greg ory w. Lang . PE# 68075-------------- PREPAREDFOR: PREPARED BY: VWP-OP Shinohara Owner, LLApplicantName;------------==: Addre ss: 2950 East Camelback Road, Suite 305 Phoenix, AZ 85016 T 1 h # (213) 362-9300eepone C N Pasco Laret Suiter & Associatesompanyame: _____________ _ Address: 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 T el eph one # (858) 259-8212 DATE: May 20, 2022 Approved By: City of Chula Vista printName & Sign) Date: PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 APPENDIX L Page intentional!J left blank for double-sided printing Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ____________________________ _ TABLE OF CONTENTS The checklist on this page summarized the table and attachments to be included with this PDP SWQMP Submittal. Tables & attachments with boxes already checked ( ) are required for all Projects j Acronym Sheet j Certification Page j Submittal Record j Project Vicinity Map j Attach a copy of the Intake Form: Storm Water Requirements Applicability Checklist j HMP Exemption Exhibit (if Applicable) Iii FORM I-3B Site Information Checklist for PDPs Iii FORM 1-4: Source Control BMP Checklist for All Development Projects Iii FORM 1-5: Site Design BMP Checklist for All Development Projects Iii FORM 1-6: Summary of PDP Structural BMPs Iii ATTACHEMNT 1: Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs Attachment 1A: DMA Exhibit Attachment 1B: Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1C: FORM 1-7 Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening (when applicable) Attachment 1D: Infiltration Information Attachment 1E: Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets/ Calculations for each DMA and Structural BMP Worksheets from Appendix B, as applicable D ATTACHMENT 2: Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2A: Hydromodification Management Exhibit Attachment 2B: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2C: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels Attachment 2D: Flow Control Facility Design; Overflow Design Summary for each structural BMP Iii ATTACHMENT 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Plan j ATTACHMENT 4: Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Storm Water BMPs j ATTACHMENT 5: Project's Drainage Report Iii ATTACHMENT 6: Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ____________________________ _ ACRONYMS APN Assessor's Parcel Number BMP Best Management Practice HMP Hydromodification Management Plan HSG Hydrologic Soil Group MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System N/ A Not Applicable NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service PDP Priority Development Project PE Professional Engineer SC Source Control SD Site Design SDRWQCB San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board SIC Standard Industrial Classification SWQMP Storm Water Quality Management Plan CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ SUBMITTAL RECORD Use this Table to keep a record of submittals of this PDP SWQMP. Each time the PDP SWQMP is re-submitted, provide the date and status of the project. In column 4 summarize the changes that have been made or indicate if response to plancheck comments is included. When applicable, insert response to plancheck comments behind this page. Submittal Date Project Status Number 1 ii Preliminary Design / 11/19/2021 Planning/ CEQA XI Final Design 2 ii Preliminary Design / 2/14/2022 Planning/ CEQA Final Design 3 ii Preliminary Design / 5/20/2022 Planning/ CEQA Final Design 4 Preliminary Design / Planning/ CEQA Final Design CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 Summary of Changes Initial Submittal Revision to disturbed area Revision to DMAs and BMPs If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ Insert Completed Intake Form (Storm Water Requirements Applicability Checklist) https: //www.chulavistaca.gov/ departments /public-works/ services/ storm-water-pollution- prevention/ documents-and-reports CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA I Storm Water Requirements Applicability Intake Form - Checklist for All Permit ApplicationsOTYOf March 2019 UpdateCHUlAVISTA Project Information Project Address: Project Application # 517 Shinohara Lane , Chula Vista, CA 91911 DR21-0032 Project Name: APN(s) Shinohara Business Center 644-040-01 Brief Description . . of Work Proposed: Proposed industrial development The project is (select one): Iii New Development Total Impervious Area 349,912 ft 2 ID] Redevelopment Total new and/or replaced Impervious Area ft2 Redevelopment is the creation and/or replacement of impervious surface on an already developed site). ID] Others Name of Person Completing this Form: Gregory W. Lang Role: ID] Property Owner [l] Contractor ID] Architect u;al Engineer [DOther Email: glang@plsaengineering.com Phone: (858)259-8212 Signature: Date Completed : 05/20/2022 An swer each sect~'n n~low , starti ng with l section 1 and progressing through each section . Additional information for determ · ing the requirements is foun d in the Chula Vista BMP Design Manual available on the Ci ty's website at httg ://www .chulavistaca .gov/dega rtments/gublic-works/services/storm-water-gollution- grevention/documents-and-regorts. SECTION 1: Storm Water BMP Requirements Does the project consist of one or both of the following : []Yes Project is NOT Subject to Repair or improvements to an existing building or Permanent Storm Water BMP structure that don't alter the size such as : tenant requirements. improvements, interior remodeling, electrical work, BUT IS subject to Construction fire alarm, fire sprinkler system, HVAC work, Gas, BMP requirements. Review & plumbing, etc . sign "Construction Storm Water Routine maintenance activities such as : roof or BMP Certification Statement" on exterior structure surface replacement; resurfacing page 2. existing roadways and parking lots including dig outs , slurry seal, overlay and restriping; repair damaged sidewalks or pedestrian ramps on existing roads without expanding the impervious footprint; routine replacement of damaged pavement, Continue to Section 2, trenching and resurfacing associated with utility ltd! No page 3. work (i.e . sewer, water, gas or electrical laterals, etc.) and pot holing or geotechnical investigation borings . City of Chula Vista Storm Water Applicability Checklist (Intake Form) Page 2 of 5 March 2019 Update) Construction Storm Water BMP Certification Statement The following stormwater quality protection measures are required by City Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 14 .20 and the City's Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program . 1. All applicable construction BMPs and non-stormwater discharge BMPs shall be installed and maintained for the duration of the project in accordance with the Appendix K "Construction BMP Standards" of the Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. 2. Erosion control BMPs shall be implemented for all portions of the project area in which no work has been done or is planned to be done over a period of 14 or more days. All onsite drainage pathways that convey concentrated flows shall be stabilized to prevent erosion . 3. Run-on from areas outside the project area shall be diverted around work areas to the extent feasible . Run-on that cannot be diverted shall be managed using appropriate erosion and sediment control BMPs . 4 . Sediment control BMPs shall be implemented, including providing fiber rolls , gravel bags, or other equally effective BMPs around the perimeter of the project to prevent transport of soil and sediment offsite . Any sediment tracked onto offsite paved areas shall be removed via sweeping at least daily. 5. Trash and other construction wastes shall be placed in a designated area at least daily and shall be disposed of in accordance with applicable requirements . 6. Materials shall be stored to avoid being transported in storm water runoff and non-storm water discharges. Concrete washout shall be directed to a washout area and shall not be washed out to the ground . 7. Stockpiles and other sources of pollutants shall be covered when the chance of rain within the next 48 hours is at least 50%. I certify that the stormwater quality protection measures listed above will be implemented at the project described on Intake Form. I understand that failure to implement these measures may result in monetary penalties or other enforcement actions . This certification is signed under penalty of perjury and does not require notarization. Name: Gregory W_. Lang Signature .~ {J. ~ Title : Principal Engineer Date : 05/20/2022 City of Chula Vista Storm Water Applicability Checklist (Intake Form) Page 3 of 5 March 2019 Update) Section 2: Determine if Project is a Standard Project or Priority Development Project Is the project in any of the following categories, (a) through (j)? a) New development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces collectively over the entire project site). This includes commercial, industrial, residential, ~ Yes No mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. b)Redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000 D Yes ~No square feet or more of impervious surfaces). This includes commercial , industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. c) New development or redevelopment projects that creates and/or replaces a combined ~ Yes No total of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site) and support one or more of the following uses : i) Restaurant. This This category is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard Industrial Classification Code 5812). ii) Hillside development projects . This category includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater. iii) Parking Lots. This category is defined as a land area or facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally, for business, or for commerce . iv) Streets, roads, highways, freeways, and driveways . This category is defined as any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles . d) New development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), discharging D Yes ~No directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA). "Discharging directly to" includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the project to the ESA (i.e . not commingled with flows from adjacent lands). e) New development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces a combined D Yes ~No total of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, that support one or more of the following used: i) Automotive repair shops. This category is defined as a facility that is categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539. ii) Retail gasoline outlets. This category includes retail gasoline outlets that meet the meet one of the following criteria : (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles per day. f) New development or redevelopment that result in the disturbance of one or more acres ~ Yes No of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction . This does not include projects creating less than 5,000 sf of impervious surface and where added landscaping does not require regular use of pesticides and fertilizers, such as slope stabilization using native plants . Calculation of the square footage of impervious surface need not include linear pathways that are for infrequent vehicle use, such as emergency maintenance access or bicycle pedestrian use, if they are built with pervious surfaces of if they sheet flow to surrounding pervious surfaces. The project is (select one): If "No" is checked for every category in Section 2, Project is "Standard Development Project". Site design and source control BMP requirements apply. Complete and submit Standard SWQMP (refer to Chapter 4 & Appendix E of the BMP Design Manual for guidance). Continue to Section 4 . If "Yes" is checked for ANY category in Section 2, Project is "Priority Development Project PDP)". Complete below, if applicable, and continue to Section 3. City of Chula Vista Storm Water Applicability Checklist (Intake Form) Page 4 of 5 March 2019 Update) Complete for PDP Redevelopment Projects ONLY: The total existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: _______ ft2 (A) The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is ft2 (B) Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: ______ % The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation): D less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) -only new impervious areas are considered a PDP OR D greater than fifty percent (50%) -the entire project site is considered a PDP D Continue to Section 3 Section 3: Determine if project is PDP Exempt 1. Does the project ONLY include new or retrofit sidewalk, bicycle lane or trails that: Are designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non- erodible permeable areas? Or; Are designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from paved streets or roads? Or; Are designed and constructed with permeable pavements or surfaces in accordance with USEPA Green Streets guidance? D Yes. Project is PDP Exempt. Complete and submit Standard SWQMP refer to Chapter 4 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance). Continue to Section 4. No. Next question 2. Does the project ONLY include retrofitting or redevelopment of existing paved alleys, streets or roads designed and constructed in accordance with the Green Streets standards? D Yes. Project is PDP Exempt. Complete and submit Standard SWQMP (refer to Chapter 4 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance). Continue to Section 4. No. Project is PDP. Site design, source control and structural pollutant control BMPs apply. Complete and submit PDP SWQMP (refer to Chapters 4 , 5 & 6 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance). Continue to Section 4. City of Chula Vista Storm Water Applicability Checklist (Intake Form) Page 5 of 5 March 2019 Update) SECTION 4: Construction Storm Water BMP Requirements: All construction sites are required to implement construction BMPs in accordance with the performance standards in the BMP Design Manual. Some sites are additionally required to obtain coverage under the State Construction General Permit (CGP), which is administered by the State Water Resource Control Board. 1. Does the project include Building/Grading/Construction permits proposing less than 5,000 square feet of ground disturbance and has less than 5-foot elevation change over the entire project area? D Yes; review & sign Construction Storm Water Certification 0 No; next question Statement, skip questions 2-4 2. Does the project propose construction or demolition activity, including but not limited to, clearing grading, grubbing, excavation, or other activity that results in ground disturbance of less than one acre and more than 5,000 square feet? D Yes. complete & submit Construction Storm Water Pollution Control Plan (CSWPCP), skip questions 3-4 0 No; next question 3. Does the project results in disturbance of an acre or more of total land area and are considered regular maintenance projects performed to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of the facility? (Projects such as sewer/storm drain/utility replacement) D Yes. complete & submit Construction Storm Water Pollution Control Plan (CSWPCP), skip question 4 No; next question 4. Is the project proposing land disturbance greater than or equal to one acre OR the project is part of a larger common plan of development disturbing 1 acre or more? 0 Yes ; Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required . Refer to online CASQA or Caltrans Template . Visit the SWRCB web site at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction .shtml . Note: for Projects that result in disturbance of one to five acres of total land area and can demonstrate that there will be no adverse water quality impacts by applying for a Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver, may be allowed to submit a CSWPCP in lieu of a SWPPP. Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ _____________________________ _ HMP Exemption Exhibit Attach this Exhibit (if Applicable) that shows direct storm water runoff discharge from the project site to HMP exempt area. Include project area, applicable underground storm drains line and/ or concrete lined channels, outfall information and exempt waterbody. Reference applicable drawing number(s). Exhibit must be provided on 11"x17" or larger paper. CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA OTAY R I V E R SWEET W A T E R R I V E R H ST J ST L ST MAIN ST PALOM A R S T I ST E ST O L Y M P IC P W F ST SR-125 TOLL ROAD THIRD AVG ST I-805 FREEWAY I- 5 FREEWAY OTAY L A K E S R D BROADWAY HUNT E P W S R -5 4 F R E E W A Y HILLTOPDRNAPLE SS TB O N ITA R D SECONDAVORANGE AV EASTLAKEPWFIRST AVTELEG RA P H CANYON RDC ST C OR RALCA N Y O NRDLANEAVPROC TO R VA L L EY RD MARINAPW BUEN A VIST A WY R A N C H OD E L R E Y P W CENTR A L A V BEYER BLPLAZABONIT A R D MOUNT MI GUELRDHERI T AGERDTERRAN O V A D R LAGO O N D R 30TH S T S R - 5 4 F R E EW AYSR-125 T O L L R O ADI 805 F R E E WA YI-5 FREEWAY H ST J ST L ST MAIN ST P ALOM A R ST O L Y M P IC P W SR- 125TOLLROADI-805FREEWAYI-5FREEWAYOT A Y L A K E S R DBROADWAY S R - 54 F R E E W A Y B O N ITAR D TELEGRAPH CANY O N R D I- 5FREEWAYPALM I J WUESTES W E ETW ATER30TH HUNTEMAXGD TIM DENNERYPARK ACA C I A FIGAWOODSSAN M I G U E L MAGDALENAALTAPROCT ORVALL EY G O TH A M OTAY L AKESS U R R E Y LONESTAR CLUBH O USE Y A L EDEGEN32ND ONEIDA C O ASTALHILLSW INNETKAHOLLISTERCAMI N O ELEVADO ENERGY OC EANHI LLSSEQ U O I A VALLEY C R E E KSI DEL O RIBAYSATURNVIAMAGGIOREPRAYJO NE LSYLVIA RIVERA P E R S H I N G BYRD GR EENSVI E W 19THTABER27TH MYRABB R I ARWOODCALM ATERMINAL S I P E S A V E N I D A D ELAS VISTASDAVIESVALLEYVISTALYNW O O D HERI TAGEA BE TOSTEINERLINDBERGH CAMINO D E LS O L LI LACORANGEL A K E CRESTIRWIN CHATEAUREDL A NDSOWENMAXWELLSTON E G A T EPALO T O P S A ILDENNIS CRESTVI E W OAK S P RI N G SMILLEROLIVE28THGRANGER MESADUFFYCITRUS JONEL DD PRO CTORVALLEYPALMMORGA N H IL L F IR S TSANTALUCIAL IO N EGRE T Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend Exempt_SystemsExempt_ Bodies SWMains Creeks River CityLimit Receiving Waters and Conveyance Systems Exempt Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ Insert Completed Form I-3B: Site Information Checklist for PDPs https: //www.chulavistaca.gov/ departments /public-works /services/ storm-water-pollution- prevention/ documents-and-reports CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: __________________________ _ Form I-3B Page 5 of10 Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)? Yes No If yes, provide details regarding the proposed project site drainage conveyance network, including storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, storm water treatment facilities, natural or constructed channels, and the method for conveying offsite flows through or around the proposed project site. Identify all discharge locations from the proposed project site along with a summary of the conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations . Provide a summary of pre-and post-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the runoff discharge locations . Reference the drainage study for detailed calculations. Describe proposed site drainage patterns: Continued from previous page) Runoff from the cut slope at the northwest portion of the project site will be conveyed via proposed brow ditch to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. This area (DMA-C) is considered a Self-Mitigating OMA per Chapter 5.2.1 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. All project site runoff is discharged onto Main Street as in existing conditions. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain and outlets over headwall into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The Otay River is considered an exempt river reach per the WMAA; therefore, the project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. The underground detention vault has been designed to provide flow control in the form of volume reduction and peak flow attenuation. The vault has been modified to include a low-flow and mid-flow orifice outlet and an overflow weir to control peak flows. The required water quality treatment flow is diverted to the downstream Modular Wetland System in accordance with Worksheet B.5-5 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. Overflow relief for the 100-year storm event is provided with a partition weir installed within the vault and discharged directly to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. The undetained peak flow for Basin A is 33.5 cfs. The detained peak flow for Basin A is 7.2 cfs, which is equal to the existing peak flow of 7.2 cfs. The undetained peak flow for Basin B is 5.8 cfs, which is less than the existing peak flow of 15.3 cfs. CCV BMP Design Manual Form I-3B, March 2019 Update Vt- i7•u - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: ______________________________ _ Form I-3B Page 6 of10 Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/ or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply): j On-site storm drain inlets Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps Interior parking garages j Need for future indoor & structural pest control j Landscape/ Outdoor Pesticide Use Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Food service j Refuse areas j Industrial processes Outdoor storage of equipment or materials Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fuel Dispensing Areas j Loading Docks ii Fire Sprinkler Test Water j Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water j Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots Description / Additional Information: CCV BMP Design Manual Form I-3B, March 2019 Update Vt- i7•u - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: ____________________________ _ utmnllffl~TlmnDJ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water and Pollutants of Concern Describe flow path of storm water from the project site discharge location(s), through urban storm conveyance systems as applicable, to receiving creeks, rivers, and lagoons as applicable, and ultimate discharge to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable): There are two (2) discharge locations from the project site. Discharges to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary are routed to Main Street through an existing underground storm drain pipe. Discharges to the existing concrete drainage channel at the southeast corner of the site flows to Main Street. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain pipe and outlets over headwall into the Otay River, an exempt river reach per the WMAA. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean.g Llst any 303(d) impaired water bodies within the path of storm water from the project site to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable), identify the pollutant(s)/stressor(s) causing impairment, and identify any TMDLs and/ or Highest Priority Pollutants from the WQIP for the impaired water bodies: 303( d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s) TMDLs / WQIP Highest Priority Pollutant San Diego Bay PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) WQIP Highest Priority Pollutant: Indicator Bacteria, Dissolved Copper, Lead Zinc (wet weather) Identification of Project Site Pollutants* Identification of project site pollutants is only required if flow-thru treatment BMPs are implemented onsite in lieu of retention or biofiltration BMPs (note the project must also participate in an alternative compliance program unless prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements is demonstrated) Identify pollutants expected from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see BMP Design Manual Appendix B .6): Pollutant Sediment Nutrients Heavy Metals Organic Compounds Trash & Debris Oxygen Demanding Substances Oil & Grease Bacteria & Viruses Pesticides CCV BMP Design Manual Form I-3B, March 2019 Update Not Applicable to the Project Site Expected from the Project Site Also a Receiving Water Pollutant of Concern Vt- i7•u - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ Insert Completed Form 1-4: Source Control BMP Checklist for All Development Projects https: //www.chulavistaca.gov/ departments /public-works /services/ storm-water-pollution- prevention/ documents-and-reports CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ Insert Completed Form 1-5: Site Design BMP Checklist for All Development Projects https: //www.chulavistaca.gov/ departments /public-works/ services /storm-water-pollution- prevention / documents-and-reports CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ___________________________ _ Insert Completed Form 1-6: Summary of PDP Structural BMPs https: //www.chulavistaca.gov/ departments /public-works/ services /storm-water-pollution- prevention/ documents-and-reports CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 If?-~--' ... __ s..., CITYOF CHUIAVISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: _____________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 2 of .(Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-1 Construction Plan Sheet No. Type of structural BMP: D Retention by harvest and use (e .g. HU-1, cistern) D Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) D Retention by bioretention (INF-2) D Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) D Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) D Biofiltration (BF-1) D Flow-thru treatment control with prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/ description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management IXI Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: D Pollutant control only D Hydromodification control only D Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control D Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP ii Other (describe in discussion section below) Who will certify construction of this BMP? Provide name and contact information for the party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if required by the City Engineer (See Section 1.12 of the manual) Who will be the final owner of this BMP? Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Gregory W. Lang, RCE 68075 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 858) 259-8212 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC , 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste. 305 , Phoenix, AZ 85016 Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: ___________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 3 of (Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-1 Construction Plan Sheet No. Discussion (as needed, must include worksheets showing BMP sizing calculations in the SWQMP): The StormCapture underground detention vault, BMP-1, is responsible for handling peak flow reduction requirements for the project site. CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: _____________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 2 of .(Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-2 Construction Plan Sheet No. Type of structural BMP: D Retention by harvest and use (e .g. HU-1, cistern) D Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) D Retention by bioretention (INF-2) D Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) D Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) D Biofiltration (BF-1) D Flow-thru treatment control with prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/ description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management IXI Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: lj Pollutant control only D Hydromodification control only D Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control D Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP D Other (describe in discussion section below) Who will certify construction of this BMP? Provide name and contact information for the party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if required by the City Engineer (See Section 1.12 of the manual) Who will be the final owner of this BMP? Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Gregory W. Lang, RCE 68075 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 858) 259-8212 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC , 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste. 305 , Phoenix, AZ 85016 Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: ________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 3 of (Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-2 Construction Plan Sheet No. Discussion (as needed, must include worksheets showing BMP sizing calculations in the SWQMP): The BioClean Modular Wetland System, BMP-2, is a proprietary biofiltration BMP BF-3) responsible for handling pollutant control requirements for a portion of the project site (OMA-A). Since the Modular Wetland System is downstream of the storage unit, the required treatment volume is based on the project DCV and drawdown time of the storage unit, in accordance with Table B.5-5 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. OMA-A DCV = 12,668 cu.ft. BMP-1 vault volume= 35,824 cu.ft .. BMP-1 vault depth= 6 ft BMP-1 low flow orifice size= 4"-dia BMP-1 mid-flow orifice height= 2 ft Drawdown time of storage unit, BMP-1 = 12 hr Fraction required to achieve greater than 92 percent capture (per Table B.5-5) = 0.85 Storage required= 10,768 cu.ft. Storage provided= 11,941 cu.ft. CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: _____________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 2 of .(Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-3 Construction Plan Sheet No. Type of structural BMP: D Retention by harvest and use (e .g. HU-1, cistern) D Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) D Retention by bioretention (INF-2) D Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) D Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) D Biofiltration (BF-1) D Flow-thru treatment control with prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) ii Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/ description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management D Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: D Pollutant control only D Hydromodification control only D Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control ii Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP D Other (describe in discussion section below) Who will certify construction of this BMP? Provide name and contact information for the party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if required by the City Engineer (See Section 1.12 of the manual) Who will be the final owner of this BMP? Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Gregory W. Lang, RCE 68075 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 858) 259-8212 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC , 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste. 305 , Phoenix, AZ 85016 Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: __________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 3 of (Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-3 Construction Plan Sheet No. Discussion (as needed, must include worksheets showing BMP sizing calculations in the SWQMP): The OldCastle NSBB, BMP-3, is a high-flow capacity trash capture BMP for the StormCapture detention system, BMP-1, and the Modular Wetland, BMP-2. CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: _____________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 2 of .(Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-4 Construction Plan Sheet No. Type of structural BMP: D Retention by harvest and use (e .g. HU-1, cistern) D Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) D Retention by bioretention (INF-2) D Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) D Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) D Biofiltration (BF-1) D Flow-thru treatment control with prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/ description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) D Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP type/ description in discussion section below) D Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management IXI Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: lj Pollutant control only D Hydromodification control only D Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control D Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP D Other (describe in discussion section below) Who will certify construction of this BMP? Provide name and contact information for the party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if required by the City Engineer (See Section 1.12 of the manual) Who will be the final owner of this BMP? Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Gregory W. Lang, RCE 68075 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff, CA 92007 858) 259-8212 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC , 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste . 305, Phoenix, AZ 85016 VWP-OP, Shinohara Owner LLC, 2950 E. Camelback Rd, Ste. 305 , Phoenix, AZ 85016 Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name: _________________________ _ Form 1-6 Page 3 of (Copy and attach as many as needed) Structural BMP ID No. BMP-4 Construction Plan Sheet No. Discussion (as needed, must include worksheets showing BMP sizing calculations in the SWQMP): The BioClean Modular Wetland System, BMP-4, is a proprietary biofiltration BMP BF-3) responsible for handling pollutant control requirements for a portion of the project site (DMA-B). This MWS is considered a flow-based compact biofiltration BMP and sized in accordance with Appendix F.2.2 of the BMP DM. The MWS is sized to treat the required flow rate of 1.5 times the DCV. DMA-B: DCV = 1,249 cu.ft. Tributary area = 1.19 ac Runoff coefficient = 0.5542 Intensity = 0.2 in/hr Required flow rate = 1 .5 x 1 .19 x 0.5542 x 0.2 = 0.198 cfs Provided MWS L-4-15 flow rate= 0.199 cfs Operating head= 3.9 feet 3'-wide curb inlet opening with 1" local depression designed to capture the water quality flow rate. CCV BMP Design Manual Form 1-6, March 2019 Update Vt-____ y.J"'9' - CITYOF CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ____________________ _ ATTACHMENT 1 Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ______________________________ _ Indicate which Items are Included: Attachment Sequence Attachment 1A Attachment 1B Attachment 1C Attachment 1D Contents DMA Exhibit (Required) See DMA Exhibit Checklist. Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing DMA ID matching DMA Exhibit, DMA Area, and DMA Type Required)* Provide table in this Attachment OR on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1a Form 1-7, Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Checklist (Required unless the entire project will use infiltration BMPs) Refer to Appendix B.3-1 of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form I-7. Infiltration Feasibility Information. Contents of Attachment 1D depend on the infiltration condition: Ii No Infiltration Condition: Ii Infiltration Feasibility Condition i Letter (Note: must be stamped & signed by licensed geotechnical engineer) D Form l-8A (optional) D Form I-8B (optional) D Partial Infiltration Condition: D Infiltration Feasibility Condition D Letter (Note: must be stamped & signed by licensed geotechnical engineer) D Form I-8A D Form I-8B D Full Infiltration Condition: D Form I-8A D Form I-8B D Worksheet C.4-3 D Form I-9 Refer to Appendices C and D of the BMP Design Manual for 2.Uidance. Checklist j] Included Included on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1A lil Included as Attachment 1B, separate from DMA Exhibit lil Included Not included because the entire project will use infiltration BMPs lil Included Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets/ [il Included Calculations (Required) Attachment 1E CCV BMP Manual Refer to Appendices B and E of the BMP Design Manual for structural pollutant control BMP design 2.Uidelines PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ____________________________ _ Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the DMA Exhibit: The DMA Exhibit must identify all the following: Iii Underlying hydrologic soil group Iii Approximate depth to groundwater Iii Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) ii Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected Iii Existing topography and impervious areas ii Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite ii Proposed grading ii Proposed impervious features ii Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness ii Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, and DMA areas (square footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to BMP, self-retaining, or self-mitigating) ii Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source controls (see Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Form I-3B) ii Structural BMPs (identify location, type of BMP, and size/ detail, and include cross-sections) CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 DMA Exhibit Attachment 1A XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X X X XX XXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXX2 5 8 2582572562562562562552552552552552 5 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235 235 235230230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 216 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207 20720720 7 206206 205205 205205 205205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200 200200 20020 0 200200200 200 200200 1 9 5 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 190190 190190 190190 190 189 18 9 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751751 7 5 1 7 5 1751 75 175172 170 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160 160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145145144 144144144144144143 143142 142 141 141141 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 139 1 3 9 139138 1 38 138 205 TSSSSSSWWWWWP SHINOHARA LANEDMA C TIMBERSTREETEXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL SD- 5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD- 5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD- 5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD- 7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES (TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS)SD- 7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES (TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS)SD- 4 MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION TYPICAL FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS)SC-2, SC- A STORM DRAIN STENCILING &SIGNAGE (TYPICAL FOR ALL CATCH BASINS)SC-2, SC- A STORM DRAIN STENCILING &SIGNAGE (TYPICAL FOR ALL CATCH BASINS)SC-5, SC- G REFUSE AREA SC-5, SC- G REFUSE AREA SC- M LOADING DOCKS SC- M LOADING DOCKS SC- M LOADING DOCKS SC-2, SC- A STORM DRAIN STENCILING &SIGNAGE (TYPICAL FOR ALL CATCH BASINS)SD- 2 CONSERVE NATURAL AREAS,SOILS AND VEGETATION DMA B DMA AINDUSTRIALBLDG 1 197.5 FF PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0. 6%PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0. 6%EXIST. TYPE F CATCH BASIN 146.35 RIM 143.67 IE PROP. 24"HDPE @ 0. 6%PROP. 24" HDPE @ 2. 0%PROP. PUMP TO CURB OUTLET 182.75 IE IN BMP- 3 6" HDPE UNDERDRAIN PIPE @ 1.0% MIN BMP- 4 MWS L-4-15 (PLANTED) WITH CURB INLET OPENING 3.9' OPERATING HEAD 149.90 FL 2' CURB CUT TO DRAIN BROW DITCH 172.00 FL BMP- 6 TREE WELL 194.80 FG AREA = 415 SF DEPTH = 4 FT VOLUME = 1,660 CF 6" PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE @ 1.0% MIN EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CROSS GUTTER EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. CURB OUTLET PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. CURB OUTLET PER SDRSD D- 25 EXISTING OPEN SPACE EASEMENT RECORDED JUNE 16, 1992 DOC#1992- 0373004 BMP- 2 MWS-L-8- 24 UNDERGROUND)4.7' OPERATING HEAD 180.55 IE IN 180.05 IE OUT BMP- 1 STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM HEIGHT = 6 FT VOLUME = 35,824 CF VAULT IE = 182. 75 VAULT SOFIT = 188. 75 VAULT TOP = 189. 33 SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET 182.75 IE 24" OUT 184.75 MID-FLOW WEIR 188.25 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 4"-DIA LOW-FLOW ORIFICE 182.75 IE OUT 2' CURB CUT 195.17 FL Q100=0.4 CFS 6" CLEANOUT 191.05 IE 6" CLEANOUT 191.30 IE P/ L P/ LP/LP/L P/ LP/LP/ LP/LP/LP/L P/L R/ WR/WP/LP/ L P/L 2' CURB CUT 195.46 FL Q100=0. 4 CFS BMP- 5 TREE WELL, 195.25 FGAREA = 475 SF DEPTH = 4 FT VOLUME = 1,900 CF6" CLEANOUT 191. 50 IE 6" CLEANOUT 192. 30 IE POC-2 POC-1 2 1 2 1 BOTTOM & SIDES OF TREE WELL SHALL BE LINED WITH 30 MIL THICK PVC LINER. PROVIDE 18- INCH OVERLAPPED, THERMAL WELDED SEAMS AT ALL SEAMS. PROVIDE IMPERMEABLE LINER ROOT BARRIER PER RSD L-6. DEEP ROOT TREE BUBBLER PER SDRSD DWG I- 4 12" SAND FILTER LAYER PER THE GREEN STREET ENGINEERED SOIL"SPECIFICATIONS SECTION B-3. 48" STRUCTURAL SOIL LAYER 3" MULCHLAYER WIDTH VARIES NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL TREE WELL DETAILA 2" MIN.SPLASH PAD ( TYPE 1)PER GS-5.06 CURB & GUTTER PER SDRSD G-2 CURB CUT 6" PERFORATED SUBDRAIN WRAPPED IN MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC "SOCK". PIPE BEYOND TREE WELL TO CONSIST OF SOLID PIPE AND CONNECT TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM.ROOT BALL COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADE STREET FLOW COMPACTED SUBGRADE DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LEGEND HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER RIGHT-OF-WAY HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER > 20 FT PROPERTY LINE R/W P/ L DMA BOUNDARY PROPOSED TREE WELL PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA DIRECTION OF FLOW PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA: 9.73 AC PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA: 9.67 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA:8. 03 AC PROPOSED PERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA: 1. 64 AC UNDERGROUND DETENTION VAULT (HU-1) STRUCTURAL BMPS THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM HYDROMODIFICATION REQUIREMENTS;THEREFORE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL COARSE SEIDMENT YIELD AREAS DOES NOT APPLY.REFER TO THE HMP EXEMPTION EXHIBIT INCLUDED IN THE "CITY OF CHULA VISTA PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) SWQMP FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA, ONPOINT DEVELOPMENT" DATED MAY 2022. CCSYAS SD-2 CONSERVE NATURAL AREAS, SOILS AND VEGETATION SD- 3 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREAS SD- 4 MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION SD-5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD-7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES SITE DESIGN BMPS SOURCE CONTROL BMPS SC-1 PREVENTION OF ILLICIT DISCHARGES TO THE MS4 SC-2 STORM DRAIN STENCILING AND SIGNAGE SC- 5 PROTECT TRASH STORAGE AREAS FROM RAINFALL, RUN-ON,AND WIND DISPERSAL SC-6 ADDITIONAL BMPS BASED ON POTENTIAL RUNOFF POLLUTANTS:SC-A ONSITE STORM DRAIN INLETS SC-D1 NEED FOR FUTURE INDOOR & STRUCTURAL PEST CONTROL SC- D2 LANDSCAPE/OUTDOOR PESTICIDE USE SC-G REFUSE AREAS SC-H INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES SC- M LOADING DOCKS SC-N FIRE SPRINKLER TEST WATER SC-O MISCELLANEOUS DRAIN OR WASH WATER SC- P PLAZAS, SIDEWALKS, AND PARKING LOTS SITE DESIGN BMPS TREE WELL (SD- A)MODULAR WETLAND, PROPRIETARY BIOFILTRATION (BF-3)RETENTION REQUIREMENTS DMA-A TARGET VOLUME RETENTION = 291 CU. FT.DMA-B TARGET VOLUME RETENTION = 29 CU.FT.TOTAL TARGET VOLUME RETENTION = 320 CU.FT.SITE DESIGN BMP USED: BMP-5, TREE WELL W/ UNDERDRAIN SOIL AREA = 475 SQ.FT.SOIL DEPTH = 4 FT SOIL VOLUME ( SV) = 1,900 CU.FT.TCV = 190 CU.FT.BMP-6, TREE WELL W/ UNDERDRAIN SOIL AREA = 415 SQ.FT.SOIL DEPTH = 4 FT SOIL VOLUME ( SV) = 1,660 CU.FT.TCV = 166 CU. FT.SUM OF VOLUME RETENTION BENEFITS = 356 CU.FT.SEE DETAIL 'A' THIS SHEET FOR TYPICAL TREE WELL DETAIL DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA EXHIBIT SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK DR- 21-0032 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 MAY 2022 SUMMARY OF DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREAS DMA IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP DMA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT,C TREATED BY BMP ID) DMA-A 7.36 88.9%0.81 DRAINAGE AREA (AC)8. 27 DMA-B 0.6856.8% 1.19 DMA- C 0. 00 0%0.25 BMP-2 POLLUTANT CONTROL TYPE PROPRIETARY BIOFILTRATION (BF-3) N/A - SELF- MITIGATING - -- -0.55 BMP-4PROPRIETARYBIOFILTRATION (BF-3) TOTAL 8.03 82.7% 9.71 0.76 DCV CU.FT.) 12,668 1,249 13,917 - -- -INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES NOTE ALL PROCESS ACTIVITIES TO BE PERFORMED INDOORS. NO PROCESSES TO DRAIN TO EXTERIOR OR TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. 7 I t. I I I I I I I I\ I I 0------I I 40' 20' 0 40' 80' 120' l~~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! l ~~~~I !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ii SCALE: 1" = 40' PASCO LARET SUITER ffe.SSOIC! ffe.llES San Diego I Encinitas I Orange County Phone 858.259.82121 www.plsaengineering.com X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X DMA Summary Attachment 1B Harvest and Use Feasibility (Form I-7) Attachment 1C Infiltration Feasibility Attachment 1D INFILTRATION FEASIBILITY CONDITION LETTER SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR ONPOINT DEVELOPMENT LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER 16, 2021 PROJECT NO. G2762-42-01 Project No. G2762-42-01 November 16, 2021 OnPoint Development 7514 Girard Street, Suite 1515 La Jolla, California 92037 Attention: Mr. Todd Dwyer Subject: INFILTRATION FEASIBILITY CONDITION LETTER SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA References: 1. Geotechnical Investigtion, Shinohara Industrial Building, 517 Shinohara Lane, Chula Vista, California, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated July 28, 2021 Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01). 2. Preliminary Grading Study for: Shinohara Industrial Building, 517 Shinohara Lane, Chula Vista, prepared by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, undated. 3. DMA Exhibit, Shinohara Industrial Building, 517 Shinohara Lane, Chula Vista, prepared by prepared by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, November 2021. Dear Mr. Dwyer: In accordance with the request of Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates (PLSA), we prepared this Infiltration Feasibility Condition Letter for the subject project located in Chula Vista, California (see Vicinity Map). GE OCON INCORPORATED G E OT E CHN I CAL E NV I RONMENTA L MA T ER I A L S 6960 Flanders Dr ive Son Diego, Ca li forn ia 9212 1-2974 Telephone 858.558.6900 Fa x 858.558.6159 Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 2 - November 16, 2021 Vicinity Map SITE DESCRIPTION The approximately 10-acre parcel is currently undeveloped except for minor surface drainage improvements. The property is fenced with gated access via Shinohara Lane at the southeast corner. Based on review of historical aerial photographs, the site was partially graded circa 1992 when it was used as a borrow site. Except for the graded area in the north-central area of the property, the site slopes moderately to steeply from north to south. Site elevations range from approximately 250 feet mean sea level (MSL) at the north end to 145 feet MSL at the south end. The site is boarded by residential developments to the north and west, and commercial/industrial buildings to the south and east. PROSOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed improvements consist of a single-story approximately 190,000 square-foot industrial warehouse building with associated improvements including utilities, paving, storm water management devices, and landscape improvements. Proposed cuts and fills are estimated to be up to 50 feet, with new slopes being up to approximately 10 feet in height. Retaining walls will be required along the perimeter of the site to reach pad grade. The walls will likely be soil nail walls and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 3 - November 16, 2021 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION We understand storm water management devices are being proposed in accordance with City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual (March 2019 Update). If not properly constructed, there is a potential for distress to improvements and properties located hydrologically down gradient or adjacent to these devices. Factors such as the amount of water to be detained, its residence time, and soil permeability have an important effect on seepage transmission and the potential adverse impacts that may occur if the storm water management features are not properly designed and constructed. We have not performed a hydrogeological study at the site. If infiltration of storm water runoff occurs, downstream properties may be subjected to seeps, springs, slope instability, raised groundwater, movement of foundations and slabs, or other undesirable impacts as a result of water infiltration. Presented below is a discussion for each item requested in Appendix C.1.1 of the BMP Design Manual. The phase of the project in which the geotechnical engineer first analyzed the site for infiltration feasibility. We analyzed for infiltration feasibility in the preliminary/planning phase. Results of previous geotechnical analyses conducted in the project area, if any. We prepared geotechnical report dated July 28, 2021 (Reference No. 1) as part of the planning phase of development. As indicated in the geotechnical report, the approximately 10-acre parcel is currently undeveloped except for minor surface drainage improvements. Except for the graded area in the north-central area of the property, the site slopes moderately to steeply from north to south. Residential developments to the north and west, and commercial/industrial buildings to the south and east border the site. Based on the results of the field investigation, the site is underlain by dense Tertiary San Diego Formation that is capped by compressible surficial deposits (i.e., undocumented fill, topsoil, alluvium), previously placed fill and dense Very Old Paralic Deposits. The surficial deposits generally consists of silty to clayey, sand and sandy clay. The Very Old Paralic Deposits are generally medium dense to very dense, silty to clayey sand with gravel and cobble. The dense San Diego Formation generally consists of silty, fine to medium coarse sandstone, with occasional gravel and cobble beds. The development status of the site prior to the project application (i.e., new development with raw ungraded land, or redevelopment with existing graded conditions.) The project is new development with generally raw undgraded land. As discussed above, minor areas of the property have been graded resulting in compressible undocumented fill. The history of designs discussions for the project footprint, resulting in the final design determination. There were no locations on the property where the storm water basins could be located that would be outside of graded areas. Final design determination was based on estimated ultimate as-graded Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 4 - November 16, 2021 conditions (deep fills), planned improvements (i.e., underground utilities, surface improvements, retaining wall structures) and bordering developments. Full/partial infiltration BMP standard setbacks to underground utilities, structures, retaining walls, fill slopes, and natural slopes applicable to the DMA that prevent full/partial infiltration. We estimate that the project will be underlain by compacted fill, Very Old Paralic Deposits and San Diego Formation after planned grading in completed. Based on our grading recommendations, we assume that the upper 5 feet of fill and cut areas may consist of very low to low expansive soils. We expect that medium to very high expansive soils will be located at least 5 feet below proposed design grades. Deep fills and MSE retaining walls up to 50 feet thick and 45 feet in height, respectively, are planned along the south and east margins of the property to achieve design grades. Infiltration into compacted fill could result in soil movement resulting in either heave or settlement and retaining wall instability. Residential development and commercial/industrial buildings border the project. Full or partial infiltration near planned and existing improvements (i.e., building foundations, retaining walls, underground utilities, surface improvements) is not recommended. Infiltration near existing and planned improvements will likely result in lateral water migration and soil movement (heave and/or settlement) which could result in structural distress. The physical impairments (i.e., fire road egress, public safety considerations, etc.) that prevent full/partial infiltration. The property consists of natural, sloping terrain with surface runoff flowing in a north to south direction. Surficial soils generally exhibit a low to high expansion potential. Additional physical impairments are the existing buildings (residential, commercial/industrial) and, existing surface and underground improvements bordering the property. The consideration of site design alternatives to achieve partial/full infiltration within the DMA. A site design alternative to include full or partial infiltration would be limited to a lined, deep dry well system founded in the underlying San Diego Formation. However, it is estimated that the infiltration zone would extend at least 70 feet below proposed finish grade and is considered practically infeasible. The extent site design BMP’s requirements were included in the overall design. This question is best answered by the project Civil engineer, if needed. Conclusion or recommendation from the geotechnical engineer regarding the DMA’s infiltration condition. Based on the responses provided above, it is our professional opinion that entire site (planned DMA’s) is not feasible for partial or full infiltration and the property should be considered to possess a No Infiltration condition in accordance with Appendix C of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual (March 2019 Update). Infiltration would create an un-mitigatable risk of soil expansion, impact to improvements, slope instability, and lateral seepage migration that could adversely impact public and private improvements. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 5 - November 16, 2021 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 SHEET OF PROJECT NO. SCALE DATE FIGURE Plotted:11/16/2021 12:57PM | By:JONATHAN WILKINS | File Location:Y:\PROJECTS\G2762-42-01 (517 Shinohara Lane)\SHEETS\G2762-42-01 DMA Exhibit.dwg GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS 1" = D1A EXHI&I8 SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 40' 11 - 16 - 2021 G2762 - 42 - 01 1 1 2 r i -------------------, ,_ __ Tl; EXIST CONCRETE 'f'- SWALE ' '\ PROP. BROW DITCH l l' I I Q PROP .LANDSCAPED-~-J!;~ 1HAV RETAINING WALL EXIST CONCRETE'-. I SWALE 1: '\ EXIST CONCRETE~, SWALE l EXIST TYPE F CATCH BASIN 146.35 RIM 14367 IE r PROP . 24 ' HOPE @20% jl I I t rt TT PROP. BROW DITCH EXIST CONCRETE \ I SWALE PROP. PUMP TO BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH r t I I r JMP-4 --IH-c, c-"-8-::,,~ MWSL-8-16 ~~ '< MW 1.5 ' OPERATING HEAD :;' JU.! EXIST CONCRETE \ SWALE \ s ------------------ EXIST PUBLIC SEWER AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT 0 ~ W I ~,____-1~~~1 SCALE : 1" -40' PIL EXIST CROSS GUTTER 120· I F t I , I I PROP. BROW DITCH 6' CLEANOUT D 0 PROP LANDSCAPED 1H 4V RETAINING WALL l . 6" HOPE UNOERORAIN PIPE@ 1.0% MIN F --- I RD BMP-5 ~ TREE WELL V AREA= 831 SF DEPTH =4 FT VOLUME= 3,324 CF TCV= 332 CF 6' CLEANOUT l I -1,i / PROP. TYPE 8 BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PIL _________________ ,. I . ' F -~ F 0 RD DMAA 2' CURB CUT ~ WERS!ONTCOW F F ' RATE = 0.4 CFS 0 l RD INDUSTRIAL BLOG 1 F --- V RD RD II"= II DMAC ll~-1i'..-----r -PROP . SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL I II 111-PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD 0-75 1- BMP-1 0 RD BMP-2 MWS-L-8-24 41' OPERA TING HEAD 178 .88 IE IN 178 .38 IE OUT RD 4"-0/A ORIFICE , 181.33 IE OUT 181.33 IE 24' OUT 183 .08 MIO-FLOW WEIR 1:::::L ' I I -I l 11/-1=+~~~0 186.33 EMERGENCY WEIR F---F ~ ---.__ ~ PROP. 24' HOPE@ 1.0% J 1' F ~~ F v . W F FF w ,i; w F w . F w F w F F f T F -. F . s -~-s ---s s s -s PIL 0 Fs =I DMAB RD 181 .33 IE IN 0 I-r Fs STORMTRAP S/NGLETRAP DETENTION VAULT AREA = 6,300 SF HEIGHT= 5.67 FT VOLUME .= 35,721 CF VAULT IE= 181 .33 VAULT SOF/T = 187.00 BMP03 ' CONTECT CDS PRETREATMENT UNI T F ---F , w wp ' p F F s s w F P/L _ . 0 F s RD F ---F ---F --F 1J 1 ~ J ~ s W ~J ~s F ____c. S' s ~ w s f ~ lbJ j RD 0 F II,~ I 1,~ j,___ 1111~· II DMAD L ----1,-PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL 1 PROP. BROW DITCH -\_EXIST.CONCRETE -PROP. SOIL NAIL P/L ________ .,.. ___ _. CONNECT TO EXIST EXIST CONCRETE _/ BROW DITCH SWALE SWALE TO REMA IN RETAINING WALL 150.20 FL SPLASH PAD (TYPE 1) PER GS-5.06 CURB & GUTTER PER - SDRSD G-2 WIDTH VARIES ________j I 2'MIN. I I 3' MULCH LAYER COMPACTED SUBGRADE COMPACTED SUBGRADE I---DEEP ROOT TREE BUBBLER PER SDRSD DWG 1-4 CURB CUT 1 48 " STRUCTURAL SOIL LA YER --I> BOTTOM & SIDES OF TREE WELL _ _..,~6;'.'.&,:Zu~~A:L\--'(/i SHALL BE LINED WITH 30 MIL THICK PVC LINER . PROVIDE 18-/NCH OVERLAPPED, THERMAL WELDED SEAMS AT ALL SEAMS . PROVIDE IMPERMEABLE LINER ROOT BARRIER PER RSD L-6. w~ :IV~ COMPACTED SUBGRADE TYPICAL TREE WELL DETAIL 6' PERFORATED SUBDRAIN WRAPPED IN MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC "SOCK '. PIPE BEYOND TREE WELL TO CONSIST OF SOLID PIPE AND CONNECT TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM 12 ' SAND FILTER LAYER PER THE GREEN STREET ENG INEERED SOIL ' SPECIF/CATIONS SECTION 8-3. NOT TO SCALE EXIST CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP . TYPE 8 BROW DITCH PER SDRSD 0-75 PA SCO LARET SUITER ASSOC IATES San D iego I So lana Beach I Orange County Phone 8 58.2 59.8212 I www.plsa e ngine e r ing .com LEGEND DESCRIPTION SYMBO L RIGHT-OF -WAY PROPERTY LINE OMA BOUNDARY PIL -- - PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA PROPOSED TREE WELL DIRECTION OF FLOW X X X X X X X X X X xxxxx x xxxxx X X X X X X X X X X HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP HYDROLOG/C SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER> 20 FT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA. 9.73 AC PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA. 9.71 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA. 8. 18 AC PROPOSED PERV/OUS / LANDSCAPE AREA : 1.54 AC STRUCTURALBMPS UNDERGROUND DETENTION VAULT (HU-1 ) 0 MODULAR WETLAND , PROPRIETARY B/OF!LTRA TION (BF-3) 8 SITE DESIGN BMPS TREE WELL (SD-A) 0 CCSYAS THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM HYDROMODIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; THEREFORE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL COARSE SEIDMENT YIELD AREAS DOES NOT APPLY REFER TO THE HMP EXEMPTION EXHIBIT INCLUDED IN THE 'CITY OF CHULA VISTA PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) SWQMP FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA , ONPOINT DEVELOPMENI" DATED NOVEMBER 2021. SITE DESIGN BMPS SD-3 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREAS SD -4 MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION SD-5 IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION SD-7 LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES SOURCECONTROLBMPS SC-1 PREVENTION OF ILLICIT DISCHARGES TO THE MS4 SC-2 STORM DRAIN STENCILING AND SIGNAGE SC-5 PROTECT TRASH STORAGE AREAS FROM RAINFALL , RUN-ON, AND WIND DISPERSAL SC-6 ADDITIONAL BMPS BASED ON POTENTIAL RUNOFF POLLUTANTS: SC-A ONS/TE STORM DRAIN INLETS SC-01 NEED FOR FUTURE INDOOR & STRUCTURAL PEST CONTROL SC-02 LANDSCAPE/OUTDOOR PESTICIDE USE SC-G REFUSE AREAS SC-H INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES SC-M LOADING DOCKS SC-N FIRE SPRINKLER TEST WATER SC-0 MISCELLANEOUS DRAIN OR WASH WATER SC-P PLAZAS, SIDEWALKS, AND PARKING LOTS RETENTION REQUIREMENTS OMA-A TARGET VOLUME RETENTION= 294 CU FT DMA -B TARGET VOLUME RETENTION= 28 CU.FT TOTAL TARGET VOLUME RETENTION= 322 CU.FT SITE DESIGN BMP USED: BMP-5, TREE WELL WI UNDERDRAIN SOIL AREA= 831 SQ.FT SOIL DEPTH= 4 FT SO IL VOLUME (SV) = 3,324 CUFT. TCV = 332 CU.FT SUM OF VOLUME RETENTION BENEFITS O 332 CU.FT SEE DETAIL 'A' THIS SHEET FOR TYPICAL TREE WELL DETAIL DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA EXHIBIT PROJECT SHINOHARA 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA , CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 NOVEMBER 2021 BMP Design Worksheets Attachment 1E Project Name BMP ID 1 360384 sq. ft. 2 0.8112 3 0.52 inches 4 12668 cu. ft. 5 0 in/hr. 6 2 7 0 in/hr. 10 291 cu. ft. Area draining to the BMP Project Shinohara BMP-2 Sizing Method for Volume Retention Criteria Worksheet B.5-2 Volume Retention Requirement Measured infiltration rate in the DMA Note: When mapped hydrologic soil groups are used enter 0.10 for NRCS Type D soils and for NRCS Type C soils enter 0.30 When in no infiltration condition and the actual measured infiltration rate is unknown enter 0.0 if there are geotechnical and/or groundwater hazards identified in Appendix C or enter 0.05Factorofsafety Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) 85th percentile 24-hour rainfall depth Design capture volume [Line 1 x Line 2 x (Line 3/12)] When Line 8 > 8% = 0.0000013 x Line 83 - 0.000057 x Line 82 + 0.0086 x Line 8 - 0.014 When Line 8 8% = 0.023 Target volume retention [Line 9 x Line 4] Reliable infiltration rate, for biofiltration BMP sizing [Line 5 / Line 6] 8 Average annual volume reduction target (Figure B.5-2) 3.5 9 Fraction of DCV to be retained (Figure B.5-3) 0.023 When Line 7 > 0.01 in/hr. = Minimum (40, 166.9 x Line 7 +6.62) When Line 7 0.01 in/hr. = 3.5% Project Name BMP ID 1 360,384 sq. ft. 2 0.8112 3 292343.5008 sq. ft. 4 12668 cu. ft. 5 0 ft./hr. 6 0 ft. 7 0 ft./hr. 8 0.05 in/in 9 12 hours 10 0.85 fraction 11 10767.98561 cu. ft. 12 11941 cu. ft. 13 Is Line 12 Line 11? 14 cfs 15 0 sq. ft. 16 fraction 17 0 sq. ft. 18 cu. ft. 19 cfs 20 0 ft 21 0 sq. ft. 22 0 sq. ft. Optimized Biofiltration BMP Footprint when Downstream of a Storage Unit Storage provided in the design, minimum(from the elevation that bypasses the biofiltration BMP, overflow elevation) Criteria 3: Retention requirement [Not applicable for No Infiltration Condition] Storage Requirement is Met Storage required to achieve greater than 92 percent capture see Table B.5-5) Optimized biofiltration footprint, maximum(Line 15, Line 17, Line 21) Depth retained in the optimized biofiltration BMP Line 6 x Line 8} + {[(Line 4)/(2400 x Line 19)] x Line 5} Criteria 1: BMP Footprint Biofiltration Capacity Peak flow from the storage unit to the biofiltration BMP (using the elevation used to evaluate the percent capture) Required biofiltration footprint [(3,600 x Line 14)/Line 7] Criteria 2: Alternative Minimum Sizing Factor (Clogging) Alternative Minimum Footprint Sizing Factor Line 11 of Worksheet B.5-4] Retention Target (Line 10 in Worksheet B.5-2) Required optimized biofiltration footprint (Line 18/Line 20) Average discharge rate from the storage unit to the biofiltration BMP Required biofiltration footprint [Line 3 x Line 16] Optimized Biofiltration Footprint Media filtration rate to be used for sizing (0.42 ft/hr. with no outlet control; if the filtration rate is controlled by the outlet use the outlet controlled rate) Storage Unit Requirement Drawdown time of the storage unit, minimum(from the elevation that bypasses the biofiltration BMP, overflow elevation) Storage required in cubic feet (Line 4 x Line 10) Effective impervious area draining to the storage unit and biofiltration BMP Line 1 x Line 2] Remaining DCV after implementing retention BMPs Design infiltration rate (measured infiltration rate / 2) Media thickness [1.5 feet minimum], also add mulch layer and washed ASTM 33 fine aggregate sand thickness to this line for sizing calculations Media retained pore space Project Shinohara BMP-2 Area draining to the storage unit and biofiltration BMP Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) Worksheet B.5-5 Drawdown Time hours) Storage requirement (below the overflow elevation, or below outlet elevation that bypass the biofiltration BMP) 12 0.85 DCV 24 1.25 DCV 36 1.50 DCV 48 1.80 DCV 72 2.20 DCV 96 2.60 DCV 120 2.80 DCV Table B.5-5 2/17/2022 Version 1.0 - June 2017 Project Name BMP ID 1 sq. ft. 2 3 sq. ft. 4 sq. ft. 5 sq. ft. Identification 1 4 5 6 7 10 sq. ft. 11 sq. ft. 12 13 14 cu. ft. 15 cu. ft. Identification 1 cu. ft. 2 cu. ft. 3 cu. ft. 4 cu. ft. 5 cu. ft. cu. ft. 17 Effective impervious area draining to the BMP [Line 1 x Line 2] Fraction of the performance standard met through the BMP footprint and/or landscaping Line 11/Line 4] 0 Volume Retention Performance Standard Sum of Landscape area [sum of Line 9 Id’s 1 to 5] Provided footprint for evapotranspiration [Line 5 + Line 10] 0 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 0 0 Target Volume Retention [Line 10 from Worksheet B.5.2] 291 Project Shinohara BMP-2 Landscape area that meet the requirements in SD-B and SD-F Fact Sheet (sq. ft.) Impervious area draining to the landscape area (sq. ft.) 292344 8770 0 Landscape Area (must be identified on DS-3247) 2 0 0 0 0 Impervious to Pervious Area ratio Line 7/Line 6] Effective Credit Area If (Line 8 >1.5, Line 6, Line 7/1.5] Required area for Evapotranspiration [Line 3 x 0.03] Biofiltration BMP Footprint 3 Volume Retention for No Infiltration Condition Worksheet B.5-6 360384 0.8112 Area draining to the biofiltration BMP Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) Volume retention required from other site design BMPs 1-Line 13) x Line 14] 291.3690225 190 166 Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met Site Design BMP Is Line 11 Line 4?No, Proceed to Line 13 CreditSiteDesignType Sum of volume retention benefits from other site design BMPs (e.g. trees; rain barrels etc.). sum of Line 16 Credits for Id’s 1 to 5] Provide documentation of how the site design credit is calculated in the PDP SWQMP. 356 16 BMP-5 Tree Well w/ Underdrain (A=475 sq.ft, SV=1,900 cu.ft.) BMP-6 Tree Well w/ Underdrain (A=415 sq.ft, SV=1,660 cu.ft.) Is Line 16 Line 15? Vault Drawdown Calculation - BMP-1 Project Name Project Shinohara Vault Dimensions PLSA Project No. 3690 Vault Volume 35,824 cf Vault Drawdown 12.0 hrs Chamber Height 6 ft Vault Area 5,971 sf Note: Drawdown time is calculated assuming an initial water surface depth equal to the invert of the lowest surface discharge opening in the basin outlet structure. C:0.6 Surface Depth (ft) Volume (cf) Qorifice (cfs) T (hr) Total Time (hr) 2.00 11941 0.581 0 0 1.75 10449 0.542 0.74 0.74 1.50 8956 0.500 0.80 1.53 1.25 7463 0.454 0.87 2.40 1.00 5971 0.402 0.97 3.37 0.75 4478 0.343 1.11 4.49 0.50 2985 0.271 1.35 5.84 0.00 0 0.00 6.12 11.95 Storage Unit Requirement 12,668 10,768 11,941 yesIsstoragerequirementmet? Underdrain Orifice Diameter: 4 in DCV 0.85DCV Storage provided in the design BBBBBBBCBAAAALINK SLABWITH Project Name BMP ID 1 49086 sq. ft. 2 0.58742 3 0.52 inches 4 1249 cu. ft. 5 0 in/hr. 6 2 7 0 in/hr. 10 29 cu. ft. Area draining to the BMP Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development BMP-B Sizing Method for Volume Retention Criteria Worksheet B.5-2 Volume Retention Requirement Measured infiltration rate in the DMA Note: When mapped hydrologic soil groups are used enter 0.10 for NRCS Type D soils and for NRCS Type C soils enter 0.30 When in no infiltration condition and the actual measured infiltration rate is unknown enter 0.0 if there are geotechnical and/or groundwater hazards identified in Appendix C or Factor of safety Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) 85th percentile 24-hour rainfall depth Design capture volume [Line 1 x Line 2 x (Line 3/12)] When Line 8 > 8% = 0.0000013 x Line 83 - 0.000057 x Line 82 + 0.0086 x Line 8 - 0.014 When Line 8 8% = 0.023 Target volume retention [Line 9 x Line 4] Reliable infiltration rate, for biofiltration BMP sizing [Line 5 / Line 6] 8 Average annual volume reduction target (Figure B.5-2) 3.5 9 Fraction of DCV to be retained (Figure B.5-3) 0.023 When Line 7 > 0.01 in/hr. = Minimum (40, 166.9 x Line 7 +6.62) When Line 7 0.01 in/hr. = 3.5% 11/18/2021 Version 1.0 - June 2017 The City of SAN DIEGOJJ Project Name BMP ID 1 sq. ft. 2 3 sq. ft. 4 sq. ft. 5 sq. ft. Identification 1 4 5 6 7 10 sq. ft. 11 sq. ft. 12 13 14 cu. ft. 15 cu. ft. Identification 1 cu. ft. 2 cu. ft. 3 cu. ft. 4 cu. ft. 5 cu. ft. cu. ft. 17 Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met Site Design BMP Is Line 11 Line 4?No, Proceed to Line 13 CreditSiteDesignType Sum of volume retention benefits from other site design BMPs (e.g. trees; rain barrels etc.). sum of Line 16 Credits for Id’s 1 to 5] Provide documentation of how the site design credit is calculated in the PDP SWQMP. 332 16 1) Tree Well w/ Underdrain (Area=831 sq-ft, SV=3,324 cu-ft) Is Line 16 Line 15? Volume retention required from other site design BMPs 1-Line 13) x Line 14]28.73798446 332 Volume Retention for No Infiltration Condition Worksheet B.5-6 49086 0.58742 Area draining to the biofiltration BMP Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) Required area for Evapotranspiration [Line 3 x 0.03] Biofiltration BMP Footprint 3 0 0 Impervious to Pervious Area ratio Line 7/Line 6] Effective Credit Area If (Line 8 >1.5, Line 6, Line 7/1.5] Target Volume Retention [Line 10 from Worksheet B.5.2] 29 Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development BMP-4 Landscape area that meet the requirements in SD-B and SD- F Fact Sheet (sq. ft.) Impervious area draining to the landscape area (sq. ft.) 28834 865 0 Landscape Area (must be identified on DS-3247) 2 0 0 Effective impervious area draining to the BMP [Line 1 x Line 2] Fraction of the performance standard met through the BMP footprint and/or landscaping Line 11/Line 4]0 Volume Retention Performance Standard Sum of Landscape area [sum of Line 9 Id’s 1 to 5] Provided footprint for evapotranspiration [Line 5 + Line 10] 0 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 0 0 11/19/2021 Version 1.0 - June 2017 SAN DIEGO) I Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Friday, Nov 19 2021 BMP-4 MWS Curb Opening Capacity Calculations Curb Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.00 Throat Height (in) = 6.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = -0- Grate Length (ft) = -0- Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = 1.00 Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 0.80 Gutter n-value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.20 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.20 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.20 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 2.64 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 2.11 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 1.74 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- All dimens i ons in feet BMP-3 Trash Capture Sizing Project Name Shinohara Business Center PLSA Project No. 3690 Runoff Coefficient, C=0.8112 (DMA-A) Intensity, i=0.364 in/hr (per NOAA Precipitation Frequency Data Server) Area, A=8.27 ac (DMA-A) Design Flow Rate, Q=CiA Q=2.44 cfs per State Water Resources Control Board Certified Full Capture System List of Trash Treatment Control Devices, Updated September 2021) Trash Capture Requirement - Certified Full Capture Devices shall be sized to treat the peak flowrate from a one-year, one-hour storm event (design storm) SKIMBOSS® MAX FLOATING SKIMMER SCREEN SYSTEM WITH SUNGLIDE™ LIDS TRASH CAPTURE COMPLIANT)8" 8'-012" 2'-0" 7" 7'-812" 3'-0" SUMP OUTLET, Ø18" OPENING FOR Ø12" HDPE. INLET, Ø18" OPENING FOR Ø12" HDPE. 12'-0"6"6" 13'-0" 6'-0" 6" 6" 7'-0" 3'-10" 4" 3'-9" 4" 3'-9" 12'-0" 13'-0" 6"6" 4" BAFFLE WALL TYP. PLAN VIEW ELEVATIONVIEWLEFTENDVIEW COVERS NOT SHOWN IN THIS VIEW FOR CLARITY 2X Ø24" BOLTED & GASKETED ACCESS COVERS. WITH 2X Ø24"x12" GRADE RING & 2X Ø24"x3" GRADE RING. FIELD GROUT AS NEEDED TO MEET GRADE, BY OTHERS. TOP OF VAULT: 190.54' 2'-0" 10'-012"11'-312" Ø36" ACCESS COVER. WITH 1X Ø36"x12" GRADE RING & 1X Ø36"x3" GRADE RING. FIELD GROUT AS NEEDED TO MEET GRADE, BY OTHERS. 2X VISUAL INSPECTION PORT 1'-8" OUTLET IE: 182.83' RIM: 192.21' INLET IE: 183.00' 3'-0" 7'-612" TURBULENCE DEFLECTORS EL: 179.83' HGL: 189.55' THIS PRODUCT IS PROTECTED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING US PATENT(S): 6,428,692; 7,270,747; 7,981,283; 8,142,666; 8,366,923; 8,491,797; 7,846,327; 8,034,236; RELATED FOREIGN PATENTS, OR OTHER PATENTS PENDING. SHEET NAME REVISION SHEET MFG DRAWN ENGINEERCHECKEDDATE SALES ORDER REV DATE PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates Nutrient Separating Baffle Box® Ph: 800.579.8819 | www.oldcastleinfrastructure.com/stormwater THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. IT IS CONFIDENTIAL, SUBMITTED FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY AND SHALL NOT BE USED IN ANY WAY INJURIOUS TO THE INTERESTS OF, OR WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. COPYRIGHT © 2022 OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. CUSTOMER PROJECT NAME 5/10/22 070-FO PPS CDH CDH - Shinohara - Chula Vista, CA 1 OF122-725632-NSBB-612-TC Trash Capture 1 5/20/22 TRASH CAPTURE PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS Screen System Storage Volume 54.51 cf Total Sump Volume 204.00 cf 56.22 cfs Treatment Flow (Trash Capture)*42.80 cfs Certifications California State Water Resources Control Board Mosquito Vector Control Association of California Certified Full Capture Accessibility Verified Contact Oldcastle for additional treatment and peak flow capacities. Peak Flow Capacity* (100% Full Screen) SITE SPECIFIC DATA Structure ID Water Quality Flow Rate (cfs) Peak Flow Rate (cfs) Rim Elevation Pipe Data Pipe Size Pipe Type Invert Elevation Inlet Outlet Notes: Top of Vault Elevation BMP3 2.50 31.00 192.21' 12" HDPE 183.00' 12" HDPE 182.83' 190.54' NOTES: 1. DESIGN LOADINGS: A. AASHTO HS-20-44 (WITH IMPACT) B. DESIGN SOIL COVER: 5'-0" MAXIMUM C. ASSUMED WATER TABLE: BELOW BASE OF PRECAST ENGINEER-OF-RECORD TO CONFIRM SITE WATER TABLE ELEVATION) D. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE: 45 PCF DRAINED) E. LATERAL LIVE LOAD SURCHARGE: 80 PSF APPLIED TO 8'-0" BELOW GRADE) F. NO LATERAL SURCHARGE FROM ADJACENT BUILDINGS, WALLS, PIERS, OR FOUNDATIONS. 2. CONCRETE 28-DAY MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH: 5,000 PSI MINIMUM. 3. REINFORCING: REBAR, ASTM A615/A706, GRADE 60 4. CEMENT: ASTM C150 5. REQ'D ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING CAPACITY: 2,500 PSF 6. REFERENCE STANDARD: A. ASTM C890 B. ASTM C913 C. ACI 318-14 7. THIS STRUCTURE IS DESIGNED TO THE PARAMETERS NOTED HEREIN. ENGINEER-OF-RECORD SHALL VERIFY FY THAT NOTED PARAMETERS MEET OR EXCEED PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. IF DESIGN PARAMETERS ARE INCORRECT, REVIEWING ENGINEER/AUTHORITY SHALL NOTIFY OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE UPON REVIEW OF THIS SUBMITTAL. 8. OVERSIZED HOLES TO ACCOMMODATE SPECIFIC PIPE TYPE MUST BE CONCENTRIC TO PIPE ID. AFTER PIPES ARE INSTALLED, ALL ANNULAR SPACES SHALL BE FILLED WITH A MINIMUM OF 3,000 PSI CONCRETE FOR FULL THICKNESS OF PRECAST WALLS. PIPES ARE TO BE FLUSH WITH THE INSIDE SURFACE OF THE CONCRETE STRUCTURE. 9. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY ALL SIZES, LOCATIONS, AND ELEVATIONS OF OPENINGS. 10. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE TO ENSURE ADEQUATE BEARING SURFACE IS PROVIDED (I.E. COMPACTED AND LEVEL PER PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS). 11. SECTION HEIGHTS, SLAB/WALL THICKNESSES, AND KEYWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS REQUIRED FOR SITE REQUIREMENTS AND/OR DUE TO PRODUCT AVAILABILITY AND PRODUCTION FACILITY CONSTRAINTS. 12. FOR SITE SPECIFIC DRAWINGS WITH DETAILED STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS, PLEASE CONTACT OLDCASTLE INFRASTRUCTURE. 13. MAXIMUM PICK WEIGHT: 19,750 LBS. COMBINED WEIGHT INCLUDES BAFFLE WALLS AND PRODUCT INTERNALS.) 14. INTERNALS SHALL CONSIST OF A FLOATING SKIMMER, FLOW DEFLECTORS, ELEVATED CENTRAL SCREEN SYSTEM AND SLIDING LIDS. THESE COMPONENTS EFFECTIVELY REDUCE HEAD LOSS, INCREASE POLLUTANT REMOVAL AND SIMPLIFY MAINTENANCE. I I I I Water Boards E. J OAQU IN ESQUIVEL, CHAIR I EILEEN SOBECK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR G AV IN NEWSOM GOVERNOR N,~ J ARED BLUMEN FELD l ~~ SECAETAAY FOA ENVlAONMENTAL PROTECTION 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 I Mailing Address: P .O . Box 100, Sacramento , CA 95812-0100 I www.waterboards.ca.gov Project Name/ Shinohara Business Center ATTACHMENT 2 Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures j Mark this box if this attachment is empty because the project is exempt from PDP hydromodification management requirements. CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ _____________________ _ ATTACHMENT 3 Structural BMP Maintenance Information Hydromodification Control Measures CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ _____________________________ _ Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included in the Structural BMP Maintenance Information Attachment: Attachment 3: For private entity operation and maintenance, Attachment 3 must include a Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement with Grant of Access and Covenant's Maintenance Agreement") Template can be found at the following link (also refer to Chapter 8.2.1 for more information's): The following information must be included in the exhibits attached to the Maintenance Agreement: Iii Vicinity map (Depiction of Project Site) II Legal Description for Project Site Iii Site design BMPs for which DCV reduction is claimed for meeting the pollutant Iii control obligations . lj BMP and HMP type, location, type, manufacture model, and dimensions, specifications, cross section Iii LID features such as (permeable paver and LS location, dim, SF). lj Maintenance recommendations and frequency CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: CITY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 276 FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 This Instrument Benefits City Only. No Fee Required. Above Space for Recorder's Use CCV File No. ----- STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH GRANT OF ACCESS AND COVENANTS INSERT PROJECT NAME] THIS STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Agreement"), dated _______ , 20_ for the purpose of reference only and effective the date on which the last party hereto affixes his/her signature ("Effective Date"), is entered into between [Enter Name of Owner(s)], [Enter Type of Corporation/Partnership], ("Owner(s)") and the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation, ("City") (individually, each may be referred to as "Party" and collectively as "Parties") with reference to the following facts: RECITALS WHEREAS, Owner(s) has(have) [? Applied for x permit/ obtained a permit/ intends to file map/ etc] for the development of [Name of Subdivision/type of project] ("Project"), located on parcels [Insert] "Project Site" as depicted in Exhibit "A" and more particularly described in Exhibit "B" , both attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, as a condition of (or condition# x ofy) [Insert], Owner(s) is(are) required to implement and maintain structural or non-structural pollution prevention measures, such as site design, source control, treatment control, and hydromodification control (where applicable) methods required to minimize polluted runoff and any other environmental impacts from Project during the post-development phase ( collectively "BMPs"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to City's urban runoff regulations, including Chula Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 14.20 (the "Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance) and the Chula Vista BMP Design Manual, Owner(s) is(are) required to prepare and submit a Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP), which includes an Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan (IOMP); and Rev April 2016 Page 1 of 13 WHEREAS, the Owner(s) has(have) submitted SWQMP, which is on file in the office of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the SWQMP proposes that storm water runoff from Project be detained and treated by the use of permanent Storm Water Management Facilities ("SWMFs"); and WHEREAS, the SWMFs are classified in the SWQMP as site design, treatment control, and hydromodification control BMPs; and WHEREAS, the SWQMP specifies the manner and standards by which the SWMFs must be inspected, maintained, and repaired in order to retain their effectiveness; and WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of any construction permits for Project, City requires Owner(s) to enter into Agreement to ensure the installation, inspection, maintenance, and repair of permanent SWMFs. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the following covenants, terms, and conditions: ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS 1.1 Unless context indicates otherwise, for the purpose of this Agreement, all the below-listed terms shall be defined as follows: Agreement" means this Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement. Best Management Practices, or BMPs" means structural or non-structural pollution prevention measures, such as site design, source control, treatment control, and hydromodification control methods required to minimize polluted runoff from Project during the post-development phase. BMPs include, but are not limited to, Storm Water Management Facilities. City" means the City of Chula Vista, an official of the City, or any staff member authorized to act on behalf of the City. Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan, or IOMP" means a description of inspection, operation, and maintenance activities and schedules required to ensure proper operation and effectiveness of the SWMFs into perpetuity. Owner(s)" means the land owner(s) of Project Site, which is the subject of this Agreement, anyone authorized to act on behalf of the land owner(s) of Project Site, and any and all of owner's successors in interest, whether individual, partnership, corporation, or other entity such as a Home Owners' Association, regardless of the manner of transfer, including purchase, devise, or gift. If land owner of SWMFs is different from development land owner (as may be in the case of offsite SWMFs), both owners are parties to Agreement and shall sign the Signature Page as Owner(s) Rev April 2016 Page 2 of 13 Project" means all improvements and land dedicated to the development, which is the subject ofAgreement, including any offsite water quality facilities. Project Site" means the land dedicated to the development, which is the subject of Agreement, including any offsite water quality facilities. Responsible Party" means Owner(s) and any other person, corporation, or legal entity accepting, in writing and in City approved form, responsibility on behalf of Owner(s). Security" means any Bond, Cash Deposit, or Letter of Credit that City may require from Owner(s) to assure the faithful performance of the obligations of Agreement. Storm Water Management Facilities" ("SWMFs") means all onsite and offsite structural facilities constructed as Project's site design, treatment control, or hydromodification control BMPs, proposed as part of the development project submittals, and as approved by City prior to the issuance of a development permit, or as amended with City's approval after the development is complete. Water Quality Technical Report" ("SWQMP") means a document prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual, and submitted to the City as part of Project's permit application documents. ARTICLE II. -OWNER'S OBLIGATIONS 2.1 Maintenance of Stormwater Management Facilities. Owner(s) shall install, inspect, maintain, repair, and replace all SWMFs for the Project as required by the Director of Public Works, or his/her designated representative ("Director). 2.1.1 Scope of Maintenance. Maintenance shall include inspection and serv1cmg of SWMFs on the schedule determined necessary to ensure the SWMFs retain their effectiveness. 2.1.2 Duration of Obligation. Owner's obligation to maintain, repair and replace the SWMFs shall continue in perpetuity until all obligations under this Agreement are transferred to, and assumed by, another owner or entity approved by City Responsible Party"). 2.2 Grant of Right of Entry. Owner(s) shall grant to the City, its representatives, or contractors, or any Responsible Party, the right to enter the Project to inspect SWMFs, or perform any permitted acts or obligations under this Agreement, including maintenance of said facilities in the event the Owner(s) fails(fail) to fulfill its(their) maintenance obligations after proper notice. 2.2.1 No Prior Notice. City shall have the right, at any time and without prior notice to Owner(s), to enter upon any part of Project as may be necessary or convenient for any acts permitted hereunder. Rev April 2016 Page 3 of 13 2.2.2 Unobstructed Access. Owner(s) shall at all times maintain Project so as to make City's access clear and unobstructed. 2.3 Modification of IOMP. Owner(s) shall, at the City's request, in City's sole discretion, amend the IOMP. The Owner(s) may amend the IOMP from time-to-time, subject to City approval. The IOMP is attached hereto as Exhibit "C." 2.3.1 Part of Owner's Obligations. Any obligations, conditions, or requirements of an amended IOMP shall become part of this Agreement immediately as if originally included herein, and the Owner(s) shall be responsible for such amended obligations, conditions, or requirements. The amended IOMP shall not be applied retroactively. The IOMP shall describe employee training programs and duties, routine inspection, service and operating schedules, maintenance frequency, and specific maintenance activities. 2.4 Submission of Documents. Owner(s) shall include a copy of the Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan ("IOMP") for the SWMFs in the SWQMP for Project and submit a copy to City, at the time Agreement is executed. ARTICLE III. -CITY'S RIGHTS 3 .1 Perform Maintenance. City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to elect to perform any or all of the maintenance activities 3.1.1 Notice. Except in the Case of an emergency, prior to performing any maintenance activities, City shall provide Owner(s) with a written notice, informing Owner(s) of its (their) failure to satisfactorily perform its (their) obligations under Agreement. 3.1.1.1 Emergencies. In the event of an emergency, as determined by City, City shall not be required to provide Owner(s) with notice in advance of performing any and all maintenance activities it deems necessary. 3.1.2 Time to Cure. Owner(s) shall have a reasonable time, as defined in the Notice, to cure any failure to perform its (their) maintenance obligations. If a cure cannot be completed within the time limit identified in the Notice, Owner(s) shall provide City with a written request for additional time, which shall include sufficiently detailed explanation as to why the cure cannot be completed within such timeframe. If the City approves a request for additional time, Owner(s) shall immediately commence such cure and diligently pursue to completion. 3 .1.3 Costs of Maintenance. In the event City performs any maintenance under this Article III, then Owner(s) shall pay all costs City incurred in performing said maintenance activities. Payment shall be subject to the following terms: 3.1.3.1 Due Date. Net 30. Rev April 2016 Page 4 of 13 3.1.3.2 Interest. Any late payment shall be subject to a rate of eight percent (8%) interest per annum. 3.1.3.3 Use ofSecurity. If payment is not received by the Due Date, City may, at its option, recover its costs through use of any security provided by Owner(s). Any costs associated with recovery shall be charged to and be an obligation of Owner(s). 3 .2 City Inspections. City shall have the right to conduct inspections of the SWMFs from time-to-time as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2013-0001 and any re-issuances thereof, to ensure adequate maintenance and effectiveness of the SWMFs. Owner(s) agrees (agree) to pay all inspection fees as may be established by City. ARTICLE IV. INDEMNITY 4.1 General Requirement. Owner(s) shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers, agents, employees, and volunteers ("Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged acts, omissions, negligence, or willful misconduct of Owner(s), its officials, officers, employees, agents, and contractors Indemnitors"), arising out of or related to the installation, inspection, maintenance, repair, or replacement of the BMPs or this Agreement. This indemnity provision does not include any claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses (including without limitations, attorneys fees) arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. Also covered is under the indemnity obligations is liability arising from, connected with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Indemnitees, which may be in combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Indemnitors . 4.2 Costs of Defense and Award. Included in the obligations in Section 4 .1, above, is the Owner's obligation to defend, at Owner's own cost, expense and risk, any and all aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against the Indemnitees. Owner(s) shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Indemnitees for any and all legal expense and cost incurred by each of them in connection therewith. 4.3 Conduct Own Defense. If City elects, at its sole discretion, to conduct its own defense, participate in its own defense, or obtain independent legal counsel in defense on any claim related to the installation, inspection, maintenance, repair or replacement of the SWMFs, Owner(s) agrees (agree) to pay the reasonable value of attorney's fees and all of City's reasonable costs. 4.4 Insurance Proceeds. Owner's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Indemnitees . Rev April 2016 Page 5 of 13 4.5 Declarations. Owner's obligations under this Article IV shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Owner(s). 4.6 Enforcement Costs. Owner(s) agrees (agree) to pay any and all costs Indemnitees incur enforcing the indemnity and defense provisions set forth in this Article IV. 4.7 Survival. Owner's obligations under this Article IV shall survive the termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE V. INSURANCE 5.1 Insurance. In the event that insurance is required by City, Owner(s) shall not begin work under this Agreement until it has (they have) : (i) obtained, and upon the City's request provided to the City, insurance certificates reflecting evidence of all insurance required in this Article V; (ii) obtained City approval of each company or companies; and (iii) confirmed that all policies contain the specific provisions required by this Section. 5.2 Types of Insurance. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Owner(s) shall maintain those types of insurance coverage and amounts of coverage required by City to protect the City from any potential claims, which may arise from the installation, inspection, maintenance, repair or replacement of the SWMFs or any other obligations under this Agreement. 5.3 Policy Endorsements Required. 5.3.1 Additional Insureds. City of Chula Vista, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds with respect all required policies of insurance with respect to liability arising out of obligations under this Agreement performed by or on behalf of the Owner(s). 5.3.2 Primary Insurance. The Owner's General Liability insurance coverage must be primary insurance as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance of the Owner(s) and in no way relieves the Owner(s) from its (their) responsibility to provide insurance. 5.3.3 Waiver of Subrogation. Owner's insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for each required policy providing coverage for the term required by this Agreement. 5.3.4 Cancellation. The insurance policies required must be endorsed to state that coverage will not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested. The words "will endeavor" and but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents, or representatives" shall be deleted from all certificates. Rev April 2016 Page 6 of 13 5.4 Proof of Insurance Coverage. Owner(s) shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements affecting coverage required. The endorsements should be on insurance industry forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the contract requirements. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences on the Project. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these specifications. 5.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer will reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as they pertain to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Owner(s) will provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. 5.6 Active Negligence. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the additional insureds in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code. 5.7 Not a Limitation of Other Obligations. Insurance provisions under this Article shall not be construed to limit the Owner's obligations under this Agreement, including Indemnity. ARTICLE VI. SECURITY 6.1 Security Required. If within any five-year period, City inspectors determine on two occasions that Owner(s) has (have) failed to effectively operate, maintain, or repair the SWMFs, City may require Owner(s) to provide City with Security to assure the faithful performance of the obligations of this Agreement. 6.1.1 Amount of Security. The amount of the security shall equal the cost to maintain the SWMFs for two (2) years, which cost shall be determined as identified in the Project SWQMP ("Security Amount"). 6.1.2 Type of Security. Security may be of any ofthe following types: 6.1.2.1 Performance Bond. Owner(s) shall provide to the City a performance bond in favor of the City in the Security Amount and subject to the provisions below. Rev April 2016 a. Certificate of Agency. All bonds signed by an agent must be accompanied by a certified copy of such agent's authority to act. b. Licensing and Rating. The bonds shall be from surety companies admitted to do business in the State of California, licensed or authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located to issue bonds for the limits required by this agreement, listed as approved by the United States Page 7 of 13 Department of Treasury Circular 570, http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570, and which also satisfy the requirements stated in Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except as provided otherwise by laws or regulation, and have a minimum AM Best rating of "A-" to an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of its capital and surplus. c. Insolvency or Bankruptcy. If the surety on any bond furnished by the Owner(s) is declared bankrupt or becomes insolvent or its right to do business is terminated in any state where any part of the Project is located, Owner(s) shall within seven (7) days thereafter substitute or require the substitution of another bond and surety, acceptable to the City. 6.1.2.2 Letter of Credit. As security for Owner's obligations under this Agreement, Owner(s) shall cause an irrevocable letter of credit in the Security Amount Letter of Credit") to be issued in favor of the City by a reputable state or national financial institution with a branch located in Chula Vista. a. Draw on Letter of Credit. The City may draw upon the Letter of Credit for the full amount or any series of partial amounts as necessary by means of a sight draft accompanied by a statement from the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, Business Center Manager, that the Owner(s) has(have) not satisfied Owner's obligations hereunder. 6.1.2.3 Cash Deposit. In lieu of a Performance Bond or Letter of Credit, Owner(s) may deposit the Security Amount with the City. a. Return of Security. Any unused balance of the Security at the end of the Term shall be returned to the Owner(s) in accordance with City's accounting procedures. 6.1.3 Adjustment for Inflation. The Security Amount shall be adjusted at a rate of 5% per annum. 6.1.4 Term. Security shall remain in full force and effect for two (2) years from the date it is received by the City provided no further failures are identified by City Inspectors during the initial two (2) year period. In the event additional violations occur, the City shall retain the Security until such time as the City Manager, in his sole discretion, deems appropriate to ensure the Owner's obligations will be satisfied. 6.1.5 Form of Security. Security required under this Article shall be in a form satisfactory to the City Manager and City Attorney. 6.1.6 Use of Security. In accordance with Article III, City may use all or any portion of this Security to fund the costs associated with the City's performance of any of the maintenance activities for the Project's SWMFs. Rev April 2016 Page 8 of 13 6.1. 7 Replenish Security. If at any time the Security Amount shall drop below the amount required under Section 6.1.1, Owner(s) shall deposit additional funds, provide an additional Letter of Credit to City, or provide an additional bond within thirty (30) days, such that the total amount of Security available to the City is equal to the amount required in Section 6.1.1. ARTICLE VII. RECORDS 7 .1 Record Keeping. The designation of a Responsible Party to maintain the SWMFs does not relieve Owner(s) of any of the obligations or duties under this Agreement. Owner(s), its (their) successors, or a designated Responsible Party, shall retain records of the IOMP and maintenance and inspection activities for at least five years. Said records shall be made available within 5 days, upon request by City. ARTICLE VIII. STANDARD PROVISIONS 8.1 Headings. All headings are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 8.2 Gender & Number. Whenever the context requires, the use herein of (i) the neuter gender includes the masculine and the feminine genders and (ii) the singular number includes the plural number. 8.3 Reference to Paragraphs. Each reference in this Agreement to an Article or Section refers, unless otherwise stated, to an Article or Section in this Agreement. 8.4. Incorporation of Recitals. All recitals herein are incorporated into this Agreement and are made a part hereof. 8.5 Covenants and Conditions. All prov1s1ons of this Agreement expressed as either covenants or conditions on the part of the City or the Owner(s), shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. 8.6 Integration. This Agreement and the Exhibits and references incorporated into this Agreement fully express all understandings of the Parties concerning the matters covered in this Agreement. No change, alteration, or modification of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, and no verbal understanding of the Parties, their officers, agents, or employees shall be valid unless made in the form of a written change agreed to in writing by both Parties or an amendment to this Agreement agreed to by both Parties. All prior negotiations and agreements are merged into this Agreement. 8.7 Severability. The unenforceability, invalidity, or illegality of any provision of this Agreement shall not render any other provision of this Agreement unenforceable, invalid, or illegal. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall for any reason, be determined to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith and agree to such amendments, modifications, or supplements to this Agreement Rev April 2016 Page 9 of 13 or such other appropriate action as shall, to the maximum extent practicable in light of such determination, implement and give effect to the intentions of the parties as reflected herein. 8.8 Drafting Ambiguities. The Parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the decision ofwhether or not to seek advice of counsel with respect to this Agreement is a decision that is the sole responsibility of each Party. This Agreement shall not be construed in favor of or against either Party by reason of the extent to which each Party participated in the drafting ofthe Agreement. 8.9 Conflicts Between Terms. If an apparent conflict or inconsistency exists between the main body of this Agreement and the Exhibits, the main body of this Agreement shall control. If a conflict exists between an applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, regulation, order, or code and this Agreement, the law, rule, regulation, order, or code shall control. Varying degrees of stringency among the main body of this Agreement, the Exhibits, and laws, rules, regulations, orders, or codes are not deemed conflicts, and the most stringent requirement shall control. Each Party shall notify the other immediately upon the identification of any apparent conflict or inconsistency concerning this Agreement. 8.10 Prompt Performance. Time is of the essence of each covenant and condition set forth in this Agreement. 8.11 Good Faith Performance. The Parties shall cooperate with each other in good faith, and assist each other in the performance ofthe provisions of this Agreement. 8.12 Further Assurances. City and Owner each agree to execute and deliver such additional documents as may be required to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. 8.13 Exhibits. Each of the following Exhibits is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Exhibit A: Vicinity map Exhibit B: Legal Description for Project Exhibit C: BMP and HMP type, location and dimensions Exhibit D: Maintenance recommendations and frequency. Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan (IOMP) 8.14 Compliance with Controlling Law. The Owner(s) shall comply with all laws, ordinances, regulations, and policies of the federal, state, and local governments applicable to this Agreement. In addition, the Owner(s) shall comply immediately with all directives issued by the City or its authorized representatives under authority of any laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, or regulations. 8.15 Enforcement. Failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement constitutes a violation of the Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 14.20 "Storm Water Management and Discharge Control" and may result in enforcement action pursuant to City's storm water regulations and administrative procedures. Rev April 2016 Page 10 of 13 8.16 Jurisdiction, Venue, and Attorney Fees. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. The prevailing Party in any such suit or proceeding shall be entitled to a reasonable award of attorney fees in addition to any other award made in such suit or proceeding. 8.17 Administrative Claims Requirement and Procedures. No suit shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City, unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the provisions ofwhich are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. 8.18 Third Party Relationships. Nothing in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship between City and any individual, entity, or other not a party to this Agreement. 8.19 Non-Assignment. The Owner(s) shall not assign the obligations under this Agreement, whether by express assignment, by sale of the company, or any monies due or to become due, without the City's prior written approval. Any assignment in violation of this paragraph shall constitute a Default. In no event shall any putative assignment create a contractual relationship between the City and any putative assignee. 8.20 Successors in Interest. This Agreement and all rights and obligations created by this Agreement shall be in force and effect whether or not any Parties to the Agreement have been succeeded by another entity, and all rights and obligations created by this Agreement shall be vested and binding on any Party's successor in interest. 8.21 Agreement Runs with Project. The terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of Owner(s) and City and shall be deemed to be for the benefit of all persons owning any interest in Project, the City, and the Public. It is the intent of the Parties that this Agreement be recorded and be binding upon all persons purchasing or otherwise acquiring all or any lot, unit or other portion of Project, who shall be deemed to have consented to and become bound by all the provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement shall commence upon execution of this Agreement by all Parties named in the Agreement. 8.22 Independent Contractors. The Owner(s), any contractors, subcontractors, and any other individuals employed by the Owner(s) shall be independent contractors and not agents of the City. Any provisions of this Agreement that may appear to give the City any right to direct the Owner(s) concerning the details of performing the Services under this Agreement, or to exercise any control over such performance, shall mean only that the Owner(s) shall follow the direction of the City concerning the end results of the performance. Rev April 2016 Page 11 of 13 8.23 No Waiver. No failure of either the City or Owner(s) to insist upon the strict performance by the other of any covenant, term or condition of this Agreement, nor any failure to exercise any right or remedy consequent upon a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement, shall constitute a waiver of any such breach of such covenant, term or condition. No waiver of any breach shall affect or alter this Agreement, and each and every covenant, condition, and term hereof shall continue in full force and effect to any existing or subsequent breach. 8.24 Notices. Owner(s) agrees(agree) that it shall, prior to transferring ownership of any land on which any part of the Project covered by this Agreement are located, and also prior to transferring ownership of any such SWMFs, provide clear written notice of the above maintenance obligations associated with that SWMF to the transferee. Owner( s) further agrees(agree) to provide evidence that Owner(s) has(have) requested the California Department of Real Estate to include in the public report issued for the development of Project, a notification regarding the SWMF maintenance requirements described in this Agreement. 8.24.1 Serving Notice. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any Party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested 8.25 Entitlement to Subsequent Notices. No notice to or demand on the Parties for notice of an event not herein legally required to be given shall in itself create the right in the Parties to any other or further notice or demand in the same, similar or other circumstances. 8.26 Remedies. The rights of the Parties under this Agreement are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights or remedies that the Parties might otherwise have unless this Agreement provides to the contrary. 8.27 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which, when taken together shall constitute but one instrument. 8.28 Signing Authority. Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement and agrees to hold the other Party or Parties hereto harmless if it is later determined that such authority does not exist. End of page (next page is signature page) Rev April 2016 Page 12 of 13 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH GRANT OF ACCESS AND COVENANTS INSERT PROJECT) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the_ day of 20 . OWNER: CITY OF CHULA VISTA: City Engineer By:---------------APPROVED AS TO FORM: Its: _____________ _ By: Its: --------------- City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk Dated: ----------- Notary to attach acknowledgment for each signature.) Corporate Authority requiredfor each Signatory, ifapplicable.) Attachments: 1. Exhibit A: Depiction of Project Site 2. Exhibit B: Legal Description for Project Site 3. Exhibit C: BMP and HMP type, location and dimensions 4. Exhibit D: Maintenance recommendations and frequency. Inspection, Operation, and Maintenance Plan (IOMP) J:\Engineer\LANDDEV\NPDES(LANDDEV ONLY)\STORM WATER AGREEMENTS\SSW Main Agree_ VERSION 2015.doc Rev April 2016 Page 13 of 13 MAIN ST INTERSTATE 805OLYMPIC P K W YMAINS TBRANDYWINE AVEPALM AVE SITE SHINOHARA LANE EXHIBIT A VICINITY MAP SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PERMIT APPLICATION NO. DR-21- 0032 EXHIBIT A NOT TO EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF LOT 1, SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 18 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, 812 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID WEST LINE, 515 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY PARALLEL WITH SAID WEST LINE 508 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES 13 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, 1320 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 528 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. APN 644-040-01 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PERMIT APPLICATION NO. DR-21-0032 TP INDUSTRIALBLDG1 DMA B DMA C BMP-2 MWS-L-8-24 BMP-5 TREE WELL AREA = 475 SF BMP-1 OLDCASTLE STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM BMP-4 MWS L-4-15 PROP. PUMP TO CURB OUTLET BMP-3 OLDCASTLE NSBB TRASH CAPTURE BMP-6 TREE WELL AREA = 415 SF P/L P/L P/LP/L P/LP/LP/LP/ LP/LP/ LP/L P/ L SHINOHARALANER/ WR/WDMA A SCALE: 1"= 100'EXHIBIT C SITE PLAN SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, EXHIBIT D BMP MAINTENANCE FACT SHEET FOR STRUCTURAL BMP HU-1 CISTERN HU-1 Cistern Cisterns are containers that capture runoff (typically rooftop runoff) and store it for future use such as irrigation or alternative grey water between storm events. Cisterns can be aboveground or below ground systems. Typical cistern components include: Storage container, barrel or tank for holding captured flows Inlet and associated valves and piping Outlet and associated valves and piping Overflow outlet Access riser or tank serviceway (i.e., access for underground and above-ground cisterns) Optional pump Optional first flush diverters Optional debris screen or pretreatment BMP (e.g., roof drain filter, drainage inlet insert) Optional roof, supports, foundation, level indicator, and other accessories Normal Expected Maintenance Cisterns can be expected to accumulate sediment and debris that is small enough to pass through the inlet into the storage container. Larger debris such as leaves or trash may accumulate at the inlet. While the storage container is generally a permanent structure, ancillary parts including valves, piping, screens, level indicators, and other accessories will wear and require occasional replacement. Maintenance of a cistern generally involves: removing accumulated sediment and debris from the inlet and storage container on a routine basis; and replacement of ancillary parts on an as-needed basis. A summary table of standard inspection and maintenance indicators is provided within this Fact Sheet. If the system as a whole includes a pump or other electrical equipment, maintenance of the equipment shall be based on the manufacturer's recommended maintenance plan. Non-Standard Maintenance or BMP Failure If any of the following scenarios are observed, the BMP is not performing as intended to protect downstream waterways from pollution and/or erosion. Corrective maintenance, increased inspection and maintenance, BMP replacement, or a different BMP type will be required. The inlet is found to be obstructed at every inspection such that storm water bypasses the cistern. The cistern is not functioning properly if it is not capturing storm water. This would require addition of ancillary features to protect the inlet, or pretreatment measures within the watershed draining to the cistern to intercept larger debris, such as screens on roof gutters, or drainage inserts within catch basins. Increase the frequency of inspection until the issue is resolved. Accumulation of sediment within one year is greater than 25% of the volume of the cistern. This means the sediment load from the tributary drainage area has diminished the storage volume of the cistern and the cistern will not capture the required volume of storm water. This would require pretreatment measures within the tributary area draining to the cistern to intercept sediment. The cistern is not drained between storm events. If the cistern is not drained between storm events, the storage volume will be diminished and the cistern will not capture the required volume of storm water from subsequent storms. This would require implementation of practices onsite to drain and use the stored water, or a different BMP if onsite use cannot be reliably sustained. HU-1 Page 1 of 8 January 12, 2017 BMP MAINTENANCE FACT SHEET FOR SITE DESIGN BMP SD-1 TREE WELLS SD-1 Tree Wells Tree wells as site design BMPs are trees planted in configurations that allow storm water runoff to be directed into the soil immediately surrounding the tree. The tree may be contained within a planter box or structural cells. The surrounding area will be graded to direct runoff to the tree well. There may be features such as tree grates, suspended pavement design, or shallow surface depressions designed to allow runoff into the tree well. Typical tree well components include: Trees of the appropriate species for site conditions and constraints Available growing space based on tree species, soil type, water availability, surrounding land uses, and project goals Entrance/opening that allows storm water runoff to flow into the tree well (e.g., a curb opening, tree grate, or surface depression) Optional suspended pavement design to provide structural support for adjacent pavement without requiring compaction of underlying layers Optional root barrier devices as needed; a root barrier is a device installed in the ground, between a tree and the sidewalk, intended to guide roots down and away from the sidewalk in order to prevent sidewalk lifting from tree roots Optional tree grates; to be considered to maximize available space for pedestrian circulation and to protect tree roots from compaction related to pedestrian circulation; tree grates are typically made up of porous material that will allow the runoff to soak through Optional shallow surface depression for ponding of excess runoff Optional planter box drain Normal Expected Maintenance Tree health shall be maintained as part of normal landscape maintenance. Additionally, ensure that storm water runoff can be conveyed into the tree well as designed. That is, the opening that allows storm water runoff to flow into the tree well (e.g., a curb opening, tree grate, or surface depression) shall not be blocked, filled, re-graded, or otherwise changed in a manner that prevents storm water from draining into the tree well. A summary table of standard inspection and maintenance indicators is provided within this Fact Sheet. Non-Standard Maintenance or BMP Failure Tree wells are site design BMPs that normally do not require maintenance actions beyond routine landscape maintenance. The normal expected maintenance described above ensures the BMP functionality. If changes have been made to the tree well entrance/ opening such that runoff is prevented from draining into the tree well (e.g., a curb inlet opening is blocked by debris or a grate is clogged causing runoff to flow around instead of into the tree well, or a surface depression has been filled so runoff flows away from the tree well), the BMP is not performing as intended to protect downstream waterways from pollution and/or erosion. Corrective maintenance will be required to restore drainage into the tree well as designed. Surface ponding of runoff directed into tree wells is expected to infiltrate/evapotranspirate within 24-96 hours following a storm event. Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to vegetation health, and surface ponding longer than approximately 96 hours following a storm event poses a risk of vector (mosquito) breeding. Poor drainage can result from clogging or compaction of the soils surrounding the tree. Loosen or replace the soils to restore drainage. SD-1 Page 1 of 6 January 12, 2017 Other Special Considerations SD-1 Tree Wells Site design BMPs, such as tree wells, installed within a new development or redevelopment project are components of an overall storm water management strategy for the project. The presence of site design BMPs within a project is usually a factor in the determination of the amount of runoff to be managed with structural BMPs (i.e., the amount of runoff expected to reach downstream retention or biofiltration basins that process storm water runoff from the project as a whole). When site design BMPs are not maintained or are removed, this can lead to clogging or failure of downstream structural BMPs due to greater delivery of runoff and pollutants than intended for the structural BMP. Therefore, the [City Engineer] may require confirmation of maintenance of site design BMPs as part of their structural BMP maintenance documentation requirements. Site design BMPs that have been installed as part of the project should not be removed, nor should they be bypassed by re-routing roof drains or re-grading surfaces within the project. If changes are necessary, consult the [City Engineer] to determine requirements. SD-1 Page 2 of 6 January 12, 2017 MODULAR WETLANDS Maintenance Notes 1. Following maintenance and/or inspection, it is recommended the maintenance operator prepare a maintenance/inspection record. The record should include any maintenance activities performed, amount and description of debris collected, and condition of the system and its various filter mechanisms. 2. The owner should keep maintenance/inspection record(s) for a minimum of five years from the date of maintenance. These records should be made available to the governing municipality for inspection upon request at any time. 3. Transport all debris, trash, organics and sediments to approved facility for disposal in accordance with local and state requirements. 4. Entry into chambers may require confined space training based on state and local regulations. 5. No fertilizer shall be used in the Biofiltration Chamber. 6. Irrigation should be provided as recommended by manufacturer and/or landscape architect. Amount of irrigation required is dependent on plant species. Some plants may require irrigation. www.modularwetlands.com Bl CLEAN. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES , INC. Cleaning and Maintenance Report Modular Wetlands System 1_ M ODUL A !\ WETLANDS Project Name ----------------------------------------For Office Use Only ProjectAddress --------------------------------------- city) (Zip Code) (Reviewed By) Owner I Management Company---------------------------------- Contact ---------------------- Inspector Name __________________ _ Type of Inspection D Routine D FollowUp D Complaint Weather Condition Site GPS Coordinates Manufacturer / Trash Map# of Insert Description / Sizing Accumulation Lat: MWS Catch Basins LonQ : MWS Sedimentation Basin Media Filter Condition Plant Condition Drain Down Media Condition Discharge Chamber Condition Drain Down Pipe Condition Inlet and Outlet Pipe Condition Comments : Phone ( Date D Storm Additional Notes Foliage Sediment Accumulation Accumulation Time Uate) Office personnel to complete section to the left. AM/PM ------- Storm Event in Last 72-hours? D No D Yes Condition of Media Operational Per Total Debris 25/50/75/100 Manufactures' Accumulation (will be changed Specifications @75%) (If not, why?) 2972 San Luis Rey Road , Oceanside , CA 92058 P. 760.433 .7640 F. 760 .433 .3176 Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ _____________________ _ CCV BMP Manual ATTACHMENT 4 Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Storm Water BMPs PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ______________________________ _ Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the plans: The plans must identify: j Structural BMP(s) with ID numbers matching Form 1-6 Summary of PDP Structural BMPs j The grading and drainage design shown on the plans must be consistent with the delineation of DMAs shown on the DMA exhibit Iii Details and specifications for construction of structural BMP(s) Iii Signage indicating the location and boundary of structural BMP(s) as required by the City Engineer Iii How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance iJ Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e .g ., observation ports, cleanouts, silt posts, or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds) Ii Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable Iii Maintenance thresholds specific to the structural BMP(s), with a location-specific frame of reference (e.g., level of accumulated materials that triggers removal of the materials, to be identified based on viewing marks on silt posts or measured with a survey rod with respect to a fixed benchmark within the BMP) Iii Recommended equipment to perform maintenance Iii When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management Iii Include landscaping plan sheets showing vegetation requirements for vegetated structural BMP(s) Iii All BMPs must be fully dimensioned on the plans iJ When proprietary BMPs are used, site specific cross section with outflow, inflow and model number shall be provided. Broucher photocopies are not allowed. CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X XX X XXXXXXXXXX X XX SSS WWWWWX X X X X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXX2 5 8 25725625625625525525525525 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235235230230230230230 230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207207207206206 205205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200200 200 2 00 200200200 200 200195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 19019019 0190 190190 190 189 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751 7 5 1 7 5 1751 75 175172 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145144144 144144144143 143142 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 1 3 9 139138 138 FFFFFFFFFFFSSSWWWWWFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F FFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F I RP W W W RP W W F WF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FFF SSSSSP W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S FFS S S S SSWWWWWWWWWSSSSSSSSSSSS P FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F F F F F F F F F SSS S S S POR LOT 1 S19 T18S R1W S.B.M. APN: 644-040-01 PM14521PM14521 ROS 21570 MAP 5729 MAP 6958 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXTSHINOHARA LANEPROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BLDG 197.50 FF BMP- 5 TREE WELL 475 SF BMP- 1 OLDCASTLE STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM BMP- 2 BIOCLEAN MWS-L-8- 24 BMP- 3 OLDCASTLE NSBB TRASH CAPTURE BMP- 4 BIOCLEAN MWS-L-4- 15 8. 4%1. 5%1. 2%1. 5%1. 0%4. 4%1. 0%1. 5%2. 9%3. 7%1. 5%1. 5%1. 5%1. 5%1.5%1. 0%6. 7%2.0%1.5%3.7%1. 7%3. 1%7. 4%4. 3%1.7%3. 1%7. 4%1. 0%8. 4%1. 0%1. 0%1. 0%1. 0%1. 0%1. 0%0. 9%1. 0%1. 0%1.0%1.5%1.0% 4 FT TRUCK DOCK 4 FT TRUCK DOCK 2. 7% 1.0%1.0% 1.5% 1.0% 3.1% 1. 0% 1. 0%1. 7% 4.3%4. 3%1.0% 1. 0%1.0%0. 9% 1.0% 1. 0%4. 8% 4. 8%4. 8%4.8% 1.5%1. 0% 3. 3% 3.3%3. 3%1.5% N 00°25' 22" E 811. 56'N 89°34' 10" W 514.65' N 88°55' 35" W 528. 19'N 01° 06'38" E 1121.68'24' 1.0%4 FT TRUCK DOCK BMP-6 TREE WELL 415 SF 24'43'19' 24' 17'19' 35' 4' 36' 3' GRADED BENCH 3' GRADEDBENCH5' GRADED BENCH 19'8. 5'21.5' 41'8.5' 43'8.5' 3'5.25' 3'3'5. 25'50' BUILDINGSETBACK15' BUILDING SETBACK 20' BUILDING SETBACK50' BUILDING SETBACK7.4' 10' 50'40'5' GRADED BENCH 50' BUILDING SETBACK 3' 13.5'5. 5'60'3. 5%4 FT TRUCK DOCK 1.0%1. 0%222.3 TW 195.4 FG H=26. 9'246. 3 TW 197. 5 FG H= 48.8'241. 0 TW 197. 5 FG H= 43.5'237. 4 TW 197. 5 FG H= 39.9'208. 2 TW 197. 5 FG H= 10.7' 234.4 TW 196.6 FG H=37. 8'207.5 TW 196.8 FG H=10. 7'207.0 TW 196.8 FG H=10. 2'205.2 TW 196.8 FS H=8. 4'197.8 TW 196.8 FG H= 1'200.1 TW 196.9 FG H= 3.2'200. 0 TW 197. 0 FG H= 3'244.8 TW 197.5 FG H=47. 3'223. 6 TW 197.5 FG H= 26.1'187. 3 TW182.1 FG H=5.2' 211. 7 TW 193. 7 FG H= 18'173.9 TW 172.9 TC H=1' 204.9 TW 197.5FGH=7. 4'205.4 TW 196.8 FG H=8. 6'159.0 TW 153.6 FS H=5. 4'151.0 TW 151.0 TC H=0' 157.0 TW 156.5 TC H=0'247. 4 TW 197.5 FG H=49. 9'197.0 TSW 198.0 TW 198.0 FG H= 1'3' GRADED BENCHDEEPENED FOOTING EXIST. STORM DRAIN INLET 197.50 FF 197.50 FF197. 50 FF 197. 50 FF DEEPENED FOOTING 5.5'197. 50 FF 197.30 TC 196.80 FS 196. 30 TC 195.80 FS 192. 90 FS192. 90 FS 197. 50 FF 194.22 FS 193.58 TC 193.08 FS 197.24 TC 196.74 FS 197.50 FF 193.50 FS 196. 10 TC 195.60 FS 195.50 TC 195. 00 FS 195.00 FL/ LP 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 196.83TC 196. 33 FS 196. 10 FS/LP EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER PROP. RIBBON GUTTER PROP. 6" CURB PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER 195. 00 FS/ HP 195.00 FL/LP 149.11 FS) PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75EXIST. CROSS GUTTER 150. 25 TC 149.75 FS 195.00 FS/ HP 196. 10 FL/LP PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H: 4V RETAINING WALL PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP.RIBBON GUTTER PROP. RIBBON GUTTER 192.61 FS PROP. 6" CURB 197. 50 TC 197.00 FS 197.50 TC 197.00 FS 197. 38 TC 196.88 FS 197. 38 TC 196. 88 FS 197. 38 TC 196.88 FS 197.38 TC/FS EXIST. 10'PUBLIC SEWER AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT 195. 80 FL BROW DITCH 203. 9 FL BROW DITCH 196.0 FL BROW DITCH 239.00 FL BROW DITCH 197. 50 FF 193.50 FS 185. 25 FL BROW DITCH PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 2' CURB CUT 172.00 FL PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN RAMP EXISTING SIDEWALK EXIST.CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL PROP. BROW DITCH 149.92FS)EXIST. CURB OUTLET VACATE EXISTING RIGHT-OF- WAY EASEMENT PROP. ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING RETAINING WALL EXISTING RETAINING WALL EXISTING RETAINING WALL EXISTINGOPENSPACEEASEMENT RECORDED JUNE 16, 1992 DOC# 1992-0373004 196. 58 FS/HP 197.50 TC 197.00 FS 193.11 TC 192.61 FS 196.58 FS/HP 196. 58 FS/HP 196. 10 FL/LP 196.58 FS/HP 194.60FS/LP 194. 50 FS/ LP 194.50 FS/ LP 195.46 TC 194.96 FS 197.50 FF 193.50 FS 197.50 FF 193.50 FS 197.50 FF197.50 FF 2' CURB CUT 195.17 FL PROP. SCREEN WALL 197.50 FF DEEPENED FOOTING 5.5' 197.50 FF 195.80 FS197. 50 FF PROP. CHEEK WALL DEEPENED FOOTING 197.50 FF 197.50 FF 193. 50FS197.50 FF 193.50 FS PROP. GATE ON RETAINING WALL 197.50FF196.00 FS DEEPENED FOOTING 3' GRADED BENCH9.5'P/L P/L P/ LP/L P/LP/LP/ LP/LP/ LP/L P/L R/ WR/WP/L P/L 46'151. 93 TC 151. 43 FS 150.95 TC 150.45 FL 150. 54 TC 150.04 FS 151.46 TC 150.96 FL 7. 4%7.4% 179.39 TC 178.89 FL 193.65 TC 193.15 FS 195.03 TC 194.53 FS 179. 93 TC 179.43 FS 193. 11 TC 192.61 FL 190. 89 FL/ LP192.35 TC 191. 85 FL 191.85 FL/HP 190.89 FL/LP1. 0%1.0% 1.0%197. 06 TC 196. 56 FL/HP PROP. 0" CURB TRANSITION 0" TO 6" CURB 197.38 TC/ FS 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 195.00 FL/HP PROP. 6" CURB GUTTER 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 195.40 FL/LP 2' CURB CUT 195. 46 FL 196. 20 FL/HP 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 197.38 TC 196.88 FS 1.0%195. 40 TG/LP 195.40 TG/ LP 196.20 FL/HP 196. 20 FL/HP 195.74 TG/ LP 196. 20 FL/HP 1.0%1. 0%1. 0%197.38 TC 196.88 FS 197. 38 TC 196. 88 FS 1. 0%1. 5%1.5% 1.5%193. 37 FS PROP. 6" CURB 195.5 TW 152.6 FS H=42.9' 195.5 TW 149.7 FS H=45.8' 195.5 TW 145.5 FS H=50' 196.2 TW 166.0 FS H=30.2' 197.0 TW 149.5 FS H=47.5' 196.3 TW 147.1 FS H=49.2' 192.4 TW 161.5 FG H=30.9' 196.4 TW 152.0 FG H= 44. 4' 196.5TW 150. 5 FG H= 46' 191. 4 TW 179. 4 FG H= 12' 193. 1 TW 193. 1FG H= 0' 197.0 TW 191. 0 FG H= 6' 197. 0TW 197.0 FGH= 0' 195. 5 TW 168.7 FS H= 26.8'196. 8 TW 174.2 FS H=22.6'197. 0 TW 178.0 FS H= 19'196. 5 TW 189.0 FG H= 7. 5' 196. 5 TW 190.5 FG H= 6.5' 195. 5 TW 147.8 FS H=47.7'195.5 TW 146.2 FSH=49.3' 193.3 TW 158. 2 FG H= 35. 1' 60' 2. 9%1651551601 5 0 180175170185190225 230 235220215210205200195 2 4 0 245250215220210205160 205 192 192 1 9 5 196 196196193 195 196 193193 250250245240235220225245250255250200 19319 4 205210193 197197 196 196 1951951951951931941951961501 9 6 192192 193 209 200149148196 19 5 19 6 195 194196 196 194 196 B A3A33 B3 F4 F4 G4G4C3C3D3D3E3E3203. 0 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XX X XXXXXX X XX SSS WWWWX X X X X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXX2 5 8 25725625625525525525525 4250250250250245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235235230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220215 215 215 215215215215215 215 215 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207207207206206 205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 520520520120020020020 0 200200200 200 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 19019019 0190 190190 190 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751 7 5 1 7 5 17517 5 175172 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145144144 144144144143143142 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 1 3 9 139138 13 8 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXTPORLOT1 S19 T18S R1W S.B.M. APN: 644-040-01 PM 14521 PM 14521 ROS 21570 MAP 5729 MAP6958F FFFFFFFFFFSSSWWWWFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F FFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F I RP W W W RP W W F WF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FFF SSSSSP W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S FFS S S S SSWWWWWWWWWSSSSSSSSSSSS P FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F F F F F F F F F SSS S S S 50' 40' SHINOHARA LANEPROPOSED INDUSTRIAL BLDG 197.50 FF EXIST. CROSS GUTTER PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSDD-75EXIST. CURB OUTLET 195.80 FL BROW DITCH 203.50 FL BROW DITCH 196.00 FL BROW DITCH 239.00 FL BROW DITCH 196.00 FL BROW DITCH 185.25 FL BROW DITCH PROP. MODIFIED TYPE D BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D- 75 PROP. PRIVATE WATER METER & BACKFLOW P/ L P/ LP/LP/L P/ LP/LP/ LP/LP/LP/L P/L R/ WR/WP/ LP/L P/ L PROPOSED ACCESS EASEMENT VACATE EXISTING RIGHT-OF- WAY EXISTING OPEN SPACE EASEMENT RECORDED JUNE 16, 1992 DOC#1992-0373004 EXIST. 12" ACP WATER PER DWG NO. 86- 478 PROP. BUILDING WATER P.O. C.EX. SMH 149.00 RIM 138.78 FL PROP. 6" SEWER @ 5.7% EXIST. 8" VCP SEWER PER DWG NO. 86-481 PROP. IRRIGATION METER PROP. PRIVATE 2" WATER EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP. SCO 141. 32 IE APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF RETAINING WALL GRID ZONE APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF RETAINING WALL GRID ZONE APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF RETAINING WALL GRID ZONE 2' CURB CUT 195.17 FL Q100= 0.4 CFS PROP. BUILDING SEWER P.O. C.189.50 IE PROP. SMH 182.02 IE PROP. 6" SEWER @ 1.0%PROP. SCO 147. 04 IE PROP. SCO 152.77 IE PROP. SCO 158.49 IE PROP. 6" SEWER @ 5.7%PROP. SCO 164. 21 IE PROP. SMH 169. 81 IEPROP. SMH 178.24 IE PROP. SCO 186.16IEPROP. SCO 187.16 IE PROP. SCO 188.16 IEPROP. SCO 189.16 IE PROP. SCO 189.29 IE 2' CURB CUT 195.46 FL Q100=0. 4 CFS PROP. PRIVATE BACKFLOW PREVENTOR PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROP.PRIVATE 8" PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROP. BUILDING FIRE P.O. C. PROP. PIV & FDC PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0.6%PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195.00 FL 191. 00 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 194.50 FL 190.50 IE OUT 182. 75 IE 24" OUT 184. 75 MID-FLOW WEIR 188. 25 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 4"-DIA LOW-FLOW ORIFICE 182. 75 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 196.10 FL 187.46 IE IN 187. 13 IE OUT PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0. 6%EXIST. TYPE F CATCH BASIN 146.35 RIM 143.67 IE PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0.6% PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 178. 40 IE IN 144.80 IE OUT BMP-2 MWS-L-8-24 ( UG)4.7' OPERATING HEAD 180.55 IE IN 180. 05 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 194.50 FL 190.50 IE OUT BMP- 5 TREE WELL, 195.25 FG AREA = 475 SF DEPTH = 4 FT VOLUME = 1,900 CF PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195.40 FL 191.40 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 191.51 IE IN 191.18 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 189.45 IE IN 189.12 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 188.02 IE IN 187.69 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 183. 44 IE IN (N) 184.49 IE IN (S) 183.11 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 186. 50 IE IN (6")185. 50 IE IN (18")185. 17 IE OUT (24") PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 186. 10 IE IN 185. 77 IE OUT BMP-1 OLDCASTLE STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM HEIGHT = 6 FT VOLUME = 35,824 CF VAULT IE = 182. 75 VAULT SOFIT = 188.75 VAULT TOP = 189. 33 SEE DETAIL 'I' SHEET 4 PROP. PUMP TO CURB OUTLET 182. 75 IE IN BMP-3 OLDCASTLE NSBB TRASH CAPTURE 6" PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE @ 1.0% MIN PROP. TYPE F CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-07 197. 13 RIM 196.00 FL 192. 00 IE OUT PROP. 24" HDPE @ 0.6%2' CURB CUT 172.00 FL PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 179. 95 IE IN 179.62 IE OUT BMP-4 MWS L-4-15 (PLANTED) WITH 3' CURB INLET OPENING 3.9' OPERATING HEAD 149. 70 FL PROP. CURB OUTLET PER SDRSD D-25A PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 196.10 FL 186.57 IE IN 186. 24 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 196.10 FL 188.35 IE IN 188. 02 IE OUT PROP. 24 HDPE @ 0.6%PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 194.60 FL 190. 60 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195.00 FL 191.00 IE OUT BMP- 6 TREE WELL 194.80 FG AREA = 415 SF DEPTH = 4 FT VOLUME = 1, 660 CF 6" CLEANOUT 191. 05 IE 6" CLEANOUT 191. 50 IE 6" CLEANOUT 192.30 IE 6" PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN PIPE @ 1.0% MIN 6" CLEANOUT 191.30 IE PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 191.30 IE IN 190. 97 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195.40 FL 191. 40 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 190.89 FL 186. 80 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 190.89 FL 186.80 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 189.30 IE IN 188. 97 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195.40 FL 191. 40 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 195. 74 FL 191. 70 IE OUT PROP. FIRE PUMP IN PUMP HOUSE PROP. 24" RCP SD ' A' SEE PROFILEDETAIL ' H' SHEET 4 1651551601 5 0 180175170185190225 230 235220215210205200195 240245250215220210205160 205 192 192 1 95 196 196196193 195 196 193 193 250250245240235220225245250255250200 19319 4 205210193 197197 196196 19519519519519319419519615019 6192192 193 209 200149148196 19 5 19 6 195 194196 196 194 196 PROP. SCO 184.51 IE PROP. 6" SEWER @ 2.5% PROP. 6" SEWER @ 2. 5% X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS S145 144 143142 141 141141 141 140 140 140 1 3 8 13813613513 513413 4 130PM 14521 ROS 21570 FFGG GGSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F 10'61'104' MAINSTREET 130'69'EXIST. 10' PUBLIC SEWER AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT OFFSITEEASEMENT AND LETTER OF PERMISSION TO GRADE FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERR/WC/LR/WP/L P/LEXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL EXIST. 12" AC WATER EX. SMH 132.50 FLEX. SMH 122.65 FL EXIST. 10" VCP SEWER EXIST. 8" VCP SEWER PER DWG NO. 86-481 EXIST. CURB OUTLET TO REMAIN EXIST. STREET LIGHT TO REMAIN EXIST. TELECOM PEDESTAL TO REMAIN EXIST. 6" HIGH PRESSURE GAS PROP. PRIVATE 8" FIRE PROPOSED BACKFLOW PREVENTOR EXIST. CURB OUTLET TO REMAIN REMARKSDESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTALDESIGN REVIEW RESUBMITTALDESIGN REVIEW RESUBMITTAL3690 MM GLDATE11/22/202102/ 14/202205/20/2022CHULA VISTA, CA 91911517 SHINOHARA LANESHINOHARA BUSINESSCENTERJOB NO.: DRAWN BY.: PA/ PM: SHEET CAUTION: IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 24" x36" IT IS A REDUCED PRINT ASSOCIATESPhone 858. 259. 8212 | www.plsaengineering. comSan Diego | Solana Beach | Orange CountyPRELIMINARY UTILITYPLANC7. 0MATCHLINE - SEE RIGHTMATCHLINE - SEE LEFTPRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN SCALE 1"= 30' I I I I i-' I 1111 \' 1 __ 1 __ - 1c_ --~ L rr I I I I_ I I I ! I I I I I Jt-------- t, J I FIRE I \ i I I T I 1 I \ \ 1 1 1 ,1\ I ' \ I \ \ y I I \ I \ mI1r1 Immm LlL... lllillillW I I I \ I I I I I I I I I I 1 -_ ~ r--_ ~ 1 ------:-_--=~--:.._=-~\ I I I I I I I 11 30' 15' 0 30' 60" 90' l~~ f-------1 __ 1-------<1 SCALE: 1" = 30' I I I I I I I j I I I I I I 7 I J.-I I ,\ J I I I X X )( X )( I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I \ I \ I \ I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I \ I I I I I I I I I L I I \ RD I I I I ' \ \ ,\\ \ \\\\,'\\\\ y',\\,\. T I I I I f--/ 7 I I \_ I J_ I II/ I I r~ l-+ l'-.--+ l --+- 1_------- h:--- 1 _ _:_ tc._ 1 1 i... J,L... I, _ 1 --...I, - - - I I I I I I J :} / ----I I - I I I I I I I I I J D I I I I I I I I \ I I I \ '-I I \ I I I I I I I I I I I I\ I I I I I I I I I r I l+------ jJ l,t---------- 1, ., / II / 111,,,,,,,, 111'===== 1 7 Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ ____________________________ _ ATTACHMENT 5 Drainage Report Attach project's drainage report. Refer to the Subdivision Manual to determine the reporting requirements. CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY For: Shinohara Business Center 517 Shinohara Lane Chula Vista, CA 91911 APN: 644-040-01 Project Permit # DR21-0032 Prepared By: 5-20-2022 Gregory W. Lang, P.E. RCE 68075 EXP: 06-30-23 Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, Inc. 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff By The Sea, CA 92007 Prepared for: VWP-OP Shinohara Owner, LLC 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 305 Phoenix, AZ 85016 May 20, 2022 PLSA Job No. 3690 PASCO LARET SUITER ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING+ LAND PLANNING+ LAND SURVEYING DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE I, hereby declare that I am the Engineer of Work for this project. That I have exercised responsible charge over the design of the project as defined in section 6703 of the business and professions code, and that the design is consistent with current standards. I understand that the check of project drawings and specifications by the County of San Diego is confined to a review only and does not relieve me, as engineer of work, of my responsibilities for project design. 05/20/2022 Gregory W. Lang DATE R.C.E. 68075 EXP. 6-30-23 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Pre-Project Conditions.................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Post-Project Conditions .................................................................................................................. 6 2. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 8 2.1 Rational Method ............................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Runoff Coefficient .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Rainfall Intensity .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Tributary Areas ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.5 Hydraulics .................................................................................................................................... 11 2.6 Curb Inlet and Catch Basin Sizing ............................................................................................... 11 2.7 Detention Basin Routing .............................................................................................................. 11 3. CALCULATIONS/RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Pre- & Post-Development Peak Flow Comparison ...................................................................... 13 3.2 Storm Water Quality..................................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Hydromodification ....................................................................................................................... 14 4. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 15 Appendix 1 ......................................... Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map Appendix 2 ........................................ Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map Appendix 3 .................................................................. Hydrology Design Summary Appendix 4 ........................................................ AES Rational Method Calculations Appendix 5 ........................................................... Modified-Puls Detention Routing 4 SITE -·· SH IINOHARA LANE VIC.INI Y MAP NO T TO SC.ALIE. 5 1. INTRODUCTION This Preliminary Drainage Study for the proposed Project Shinohara has been prepared to analyze the hydrologic characteristics of the existing and proposed project site. This report presents both the methodology and the calculations used for determining the storm water runoff from the project site in the existing and proposed conditions produced by the 100-year, 6-hour storm event. 1.1 Project Description The 9.73-acre project site consists of undeveloped land located northwest of the intersection of Brandywine Avenue and Shinohara Lane, at the end of Shinohara Lane in the City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California. The property is defined as a portion of Lot 1, Section 19, Township 18 South, Range 1 West, San Bernadino Meridian, and identified by the Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 644-040-01. The existing site is currently undeveloped except for minor concrete drainage channels located on site and along the eastern and southern property boundaries. The site is bounded on the north and west by residential properties, and on the east and south by industrial buildings. The existing site condition is divided into three (3) drainage basins, Basins Am B, and C, and three (3) separate discharge locations across the project site. Treatment of storm water runoff from the site has been addressed in a separate report- Storm Water Quality Management Plan for OnPoint Development, Project Shinohara by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022. Per City of Chula Vista general design criteria, the Modified Rational Method should be used to determine peak flowrates when the contributing drainage area is up to 1.0 square mile in size. All public and private drainage facilities shall be designed for a 100-year frequency storm. Methodology used for the computation of design rainfall events, runoff coefficients, and rainfall intensity values are consistent with the criteria set forth in Section 3 – General Design Criteria of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, revised March 2012. 1.2 Pre-Project Conditions Topographically, the site slopes steeply to the south from the northern property boundary, forming three 3) drainage basins with three (3) discharge locations. Existing Drainage Basin A comprises the western portion of the site. Runoff drains via overland flow to an existing concrete swale located at the southern property boundary. The drainage swale carries flow east to an existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. The catch basin connects to an existing private storm drain pipe that outlets via curb outlet onto Main Street. Existing Drainage Basin B comprises the eastern portion of the site. Runoff is conveyed via overland surface flow to an existing concrete drainage channel located at the southeastern corner of the site. The drainage channel conveys runoff south and outlets via curb outlet onto Main Street. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain pipe and outlets over headwall into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The site is not within a FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary or regulatory floodway. 6 Existing Drainage Basin C comprises the northwesterly portion of the site. Runoff is conveyed via overland surface flow to an existing swale west of the project site. Local surface runoff from the project site and surrounding properties collect in this area and flow to the south to an existing concrete drainage channel located in the rear yard of an existing single family residence at the end of Tanoak Court. The existing concrete channel flows to the south and then turns and flows to the west and discharges into Tanoak Court through two existing Type A curb outlets. Per the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey, the project site is Hydrologic Soil Group C and D. Refer to Appendix C of this report for the USDA Web Soil Survey and geotechnical findings. Table 1.1 below summarizes the pre-project condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map included in Appendix 1 of this report. TABLE 1.1 – Summary of Pre-Project Conditions Existing Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Time of Concentration, Tc (min) Intensity, I in/hr) Pre-Project Q100 (cfs) Basin A 2.79 0.55 9.15 4.70 7.20 Basin B 6.13 0.55 8.86 4.57 15.42 Basin C 0.79 0.55 4.77 6.32 2.78 Total 9.71 0.55 25.40 1.3 Post-Project Conditions The project will include the construction of an industrial building, paved drive aisles and parking areas, retaining walls, and other associated improvements. Private drainage improvements will consist of catch basins, curb inlets and storm drain pipes. Proprietary Modular Wetland Systems are proposed for storm water treatment. An underground detention vault is proposed for peak flow attenuation. The project will be accessed by a proposed driveway off Shinohara Lane. The proposed land use is ILP- Limited Industrial. The proposed site will consist of two (2) major drainage basins with two (2) discharge locations which match the existing drainage discharge points and pre-project peak flow rates for Existing Drainage Basins A and B. The proposed project’s area in the northwesterly corner of the project site that comprised Existing Drainage Basin C is proposed to be included in Proposed Drainage Basin A. This will enable the proposed project to collect and convey runoff from this location to the project’s peak flow detention facility and storm water treatment and no longer discharge runoff on an existing single family residential property. While the size of Proposed Drainage Basin A is larger than the size of Existing Drainage Basin A when comparing areas, the proposed project will provide peak flow detention so the peak flow runoff rate from this basin for the post-project condition will be equal to or less than the pre-project condition. Storm water runoff from a majority of the proposed development (DMA-A) is routed to a series of BMPs including a Contech CDS pretreatment unit, a StormTrap underground detention vault and a BioClean Modular Wetland System (MWS). The underground detention vault has been designed to meet 100-year peak flow detention requirements. The Modular Wetland System is designed as a proprietary biofiltration 7 BMP for storm water treatment. Outflows from the detention vault and MWS are discharged through a proposed storm drain pipe to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. Stormwater is then conveyed through the neighboring property to the south through an existing private storm drain and outlets onto Main Street as in existing conditions. Storm water runoff from the proposed driveway (DMA-B) will be drained to a Modular Wetland System for storm water treatment. The MWS will be designed with a 3-foot-wide curb inlet opening and a 1-inch local curb depression to capture the required water quality flow. Runoff that exceeds the water quality flow rate or capacity of the MWS will flow by the MWS and drain to the existing concrete drainage channel at the southeast corner of the project site. Outflows from the MWS will be pumped to a proposed curb outlet along the southern property boundary and discharged to the existing concrete drainage channel. The concrete drainage channel discharges onto Main Street via curb outlet as in existing conditions. The characteristics of existing stormwater flows through the neighboring property will not change as a result of the proposed project. Runoff from the cut slope at the northwest portion of the project site will be conveyed via proposed brow ditch to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. This area (DMA-C) is considered a Self-Mitigating DMA per Chapter 5.2.1 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. All project site runoff is discharged onto Main Street as in existing conditions. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain and outlets over headwall into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The Otay River is considered an exempt river reach per the WMAA; therefore, the project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. The underground detention vault has been designed to provide flow control in the form of volume reduction and peak flow attenuation. The vault has been modified to include a low-flow and mid-flow orifice outlet and an overflow weir to control peak flows. The required water quality treatment flow is diverted to the downstream Modular Wetland System in accordance with Worksheet B.5-5 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. Overflow relief for the 100-year storm event is provided with a partition weir installed within the vault and discharged directly to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. Table 1.2 below summarizes the post-project condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map included as an Attachment of this report. TABLE 1.2 – Summary of Post-Project Conditions Proposed Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Time of Concentration, Tc (min) Intensity, I in/hr) Post-Project Q100 (cfs) Required Detention cfs) Basin A 8.52 0.79 8.78 4.60 33.45 26.25 Basin B 1.19 0.80 5.55 6.07 5.77 -- Total 9.71 0.79 39.22 26.25 8 2. METHODOLOGY Runoff calculations for Project Shinohara have been performed in accordance with Section 3 – General Design Criteria of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual dated March 2012. Per City of City of Chula Vista design criteria, the Modified Rational Method should be used to determine peak flowrates for local drainage basins. Advanced Engineering Software (AES) were used to calculate the peak runoff from the 100-year, 6-hour storm event using the Rational Method. Please refer to this report’s Appendix for the results of these calculations. 2.1 Rational Method As mentioned above, runoff from the project site was calculated for the 100-year storm event. Runoff was calculated using the Rational Method which is given by the following equation: Q = C x I x A Where: Q = Flow rate in cubic feet per second (cfs) C = Runoff coefficient I = Rainfall Intensity in inches per hour (in/hr) A = Drainage basin area in acres, (ac) Rational Method calculations were performed using the AES 2008 computer program. To perform the hydrology routing, the total watershed area is divided into sub-areas which discharge at designated nodes. The procedure for the sub-area summation model is as follows: 1) Subdivide the watershed into an initial sub-areas and subsequent sub-areas, which are generally less than 10 acres in size. Assign upstream and downstream node numbers to each sub-area. 2) Estimate an initial Tc by using the appropriate nomograph or overland flow velocity estimation. The minimum Tc considered is 5.0 minutes. All Tc values for the proposed project were assumed to be 5 minutes due to the small size of each contributing drainage area. 3) Using the initial Tc, determine the corresponding values of I. Then Q = CIA. 4) Using Q, estimate the travel time between this node and the next by Manning’s equation as applied to particular channel or conduit linking the two nodes. Then, repeat the calculation for Q based on the revised intensity (which is a function of the revised time of concentration) 9 2.2 Runoff Coefficient In accordance with City of Chula Vista design standards, runoff coefficients were based on land use. An appropriate runoff coefficient (C) for each type of land use in the subarea was selected from Section 3- 203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual and multiplied by the percentage of total area (A) included in that class. The sum of products for all land uses is the weighted runoff coefficient ([C]). See Tables 2.1 and 2.2 below for weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. The Pre-Project and Post- Project Condition Hydrology Node Maps show the drainage basin subareas, on-site drainage system and nodal points. Runoff coefficients of 0.55 and 0.60 were selected from Section 3-203.3 for hilly and steep vegetated slopes, consistent with existing conditions. The existing site is assumed to be 0% impervious. See Table 2.1 below for pre-project condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. In the post-project condition, the developed site was assigned a runoff coefficient of 0.85 for commercial area. Developed slopes along the northern and southern property boundary were classified as steep per Section 3-203.3 and assigned a runoff coefficient of 0.60. See Table 2.2 on the following page for post- project condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. TABLE 2.1- Summary of Pre-Project Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Pre-Project Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 10 11 0.04 0.55 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.55 11 12 2.75 0.55 2.75 0.60 0.00 0.55 20 21 0.09 0.55 0.09 0.60 0.00 0.55 21 22 6.01 0.55 6.01 0.60 0.00 0.55 30 31 0.08 0.55 0.08 0.60 0.00 0.55 31 32 0.72 0.55 0.72 0.60 0.00 0.55 Note: C values taken from Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual Runoff Coefficient of 0.55 for Vegetated Slopes, Hilly Runoff Coefficient of 0.60 for Vegetated Slopes, Steep 10 TABLE 2.2- Summary of Post-Project Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Post-Project Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 100 101 0.04 0.85 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.85 101 102 0.34 0.85 0.34 0.60 0.00 0.85 103 103 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 104 104 0.38 0.85 0.38 0.60 0.00 0.85 105 105 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 106 106 0.41 0.85 0.41 0.60 0.00 0.85 107 107 0.14 0.85 0.14 0.60 0.00 0.85 107 107 0.39 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.39 0.60 108 108 0.12 0.85 0.12 0.60 0.00 0.85 109 109 0.12 0.85 0.12 0.60 0.00 0.85 110 110 0.11 0.85 0.11 0.60 0.00 0.85 111 111 0.06 0.85 0.06 0.60 0.00 0.85 112 112 0.29 0.85 0.29 0.60 0.00 0.85 113 113 0.27 0.85 0.27 0.60 0.00 0.85 114 114 0.94 0.85 0.94 0.60 0.00 0.85 115 115 0.80 0.85 0.80 0.60 0.00 0.85 117 118 0.04 0.85 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.85 118 119 0.34 0.85 0.34 0.60 0.00 0.85 120 120 0.08 0.85 0.08 0.60 0.00 0.85 121 121 0.22 0.85 0.22 0.60 0.00 0.85 122 122 0.38 0.85 0.38 0.60 0.00 0.85 123 123 0.35 0.85 0.35 0.60 0.00 0.85 124 124 0.19 0.85 0.19 0.60 0.00 0.85 125 125 0.11 0.85 0.11 0.60 0.00 0.85 126 126 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 127 127 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 128 128 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 129 129 0.37 0.85 0.37 0.60 0.00 0.85 131 131 0.84 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.84 0.60 136 136 0.25 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.25 0.60 200 201 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 201 202 1.03 0.85 0.79 0.60 0.24 0.79 Note: C values taken from Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual Runoff Coefficient of 0.85 for Commercial Area Runoff Coefficient of 0.60 for Vegetated Slopes, Steep 11 2.3 Rainfall Intensity Rainfall intensity is calculated per Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, which is given by the following equation: I = 7.44P6D-0.645 Where: I = Rainfall Intensity in inches per hour (in/hr) P6 = Adjusted 6-hour storm precipitation D = Duration in minutes (use Tc) The intensity values for varying time of concentrations were input manually into the AES computer program where runoff calculations were performed. The 6-hour storm rainfall amount (P6) for the 100- year storm frequency was determined using City of Chula Vista Isopluvial Maps provided from Figure 7 of the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan. The P6 for the 100-year storm frequency was found as 2.4 inches. See Appendix 3 of this report for Isopluvial maps for the 100-year rainfall event. 2.4 Tributary Areas Drainage basins for the existing and proposed project site are delineated in the Pre-Project and Post- Project Condition Hydrology Node Maps located in Appendix 1 and 2 of this report and graphically portray the tributary area for each drainage basin. 2.5 Hydraulics The hydraulics of existing and proposed storm drain pipes were analyzed using the AES computer program. For pipe flow, a Manning’s N value of 0.011 was used to reflect the use of HDPE pipe. A Manning’s N value of 0.013 was used to reflect the use of RCP pipe. 2.6 Curb Inlet and Catch Basin Sizing Curb inlets and catch basins will be sized in accordance with City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual March 2012) upon final engineering. 2.7 Detention Basin Routing The detention facility was modeled using the Army Corps of Engineers HEC-HMS 4.3 software. Hydraulic Modified-Puls detention routing was performed to analyze the developed condition 100-year peak flow rate at the project’s detention system. Stage-storage-discharge tables were generated and input into HEC-HMS to model the design of the vault outlet structure. This procedure was selected in order to model the flow control requirements and to accurately represent the middle stages of the BMP for accurate mid-flow orifice and emergency weir sizing. The stage-storage-discharge tables have been provided in Appendix 5. The HEC-HMS Modified-Puls results are summarized in Table 2.3 on the following page. 12 TABLE 2.3- Summary of Detention Basin Routing Detention Basin Tributary Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Inflow Tc min)1 100-Year Peak Inflow cfs) Outflow Tc (min) 100-Year Peak Outflow cfs) Peak Elevation ft)2 BMP-1 8.27 0.85 10 33.45 19 6.99 5.37 Notes: (1) Inflow time of concentration rounded to the nearest time interval that HEC-HMS could accept 2) Peak elevation measured from the invert of the mid-flow orifice A Rational method inflow hydrograph was generated using RickRat Hydro software from Rick Engineering. The parameters of the drainage area were entered into RickRat Hydro software to generate an inflow hydrograph. The data from this hydrograph was then entered into HEC-HMS software to model the release rates from the detention system. HEC-HMS allows for hydrology input time steps of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 15 & 20 minutes. Rick Rat Hydro requires a minimum time of concentration (Tc) of 5 minutes. Therefore, the time of concentration (Tc) used for the concentration of the hydrograph was rounded to the nearest time interval that RickRat Hydro and HEC-HMS could accept. The time of concentration used is 10 minutes. The peak flow remains as per the modified Rational Method analysis and is not reduced (or increased) from this hydrograph development accordingly. Rational method hydrographs, stage-storage-discharge relationships and HEC-HMS model output is provided in Appendix 5 of this report. 13 3. CALCULATIONS/RESULTS 3.1 Pre- & Post-Development Peak Flow Comparison Below are a series of tables which summarize the calculations provided in the appendices of this report. Table 3.1 itemizes the pre-project condition peak flow rates for the 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.1- Pre-Project Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Pre-Project Q100 (cfs) Basin A 2.79 0.55 7.20 Basin B 6.13 0.55 15.42 Basin C 0.79 0.55 2.78 Total 9.71 0.55 25.40 Table 3.2 itemizes the post-project and detained condition peak flow rates for the 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.2- Proposed Post-Project Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Post-Project Condition Q100 (cfs) Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) Basin A 8.52 0.79 33.45 7.17 Basin B 1.19 0.80 5.77 5.77 Total 9.71 0.79 39.22 12.94 Table 3.3 shows that the total storm water peak flow for the proposed development is less than the existing storm water peak flow for the 100-year rainfall event. TABLE 3.3- Pre-Project Vs. Post-Project Detained Condition Peak Flow Summary Pre-Project Condition Q100 cfs) Post-Project Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) Pre-Project Vs. Post-Project Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) 25.40 12.94 -12.46 14 3.2 Storm Water Quality The proposed site will include Modular Wetland Systems that will provide the required storm water quality treatment for the project. For information regarding BMP sizing and the water quality design, refer to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022, under separate cover. 3.3 Hydromodification The project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. For additional information regarding hydromodification exemption, refer to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022, under separate cover. 15 4. CONCLUSION This report analyzed the 100-year storm event hydrology for the proposed site using the Advanced Engineering Software (AES) and demonstrates that the post-developed peak flow rates are less than the pre-developed peak flow rates at the project’s two existing discharge locations. In addition, the proposed storm drain system was sized adequately to convey the proposed project’s runoff and supporting calculations can be found in the appendices of this report. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site. In addition, the proposed project will not increase the peak runoff rate for the post-project condition when compared to the pre-project condition. The project is not within the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary as mapped on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Appendix 1 Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X X X XX XXXXXXXXX X X SSSSSS WWWWWX X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXX2 5 8 2582572562562562562552552552552552 5 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235 235 235230230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 216 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207 2072072 07 206206 205205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200 200200 200 20 0 200200200 200 200200 1 9 5 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 19019019 0190 190190 190 189 18 9 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751751 7 5 1 7 5 17517 5 175172 170 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160 160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145145144 144144144144144143 143142 142 141 141141 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 139 1 3 9 139138 13 8 138 BASIN A 20 21 0.31 P/LP/ LP/ L L 7 5 L= 1, 062'22 15.4 A= 6.05 C= 0.55 A= 0.09 C= 0.55 POR LOT 1 S19 T18S R1W S. B.M.PM 14521PM 14521 ROS 21570 MAP 5729 MAP 6958 BASIN B L= 72' 10 11 0.13 L= 500'12 7. 20 13 7.20 A=0.04 C= 0.55 A= 2.75 C= 0.55 L= 224'SHINOHARA LANETIMBERSTREETEXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. STORM DRAIN INLET EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 255. 0 FG)231. 0 FG)149. 0 FG)215. 5 FG) 213. 0 FG)EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 149. 0 FG)EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 143.67 FL)EXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL EXIST. D- 25 CURB OUTLET EXIST. CROSS GUTTER EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE P/ L 30 31 0.28 L= 75'L=83' A=0.08 C= 0.55 A=0.72 C=0.55 32 2.78 234.0 FG)207.0 FG)220.0 FG)BASIN C PRE-PROJECT CONDITION HYDROLOGY NODE MAP SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 MAY 2022 ASSOCIATES Phone 858.259.8212 | www.plsaengineering.com San Diego | Solana Beach | Orange County HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER > 20 FT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA: 9.73 AC EXISTING DRAINAGE BOUNDARY: 9.71 AC EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 0 AC EXISTING PERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA: 9.71 AC DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LEGEND RIGHT-OF-WAY BASIN BOUNDARY FLOWLINESUB- BASIN BOUNDARY SUB- BASIN AREA HYDROLOGY NODE 101.00 A=0.10 Q100 ( CFS)PROPERTY LINE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT C= 0. 55 RUNOFF COEFFICIENT R/ W P/ L DRAINAGE BASIN IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, C 100-YEAR EXISTING PEAK FLOW (CFS)BASIN A 0.00 0.0% 0.55 7.20 DRAINAGE AREA (AC)2. 79 SUMMARY OFEXISTINGCONDITION 100-YEAR PEAKFLOWSBASIN B 15. 426.13 BASIN C 2.780. 79 0. 00 0. 00 0.0%0.0%0.55 0.55 TOTAL 25.409.71 0.00 0.0%0.55 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 - GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBDIVISION MANUAL, RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS WERE BASED ON LAND USE. AN APPROPRIATE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WAS SELECTED FROM SECTION 3-203.3 AND MULTIPLIED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA IN THAT CLASS. THE SUM OF THE PRODUCTS FOR ALL LAND USES IS THE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT.SEE TABLE 2.1 OF THE "PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA" BY PLSA DATED FEBRUARY 2022 Appendix 2 Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X X X XX XXXXXXXXX X X SSSSSS WWWWWX X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXX2 5 8 2582572562562562562552552552552552 5 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235 235 235230230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 216 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207 207207207 206206 205205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200 200200 20020 0 200200200 200 200200 1 9 5 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 190190 190190 190190 190 189 18 9 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751751 7 5 1 7 5 1751 75 175172 170 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160 160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145145144 144144144144144143 143142 142 141 141141 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 139 1 3 9 139138 138 138 TX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSSSSSSWWWWWP BASIN A INDUSTRIALBLDG 197.50 FF BASIN B SHINOHARA LANETIMBERSTREETA=0. 39 C=0. 60 111 10. 5 133 6. 99 A=0. 14 C=0. 85 L=118' 136 7.17 A=0.20 C=0.85 A=0.94 C=0.85 A=0.16 C= 0.85 201 0. 48 L= 100'L= 718' L=102' L=94'L= 110'L=155' L= 203'129 11.2 A= 1.03 C= 0. 79 202 5. 77 A=0. 34 C=0. 85 100 102 1.96 103 2.98 104 4.80 A= 0.38 C= 0.85 A= 0.41 C=0.85 L= 103' 110 10. 5 L=106' 113 12.6 L=49'L= 53'L=19' 114 16.3 A=0.29 C=0.85 A=0.27 C=0.85 A=0.80 C=0.85 A=0.34 C= 0.85 A= 0.38 C=0.85 A=0.35 C=0.85 123 6.76 124 7.62 L= 103'L= 59'L= 33'A=0. 22 C=0. 85 125 8. 15 130 11.2 L=67'A= 0.37 C= 0. 85 L= 105'135 6.99 L= 76'A=0. 04 C=0. 85 101 0. 21 L=50' L= 47'A= 0.25 C= 0.60 109 10.2 A= 0.20 C= 0.85 108 9.87 A= 0.12 C= 0. 85 L= 94'A=0. 12 C=0. 85 A=0. 11 C=0. 85 L=31' L= 118'117 119 1.96 A=0.04 C=0.85 118 0.21 L=50'A= 0.19 C= 0.85 126 8.60 127 9.10 L= 42L= 73'A= 0.11 C=0. 85 A= 0. 16 C= 0. 85A=0.16 C= 0. 85 A= 0. 20 C= 0.85 116 33.5 L= 104'L=29'L= 28' L=29' L=50' 105 5.72 106 7. 65L= 54'L= 70' 107 9. 52 115 19. 5 L=51' 112 11.7 120 2.24121 3.32 122 5.18 L= 42' 128 9.91 L=108' 131 14. 21346.99 A= 0.06 C=0. 85 A= 0. 08 C=0. 60 A= 0. 84 C= 0. 85 200 132 33. 5 P/L P/ LP/ LP/ L P/LP/ LP/ LP/ LP/ L P/ L P/ L P/ LP/LR/ WR/W1651551601 5 0 180175170185190225 230 235220215210205200195 240245250215220210205160 205 19219219 5 196 196196193 195 194 193 193 250250245240235220225245250255250200 19319 4 205210193 197197 196 196 1951951951951931941951961501 9 6 192 192 193 196 209 200149148196 19 5 19 6 149.11 FS) 182.75 IE 190.57 IE189.94 IE 189.73 IE 186.51 IE 192.50 IE 194.20 IE 193.70 IE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. TYPEB BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. BROW DITCHEXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL PROP. CURB OUTLET 192.50 IE 194.20 IE 193.70 IE 188.68 IE 185.12 IE POC- 2 POC-1 EXIST. CURB OUTLETEXIST. CROSS GUTTER PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 179. 95 IE IN 179. 62 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 191. 30 IE IN 190. 97 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 187.46 IE IN 187.13 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 185.50 IE IN 185.17 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D-09 191.51 IE IN 191.18 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 188.02 IE IN 187.69 IE OUT EXIST. TYPE F CATCH BASIN 146.35 RIM 143.67 IE PROP. MOD. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 178.40 IE IN 144.80 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D- 09 183.44 IE IN (N)184. 49 IE IN ( S)183.11 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O. PER SDRSD D-09 186.10 IE IN 185.77 IE OUT 190.35 IE 184.87 IE 183.93 IE 2' CURB CUT TO DRAIN BROW DITCH 172.00 FL BMP-2 MWS-L- 8-24 UNDERGROUND) 4.7' OPERATING HEAD 180.55 IE IN 180.05 IE OUT BMP-4 MWS L-4-15 ( PLANTED) WITH CURB INLET OPENING 3. 9' OPERATING HEAD 149. 90 FL PROP. PUMP TO CURB OUTLET 190. 05 IE PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 188.35 IE IN 188.02 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G- 1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 186. 57 IE IN 186. 24 IE OUT 183. 63 IE PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D- 09 189.06 IE IN 188. 73 IE OUT 187.44 IE 189.72 IE PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 189.30 IE IN 188.97 IE OUT 184.25 IE 190.82 IE 196. 50 FS 192.61 FS BMP-1 STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM HEIGHT = 6 FT VOLUME = 35, 824 CF VAULT IE = 182.75 VAULT SOFIT = 188.75VAULTTOP = 189. 33 SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET 182.75 IE 24" OUT 184.75 MID- FLOW WEIR 188. 25 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 4"-DIA LOW- FLOW ORIFICE 182.75 IE OUT BMP-1OLDCASTLE STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM5.5' 2'6'SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 2. 75' L x 0.25' H MID-FLOW WEIR 24" HDPE SD OUTFLOW PIPE 14'24" HDPE OUTFLOW SD 182.75 IE OUT Q100 DETAINED = 6. 99 CFS2' 5. 5'6'182.75 IE OUT 184. 75 IE 188. 25 IE 14' L EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 184. 75 IE 24" HDPE INFLOW SD 182. 75 IE IN Q100 = 33. 45 CFS Q100 = 33.45 CFS PEAK ELEV. = 5.37'5.37' 2 0 5 200 19 5190 18518518018017517016 5 DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LEGEND HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER > 20 FT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA:9.73 AC PROPOSED DRAINAGE BOUNDARY: 9. 71 AC PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA:9. 67 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA:8. 03 AC PROPOSEDPERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA: 1. 64 AC POST-PROJECT CONDITION HYDROLOGY NODE MAP SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 MAY 2022 RIGHT-OF- WAY PROPERTY LINE R/ W P/L BASIN BOUNDARY FLOWLINE SUB-BASIN AREA HYDROLOGY NODE 1001.00 A=0. 10 POST-PROJECT DETAINED Q100 (CFS)WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT C=0.85 SUB-BASIN BOUNDARY RUNOFF COEFFICIENTDRAINAGEBASIN IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, CPOST-PROJECT Q100 (CFS) BASIN A 7. 36 86. 4%0. 83 33. 45 DRAINAGE AREA (AC)8.52 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CONDITION 100-YEAR PEAK FLOWS BASIN B 0.68 56.8%0.80 5.771.19 TOTAL 8.03 82.7%0.83 39.229.71 POST-PROJECT DETAINED Q100 (CFS) 7. 17 5. 77 12. 94 NOTE: UNMITIGATED PEAK FLOW IS THE POST- PROJECT PEAK FLOW THAT HAS NOT BEEN REDUCED FROM DETENTION ROUTING.MITIGATED PEAK FLOW IS THE POST-PROJECT PEAK FLOW THAT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY ROUTING FLOW THROUGH THE PROJECT'S DETENTION FACILITY. POC POC-1 POC-2 AAB B BMP-1 STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM DETAIL NOT TO SCALE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 -GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBDIVISION MANUAL, RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS WERE BASED ON LAND USE. AN APPROPRIATE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WAS SELECTED FROM SECTION 3-203. 3 AND MULTIPLIED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA IN THAT CLASS. THE SUM OF THE PRODUCTS FOR ALL LANDUSES IS THE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT.SEE TABLE 2. 2 OF THE " PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA, ONPOINT DEVELOMENT" BY PLSA DATED MAY 2022 FOR POST- PROJECT CONDITION WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICEINT " C" CALCULATIONS.I 7 l7 l J c--- 1)- L'-_:-', ;;,-......_[ ) I r I -I r ~ L I 1 +-+-1' I..-+\:-+-+-) I ! I I J I f J I• ----=----------- --I I I I I I I I I II I ~ I I . I I I I . I' L ~ I_ I/ =' 40' 20' 0 I~~ I I I I I I I I • K• \ I --,/;t!F" i1r I I I I I 40' 80' 120' I 1-____,, SCALE: 1" = 40' C) I I IJL.JIII. III.IWJ I I I I C) @ C) \ RD RD @ C) \ N3 RD RD RD Appendix 3 Hydrology Design Summary Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area , California Map Scale: 1 :1,500 ifprinted onAportrait(8.5"x 11") sheet Meters 0 2) 40 8J 12l feet 0 50 100 200 :m Map projection : 'Neb Men::ator Comer coordinates : WGS84 Edge tics : lJTM Zone llN WGS84 USDA Natural Resources = Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/23/2021 Page 1 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) D Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons D A D A/D DB D B/D D C CID D D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C CID D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service C CID D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning : Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale . Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required . This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area : San Diego County Area , California Survey Area Data : Version 15, May 27, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1 :50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed : Aug 22, 2018-Aug 31,2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 9/23/2021 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area , California Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI OhE Olivenhain cobbly loam , D 7 .5 9 to 30 percent slopes SbC Salinas clay loam, 2 to 9 C 3.0 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 10.5 Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation , are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A , B , C , and D) and three dual classes (AID , B/D , and C/D). The groups are defined as follows : Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture . These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission . Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission . Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential , soils that have a high water table , soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission . If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, B/D , or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes . Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 71 .3% 28.7% 100.0% 9/23/2021 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California ii Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/23/2021 Page 4 of 4 Appendix 4 AES Rational Method Calculations RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2008 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 15.0 Release Date: 04/01/2008 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101 SUITE A SOLANA BEACH CA 92705 FILE NAME: 3690E100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 12:51 02/24/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 11.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 72.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 215.50 100-YEAR PRE-PROJECT CONDITION DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 213.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 2.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 5.548 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.073 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.13 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11.00 TO NODE 12.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 213.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 500.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1280 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 10.00 "Z" FACTOR = 20.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.695 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.76 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.76 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.11 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 3.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.57 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.75 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.10 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 7.20 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.16 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.33 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 12.00 = 572.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 12.00 TO NODE 13.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 224.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0238 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 2.50 "Z" FACTOR = 2.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 7.20 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.48 FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.35 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 9.15 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 13.00 = 796.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 21.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 255.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 231.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 24.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.980 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 22.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 231.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 1062.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0772 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 5.00 "Z" FACTOR = 10.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.565 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 8.20 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.63 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.29 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 4.88 Tc(MIN.) = 8.86 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 6.05 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 15.19 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 15.42 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.39 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 22.00 = 1137.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 31.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 234.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 220.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 14.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.980 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 31.00 TO NODE 32.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 220.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 207.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 83.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1566 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 20.00 "Z" FACTOR = 8.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.53 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.75 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.79 Tc(MIN.) = 4.77 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.72 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.50 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.78 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.06 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 32.00 = 158.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 TC(MIN.) = 4.77 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.78 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: FILE NAME: 3690P100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:19 05/20/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.05 Tc(MIN.) = 5.60 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.047 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.03 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.98 TC(MIN.) = 5.60 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.61 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.98 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 300.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.877 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.80 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.26 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 6.14 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 105.00 = 350.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.805 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.99 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.72 TC(MIN.) = 6.14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.72 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 404.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.729 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.65 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.65 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 6.50 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 107.00 = 474.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.67 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.20 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8036 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.39 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.52 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 102.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.52 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 6.77 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 576.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.517 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8061 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.87 TC(MIN.) = 6.77 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.46 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.87 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 109.00 = 670.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.404 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8083 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.55 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.22 TC(MIN.) = 7.02 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.13 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.38 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 764.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.293 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8102 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.51 TC(MIN.) = 7.26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 106.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.83 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 111.00 = 870.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.175 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8112 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.06 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.54 TC(MIN.) = 7.52 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.17 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 49.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.50 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.54 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 7.64 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 919.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.117 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8152 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.29 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.68 TC(MIN.) = 7.64 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 104.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.55 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.68 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 113.00 = 1023.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.997 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8182 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.15 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 12.55 TC(MIN.) = 7.91 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 53.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.66 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 12.55 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 8.04 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1076.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.936 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8257 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.94 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 16.34 TC(MIN.) = 8.04 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 51.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 16.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.09 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 16.34 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 8.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 115.00 = 1127.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.882 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8297 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.80 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 19.48 TC(MIN.) = 8.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 31.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.39 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 19.48 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 10 MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 118.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.20 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 5.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.045 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8065 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.24 TC(MIN.) = 5.61 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 191.18 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.24 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.22 Tc(MIN.) = 5.83 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 256.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.944 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8206 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TC(MIN.) = 5.83 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.85 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.32 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 298.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.878 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8311 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.18 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.35 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.18 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 401.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.732 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8358 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.71 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.76 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.73 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.76 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.09 Tc(MIN.) = 6.39 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 434.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.690 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8375 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.19 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.62 TC(MIN.) = 6.39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1289.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.06 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 47.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 131.47 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.62 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 6.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 125.00 = 481.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.687 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8383 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.53 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.15 TC(MIN.) = 6.40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 73.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.15 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.46 Tc(MIN.) = 6.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 126.00 = 554.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.477 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8393 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.74 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.60 TC(MIN.) = 6.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 110.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.60 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.30 Tc(MIN.) = 7.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 127.00 = 664.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.338 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8401 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.10 TC(MIN.) = 7.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.69 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.10 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 7.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 128.00 = 706.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.286 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8410 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.91 TC(MIN.) = 7.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 155.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.36 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.91 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.41 Tc(MIN.) = 7.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 129.00 = 861.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.100 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8423 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.17 TC(MIN.) = 7.68 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 130.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 67.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.57 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 7.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 130.00 = 928.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.77 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 108.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.28 Tc(MIN.) = 8.13 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 1036.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.897 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8442 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.84 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.22 TC(MIN.) = 8.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.49 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 105.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.96 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 8.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 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 14.22 8.38 4.783 3.44 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 19.48 8.23 4.850 4.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 33.45 8.23 4.850 2 33.43 8.38 4.783 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 33.45 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.2 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 132.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.11 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 19.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.97 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 132.00 = 1177.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 134.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.95 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 24.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 134.00 = 1205.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 134.00 TO NODE 135.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 203.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 30.0 INCH PIPE IS 22.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.46 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 30.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.40 Tc(MIN.) = 8.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 135.00 = 1408.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 135.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 76.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 17.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.06 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.11 Tc(MIN.) = 8.78 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 136.00 = 1484.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 136.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.600 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8288 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 33.45 TC(MIN.) = 8.78 NOTE: PEAK FLOW RATE DEFAULTED TO UPSTREAM VALUE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 196.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.89 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.861 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 61 COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.11 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 718.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 36.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 1.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section = 0.0200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.35 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.16 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.45 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.21 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.69 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.071 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7900 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.798 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.03 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.64 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.06 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.56 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 818.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TC(MIN.) = 5.55 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: FILE NAME: 3690D100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:19 05/20/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.05 Tc(MIN.) = 5.60 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.047 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.03 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.98 TC(MIN.) = 5.60 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.61 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.98 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 300.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.877 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.80 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.26 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 6.14 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 105.00 = 350.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.805 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.99 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.72 TC(MIN.) = 6.14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.72 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 404.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.729 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.65 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.65 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 6.50 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 107.00 = 474.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.67 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.20 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8036 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.39 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.52 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 102.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.52 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 6.77 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 576.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.517 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8061 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.87 TC(MIN.) = 6.77 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.46 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.87 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 109.00 = 670.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.404 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8083 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.55 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.22 TC(MIN.) = 7.02 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.13 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.38 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 764.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.293 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8102 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.51 TC(MIN.) = 7.26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 106.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.83 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 111.00 = 870.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.175 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8112 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.06 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.54 TC(MIN.) = 7.52 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.17 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 49.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.50 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.54 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 7.64 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 919.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.117 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8152 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.29 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.68 TC(MIN.) = 7.64 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 104.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.55 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.68 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 113.00 = 1023.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.997 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8182 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.15 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 12.55 TC(MIN.) = 7.91 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 53.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.66 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 12.55 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 8.04 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1076.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.936 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8257 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.94 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 16.34 TC(MIN.) = 8.04 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 51.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 16.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.09 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 16.34 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 8.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 115.00 = 1127.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.882 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8297 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.80 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 19.48 TC(MIN.) = 8.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 31.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.39 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 19.48 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 10 MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 118.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.20 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 5.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.045 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8065 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.24 TC(MIN.) = 5.61 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 191.18 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.24 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.22 Tc(MIN.) = 5.83 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 256.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.944 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8206 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TC(MIN.) = 5.83 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.85 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.32 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 298.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.878 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8311 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.18 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.35 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.18 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 401.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.732 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8358 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.71 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.76 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.73 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.76 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.09 Tc(MIN.) = 6.39 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 434.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.690 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8375 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.19 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.62 TC(MIN.) = 6.39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1289.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.06 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 47.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 131.47 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.62 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 6.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 125.00 = 481.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.687 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8383 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.53 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.15 TC(MIN.) = 6.40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 73.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.15 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.46 Tc(MIN.) = 6.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 126.00 = 554.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.477 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8393 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.74 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.60 TC(MIN.) = 6.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 110.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.60 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.30 Tc(MIN.) = 7.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 127.00 = 664.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.338 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8401 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.10 TC(MIN.) = 7.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.69 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.10 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 7.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 128.00 = 706.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.286 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8410 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.91 TC(MIN.) = 7.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 155.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.36 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.91 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.41 Tc(MIN.) = 7.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 129.00 = 861.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.100 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8423 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.17 TC(MIN.) = 7.68 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 130.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 67.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.57 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 7.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 130.00 = 928.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.77 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 108.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.28 Tc(MIN.) = 8.13 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 1036.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.897 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8442 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.84 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.22 TC(MIN.) = 8.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.49 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 105.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.96 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 8.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 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 14.22 8.38 4.783 3.44 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 19.48 8.23 4.850 4.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 33.45 8.23 4.850 2 33.43 8.38 4.783 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 33.45 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.2 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 132.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.11 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 19.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.97 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 132.00 = 1177.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 133.00 IS CODE = 7 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY INFORMATION AT NODE<<<<< USER-SPECIFIED VALUES ARE AS FOLLOWS: TC(MIN) = 19.00 RAIN INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.27 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.99 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 134.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.95 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.82 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.03 Tc(MIN.) = 19.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 134.00 = 1205.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 134.00 TO NODE 135.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 203.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.82 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 19.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 135.00 = 1408.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 135.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 76.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.16 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 19.76 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 136.00 = 1484.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 136.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.611 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.3224 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.17 TC(MIN.) = 19.76 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 196.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.89 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.861 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 61 COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.11 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 718.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 36.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 1.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section = 0.0200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.35 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.16 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.45 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.21 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.69 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.071 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7900 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.798 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.03 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.64 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.06 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.56 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 818.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TC(MIN.) = 5.55 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Appendix 5 Modified-Puls Detention Routing RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 5/20/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.4 INCHES BASIN AREA 8.27 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 33.45 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 10 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 20 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 40 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 50 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 70 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 80 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 100 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 110 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 130 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 140 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.8 TIME (MIN) = 160 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 170 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.1 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.2 TIME (MIN) = 190 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.5 TIME (MIN) = 200 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.8 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.4 TIME (MIN) = 220 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.8 TIME (MIN) = 230 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 5.6 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.9 TIME (MIN) = 250 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 33.45 TIME (MIN) = 260 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.5 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3 TIME (MIN) = 280 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.4 TIME (MIN) = 290 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 310 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 320 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 340 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 350 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 370 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 Outlet Structure for Discharge of BMP-1 Discharge vs. Elevation Table Low-flow orifice Slot orifice Emergency Overflow No.:1 No.:1 Invert:5.5 ft Invert:0 ft Invert:2.00 ft L:14 ft Dia:4 in Length: 2.75 ft Cw:3.1 Dia:0.33 ft Height 0.25 ft Tank Dimensions A:0.087 sq.ft. A:0.69 sq.ft Area:5,971 sq.ft. Co:0.6 Co:0.6 Height:6 ft Total Vol:35,824 cu.ft. Note: h = head above the invert of the lowest surface discharge opening. Elev h* Volume Qorifice-low Qslot-mid Qemerg Qtotal ft) (ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 182.75 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.000 0.0000 183.00 0.25 0.0343 0.1292 0.000 0.000 0.1292 183.25 0.50 0.0685 0.2712 0.000 0.000 0.2712 183.50 0.75 0.1028 0.3431 0.000 0.000 0.3431 183.75 1.00 0.1371 0.4023 0.000 0.000 0.4023 184.00 1.25 0.1713 0.4539 0.000 0.000 0.4539 184.25 1.50 0.2056 0.5001 0.000 0.000 0.5001 184.50 1.75 0.2399 0.5425 0.000 0.000 0.5425 184.75 2.00 0.2741 0.5817 0.000 0.000 0.5817 185.00 2.25 0.3084 0.6185 1.433 0.000 2.0519 185.25 2.50 0.3427 0.6532 2.190 0.000 2.8428 185.50 2.75 0.3769 0.6862 2.745 0.000 3.4309 185.75 3.00 0.4112 0.7176 3.205 0.000 3.9228 186.00 3.25 0.4455 0.7477 3.607 0.000 4.3550 186.25 3.50 0.4797 0.7767 3.969 0.000 4.7456 186.50 3.75 0.5140 0.8046 4.300 0.000 5.1048 186.75 4.00 0.5483 0.8316 4.608 0.000 5.4393 187.00 4.25 0.5825 0.8577 4.896 0.000 5.7537 187.25 4.50 0.6168 0.8831 5.168 0.000 6.0513 187.50 4.75 0.6511 0.9077 5.427 0.000 6.3345 187.75 5.00 0.6853 0.9317 5.674 0.000 6.6053 188.00 5.25 0.7196 0.9551 5.910 0.000 6.8652 188.25 5.50 0.7539 0.9779 6.137 0.000 7.1154 188.50 5.75 0.7881 1.0002 6.357 5.425 12.7820 188.75 6.00 0.8224 1.0221 6.569 15.344 22.9350 Note: 1. Weir equation, Q=CwLe(h)3/2 2. Orifice equation, Q=CoAe(2gh)1/2 3. Slot orifice acts as a weir when h* < hslot; slot orifice acts as an orifice when h* hslot HEC-HMS Detention Routing Summary Project Shinohara 1im Summary Results for Reservoir "BMP-1 " - X Project: Shinohara Simulation Run : Q100 Reservoir : BMP-1 Start of Run: 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model: Post_Dev End of Run: 01Jan 2000, 06:05 Meteorologic Model: Met 1 Compute T ime:DATA CHANGED, RECOMPUTE Control Specifications :Control 1 Volume Units : @ IN Q ACRE-FT Computed Result~ Peak Inflow : 33.45 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow: 01Jan2000, 04 : 10 Peak Discharge: 6.99 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Discharge :01Jan2000, 04 :19 Inflow Volume: n/a Pea k Storage: 0.74 (ACRE -FT) Discharge Volume :n/a Pe ak Elevation : 5 .37 (FT) observed Flow Gage BMP .. a_ Peak Dischar ge :33.45 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Discharge :01J an2000, 04: 10 Volume: n/a RMSE Std Dev: 0.93 Nash-Sutcliffe: 0 .126 Percent Bias: -22.43 % Reservoir "BMP-1" Resu lts for Run "0100" 0 .8 0 .7 t:: 0 .6 I ~ 0 .5 -- DA roo 0 .3 u5 0 .2 0 .1 0 .0 I-"".,.~ V) - u 0 u:::: 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 00:00 I T 01 :00 6 .00 f '-· .. 1, ,,.,.,.., jf -----=.t .. t a· 5 .25 4 .50 3 .75 3 .00 2 .25 1 .50 0 .75 f-- f--~1/'=7:::---,_ I ~ I I ~ 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 01 Jan2000 s Q) iJ Legend (Compute Time: DATA CHANGED, RECOMPUT=---------------------~ Run:Q100 Element:BMP·1 Result:Storage EX PIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Pool Elev ation EXPIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Observed Flow EXPIR. .. Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Outflow EX PIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP -1 Result:Combined Inflow EXPIR. .. PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY For: Shinohara Business Center 517 Shinohara Lane Chula Vista, CA 91911 APN: 644-040-01 Project Permit # DR21-0032 Prepared By: 5-20-2022 Gregory W. Lang, P.E. RCE 68075 EXP: 06-30-23 Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates, Inc. 119 Aberdeen Drive Cardiff By The Sea, CA 92007 Prepared for: VWP-OP Shinohara Owner, LLC 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 305 Phoenix, AZ 85016 May 20, 2022 PLSA Job No. 3690 PASCO LARET SUITER ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING+ LAND PLANNING+ LAND SURVEYING DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE I, hereby declare that I am the Engineer of Work for this project. That I have exercised responsible charge over the design of the project as defined in section 6703 of the business and professions code, and that the design is consistent with current standards. I understand that the check of project drawings and specifications by the County of San Diego is confined to a review only and does not relieve me, as engineer of work, of my responsibilities for project design. 05/20/2022 Gregory W. Lang DATE R.C.E. 68075 EXP. 6-30-23 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Pre-Project Conditions.................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Post-Project Conditions .................................................................................................................. 6 2. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 8 2.1 Rational Method ............................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Runoff Coefficient .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Rainfall Intensity .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Tributary Areas ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.5 Hydraulics .................................................................................................................................... 11 2.6 Curb Inlet and Catch Basin Sizing ............................................................................................... 11 2.7 Detention Basin Routing .............................................................................................................. 11 3. CALCULATIONS/RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Pre- & Post-Development Peak Flow Comparison ...................................................................... 13 3.2 Storm Water Quality..................................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Hydromodification ....................................................................................................................... 14 4. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 15 Appendix 1 ......................................... Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map Appendix 2 ........................................ Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map Appendix 3 .................................................................. Hydrology Design Summary Appendix 4 ........................................................ AES Rational Method Calculations Appendix 5 ........................................................... Modified-Puls Detention Routing 4 SITE -·· SH IINOHARA LANE VIC.INI Y MAP NO T TO SC.ALIE. 5 1. INTRODUCTION This Preliminary Drainage Study for the proposed Project Shinohara has been prepared to analyze the hydrologic characteristics of the existing and proposed project site. This report presents both the methodology and the calculations used for determining the storm water runoff from the project site in the existing and proposed conditions produced by the 100-year, 6-hour storm event. 1.1 Project Description The 9.73-acre project site consists of undeveloped land located northwest of the intersection of Brandywine Avenue and Shinohara Lane, at the end of Shinohara Lane in the City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California. The property is defined as a portion of Lot 1, Section 19, Township 18 South, Range 1 West, San Bernadino Meridian, and identified by the Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 644-040-01. The existing site is currently undeveloped except for minor concrete drainage channels located on site and along the eastern and southern property boundaries. The site is bounded on the north and west by residential properties, and on the east and south by industrial buildings. The existing site condition is divided into three (3) drainage basins, Basins Am B, and C, and three (3) separate discharge locations across the project site. Treatment of storm water runoff from the site has been addressed in a separate report- Storm Water Quality Management Plan for OnPoint Development, Project Shinohara by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022. Per City of Chula Vista general design criteria, the Modified Rational Method should be used to determine peak flowrates when the contributing drainage area is up to 1.0 square mile in size. All public and private drainage facilities shall be designed for a 100-year frequency storm. Methodology used for the computation of design rainfall events, runoff coefficients, and rainfall intensity values are consistent with the criteria set forth in Section 3 – General Design Criteria of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, revised March 2012. 1.2 Pre-Project Conditions Topographically, the site slopes steeply to the south from the northern property boundary, forming three 3) drainage basins with three (3) discharge locations. Existing Drainage Basin A comprises the western portion of the site. Runoff drains via overland flow to an existing concrete swale located at the southern property boundary. The drainage swale carries flow east to an existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. The catch basin connects to an existing private storm drain pipe that outlets via curb outlet onto Main Street. Existing Drainage Basin B comprises the eastern portion of the site. Runoff is conveyed via overland surface flow to an existing concrete drainage channel located at the southeastern corner of the site. The drainage channel conveys runoff south and outlets via curb outlet onto Main Street. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain pipe and outlets over headwall into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The site is not within a FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary or regulatory floodway. 6 Existing Drainage Basin C comprises the northwesterly portion of the site. Runoff is conveyed via overland surface flow to an existing swale west of the project site. Local surface runoff from the project site and surrounding properties collect in this area and flow to the south to an existing concrete drainage channel located in the rear yard of an existing single family residence at the end of Tanoak Court. The existing concrete channel flows to the south and then turns and flows to the west and discharges into Tanoak Court through two existing Type A curb outlets. Per the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey, the project site is Hydrologic Soil Group C and D. Refer to Appendix C of this report for the USDA Web Soil Survey and geotechnical findings. Table 1.1 below summarizes the pre-project condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map included in Appendix 1 of this report. TABLE 1.1 – Summary of Pre-Project Conditions Existing Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Time of Concentration, Tc (min) Intensity, I in/hr) Pre-Project Q100 (cfs) Basin A 2.79 0.55 9.15 4.70 7.20 Basin B 6.13 0.55 8.86 4.57 15.42 Basin C 0.79 0.55 4.77 6.32 2.78 Total 9.71 0.55 25.40 1.3 Post-Project Conditions The project will include the construction of an industrial building, paved drive aisles and parking areas, retaining walls, and other associated improvements. Private drainage improvements will consist of catch basins, curb inlets and storm drain pipes. Proprietary Modular Wetland Systems are proposed for storm water treatment. An underground detention vault is proposed for peak flow attenuation. The project will be accessed by a proposed driveway off Shinohara Lane. The proposed land use is ILP- Limited Industrial. The proposed site will consist of two (2) major drainage basins with two (2) discharge locations which match the existing drainage discharge points and pre-project peak flow rates for Existing Drainage Basins A and B. The proposed project’s area in the northwesterly corner of the project site that comprised Existing Drainage Basin C is proposed to be included in Proposed Drainage Basin A. This will enable the proposed project to collect and convey runoff from this location to the project’s peak flow detention facility and storm water treatment and no longer discharge runoff on an existing single family residential property. While the size of Proposed Drainage Basin A is larger than the size of Existing Drainage Basin A when comparing areas, the proposed project will provide peak flow detention so the peak flow runoff rate from this basin for the post-project condition will be equal to or less than the pre-project condition. Storm water runoff from a majority of the proposed development (DMA-A) is routed to a series of BMPs including a Contech CDS pretreatment unit, a StormTrap underground detention vault and a BioClean Modular Wetland System (MWS). The underground detention vault has been designed to meet 100-year peak flow detention requirements. The Modular Wetland System is designed as a proprietary biofiltration 7 BMP for storm water treatment. Outflows from the detention vault and MWS are discharged through a proposed storm drain pipe to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. Stormwater is then conveyed through the neighboring property to the south through an existing private storm drain and outlets onto Main Street as in existing conditions. Storm water runoff from the proposed driveway (DMA-B) will be drained to a Modular Wetland System for storm water treatment. The MWS will be designed with a 3-foot-wide curb inlet opening and a 1-inch local curb depression to capture the required water quality flow. Runoff that exceeds the water quality flow rate or capacity of the MWS will flow by the MWS and drain to the existing concrete drainage channel at the southeast corner of the project site. Outflows from the MWS will be pumped to a proposed curb outlet along the southern property boundary and discharged to the existing concrete drainage channel. The concrete drainage channel discharges onto Main Street via curb outlet as in existing conditions. The characteristics of existing stormwater flows through the neighboring property will not change as a result of the proposed project. Runoff from the cut slope at the northwest portion of the project site will be conveyed via proposed brow ditch to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. This area (DMA-C) is considered a Self-Mitigating DMA per Chapter 5.2.1 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. All project site runoff is discharged onto Main Street as in existing conditions. From Main Street, flow travels west via concrete curb and gutter to an existing curb inlet. Stormwater is then conveyed south through an existing storm drain and outlets over headwall into the Otay River. The Otay River travels west and outlets at the San Diego Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The Otay River is considered an exempt river reach per the WMAA; therefore, the project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. The underground detention vault has been designed to provide flow control in the form of volume reduction and peak flow attenuation. The vault has been modified to include a low-flow and mid-flow orifice outlet and an overflow weir to control peak flows. The required water quality treatment flow is diverted to the downstream Modular Wetland System in accordance with Worksheet B.5-5 of the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual. Overflow relief for the 100-year storm event is provided with a partition weir installed within the vault and discharged directly to the existing Type F catch basin at the southern property boundary. Table 1.2 below summarizes the post-project condition 100-year peak flows at the project’s discharge locations. For delineated basin details, please refer to the Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map included as an Attachment of this report. TABLE 1.2 – Summary of Post-Project Conditions Proposed Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Time of Concentration, Tc (min) Intensity, I in/hr) Post-Project Q100 (cfs) Required Detention cfs) Basin A 8.52 0.79 8.78 4.60 33.45 26.25 Basin B 1.19 0.80 5.55 6.07 5.77 -- Total 9.71 0.79 39.22 26.25 8 2. METHODOLOGY Runoff calculations for Project Shinohara have been performed in accordance with Section 3 – General Design Criteria of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual dated March 2012. Per City of City of Chula Vista design criteria, the Modified Rational Method should be used to determine peak flowrates for local drainage basins. Advanced Engineering Software (AES) were used to calculate the peak runoff from the 100-year, 6-hour storm event using the Rational Method. Please refer to this report’s Appendix for the results of these calculations. 2.1 Rational Method As mentioned above, runoff from the project site was calculated for the 100-year storm event. Runoff was calculated using the Rational Method which is given by the following equation: Q = C x I x A Where: Q = Flow rate in cubic feet per second (cfs) C = Runoff coefficient I = Rainfall Intensity in inches per hour (in/hr) A = Drainage basin area in acres, (ac) Rational Method calculations were performed using the AES 2008 computer program. To perform the hydrology routing, the total watershed area is divided into sub-areas which discharge at designated nodes. The procedure for the sub-area summation model is as follows: 1) Subdivide the watershed into an initial sub-areas and subsequent sub-areas, which are generally less than 10 acres in size. Assign upstream and downstream node numbers to each sub-area. 2) Estimate an initial Tc by using the appropriate nomograph or overland flow velocity estimation. The minimum Tc considered is 5.0 minutes. All Tc values for the proposed project were assumed to be 5 minutes due to the small size of each contributing drainage area. 3) Using the initial Tc, determine the corresponding values of I. Then Q = CIA. 4) Using Q, estimate the travel time between this node and the next by Manning’s equation as applied to particular channel or conduit linking the two nodes. Then, repeat the calculation for Q based on the revised intensity (which is a function of the revised time of concentration) 9 2.2 Runoff Coefficient In accordance with City of Chula Vista design standards, runoff coefficients were based on land use. An appropriate runoff coefficient (C) for each type of land use in the subarea was selected from Section 3- 203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual and multiplied by the percentage of total area (A) included in that class. The sum of products for all land uses is the weighted runoff coefficient ([C]). See Tables 2.1 and 2.2 below for weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. The Pre-Project and Post- Project Condition Hydrology Node Maps show the drainage basin subareas, on-site drainage system and nodal points. Runoff coefficients of 0.55 and 0.60 were selected from Section 3-203.3 for hilly and steep vegetated slopes, consistent with existing conditions. The existing site is assumed to be 0% impervious. See Table 2.1 below for pre-project condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. In the post-project condition, the developed site was assigned a runoff coefficient of 0.85 for commercial area. Developed slopes along the northern and southern property boundary were classified as steep per Section 3-203.3 and assigned a runoff coefficient of 0.60. See Table 2.2 on the following page for post- project condition weighted runoff coefficient “C” calculations. TABLE 2.1- Summary of Pre-Project Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Pre-Project Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 10 11 0.04 0.55 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.55 11 12 2.75 0.55 2.75 0.60 0.00 0.55 20 21 0.09 0.55 0.09 0.60 0.00 0.55 21 22 6.01 0.55 6.01 0.60 0.00 0.55 30 31 0.08 0.55 0.08 0.60 0.00 0.55 31 32 0.72 0.55 0.72 0.60 0.00 0.55 Note: C values taken from Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual Runoff Coefficient of 0.55 for Vegetated Slopes, Hilly Runoff Coefficient of 0.60 for Vegetated Slopes, Steep 10 TABLE 2.2- Summary of Post-Project Condition Weighted Runoff Coefficient Calculations Post-Project Condition - Weighted Runoff Coefficient Up Node Down Node Area (ac) C1 A1 C2 A2 C 100 101 0.04 0.85 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.85 101 102 0.34 0.85 0.34 0.60 0.00 0.85 103 103 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 104 104 0.38 0.85 0.38 0.60 0.00 0.85 105 105 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 106 106 0.41 0.85 0.41 0.60 0.00 0.85 107 107 0.14 0.85 0.14 0.60 0.00 0.85 107 107 0.39 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.39 0.60 108 108 0.12 0.85 0.12 0.60 0.00 0.85 109 109 0.12 0.85 0.12 0.60 0.00 0.85 110 110 0.11 0.85 0.11 0.60 0.00 0.85 111 111 0.06 0.85 0.06 0.60 0.00 0.85 112 112 0.29 0.85 0.29 0.60 0.00 0.85 113 113 0.27 0.85 0.27 0.60 0.00 0.85 114 114 0.94 0.85 0.94 0.60 0.00 0.85 115 115 0.80 0.85 0.80 0.60 0.00 0.85 117 118 0.04 0.85 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.85 118 119 0.34 0.85 0.34 0.60 0.00 0.85 120 120 0.08 0.85 0.08 0.60 0.00 0.85 121 121 0.22 0.85 0.22 0.60 0.00 0.85 122 122 0.38 0.85 0.38 0.60 0.00 0.85 123 123 0.35 0.85 0.35 0.60 0.00 0.85 124 124 0.19 0.85 0.19 0.60 0.00 0.85 125 125 0.11 0.85 0.11 0.60 0.00 0.85 126 126 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 127 127 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 128 128 0.20 0.85 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.85 129 129 0.37 0.85 0.37 0.60 0.00 0.85 131 131 0.84 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.84 0.60 136 136 0.25 0.85 0.00 0.60 0.25 0.60 200 201 0.16 0.85 0.16 0.60 0.00 0.85 201 202 1.03 0.85 0.79 0.60 0.24 0.79 Note: C values taken from Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual Runoff Coefficient of 0.85 for Commercial Area Runoff Coefficient of 0.60 for Vegetated Slopes, Steep 11 2.3 Rainfall Intensity Rainfall intensity is calculated per Section 3-203.3 of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, which is given by the following equation: I = 7.44P6D-0.645 Where: I = Rainfall Intensity in inches per hour (in/hr) P6 = Adjusted 6-hour storm precipitation D = Duration in minutes (use Tc) The intensity values for varying time of concentrations were input manually into the AES computer program where runoff calculations were performed. The 6-hour storm rainfall amount (P6) for the 100- year storm frequency was determined using City of Chula Vista Isopluvial Maps provided from Figure 7 of the City of Chula Vista Drainage Master Plan. The P6 for the 100-year storm frequency was found as 2.4 inches. See Appendix 3 of this report for Isopluvial maps for the 100-year rainfall event. 2.4 Tributary Areas Drainage basins for the existing and proposed project site are delineated in the Pre-Project and Post- Project Condition Hydrology Node Maps located in Appendix 1 and 2 of this report and graphically portray the tributary area for each drainage basin. 2.5 Hydraulics The hydraulics of existing and proposed storm drain pipes were analyzed using the AES computer program. For pipe flow, a Manning’s N value of 0.011 was used to reflect the use of HDPE pipe. A Manning’s N value of 0.013 was used to reflect the use of RCP pipe. 2.6 Curb Inlet and Catch Basin Sizing Curb inlets and catch basins will be sized in accordance with City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual March 2012) upon final engineering. 2.7 Detention Basin Routing The detention facility was modeled using the Army Corps of Engineers HEC-HMS 4.3 software. Hydraulic Modified-Puls detention routing was performed to analyze the developed condition 100-year peak flow rate at the project’s detention system. Stage-storage-discharge tables were generated and input into HEC-HMS to model the design of the vault outlet structure. This procedure was selected in order to model the flow control requirements and to accurately represent the middle stages of the BMP for accurate mid-flow orifice and emergency weir sizing. The stage-storage-discharge tables have been provided in Appendix 5. The HEC-HMS Modified-Puls results are summarized in Table 2.3 on the following page. 12 TABLE 2.3- Summary of Detention Basin Routing Detention Basin Tributary Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Inflow Tc min)1 100-Year Peak Inflow cfs) Outflow Tc (min) 100-Year Peak Outflow cfs) Peak Elevation ft)2 BMP-1 8.27 0.85 10 33.45 19 6.99 5.37 Notes: (1) Inflow time of concentration rounded to the nearest time interval that HEC-HMS could accept 2) Peak elevation measured from the invert of the mid-flow orifice A Rational method inflow hydrograph was generated using RickRat Hydro software from Rick Engineering. The parameters of the drainage area were entered into RickRat Hydro software to generate an inflow hydrograph. The data from this hydrograph was then entered into HEC-HMS software to model the release rates from the detention system. HEC-HMS allows for hydrology input time steps of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 15 & 20 minutes. Rick Rat Hydro requires a minimum time of concentration (Tc) of 5 minutes. Therefore, the time of concentration (Tc) used for the concentration of the hydrograph was rounded to the nearest time interval that RickRat Hydro and HEC-HMS could accept. The time of concentration used is 10 minutes. The peak flow remains as per the modified Rational Method analysis and is not reduced (or increased) from this hydrograph development accordingly. Rational method hydrographs, stage-storage-discharge relationships and HEC-HMS model output is provided in Appendix 5 of this report. 13 3. CALCULATIONS/RESULTS 3.1 Pre- & Post-Development Peak Flow Comparison Below are a series of tables which summarize the calculations provided in the appendices of this report. Table 3.1 itemizes the pre-project condition peak flow rates for the 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.1- Pre-Project Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Pre-Project Q100 (cfs) Basin A 2.79 0.55 7.20 Basin B 6.13 0.55 15.42 Basin C 0.79 0.55 2.78 Total 9.71 0.55 25.40 Table 3.2 itemizes the post-project and detained condition peak flow rates for the 100-year storm event at the project’s discharge locations. TABLE 3.2- Proposed Post-Project Condition Peak Flow Summary Drainage Basin Drainage Area (ac) Runoff Coefficient, C Post-Project Condition Q100 (cfs) Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) Basin A 8.52 0.79 33.45 7.17 Basin B 1.19 0.80 5.77 5.77 Total 9.71 0.79 39.22 12.94 Table 3.3 shows that the total storm water peak flow for the proposed development is less than the existing storm water peak flow for the 100-year rainfall event. TABLE 3.3- Pre-Project Vs. Post-Project Detained Condition Peak Flow Summary Pre-Project Condition Q100 cfs) Post-Project Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) Pre-Project Vs. Post-Project Detained Condition Q100 (cfs) 25.40 12.94 -12.46 14 3.2 Storm Water Quality The proposed site will include Modular Wetland Systems that will provide the required storm water quality treatment for the project. For information regarding BMP sizing and the water quality design, refer to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022, under separate cover. 3.3 Hydromodification The project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. For additional information regarding hydromodification exemption, refer to the Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Project Shinohara, OnPoint Development by PLSA, dated May 20, 2022, under separate cover. 15 4. CONCLUSION This report analyzed the 100-year storm event hydrology for the proposed site using the Advanced Engineering Software (AES) and demonstrates that the post-developed peak flow rates are less than the pre-developed peak flow rates at the project’s two existing discharge locations. In addition, the proposed storm drain system was sized adequately to convey the proposed project’s runoff and supporting calculations can be found in the appendices of this report. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site. In addition, the proposed project will not increase the peak runoff rate for the post-project condition when compared to the pre-project condition. The project is not within the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary as mapped on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Appendix 1 Pre-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X X X XX XXXXXXXXX X X SSSSSS WWWWWX X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXX2 5 8 2582572562562562562552552552552552 5 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235 235 235230230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 216 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207 2072072 07 206206 205205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200 200200 200 20 0 200200200 200 200200 1 9 5 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 19019019 0190 190190 190 189 18 9 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751751 7 5 1 7 5 17517 5 175172 170 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160 160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145145144 144144144144144143 143142 142 141 141141 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 139 1 3 9 139138 13 8 138 BASIN A 20 21 0.31 P/LP/ LP/ L L 7 5 L= 1, 062'22 15.4 A= 6.05 C= 0.55 A= 0.09 C= 0.55 POR LOT 1 S19 T18S R1W S. B.M.PM 14521PM 14521 ROS 21570 MAP 5729 MAP 6958 BASIN B L= 72' 10 11 0.13 L= 500'12 7. 20 13 7.20 A=0.04 C= 0.55 A= 2.75 C= 0.55 L= 224'SHINOHARA LANETIMBERSTREETEXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. STORM DRAIN INLET EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 255. 0 FG)231. 0 FG)149. 0 FG)215. 5 FG) 213. 0 FG)EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 149. 0 FG)EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE 143.67 FL)EXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL EXIST. D- 25 CURB OUTLET EXIST. CROSS GUTTER EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE P/ L 30 31 0.28 L= 75'L=83' A=0.08 C= 0.55 A=0.72 C=0.55 32 2.78 234.0 FG)207.0 FG)220.0 FG)BASIN C PRE-PROJECT CONDITION HYDROLOGY NODE MAP SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 MAY 2022 ASSOCIATES Phone 858.259.8212 | www.plsaengineering.com San Diego | Solana Beach | Orange County HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER > 20 FT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA: 9.73 AC EXISTING DRAINAGE BOUNDARY: 9.71 AC EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 0 AC EXISTING PERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA: 9.71 AC DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LEGEND RIGHT-OF-WAY BASIN BOUNDARY FLOWLINESUB- BASIN BOUNDARY SUB- BASIN AREA HYDROLOGY NODE 101.00 A=0.10 Q100 ( CFS)PROPERTY LINE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT C= 0. 55 RUNOFF COEFFICIENT R/ W P/ L DRAINAGE BASIN IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, C 100-YEAR EXISTING PEAK FLOW (CFS)BASIN A 0.00 0.0% 0.55 7.20 DRAINAGE AREA (AC)2. 79 SUMMARY OFEXISTINGCONDITION 100-YEAR PEAKFLOWSBASIN B 15. 426.13 BASIN C 2.780. 79 0. 00 0. 00 0.0%0.0%0.55 0.55 TOTAL 25.409.71 0.00 0.0%0.55 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 - GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBDIVISION MANUAL, RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS WERE BASED ON LAND USE. AN APPROPRIATE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WAS SELECTED FROM SECTION 3-203.3 AND MULTIPLIED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA IN THAT CLASS. THE SUM OF THE PRODUCTS FOR ALL LAND USES IS THE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT.SEE TABLE 2.1 OF THE "PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA" BY PLSA DATED FEBRUARY 2022 Appendix 2 Post-Project Condition Hydrology Node Map XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X X X XX XXXXXXXXX X X SSSSSS WWWWWX X X X X X X XXSDMH146.35RIMX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXX2 5 8 2582572562562562562552552552552552 5 4250250250250 250 245245245245245240240240240240240235235235235235 235 235230230230230230230 230 227 225225 225225225225225 225 22 2 220 220 220 220 220 220 220220220220217 216 215 215 215 215215215215215 215 21 5 215 215 215 215215210210 210 210 210 210 210 21 0 210 210 21021021 0 2102092 0 9 208 2 0 8 208207 207207207 206206 205205 205205 205205 205 205 2 0 5 205 2 0 5205205201 200 200 200200 20020 0 200200200 200 200200 1 9 5 195 19519519 5 19 5 195 195 195190190 190190 190190 190190 190 189 18 9 186185 185185185 1 8 5 185185185 1 84180 1801801 8 0 18 0 180180 1801751751751751 7 5 1 7 5 1751 75 175172 170 170 1701701 7 0 1 7 0 170170170 165 1651651 6 5 1 6 5 165 165160 160 16016016 0 1601601601561 5 5 1551 5 5 155155155155 155 154 153152152152 151 1 5 0 1501 5 0 150150150150149148 148146 145 145145145145145145144 144144144144144143 143142 142 141 141141 1 4114114 0 140140 1401 4 0 139 1 3 9 139138 138 138 TX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSSSSSSWWWWWP BASIN A INDUSTRIALBLDG 197.50 FF BASIN B SHINOHARA LANETIMBERSTREETA=0. 39 C=0. 60 111 10. 5 133 6. 99 A=0. 14 C=0. 85 L=118' 136 7.17 A=0.20 C=0.85 A=0.94 C=0.85 A=0.16 C= 0.85 201 0. 48 L= 100'L= 718' L=102' L=94'L= 110'L=155' L= 203'129 11.2 A= 1.03 C= 0. 79 202 5. 77 A=0. 34 C=0. 85 100 102 1.96 103 2.98 104 4.80 A= 0.38 C= 0.85 A= 0.41 C=0.85 L= 103' 110 10. 5 L=106' 113 12.6 L=49'L= 53'L=19' 114 16.3 A=0.29 C=0.85 A=0.27 C=0.85 A=0.80 C=0.85 A=0.34 C= 0.85 A= 0.38 C=0.85 A=0.35 C=0.85 123 6.76 124 7.62 L= 103'L= 59'L= 33'A=0. 22 C=0. 85 125 8. 15 130 11.2 L=67'A= 0.37 C= 0. 85 L= 105'135 6.99 L= 76'A=0. 04 C=0. 85 101 0. 21 L=50' L= 47'A= 0.25 C= 0.60 109 10.2 A= 0.20 C= 0.85 108 9.87 A= 0.12 C= 0. 85 L= 94'A=0. 12 C=0. 85 A=0. 11 C=0. 85 L=31' L= 118'117 119 1.96 A=0.04 C=0.85 118 0.21 L=50'A= 0.19 C= 0.85 126 8.60 127 9.10 L= 42L= 73'A= 0.11 C=0. 85 A= 0. 16 C= 0. 85A=0.16 C= 0. 85 A= 0. 20 C= 0.85 116 33.5 L= 104'L=29'L= 28' L=29' L=50' 105 5.72 106 7. 65L= 54'L= 70' 107 9. 52 115 19. 5 L=51' 112 11.7 120 2.24121 3.32 122 5.18 L= 42' 128 9.91 L=108' 131 14. 21346.99 A= 0.06 C=0. 85 A= 0. 08 C=0. 60 A= 0. 84 C= 0. 85 200 132 33. 5 P/L P/ LP/ LP/ L P/LP/ LP/ LP/ LP/ L P/ L P/ L P/ LP/LR/ WR/W1651551601 5 0 180175170185190225 230 235220215210205200195 240245250215220210205160 205 19219219 5 196 196196193 195 194 193 193 250250245240235220225245250255250200 19319 4 205210193 197197 196 196 1951951951951931941951961501 9 6 192 192 193 196 209 200149148196 19 5 19 6 149.11 FS) 182.75 IE 190.57 IE189.94 IE 189.73 IE 186.51 IE 192.50 IE 194.20 IE 193.70 IE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN EXIST. CONCRETE SWALE TO REMAIN PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. BROW DITCH PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. TYPE B BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. LANDSCAPED 1H:4V RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. SOIL NAIL RETAINING WALL PROP. TYPEB BROW DITCH PER SDRSD D-75 PROP. BROW DITCHEXIST. CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL PROP. CURB OUTLET 192.50 IE 194.20 IE 193.70 IE 188.68 IE 185.12 IE POC- 2 POC-1 EXIST. CURB OUTLETEXIST. CROSS GUTTER PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 179. 95 IE IN 179. 62 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 191. 30 IE IN 190. 97 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 187.46 IE IN 187.13 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 185.50 IE IN 185.17 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D-09 191.51 IE IN 191.18 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O.PER SDRSD D- 09 188.02 IE IN 187.69 IE OUT EXIST. TYPE F CATCH BASIN 146.35 RIM 143.67 IE PROP. MOD. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D-09 178.40 IE IN 144.80 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D- 09 183.44 IE IN (N)184. 49 IE IN ( S)183.11 IE OUT PROP. TYPE A C. O. PER SDRSD D-09 186.10 IE IN 185.77 IE OUT 190.35 IE 184.87 IE 183.93 IE 2' CURB CUT TO DRAIN BROW DITCH 172.00 FL BMP-2 MWS-L- 8-24 UNDERGROUND) 4.7' OPERATING HEAD 180.55 IE IN 180.05 IE OUT BMP-4 MWS L-4-15 ( PLANTED) WITH CURB INLET OPENING 3. 9' OPERATING HEAD 149. 90 FL PROP. PUMP TO CURB OUTLET 190. 05 IE PROP. TYPE G-1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 188.35 IE IN 188.02 IE OUT PROP. TYPE G- 1 CATCH BASIN PER SDRSD D-08 186. 57 IE IN 186. 24 IE OUT 183. 63 IE PROP. TYPE A C.O. PER SDRSD D- 09 189.06 IE IN 188. 73 IE OUT 187.44 IE 189.72 IE PROP. TYPE A C.O.PER SDRSD D-09 189.30 IE IN 188.97 IE OUT 184.25 IE 190.82 IE 196. 50 FS 192.61 FS BMP-1 STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM HEIGHT = 6 FT VOLUME = 35, 824 CF VAULT IE = 182.75 VAULT SOFIT = 188.75VAULTTOP = 189. 33 SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET 182.75 IE 24" OUT 184.75 MID- FLOW WEIR 188. 25 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 4"-DIA LOW- FLOW ORIFICE 182.75 IE OUT BMP-1OLDCASTLE STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM5.5' 2'6'SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 2. 75' L x 0.25' H MID-FLOW WEIR 24" HDPE SD OUTFLOW PIPE 14'24" HDPE OUTFLOW SD 182.75 IE OUT Q100 DETAINED = 6. 99 CFS2' 5. 5'6'182.75 IE OUT 184. 75 IE 188. 25 IE 14' L EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR 184. 75 IE 24" HDPE INFLOW SD 182. 75 IE IN Q100 = 33. 45 CFS Q100 = 33.45 CFS PEAK ELEV. = 5.37'5.37' 2 0 5 200 19 5190 18518518018017517016 5 DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LEGEND HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGIC SOIL TYPE: C & D DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER > 20 FT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL AREA:9.73 AC PROPOSED DRAINAGE BOUNDARY: 9. 71 AC PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA:9. 67 AC PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA:8. 03 AC PROPOSEDPERVIOUS / LANDSCAPE AREA: 1. 64 AC POST-PROJECT CONDITION HYDROLOGY NODE MAP SHINOHARA BUSINESS PARK 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 PLSA JOB NO. 3690 MAY 2022 RIGHT-OF- WAY PROPERTY LINE R/ W P/L BASIN BOUNDARY FLOWLINE SUB-BASIN AREA HYDROLOGY NODE 1001.00 A=0. 10 POST-PROJECT DETAINED Q100 (CFS)WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT C=0.85 SUB-BASIN BOUNDARY RUNOFF COEFFICIENTDRAINAGEBASIN IMPERVIOUS AREA (AC)% IMP WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT, CPOST-PROJECT Q100 (CFS) BASIN A 7. 36 86. 4%0. 83 33. 45 DRAINAGE AREA (AC)8.52 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CONDITION 100-YEAR PEAK FLOWS BASIN B 0.68 56.8%0.80 5.771.19 TOTAL 8.03 82.7%0.83 39.229.71 POST-PROJECT DETAINED Q100 (CFS) 7. 17 5. 77 12. 94 NOTE: UNMITIGATED PEAK FLOW IS THE POST- PROJECT PEAK FLOW THAT HAS NOT BEEN REDUCED FROM DETENTION ROUTING.MITIGATED PEAK FLOW IS THE POST-PROJECT PEAK FLOW THAT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY ROUTING FLOW THROUGH THE PROJECT'S DETENTION FACILITY. POC POC-1 POC-2 AAB B BMP-1 STORMCAPTURE DETENTION SYSTEM DETAIL NOT TO SCALE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 -GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBDIVISION MANUAL, RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS WERE BASED ON LAND USE. AN APPROPRIATE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WAS SELECTED FROM SECTION 3-203. 3 AND MULTIPLIED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA IN THAT CLASS. THE SUM OF THE PRODUCTS FOR ALL LANDUSES IS THE WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT.SEE TABLE 2. 2 OF THE " PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROJECT SHINOHARA, ONPOINT DEVELOMENT" BY PLSA DATED MAY 2022 FOR POST- PROJECT CONDITION WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICEINT " C" CALCULATIONS.I 7 l7 l J c--- 1)- L'-_:-', ;;,-......_[ ) I r I -I r ~ L I 1 +-+-1' I..-+\:-+-+-) I ! I I J I f J I• ----=----------- --I I I I I I I I I II I ~ I I . I I I I . I' L ~ I_ I/ =' 40' 20' 0 I~~ I I I I I I I I • K• \ I --,/;t!F" i1r I I I I I 40' 80' 120' I 1-____,, SCALE: 1" = 40' C) I I IJL.JIII. III.IWJ I I I I C) @ C) \ RD RD @ C) \ N3 RD RD RD Appendix 3 Hydrology Design Summary Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area , California Map Scale: 1 :1,500 ifprinted onAportrait(8.5"x 11") sheet Meters 0 2) 40 8J 12l feet 0 50 100 200 :m Map projection : 'Neb Men::ator Comer coordinates : WGS84 Edge tics : lJTM Zone llN WGS84 USDA Natural Resources = Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/23/2021 Page 1 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) D Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons D A D A/D DB D B/D D C CID D D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C CID D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service C CID D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning : Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale . Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required . This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area : San Diego County Area , California Survey Area Data : Version 15, May 27, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1 :50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed : Aug 22, 2018-Aug 31,2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 9/23/2021 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area , California Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI OhE Olivenhain cobbly loam , D 7 .5 9 to 30 percent slopes SbC Salinas clay loam, 2 to 9 C 3.0 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 10.5 Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation , are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A , B , C , and D) and three dual classes (AID , B/D , and C/D). The groups are defined as follows : Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture . These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission . Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission . Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential , soils that have a high water table , soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission . If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, B/D , or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes . Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 71 .3% 28.7% 100.0% 9/23/2021 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California ii Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/23/2021 Page 4 of 4 Appendix 4 AES Rational Method Calculations RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2008 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 15.0 Release Date: 04/01/2008 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 NORTH HIGHWAY 101 SUITE A SOLANA BEACH CA 92705 FILE NAME: 3690E100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 12:51 02/24/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 11.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 72.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 215.50 100-YEAR PRE-PROJECT CONDITION DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 213.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 2.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 5.548 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.073 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.13 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 11.00 TO NODE 12.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 213.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 500.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1280 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 10.00 "Z" FACTOR = 20.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.695 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.76 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.76 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.11 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 3.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.57 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 2.75 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.10 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 7.20 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.16 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.33 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 12.00 = 572.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 12.00 TO NODE 13.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 224.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0238 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 2.50 "Z" FACTOR = 2.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 CHANNEL FLOW THRU SUBAREA(CFS) = 7.20 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.48 FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.35 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 9.15 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 10.00 TO NODE 13.00 = 796.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 21.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 255.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 231.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 24.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.980 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.09 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.31 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 21.00 TO NODE 22.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 231.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 1062.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0772 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 5.00 "Z" FACTOR = 10.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.565 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 8.20 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.63 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.29 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 4.88 Tc(MIN.) = 8.86 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 6.05 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 15.19 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 6.1 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 15.42 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.39 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 20.00 TO NODE 22.00 = 1137.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 31.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 75.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 234.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 220.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 14.00 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.980 WARNING: THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE, 10.%, IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 31.00 TO NODE 32.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 220.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 207.00 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 83.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.1566 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 20.00 "Z" FACTOR = 8.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.040 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .5500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.53 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.75 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.79 Tc(MIN.) = 4.77 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.72 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.50 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.550 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.78 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.06 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 30.00 TO NODE 32.00 = 158.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 TC(MIN.) = 4.77 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.78 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: FILE NAME: 3690P100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:19 05/20/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.05 Tc(MIN.) = 5.60 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.047 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.03 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.98 TC(MIN.) = 5.60 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.61 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.98 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 300.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.877 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.80 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.26 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 6.14 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 105.00 = 350.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.805 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.99 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.72 TC(MIN.) = 6.14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.72 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 404.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.729 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.65 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.65 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 6.50 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 107.00 = 474.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.67 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.20 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8036 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.39 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.52 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 102.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.52 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 6.77 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 576.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.517 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8061 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.87 TC(MIN.) = 6.77 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.46 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.87 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 109.00 = 670.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.404 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8083 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.55 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.22 TC(MIN.) = 7.02 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.13 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.38 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 764.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.293 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8102 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.51 TC(MIN.) = 7.26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 106.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.83 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 111.00 = 870.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.175 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8112 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.06 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.54 TC(MIN.) = 7.52 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.17 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 49.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.50 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.54 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 7.64 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 919.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.117 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8152 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.29 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.68 TC(MIN.) = 7.64 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 104.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.55 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.68 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 113.00 = 1023.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.997 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8182 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.15 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 12.55 TC(MIN.) = 7.91 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 53.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.66 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 12.55 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 8.04 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1076.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.936 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8257 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.94 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 16.34 TC(MIN.) = 8.04 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 51.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 16.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.09 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 16.34 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 8.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 115.00 = 1127.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.882 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8297 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.80 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 19.48 TC(MIN.) = 8.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 31.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.39 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 19.48 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 10 MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 118.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.20 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 5.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.045 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8065 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.24 TC(MIN.) = 5.61 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 191.18 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.24 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.22 Tc(MIN.) = 5.83 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 256.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.944 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8206 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TC(MIN.) = 5.83 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.85 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.32 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 298.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.878 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8311 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.18 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.35 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.18 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 401.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.732 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8358 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.71 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.76 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.73 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.76 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.09 Tc(MIN.) = 6.39 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 434.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.690 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8375 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.19 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.62 TC(MIN.) = 6.39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1289.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.06 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 47.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 131.47 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.62 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 6.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 125.00 = 481.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.687 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8383 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.53 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.15 TC(MIN.) = 6.40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 73.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.15 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.46 Tc(MIN.) = 6.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 126.00 = 554.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.477 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8393 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.74 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.60 TC(MIN.) = 6.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 110.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.60 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.30 Tc(MIN.) = 7.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 127.00 = 664.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.338 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8401 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.10 TC(MIN.) = 7.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.69 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.10 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 7.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 128.00 = 706.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.286 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8410 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.91 TC(MIN.) = 7.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 155.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.36 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.91 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.41 Tc(MIN.) = 7.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 129.00 = 861.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.100 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8423 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.17 TC(MIN.) = 7.68 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 130.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 67.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.57 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 7.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 130.00 = 928.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.77 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 108.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.28 Tc(MIN.) = 8.13 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 1036.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.897 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8442 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.84 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.22 TC(MIN.) = 8.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.49 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 105.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.96 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 8.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 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 14.22 8.38 4.783 3.44 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 19.48 8.23 4.850 4.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 33.45 8.23 4.850 2 33.43 8.38 4.783 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 33.45 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.2 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 132.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.11 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 19.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.97 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 132.00 = 1177.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 134.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.95 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 24.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 134.00 = 1205.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 134.00 TO NODE 135.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 203.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 30.0 INCH PIPE IS 22.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.46 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 30.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.40 Tc(MIN.) = 8.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 135.00 = 1408.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 135.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 76.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 17.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.06 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.11 Tc(MIN.) = 8.78 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 136.00 = 1484.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 136.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.600 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8288 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 33.45 TC(MIN.) = 8.78 NOTE: PEAK FLOW RATE DEFAULTED TO UPSTREAM VALUE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 196.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.89 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.861 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 61 COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.11 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 718.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 36.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 1.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section = 0.0200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.35 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.16 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.45 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.21 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.69 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.071 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7900 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.798 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.03 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.64 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.06 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.56 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 818.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TC(MIN.) = 5.55 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1452 Analysis prepared by: FILE NAME: 3690D100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 09:19 05/20/2022 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 4.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 RAINFALL-INTENSITY ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.000 USER SPECIFIED: NUMBER OF [TIME,INTENSITY] DATA PAIRS = 9 1) 5.000; 6.323 2) 10.000; 4.044 3) 15.000; 3.113 4) 20.000; 2.586 5) 25.000; 2.239 6) 30.000; 1.991 7) 40.000; 1.654 8) 50.000; 1.432 9) 60.000; 1.273 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: ONLY PEAK CONFLUENCE VALUES CONSIDERED USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.05 Tc(MIN.) = 5.60 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.047 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.03 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.98 TC(MIN.) = 5.60 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.61 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.98 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 300.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.877 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.80 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 104.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.35 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.26 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.80 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 6.14 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 105.00 = 350.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 105.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.805 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.99 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.72 TC(MIN.) = 6.14 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 105.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.05 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.40 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.72 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 106.00 = 404.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 106.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.729 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.41 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.65 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 106.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.72 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.30 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.65 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.20 Tc(MIN.) = 6.50 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 107.00 = 474.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8500 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.14 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.67 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.20 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 107.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.639 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8036 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.39 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.52 TC(MIN.) = 6.50 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 107.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.97 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.35 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 102.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.52 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 6.77 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 108.00 = 576.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 108.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.517 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8061 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.56 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.87 TC(MIN.) = 6.77 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 108.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.46 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.87 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.02 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 109.00 = 670.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 109.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.404 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8083 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.55 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.22 TC(MIN.) = 7.02 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 109.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.13 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 94.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.38 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 7.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 110.00 = 764.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 110.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.293 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8102 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.51 TC(MIN.) = 7.26 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 110.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.50 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 106.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 12.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.83 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.51 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 111.00 = 870.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 111.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.175 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8112 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.06 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 10.54 TC(MIN.) = 7.52 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 111.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.17 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 49.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.50 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 10.54 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 7.64 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 112.00 = 919.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 112.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.117 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8152 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.29 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.26 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.68 TC(MIN.) = 7.64 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 112.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.87 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 104.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.55 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.68 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.26 Tc(MIN.) = 7.91 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 113.00 = 1023.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 113.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.997 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8182 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.27 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.15 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 12.55 TC(MIN.) = 7.91 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 113.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 184.25 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 53.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 15.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.66 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 12.55 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.13 Tc(MIN.) = 8.04 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 114.00 = 1076.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 114.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.936 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8257 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.94 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 16.34 TC(MIN.) = 8.04 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 114.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.93 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 51.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 16.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.09 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 16.34 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 8.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 115.00 = 1127.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 115.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.882 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8297 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.80 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 4.8 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 19.48 TC(MIN.) = 8.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 115.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.63 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 183.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 31.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 7.39 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 19.48 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.07 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 10 MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 118.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 50.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 194.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 193.70 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.50 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.182 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.04 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.21 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 118.00 TO NODE 119.00 IS CODE = 51 COMPUTE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL FLOW<<<<< TRAVELTIME THRU SUBAREA (EXISTING ELEMENT)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 193.70 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 118.00 CHANNEL SLOPE = 0.0102 CHANNEL BASE(FEET) = 50.00 "Z" FACTOR = 50.000 MANNING'S FACTOR = 0.015 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 1.00 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.072 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 0.83 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.03 TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.37 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.34 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.75 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.850 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.96 END OF SUBAREA CHANNEL FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.07 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 119.00 = 168.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 119.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 192.50 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 191.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 29.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 9.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.8 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.20 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 9.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.96 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.06 Tc(MIN.) = 5.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 120.00 = 197.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 120.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.045 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8065 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.08 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.29 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.24 TC(MIN.) = 5.61 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 120.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 191.18 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 7.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.42 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 2.24 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.22 Tc(MIN.) = 5.83 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 121.00 = 256.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 121.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.944 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8206 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.32 TC(MIN.) = 5.83 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 121.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.82 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.85 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 3.32 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.14 Tc(MIN.) = 5.98 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 122.00 = 298.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 122.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.878 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8311 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.38 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.1 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.18 TC(MIN.) = 5.98 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 122.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 190.57 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 103.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.35 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 5.18 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.32 Tc(MIN.) = 6.30 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 123.00 = 401.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 123.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.732 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8358 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.35 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.71 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.76 TC(MIN.) = 6.30 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 123.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 189.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.73 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.91 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.76 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.09 Tc(MIN.) = 6.39 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 124.00 = 434.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 124.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.690 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8375 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.19 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.62 TC(MIN.) = 6.39 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 124.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 1289.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 189.06 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 47.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 6.0 INCH PIPE IS 2.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 131.47 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 6.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 7.62 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.01 Tc(MIN.) = 6.40 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 125.00 = 481.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 125.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.687 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8383 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.53 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.15 TC(MIN.) = 6.40 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 125.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.73 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 73.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 27.0 INCH PIPE IS 19.5 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.65 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 27.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.15 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.46 Tc(MIN.) = 6.86 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 126.00 = 554.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 126.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.477 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8393 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.74 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.9 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 8.60 TC(MIN.) = 6.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 126.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 188.68 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 188.02 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 110.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 8.60 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.30 Tc(MIN.) = 7.16 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 127.00 = 664.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 127.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.338 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8401 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.73 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.0 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.10 TC(MIN.) = 7.16 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 127.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.69 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 42.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.02 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.10 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.12 Tc(MIN.) = 7.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 128.00 = 706.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 128.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.286 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8410 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.2 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 9.91 TC(MIN.) = 7.28 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 128.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 187.44 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 155.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 13.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.36 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 9.91 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.41 Tc(MIN.) = 7.68 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 129.00 = 861.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 129.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.100 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8423 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.60 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 2.6 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 11.17 TC(MIN.) = 7.68 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 129.00 TO NODE 130.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 186.51 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 186.10 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 67.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.0 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.57 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.17 Tc(MIN.) = 7.85 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 130.00 = 928.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 130.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.77 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 108.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 21.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.52 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 21.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 11.17 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.28 Tc(MIN.) = 8.13 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 131.00 = 1036.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 131.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.897 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.8442 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.84 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.50 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.4 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 14.22 TC(MIN.) = 8.13 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 131.00 TO NODE 116.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 185.12 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 184.49 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 105.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 14.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 6.96 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 14.22 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.25 Tc(MIN.) = 8.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 116.00 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 14.22 8.38 4.783 3.44 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 117.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1141.00 FEET. MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY AREA NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) (ACRE) 1 19.48 8.23 4.850 4.81 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 116.00 = 1158.00 FEET. PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM RUNOFF Tc INTENSITY NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HOUR) 1 33.45 8.23 4.850 2 33.43 8.38 4.783 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 33.45 Tc(MIN.) = 8.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.2 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 116.00 TO NODE 132.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 183.11 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 19.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 24.0 INCH PIPE IS 18.4 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 12.97 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 24.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 33.45 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.02 Tc(MIN.) = 8.26 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 132.00 = 1177.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 133.00 IS CODE = 7 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY INFORMATION AT NODE<<<<< USER-SPECIFIED VALUES ARE AS FOLLOWS: TC(MIN) = 19.00 RAIN INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.27 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 6.99 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 133.00 TO NODE 134.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 182.75 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 179.95 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 28.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 12.0 INCH PIPE IS 6.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 16.82 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 12.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.03 Tc(MIN.) = 19.03 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 134.00 = 1205.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 134.00 TO NODE 135.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 179.62 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 178.40 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 203.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 11.6 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.82 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.58 Tc(MIN.) = 19.61 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 135.00 = 1408.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 135.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 31 COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.80 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.67 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 76.00 MANNING'S N = 0.011 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 15.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 8.16 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 15.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.99 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.16 Tc(MIN.) = 19.76 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 136.00 = 1484.00 FEET. FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 136.00 TO NODE 136.00 IS CODE = 81 ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW<<<<< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.611 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .6000 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.3224 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.39 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 8.5 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 7.17 TC(MIN.) = 19.76 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE = 21 RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8500 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 100.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 196.50 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 3.89 URBAN SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.861 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.323 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.16 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 201.00 TO NODE 202.00 IS CODE = 61 COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< STANDARD CURB SECTION USED)<<<<< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 192.61 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.11 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 718.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 6.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 36.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 1.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.015 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section = 0.0200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.35 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 9.16 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 4.45 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.21 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.69 Tc(MIN.) = 5.55 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.071 USER SPECIFIED(SUBAREA): USER-SPECIFIED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7900 S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 0 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.798 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.03 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.31 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.64 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.06 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 1.56 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 202.00 = 818.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.2 TC(MIN.) = 5.55 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.77 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Appendix 5 Modified-Puls Detention Routing RATIONAL METHOD HYDROGRAPH PROGRAM COPYRIGHT 1992, 2001 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY RUN DATE 5/20/2022 HYDROGRAPH FILE NAME Text1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 MIN. 6 HOUR RAINFALL 2.4 INCHES BASIN AREA 8.27 ACRES RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85 PEAK DISCHARGE 33.45 CFS TIME (MIN) = 0 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 TIME (MIN) = 10 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 20 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 30 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 40 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 50 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 60 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 70 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 80 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 90 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 100 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 110 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 120 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 130 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.6 TIME (MIN) = 140 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 150 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.8 TIME (MIN) = 160 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.9 TIME (MIN) = 170 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.1 TIME (MIN) = 180 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.2 TIME (MIN) = 190 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.5 TIME (MIN) = 200 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.8 TIME (MIN) = 210 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.4 TIME (MIN) = 220 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3.8 TIME (MIN) = 230 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 5.6 TIME (MIN) = 240 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.9 TIME (MIN) = 250 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 33.45 TIME (MIN) = 260 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 4.5 TIME (MIN) = 270 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 3 TIME (MIN) = 280 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2.4 TIME (MIN) = 290 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 2 TIME (MIN) = 300 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.7 TIME (MIN) = 310 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.5 TIME (MIN) = 320 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.4 TIME (MIN) = 330 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.3 TIME (MIN) = 340 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.2 TIME (MIN) = 350 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1.1 TIME (MIN) = 360 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 1 TIME (MIN) = 370 DISCHARGE (CFS) = 0 Outlet Structure for Discharge of BMP-1 Discharge vs. Elevation Table Low-flow orifice Slot orifice Emergency Overflow No.:1 No.:1 Invert:5.5 ft Invert:0 ft Invert:2.00 ft L:14 ft Dia:4 in Length: 2.75 ft Cw:3.1 Dia:0.33 ft Height 0.25 ft Tank Dimensions A:0.087 sq.ft. A:0.69 sq.ft Area:5,971 sq.ft. Co:0.6 Co:0.6 Height:6 ft Total Vol:35,824 cu.ft. Note: h = head above the invert of the lowest surface discharge opening. Elev h* Volume Qorifice-low Qslot-mid Qemerg Qtotal ft) (ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 182.75 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.000 0.000 0.0000 183.00 0.25 0.0343 0.1292 0.000 0.000 0.1292 183.25 0.50 0.0685 0.2712 0.000 0.000 0.2712 183.50 0.75 0.1028 0.3431 0.000 0.000 0.3431 183.75 1.00 0.1371 0.4023 0.000 0.000 0.4023 184.00 1.25 0.1713 0.4539 0.000 0.000 0.4539 184.25 1.50 0.2056 0.5001 0.000 0.000 0.5001 184.50 1.75 0.2399 0.5425 0.000 0.000 0.5425 184.75 2.00 0.2741 0.5817 0.000 0.000 0.5817 185.00 2.25 0.3084 0.6185 1.433 0.000 2.0519 185.25 2.50 0.3427 0.6532 2.190 0.000 2.8428 185.50 2.75 0.3769 0.6862 2.745 0.000 3.4309 185.75 3.00 0.4112 0.7176 3.205 0.000 3.9228 186.00 3.25 0.4455 0.7477 3.607 0.000 4.3550 186.25 3.50 0.4797 0.7767 3.969 0.000 4.7456 186.50 3.75 0.5140 0.8046 4.300 0.000 5.1048 186.75 4.00 0.5483 0.8316 4.608 0.000 5.4393 187.00 4.25 0.5825 0.8577 4.896 0.000 5.7537 187.25 4.50 0.6168 0.8831 5.168 0.000 6.0513 187.50 4.75 0.6511 0.9077 5.427 0.000 6.3345 187.75 5.00 0.6853 0.9317 5.674 0.000 6.6053 188.00 5.25 0.7196 0.9551 5.910 0.000 6.8652 188.25 5.50 0.7539 0.9779 6.137 0.000 7.1154 188.50 5.75 0.7881 1.0002 6.357 5.425 12.7820 188.75 6.00 0.8224 1.0221 6.569 15.344 22.9350 Note: 1. Weir equation, Q=CwLe(h)3/2 2. Orifice equation, Q=CoAe(2gh)1/2 3. Slot orifice acts as a weir when h* < hslot; slot orifice acts as an orifice when h* hslot HEC-HMS Detention Routing Summary Project Shinohara 1im Summary Results for Reservoir "BMP-1 " - X Project: Shinohara Simulation Run : Q100 Reservoir : BMP-1 Start of Run: 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model: Post_Dev End of Run: 01Jan 2000, 06:05 Meteorologic Model: Met 1 Compute T ime:DATA CHANGED, RECOMPUTE Control Specifications :Control 1 Volume Units : @ IN Q ACRE-FT Computed Result~ Peak Inflow : 33.45 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow: 01Jan2000, 04 : 10 Peak Discharge: 6.99 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Discharge :01Jan2000, 04 :19 Inflow Volume: n/a Pea k Storage: 0.74 (ACRE -FT) Discharge Volume :n/a Pe ak Elevation : 5 .37 (FT) observed Flow Gage BMP .. a_ Peak Dischar ge :33.45 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Discharge :01J an2000, 04: 10 Volume: n/a RMSE Std Dev: 0.93 Nash-Sutcliffe: 0 .126 Percent Bias: -22.43 % Reservoir "BMP-1" Resu lts for Run "0100" 0 .8 0 .7 t:: 0 .6 I ~ 0 .5 -- DA roo 0 .3 u5 0 .2 0 .1 0 .0 I-"".,.~ V) - u 0 u:::: 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 00:00 I T 01 :00 6 .00 f '-· .. 1, ,,.,.,.., jf -----=.t .. t a· 5 .25 4 .50 3 .75 3 .00 2 .25 1 .50 0 .75 f-- f--~1/'=7:::---,_ I ~ I I ~ 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 01 Jan2000 s Q) iJ Legend (Compute Time: DATA CHANGED, RECOMPUT=---------------------~ Run:Q100 Element:BMP·1 Result:Storage EX PIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Pool Elev ation EXPIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Observed Flow EXPIR. .. Run:Q100 Element:BMP-1 Result:Outflow EX PIRED Run:Q100 Element:BMP -1 Result:Combined Inflow EXPIR. .. Shinohara Business Center Project Name/ _________________________ _ ATTACHMENT 6 Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report Attach project's geotechnical and groundwater investigation report. Refer to Appendix C.4 to determine the reporting requirements. CCV BMP Manual PDP SWQMP Template Date: March 2019 CllYOf CHULA VISTA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR ONPOINT DEVELOPMENT LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA JULY 28, 2021 PROJECT NO. G2762-42-01 Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2021 OnPoint Development 7514 Girard Street, Suite 1515 La Jolla, California 92037 Attention: Mr. Todd Dwyer Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Dwyer: In accordance with your request, we have prepared this geotechnical investigation report for the proposed industrial building at the subject site. The site is underlain by Tertiary age San Diego Formation mantled by Very Old Paralic Deposits, alluvium, and topsoil. Undocumented fill berms are present on the property. This report is based on our observations made during our field investigation performed between June 30 and July 7, 2021, and laboratory testing. Based on the results of this study, we opine that the subject site is suitable for construction of the proposed industrial building. The accompanying report includes the results of our study and conclusions and recommendations regarding geotechnical aspects of site development. Should you have questions regarding this investigation, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED GE 2533 Rupert S. Adams CEG 2561 RCM:RSA:arm e-mail) Addressee GE OCON INCORPORATED G E OT E CHN I CAL E NV I RONMENTA L MA T ER I A L S 6960 Flanders Dr ive Son Diego, Ca li forn ia 9212 1-2974 Telephone 858.558.6900 Fa x 858.558.6159 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...................................................................................................................... 1 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 2 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ............................................................................................. 2 3.1 Undocumented Fill (Qudf) ......................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) ....................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Topsoil (Unmapped) ................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Alluvium (Qal) ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.5 Terrace Deposits (Qt) ................................................................................................................. 3 3.6 Very Old Paralic Deposits (Qvop) .............................................................................................. 4 3.7 San Diego Formation (Tsd) ........................................................................................................ 4 4. GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................... 4 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ...................................................................................................................... 4 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity .............................................................................................................. 4 5.2 Ground Rupture .......................................................................................................................... 6 5.3 Storm Surge, Tsunamis, and Seiches .......................................................................................... 6 5.4 Flooding ...................................................................................................................................... 7 5.5 Liquefaction ................................................................................................................................ 7 5.6 Landslides ................................................................................................................................... 7 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 8 6.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 8 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ........................................................................................... 9 6.3 Grading Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 11 6.4 Slopes ........................................................................................................................................ 13 6.5 Earthwork Grading Factors ....................................................................................................... 15 6.6 Subdrains .................................................................................................................................. 15 6.7 Settlement Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 15 6.8 Seismic Design Criteria ............................................................................................................ 17 6.9 Shallow Foundations ................................................................................................................ 19 6.10 Conventional Retaining Wall Recommendations ..................................................................... 21 6.11 Lateral Loading ......................................................................................................................... 24 6.12 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls ........................................................... 25 6.13 Soil Nail Walls .......................................................................................................................... 27 6.14 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations ................................................................................ 29 6.15 Exterior Concrete Flatwork ...................................................................................................... 32 6.16 Slope Maintenance.................................................................................................................... 33 6.17 Storm Water Management ........................................................................................................ 34 6.18 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection ..................................................................................... 34 6.19 Grading and Foundation Plan Review ...................................................................................... 35 MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Geologic Map Figure 2, Geologic Cross Section A-A’ TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded) APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figure A-1, Log of Small Diameter Boring Figures A-2 and A-3, Logs of Large Diameter Boring Figures A-4 to A-23, Logs of Exploratory Test Pits APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Summary of Laboratory Water-Soluble Sulfate Test Results Summary of Laboratory Chloride Ion Content Test Results Summary of Laboratory pH and Resistivity Test Results Summary of Laboratory Atterberg Test Results APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LIST OF REFERENCES Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 1 - July 28, 2021 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report contains the results of our geotechnical investigation for a proposed industrial building located at the terminus of Shinohara Lane, in Chula Vista, California (see Vicinity Map). Vicinity Map The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate subsurface soil and geologic conditions at the site, and provide conclusions and recommendations pertaining to geotechnical aspects of developing the property as proposed. The scope of our investigation included a site reconnaissance, excavating and logging 20 backhoe test pits, 2 large diameter borings, 1 small diameter boring, and reviewing published and unpublished geologic literature and reports (see List of References). Appendix A presents a discussion of our field investigation. We performed laboratory tests on soil samples obtained from the exploratory test pits to evaluate pertinent physical properties for engineering analyses. The results of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. Site geologic conditions are depicted on Figure 1 (Geologic Map). A CAD file of the preliminary grading plan prepared by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates was utilized as a base map to plot geologic Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 2 - July 28, 2021 contacts and exploratory excavation locations. It is our understanding the site plan has not yet been finalized and building configuration and location might be adjusted from what is shown on our geologic map. An updated geologic map can be provided once final site configuration is known. The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based on our analysis of the data obtained during the investigation, and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions on this and adjacent properties. 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property consists of a rectangular parcel located west of the terminus of Shinohara Lane, north of Main Street and west of Brandywine Avenue, in Chula Vista, California (see Vicinity Map). The approximately 10-acre parcel is currently undeveloped except for minor surface drainage improvements. The property is fenced with gated access via Shinohara Lane at the southeast corner. Based on review of historical aerial photographs, the site was partially graded circa 1992 when it was used as a borrow site. Except for the graded area in the north-central area of the property, the site slopes moderately to steeply from north to south. Site elevations range from approximately 250 feet mean sea level (MSL) at the north end to 145 feet MSL at the south end. The site is boarded by residential developments to the north and west, and commercial/industrial buildings to the south and east. The current proposed improvements consist of a single-story approximately 190,000 square-foot industrial warehouse building with associated improvements including utilities, paving, storm water management devices, and landscape improvements. Proposed cuts and fills are estimated to be up to 50 feet, with new slopes being up to approximately 10 feet in height. Retaining walls will be requied along the perimeter of the site to reach pad grades. We understand the walls will likely be soil nail walls and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. Paved parking lots and driveways are planned along the perimeter of the site. The locations and descriptions of the site and proposed development are based on our site reconnaissance and recent field investigations, and our understanding of site development as shown on the preliminary grading study plans prepared Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates. If project details vary significantly from those described, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted to review the changes and provide additional analyses and/or revisions to this report, if warranted. 3. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Based on the results of the field investigation, the site is underlain by Tertiary San Diego Formation capped with Very Old Paralic Deposits, terrace deposits, alluvium, topsoil, previously placed fill and undocumented fill, which are described below in order of increasing age. Mapped geologic conditions Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 3 - July 28, 2021 are depicted on the Geologic Map (Figure 1), and on the Geologic Cross Section (Figure 2). Exploratory test pit and boring logs are presented in Appendix A. 3.1 Undocumented Fill (Qudf) The southeast and central portions of the site have soil berms that appear to have been constructed during previous grading to control surface water runoff. The undocumented soil generally consists of loose to medium dense, dry to damp, clayey sand with cobble. Several small trash piles are also present at the site. The undocumented fill and trash are unsuitable for support of structural fill or other improvements in their present condition. Undocumented fill should be removed and replaced as compacted fill. Trash should be hauled offsite prior to grading. Soil berms can be incorporated into fill areas during grading, provided they are free of trash and/or hazardous substances. 3.2 Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) Previously placed compacted fill (by others) associated with a sewer easement adjacent to the northwest corner of the site extends on to the site. We did not evaluate the condition of this fill during our subsurface exploration. However, it is located behind the proposed soil nail wall and will likely not be encountered during grading operations. It might be encountered when drilling soil nails. 3.3 Topsoil (Unmapped) Topsoil mantles the site, typically consisting of loose/soft to stiff, dry to damp, silty and clayey sand and sandy silt and clay with gravel. Topsoil ranges from one to three feet thick across the site. Remedial grading in the form of removal and recompaction will be required in areas receiving improvements. Portions of the topsoils are highly expansive. 3.4 Alluvium (Qal) Alluvium is present in the shallow drainages along the east and west sides of the site, and across most of the southern portion of the site. The alluvium ranges in thickness from 2 feet to greater than 20 feet. The alluvium generally consist of medium dense to dense, silty to clayey sand with minor amounts of gravel and cobble. The upper five feet of the alluvium is unsuitable for the support of foundations or structural fills and will require removal during remedial grading operations. Deeper removals may be required if pockets of loose/soft alluvium extend below the recommended remedial depth. 3.5 Terrace Deposits (Qt) Pleistocene-age Terrace Deposits are present in limited area the site, consisting of loose to medium dense, damp, sand with gravel and cobble up to 10-inches in diameter. The Terrace Deposits are considered suitable for support or structural loads but may require some remedial grading in the upper Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 4 - July 28, 2021 five feet. Remedial grading depths in Terrace Deposits should be verified by a Geocon representative during grading operations. 3.6 Very Old Paralic Deposits (Qvop) Quaternary-age Very Old Paralic Deposits caps the San Diego Formation in the northwest portion of the site. The Very Old Paralic Deposits were up to approximately 8 feet thick in the areas explored and consisted of dense to very dense, medium to coarse grained sandstone with cobble. We expect grading will remove the majority of the Very Old Paralic Deposits within the building pad area. Vertical wall cuts may expose Very Old Paralic Deposits in the northwest corner of the site. 3.7 San Diego Formation (Tsd) Tertiary-age San Diego Formation underlies the Very Old Paralic Deposits and surficial deposits, is exposed at grade in the central and northern portions of the site, and was identified in most of test pits in the southern portion of the site. The San Diego Formation generally consists of weakly to moderately cemented, massive to laminated/cross-bedded, micaceous, damp to moist, fine- to medium-grained sandstone and silty sandstone, with occasional gravel and cobble beds. The San Diego Formation possesses a “very low” to “low” expansion potential (expansion index of 50 or less). The San Diego Formation is considered suitable for support of structural loads. Bedding attitudes measured in Test Pit No. 11 and in both large diameter borings (Appendix A) range from approximately N10E to N30W, with dips between 9 and 20 degrees to the west. Measured bedding attitudes were similar to those reported on regional geologic maps of the area. 4. GROUNDWATER We did not encounter groundwater or seepage during our site investigation. However, it is not uncommon for shallow seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed when sites are irrigated or infiltration is implemented. Seepage is dependent on seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, among other factors, and varies as a result. Proper surface drainage will be important to future performance of the project. 5. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 Faulting and Seismicity A review of the referenced geologic materials and our knowledge of the general area indicates that the site is not underlain by active, potentially active, or inactive faults. However, a strand of the potentially active La Nacion Fault is mapped approximately 400 feet east of the site. An active fault is defined by the California Geological Survey (CGS) as a fault showing evidence for activity within the Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 5 - July 28, 2021 last 11,700 years. The closest active fault is Newport Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault zone, located approximately eight miles west of the site. The site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has developed a program to evaluate the approximate location of faulting in the area of properties. The following figure shows the location of the existing faulting in the San Diego County and Southern California region. The faults are shown as solid, dashed and dotted traces representing well constrained, moderately constrained and inferred faults, respectively. The fault line colors represent faults with ages less than 150 years (red), 15,000 years orange), 130,000 years (green), 750,000 years (blue) and 1.6 million years (black). Faults in the San Diego Area The San Diego County and Southern California region is seismically active. The following figure presents the occurrence of earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 2.5 from the period of 1900 through 2015 according to the Bay Area Earthquake Alliance website. l ay;J; ~e~:: ~fi GO five Poi emon Grove M f S Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 6 - July 28, 2021 Earthquakes in Southern California Considerations important in seismic design include the frequency and duration of motion and the soil conditions underlying the site. Seismic design of structures should be evaluated in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) guidelines currently adopted by the local agency. 5.2 Ground Rupture The risk associated with ground rupture hazard is very low due to the absence of active faults at the subject site. 5.3 Storm Surge, Tsunamis, and Seiches Storm surges are large ocean waves that sweep across coastal areas when storms make landfall. Storm surges can cause inundation, severe erosion and backwater flooding along the waterfront. The site is located over six miles from the Pacific Ocean and is at an elevation of about 145 feet or greater above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Therefore, the potential of storm surges affecting the site is considered low. A tsunami is a series of long period waves generated in the ocean by a sudden displacement of large volumes of water. Causes of tsunamis include underwater earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or offshore slope failures. The potential for the site to be affected by a tsunami is negligible due to the distance from the Pacific Ocean and the site elevation. 0 0 0 0 oo 0 • • M3• M4· M5-M-M7+ • S..11' Cl~net~e C ,>;mt I f'ttwfla~n f,,1 !II "l B .. • 0 0 • • 0 • 0 ••o 990-2000 2000-20 10 2010-2015 Oce.:1 1ls lde • E$C01Hlld • • • 0 • • 0 u .. ,-s Sar,1~ hr;,rn • -:. !!< 1)N • • .. El \..JJ011 1 ••o Sn !]ll[ti e s;hu lo~lsto 0 0 • • • •• e •• • • • C> -~ '°" Jec..119' 0 t e • • .:m ll;i ae 0 Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 7 - July 28, 2021 A seiche is a run-up of water within a lake or embayment triggered by fault- or landslide-induced ground displacement. The site is not located in the vicinity of or downstream from such bodies of water. Therefore, the risk of seiches affecting the site is negligible. 5.4 Flooding According to maps produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the site is zoned as “Zone X – Minimal Flood Hazard.” Based on our review of FEMA flood maps, the risk of site flooding is considered low. 5.5 Liquefaction Liquefaction typically occurs when a site is located in a zone with seismic activity, onsite soils are cohesionless or silt/clay with low plasticity, groundwater is encountered within 50 feet of the surface and soil densities are less than about 70 percent of the maximum dry densities. If the four previous criteria are met, a seismic event could result in a rapid pore water pressure increase from the earthquake-generated ground accelerations. Due to the lack of a permanent, near-surface groundwater table and the dense nature of the underlying geologic units on the property, liquefaction potential for the site is considered very low. 5.6 Landslides We did not observe evidence of previous or incipient slope instability at the site during our study. Published geologic mapping indicates landslides are not present on or immediately adjacent to the site. Therefore, the risk of landsliding at the site is considered low. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 8 - July 28, 2021 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General 6.1.1 No soil or geologic conditions were observed that would preclude the development of the property as presently proposed provided that the recommendations of this report are followed. 6.1.2 The site is underlain by compressible surficial deposits consisting of undocumented fill, topsoil and alluvium, overlying Quaternary-age Terrace Deposits, Very Old Paralic Deposits, and Tertiary-age San Diego Formation. The undocumented fill and topsoil range from approximately one to 4 feet thick. The alluvium extends to depths greater than 20 feet thick in the southeast corner of the site, but may be thicker in unexplored areas of the site. Additionally, minor amounts of trash and construction debris have been placed at the site. 6.1.3 Undocumented fill, topsoil, and the upper five feet of alluvium and Terrace Deposits are unsuitable in their present condition to receive additional fill or settlement-sensitive structures and will require removal and recompaction. Portions of the topsoil are highly expansive. To reduce the potential for soil heave impacting foundations and site improvements, we recommend burial of clayey topsoil at least five feet below design pad grade and outside of the foundation, reinforced, and retained zones of MSE walls. 6.1.4 We did not encounter groundwater during our subsurface exploration, and groundwater should not be a constraint to project development. However, seepage within surficial soils and formational materials may be encountered during the grading operations, especially during the rainy seasons. 6.1.5 Except for possible strong seismic shaking, no significant geologic hazards were observed or are known to exist on the site that would adversely affect the site. No special seismic design considerations, other than those recommended herein, are required. 6.1.6 Proper drainage should be maintained in order to preserve the engineering properties of the fill in both the building pads and slope areas. Recommendations for site drainage are provided herein. 6.1.7 We did not perform infiltration testing as part of this study as preliminary design plans were not available. Due to the proposed MSE walls and deep fills required in the south (down- gradient) portion of the site needed to create a level building pad, infiltration of storm water is not recommended on this site. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 9 - July 28, 2021 6.1.8 Provided the recommendations of this report are followed, it is our opinion that the proposed development will not destabilize or result in settlement of adjacent properties and City right-of-way. 6.1.9 Subsurface conditions observed may be extrapolated to reflect general soil/geologic conditions; however, some variations in subsurface conditions between trench locations should be anticipated. 6.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 6.2.1 The recommendations included herein are provided for stable excavations. It is the responsibility of the contractor and their competent person to ensure all excavations, temporary slopes and trenches are properly constructed and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA guidelines in order to maintain safety and the stability of the excavations and adjacent improvements. These excavations should not be allowed to become saturated or to dry out. Surcharge loads should not be permitted to a distance equal to the height of the excavation from the top of the excavation. The top of the excavation should be a minimum of 15 feet from the edge of existing improvements. Excavations steeper than those recommended or closer than 15 feet from an existing surface improvement should be shored in accordance with applicable OSHA codes and regulations. 6.2.2 The stability of the excavations is dependent on the design and construction of the shoring system and site conditions. Therefore, Geocon Incorporated cannot be responsible for site safety and the stability of the proposed excavations. 6.2.3 Excavation of existing undocumented fill and surficial deposits should be possible with moderate to heavy effort using conventional heavy-duty equipment. We expect excavation of the Terrace Deposits, Very Old Paralic Deposits, and the San Diego Formation will require moderate to very heavy effort. Weakly to moderately cemented gravel and/or cobble and zones may be encountered requiring very heavy effort to excavate. 6.2.4 The soil encountered in the field investigation is considered to be both “non-expansive” expansion index [EI] of 20 and less) and “expansive” (EI greater than 20) as defined by 2019 California Building Code (CBC) Section 1803.5.3. Table 6.2.1 presents soil classifications based on the expansion index. We expect the majority of the soils that will be encountered in remedial grading and cut areas will have a “low” expansion potential. Portions of the topsoil possess a “medium” to “high” expansion potential (EI of 51 or greater). Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 10 - July 28, 2021 TABLE 6.2.1 EXPANSION CLASSIFICATION BASED ON EXPANSION INDEX Expansion Index (EI) ASTM D 4829 Expansion Classification 2019 CBC Expansion Classification 0 – 20 Very Low Non-Expansive 21 – 50 Low Expansive51 – 90 Medium 91 – 130 High Greater Than 130 Very High 6.2.5 We performed laboratory tests on samples of the site materials to evaluate the percentage of water-soluble sulfate content. Appendix B presents results of the laboratory water-soluble sulfate content tests. The test results indicate the on-site materials at the locations tested possess “S0” sulfate exposure to concrete structures as defined by 2019 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318-14 Chapter 19. Table 6.2.2 presents a summary of concrete requirements set forth by 2019 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318. The presence of water-soluble sulfates is not a visually discernible characteristic; therefore, other soil samples from the site could yield different concentrations. Additionally, over time landscaping activities (i.e., addition of fertilizers and other soil nutrients) may affect the concentration. TABLE 6.2.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLUTIONS Exposure Class Water-Soluble Sulfate (SO4) Percent by Weight Cement Type (ASTM C 150) Maximum Water to Cement Ratio by Weight1 Minimum Compressive Strength (psi) S0 SO4<0.10 No Type Restriction n/a 2,500 S1 0.10<SO4<0.20 II 0.50 4,000 S2 0.20<SO4<2.00 V 0.45 4,500 S3 SO4>2.00 V+Pozzolan or Slag 0.45 4,500 6.2.6 We tested samples for potential of hydrogen (pH) and resistivity and chloride to aid in evaluating the corrosion potential. Appendix B presents the laboratory test results. 6.2.7 Geocon Incorporated does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering. Therefore, further evaluation by a corrosion engineer may be needed if improvements susceptible to corrosion are planned. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 11 - July 28, 2021 6.3 Grading Recommendations 6.3.1 Grading should be performed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report, the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix C and the City of Chula Vista’s Grading Ordinance. Where the recommendations of this section conflict with those of Appendix C, the recommendations of this section take precedence. Geocon Incorporated should observe the grading operations on a full-time basis and provide testing during the fill placement. 6.3.2 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the City inspector, developer, grading and underground contractors, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time. 6.3.3 Site preparation should begin with the removal of deleterious material, trash and debris, and vegetation. The depth of vegetation removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas or soil to be used as fill is relatively free of organic matter. Material generated during stripping and/or site demolition should be exported from the site. Asphalt and concrete (if encountered) should not be mixed with the fill soil unless approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. 6.3.4 Abandoned foundations and buried utilities (if encountered) should be removed and the resultant depressions and/or trenches should be backfilled with properly compacted material as part of the remedial grading. 6.3.5 We recommend undocumented fill, topsoil, and the upper five feet of alluvium and Terrace Deposits be removed and replaced as compacted fill throughout the site. Trash and debris may be encountered in the undocumented fill. Trash and debris, if encountered, should be removed from the fill and exported. 6.3.6 Estimated remedial removal depths are shown on the Geologic Map (Figure 1). The actual depth of remedial removals should be determined in the field during grading by a representative of Geocon Incorporated prior to placement and compaction of fill. 6.3.7 Based on the existing site conditions, we expect grading will result in cuts and fills from existing grade up to approximately 50 feet to create a level building pad. A cut-to-fill transition will be created in the proposed building pad resulting in San Diego Formation at grade in the north portion of the site and compacted fills up to 50 feet deep in the south portion of the site. Undercutting of the north side of the building pad will be required as shown in Table 6.3.1 below. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 12 - July 28, 2021 6.3.8 Expansive soils found in the upper three to four feet below existing site grades should be buried in deep fills and outside of the foundation, reinforced and retained zones of MSE walls, and at least five feet below pad grade or three feet below the deepest foundation element, whichever is deeper. 6.3.9. Removals at the toes of proposed fill slopes and in front of retaining walls should extend horizontally beyond the edge of the slope toe or wall a distance equal to the depth of removal. A typical detail of remedial grading beyond slope toes is presented below. TABLE 6.3.1 SUMMARY OF GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS Area Removal Requirements All Structural Improvement Areas All undocumented fill and topsoil and the Upper 5 feet of Alluvium and Terrace Deposits Building Pad (North Side [Cut]) Undercut building pad 5 feet below bottom of building footings to remove cut to fill transition Fill Areas Expansive Soil Buried at Least 5 Feet Below Pad Grade or at Least 3 Feet Below Bottom of Footings Remedial Grading Limits 10 Feet Outside of Building Pads; 2 Feet Outside of Improvement Areas; Beyond toe of slopes and retaining walls a distance equal to the depth of the remedial excavation, where possible Exposed Bottoms of Remedial Grading Scarify Upper 12 Inches EXIS T ING GRADE NOTE: U NSUI TABLE COMPRESS IB L E SURFI C I A L DEPOSIT S FORMAT I ONAL MATER IA L SLOPE OF BACKCUT MAY BE STEEPENED W ITH THE APP ROVAL OF THE P ROJECT ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST WHERE BOUNDARY CON STRAINTS LIM IT EXT E NT OF REMO VALS N OTTO SCAL E Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 13 - July 28, 2021 6.3.10 Along the south side of the site an existing retaining wall adjacent to the property margin may impact remedial grading limits. Deepened wall footings may be required so as to not impact the existing retaining wall. 6.3.11 Excavation bottoms should be sloped 1 percent to the adjacent street or deepest fill. Prior to fill soil being placed, the existing ground surface should be scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary, and compacted to a depth of at least 12 inches. Deeper removals may be required if saturated or loose fill soil is encountered. A representative of Geocon should be on-site during removals to evaluate the limits of the remedial grading. 6.3.12 The site should then be brought to final subgrade elevations with fill compacted in layers. In general, soil native to the site is suitable for use from a geotechnical engineering standpoint as fill if relatively free from vegetation, debris and other deleterious material. Layers of fill should be no thicker than will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. Fill, including backfill and scarified ground surfaces, should be compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557. Fill materials placed below optimum moisture content may require additional moisture conditioning prior to placing additional fill. 6.3.13 Imported fill (if necessary) should consist of the characteristics presented in Table 6.3.2. Geocon Incorporated should be notified of the import soil source and should perform laboratory testing of import soil prior to its arrival at the site to determine its suitability as fill material. TABLE 6.3.2 SUMMARY OF IMPORT FILL RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Characteristic Values Expansion Potential “Very Low” to “Low” (Expansion Index of 50 or less) Particle Size Maximum Dimension Less Than 3 Inches Generally Free of Debris 6.4 Slopes 6.4.1 Slope stability analyses were performed for proposed cut and fill slopes up to 10 feet high 2:1 gradient). The stability analyses were performed using simplified Janbu analysis. Our analyses utilized average drained direct shear strength parameters based on laboratory tests performed for this project and our experience with similar soils. The analyses indicate planned cut and fill slopes, and the existing native perimeter slope will have a calculated factors of safety in excess of 1.5 under static conditions for both deep-seated failure and shallow sloughing conditions. Table 6.4.1 presents the slope stability analysis. Slope Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 14 - July 28, 2021 stability analysis for MSE walls should be performed once the wall design is complete and grid locations and lengths are known. TABLE 6.4.1 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION Parameter Value Slope Height, H 20 Feet Slope Inclination, I (Horizontal to Vertical) 2:1 Total Soil Unit Weight, 125 pcf Friction Angle, 30 Degrees Cohesion, C 200 psf Slope Factor C 7.2 NCf (From Chart) 25 Factor of Safety = (NCfC)/(2.0 6.4.2 Table 6.4.2 presents the surficial slope stability analysis for the proposed sloping conditions. TABLE 6.4.2 SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION Parameter Value Slope Height, H Vertical Depth of Saturation, Z 3 Feet Slope Inclination, I (Horizontal to Vertical) 2:1 (26.6 Degrees) Total Soil Unit Weight, 125 pcf Water Unit Weight, 62.4 pcf Friction Angle, 30 Degrees Cohesion, C 200 psf Factor of Safety = (C+(Zcos2I tan)/(cosI) 1.9 6.4.3 All cut slope excavations should be observed during grading by an engineering geologist to verify that soil and geologic conditions do not differ significantly from those anticipated. 6.4.4 The outer 15 feet (or a distance equal to the height of the slope, whichever is less) of fill slopes should be composed of properly compacted granular soil fill to reduce the potential for surficial sloughing. Granular “soil” fill is defined as a well-graded soil mix with less than 20 percent fines (silt and clay particles). Poorly graded soils with less than 5 percent fines should not be used in the slope zone due to high erosion potential. All slopes should be compacted by backrolling with a loaded sheepsfoot roller at vertical intervals not to exceed 4 feet and should Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 15 - July 28, 2021 be track-walked at the completion of each slope such that the fill soils are uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction to the face of the finished sloped. 6.4.5 All slopes should be landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation, having variable root depths and requiring minimal landscape irrigation. In addition, all slopes should be drained and properly maintained to reduce erosion. 6.5 Earthwork Grading Factors 6.5.1 Estimates of shrink-swell factors are based on comparing laboratory compaction tests with the density of the material in its natural state and experience with similar soil types. Variations in natural soil density and compacted fill render shrinkage value estimates very approximate. As an example, the contractor can compact fill to a density of 90 percent or higher of the laboratory maximum dry density. Thus, the contractor has at least a 10 percent range of control over the fill volume. Based on the work performed to date and considering the discussion herein, the earthwork factors in Table 6.5 may be used as a basis for estimating how much the on-site soils may shrink or swell when removed from their natural state and placed as compacted fill. TABLE 6.5 SHRINKAGE AND BULK FACTORS Soil Unit Shrink/Bulk Factor Undocumented Fill (Qudf) 10-15% Shrink Previously Placed Fill (Qpf) 0-3% Shrink Topsoil (unmapped) 5-10% Shrink Alluvium (Qal) 4-8% Shrink Terrace Deposits (Qt) 0-5% Bulk Very Old Paralic Deposits (Qvop) 3-5% Bulk San Diego Formation (Tsd) 3-5% Bulk 6.6 Subdrains 6.6.1 With the exception of retaining wall drains, we do not expect subdrains will be required. We should be contacted to provide recommendations for subdrains if field conditions differ from those described herein. 6.7 Settlement Monitoring 6.7.1 At the completion of grading, the south side of the site will be underlain by up to 50 feet of compacted fill behind MSE walls. Post-grading settlement (hydro-compression) of properly compacted new fill with a maximum thickness of 50 feet could be up to about 2.5 inches. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 16 - July 28, 2021 We expect the settlement could occur over 20+ years depending on the influx of rain and irrigation water into the fill mass. This settlement will likely be linear from the time the fill is placed to the end of the settlement period. We do not expect the settlement will impact proposed utilities with proposed gradients of 1 percent or greater. The building foundation design should be designed to account for potential hydro-compression settlement. It has been our experience that developments/improvements, such as proposed, can be constructed with the planned fill depths and proposed settlements. 6.7.2 We expect settlement in the fill as a result of self-weight compression could take up to 3 to 9 months. If building foundations will be constructed shortly after completion of the fill mass, building foundations will need to be designed to accommodate differential settlement as a result of self-weight compression. If the planned structures cannot tolerate the expected movement, a construction waiting period should be implemented until settlement monitoring indicates self-weight compression has essentially ceased. 6.7.3 At the south end of the property where fills are the greatest, we recommend settlement monuments be installed subsequent to the wall construction. A typical settlement monument is shown below. Settlement Plate Detail TOP OF SU RCHA RGE APPROX . FINAL GROU ND SURFACE 4" OR 6" DIA . PLAS TI C PIPE 1" MIN. DIA. RIGID METAL PIPE 1" PLYWOOD OR 0.25 " STEEL PLATE USE SILI CA SA ND TO PROV IDE LEVEL BASE Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 17 - July 28, 2021 6.7.4 Surveying of the surface monument should be performed by the project civil engineer every two weeks for at least three months with the results provided to Geocon for review. Settlement due to primary consolidation will be considered to have ceased when survey readings show a relatively level plateau of settlement data over 4 consecutive readings. 6.8 Seismic Design Criteria 6.8.1 Table 6.8.1 summarizes site-specific design criteria obtained from the 2019 California Building Code (CBC; Based on the 2018 International Building Code [IBC] and ASCE 7-16), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613 Earthquake Loads. We used the computer program Seismic Design Maps, provided by the Structural Engineers Association (SEA) to calculate the seismic design parameters. The short spectral response uses a period of 0.2 second. We evaluated the Site Class based on the discussion in Section 1613.2.2 of the 2019 CBC and Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7-16. The values presented herein are for the risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER) for Site Classes C and D. The southern portion of the building will be underlain by compacted fill in excess of 40 feet. A Site Class D is appropriate for this condition. The northern portion of the building pad will be underlain by shallow compacted fills. Site Class C is appropriate for this condition. TABLE 6.8.1 2019 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value 2019 CBC Reference Site Class C D Section 1613.2.2 MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response Acceleration – Class B (short), SS 0.896g 0.896g Figure 1613.2.1(1) MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response Acceleration – Class B (1 sec), S1 0.313g 0.313g Figure 1613.2.1(2) Site Coefficient, FA 1.2 1.142 Table 1613.2.3(1) Site Coefficient, FV 1.5 1.987* Table 1613.2.3(2) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SMS 1.075g 1.023g Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-36) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration – (1 sec), SM1 0.47g 0.622g* Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-37) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SDS 0.717g 0.682g Section 1613.2.4 (Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SD1 0.313g 0.415g* Section 1613.2.4 (Eqn 16-39) Using the code-based values presented in this table, in lieu of a performing a ground motion hazard analysis, requires the exceptions outlined in ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8 be followed by the project structural engineer. Per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE/SEI 7-16, a ground motion hazard analysis should be performed for projects for Site Class “E” sites with Ss greater than or equal to 1.0g and for Site Class D” and “E” sites with S1 greater than 0.2g. Section 11.4.8 also provides exceptions which indicates that the ground motion hazard analysis may be waived provided the exceptions are followed. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 18 - July 28, 2021 6.8.2 Table 6.8.2 presents the mapped maximum considered geometric mean (MCEG) seismic design parameters for projects located in Seismic Design Categories of D through F in accordance with ASCE 7-16. TABLE 6.8.2 ASCE 7-16 PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION Parameter Value ASCE 7-16 Reference Site Class C D Section 1613.2.2 (2019 CBC) Mapped MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA 0.394g 0.394g Figure 22-7 Site Coefficient, FPGA 1.2 1.206 Table 11.8-1 Site Class Modified MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 0.473g 0.475g Section 11.8.3 (Eqn 11.8-1) 6.8.3 Conformance to the criteria in Tables 6.8.1 and 6.8.2 for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur if a large earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. 6.8.4 The project structural engineer and architect should evaluate the appropriate Risk Category and Seismic Design Category for the planned structures. The values presented herein assume a Risk Category of II and resulting in a Seismic Design Category D. Table 6.8.3 presents a summary of the risk categories. TABLE 6.8.3 ASCE 7-16 RISK CATEGORIES Risk Category Building Use Examples I Low risk to Human Life at Failure Barn, Storage Shelter II Nominal Risk to Human Life at Failure (Buildings Not Designated as I, III or IV) Residential, Commercial and Industrial Buildings III Substantial Risk to Human Life at Failure Theaters, Lecture Halls, Dining Halls, Schools, Prisons, Small Healthcare Facilities, Infrastructure Plants, Storage for Explosives/Toxins IV Essential Facilities Hazardous Material Facilities, Hospitals, Fire and Rescue, Emergency Shelters, Police Stations, Power Stations, Aviation Control Facilities, National Defense, Water Storage Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 19 - July 28, 2021 6.9 Shallow Foundations 6.9.1 The proposed structure can be supported on a shallow foundation system founded in compacted fill provided the grading recommendations provided in Section 6.3 are followed. Foundations for the structure should consist of continuous strip footings and/or isolated spread footings. Table 6.9.1 provides a summary of the foundation design recommendations. TABLE 6.9.1 SUMMARY OF FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Parameter Value Minimum Continuous Foundation Width 12 inches Minimum Isolated Foundation Width 24 inches Minimum Foundation Depth 24 Inches Below Lowest Adjacent Grade Minimum Steel Reinforcement 4 No. 5 Bars, 2 at the Top and 2 at the Bottom Allowable Bearing Capacity 2,500 psf Bearing Capacity Increase 500 psf per Foot of Depth 300 psf per Foot of Width Maximum Allowable Bearing Capacity 4,000 psf Estimated Total Settlement 1 Inch Estimated Differential Settlement ½ Inch in 40 Feet Footing Size Used for Settlement 9-Foot Square Design Expansion Index 50 or less 6.9.2 Additional settlement as a result of self-weight compression and hydro-compression could occur over the life of the structure. We estimate approximately 0.4 percent of the total fill thickness underlying the building pad. Self-weight compression is expected to occur over 3 to 9 months. Hydro-compression is expected to occur over a 20 year or more duration. The estimated fill thickness and total settlement as a result of self-weight compression and hydro-compression is shown on Table 6.9.2 and is in addition to the static settlement indicated on Table 6.9.1. An estimate of total and differential fill settlement, including settlement contours thickness and final foundation recommendations to be used in design can be provided, if desired. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 20 - July 28, 2021 TABLE 6.9.2 ESTIMATED FILL THICKNESS AND TOTAL AND DIFFERENTIAL FILL SETTLEMENT AS A RESULT OF SELF-WEIGHT AND HYDRO-COMPRESSION Estimated Compacted Fill Thickness after grading) feet) Estimated Total Fill Settlement Self-Weight and Hydro-Compression) inches) Estimated Differential Fill Settlement Self-Weight and Hydro-Compression) inches) 0 to 50 0 to 2.5 2.5 inches over a span of 200 feet (angular distortion of 1/960) 6.9.3 The foundations should be embedded in accordance with the recommendations herein and the Wall/Column Footing Dimension Detail. The embedment depths should be measured from the lowest adjacent pad grade for both interior and exterior footings. Footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope (unless designed with a post-tensioned foundation system as discussed herein). Wall/Column Footing Dimension Detail 6.9.4 The bearing capacity values presented herein are for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 6.9.5 Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 horizontal:vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended due to the tendency for lateral soil movement to occur. For fill slopes less than 20 feet high or cut slopes regardless of height, footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. 4. '• ~;':~:·_. ·. 4 ,' .,., .:.1~; 41 :0:,: .. )A·-•. : ;_,,;/·-~• a , ':'" •·,;-. L-:=FOOTING"~ WIDTH PAD GRADE b :,: 0. ow oo u. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 21 - July 28, 2021 When located next to a descending 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) fill slope or steeper, the foundations should be extended to a depth where the minimum horizontal distance is equal to H/3 (where H equals the vertical distance from the top of the fill slope to the base of the fill soil) with a minimum of 7 feet but need not exceed 40 feet. The horizontal distance is measured from the outer, deepest edge of the footing to the face of the slope. A post-tensioned slab and foundation system or mat foundation system can be used to reduce the potential for distress in the structures associated with strain softening and lateral fill extension. Specific design parameters or recommendations for either of these alternatives can be provided once the building location and fill slope geometry have been determined. Although other improvements, which are relatively rigid or brittle, such as concrete flatwork or masonry walls, may experience some distress if located near the top of a slope, it is generally not economical to mitigate this potential. It may be possible, however, to incorporate design measures that would permit some lateral soil movement without causing extensive distress. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for specific recommendations. 6.9.6 We should observe the foundation excavations prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to check that the exposed soil conditions are similar to those expected and that they have been extended to the appropriate bearing strata. Foundation modifications may be required if unexpected soil conditions are encountered. 6.9.7 Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by the structural engineer. 6.10 Conventional Retaining Wall Recommendations 6.10.1 Retaining walls should be designed using the values presented in Table 6.10.1. Soil with an expansion index (EI) of greater than 50 should not be used as backfill soil behind retaining walls. TABLE 6.10.1 RETAINING WALL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Parameter Value Active Soil Pressure, A (Fluid Density, Level Backfill) 35 pcf Active Soil Pressure, A (Fluid Density, 2:1 Sloping Backfill) 50 pcf Seismic Pressure, S 18H psf At-Rest/Restrained Walls Additional Uniform Pressure (0 to 8 Feet High) 7H psf At-Rest/Restrained Walls Additional Uniform Pressure (8+ Feet High) 13H psf Expected Expansion Index for the Subject Property EI<50 H equals the height of the retaining portion of the wall Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 22 - July 28, 2021 6.10.2 The project retaining walls should be designed as shown in the Retaining Wall Loading Diagram. Retaining Wall Loading Diagram 6.10.3 Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001H (where H equals the height of the retaining portion of the wall) at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top (at-rest condition), an additional uniform pressure should be applied to the wall. For retaining walls subject to vehicular loads within a horizontal distance equal to two-thirds the wall height, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of fill soil should be added. 6.10.4 The structural engineer should determine the Seismic Design Category for the project in accordance with Section 1613.2.5 of the 2019 CBC or Section 11.6 of ASCE 7-16. For structures assigned to Seismic Design Category of D, E, or F, retaining walls that support more than 6 feet of backfill should be designed with seismic lateral pressure in accordance with Section 1803.5.12 of the 2019 CBC. The seismic load is dependent on the retained height where H is the height of the wall, in feet, and the calculated loads result in pounds per square foot (psf) exerted at the base of the wall and zero at the top of the wall. 6.10.5 Retaining walls should be designed to ensure stability against overturning sliding, and excessive foundation pressure. Where a keyway is extended below the wall base with the intent to engage passive pressure and enhance sliding stability, it is not necessary to consider active pressure on the keyway. IF PRESENT RETAINING WALL SLAB ACTIVE PRESSURE H (Feet) FOOT ING SEISMIC IF REQUIRED) AT-REST/ RESTRAINED IF REQUIRED) Ri_ psf ---- l H>8' Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 23 - July 28, 2021 6.10.6 Drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes) should not be used where the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely affect the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The recommendations herein assume a properly compacted granular (EI of 50 or less) free-draining backfill material with no hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. The retaining wall should be properly drained as shown in the Typical Retaining Wall Drainage Detail. If conditions different than those described are expected, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for additional recommendations. Typical Retaining Wall Drainage Detail 6.10.7 The retaining walls may be designed using either the active and restrained (at-rest) loading condition or the active and seismic loading condition as suggested by the structural engineer. Typically, it appears the design of the restrained condition for retaining wall loading may be adequate for the seismic design of the retaining walls. However, the active earth pressure combined with the seismic design load should be reviewed and also considered in the design of the retaining walls. 6.10.8 In general, wall foundations having should be designed in accordance with Table 6.10.2. The proximity of the foundation to the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 could impact the allowable soil bearing pressure. Therefore, retaining wall foundations should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. H PROPOSED GRADE 213H GROUND SURFACE TEMPORARY BACKCUT PER OSHA MIRAFI 140N FILTERFABRIC OR EQUIVALENT) OPEN GRADED 1' MAX. AGGREGATE 4" DIA . PERFORATED SCHEDULE 40PVC PIPEEXTENDED TO APPROVED OUTlET OR RETAINING WALL 213 H GROUND SURFACE WATER PROOFING PER ARCHITECT DRAINAGE PANEL MIRADRAIN6000 OR EQUIVALENT) 314' CRUSHEDROCK 12"t~i~N7~~~:tRAP AROUND PIPE .~_.'( V ILT~FABRIC -}\ t_,I ENVELOPE \£ ti MIRAFI 140NOR 1---m,.--..,.,~r .J EQUIVALENT 4' DIA. SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE ORTOTAl DRAIN EXTENDED TO APPROVED OUTLET Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 24 - July 28, 2021 TABLE 6.10.2 SUMMARY OF RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Parameter Value Minimum Retaining Wall Foundation Width 12 inches Minimum Retaining Wall Foundation Depth 12 Inches Minimum Steel Reinforcement Per Structural Engineer Bearing Capacity 2,500 psf Bearing Capacity Increase 500 psf per additional foot of footing depth 300 psf per additional foot of footing width Maximum Bearing Capacity 4,000 psf Estimated Total Settlement 1 Inch Estimated Differential Settlement ½ Inch in 40 Feet 6.10.9 The recommendations presented herein are generally applicable to the design of rigid concrete or masonry retaining walls. Additional recommendations for MSE walls and soil nail walls are provided in Sections 6.12 and 6.13. 6.10.10 Unrestrained walls will move laterally when backfilled and loading is applied. The amount of lateral deflection is dependent on the wall height, the type of soil used for backfill, and loads acting on the wall. The retaining walls and improvements above the retaining walls should be designed to incorporate an appropriate amount of lateral deflection as determined by the structural engineer. 6.10.11 Soil contemplated for use as retaining wall backfill, including import materials, should be identified in the field prior to backfill. At that time, Geocon Incorporated should obtain samples for laboratory testing to evaluate its suitability. Modified lateral earth pressures may be necessary if the backfill soil does not meet the required expansion index or shear strength. City or regional standard wall designs, if used, are based on a specific active lateral earth pressure and/or soil friction angle. In this regard, on-site soil to be used as backfill may or may not meet the values for standard wall designs. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to assess the suitability of the on-site soil for use as wall backfill if standard wall designs will be used. 6.11 Lateral Loading 6.11.1 Table 6.11 should be used to help design the proposed structures and improvements to resist lateral loads for the design of footings or shear keys. 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 in areas not Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 25 - July 28, 2021 protected by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in design for passive resistance. Where walls are planned adjacent to and/or on descending slopes, a passive pressure of 150 pcf should be used in design. TABLE 6.11 SUMMARY OF LATERAL LOAD DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Parameter Value Passive Pressure Fluid Density 350 pcf Passive Pressure Fluid Density Adjacent to and/or on Descending Slopes 150 pcf Coefficient of Friction (Concrete and Soil) 0.35 Coefficient of Friction (Along Vapor Barrier) 0.2 to 0.25* Per manufacturer’s recommendations. 6.11.2 The passive and frictional resistant loads can be combined for design purposes. The lateral passive pressures may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 6.12 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls 6.12.1 Mechanized stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls are planned for the project. MSE retaining walls are alternative walls that consist of modular block facing units with geogrid reinforced earth behind the block. The reinforcement grid attaches to the block units and is typically placed at specified vertical intervals and embedment lengths. The grid length and spacing will be determined by the wall designer. 6.12.2 The geotechnical parameters listed in Table 6.12.1 can be used for preliminary design of the MSE walls. Once actual soil to be used as backfill has been determined and stockpiled, laboratory testing should be performed to check that the soil meets the parameters used in the design of the MSE walls. TABLE 6.12.1 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR MSE WALLS Parameter Reinforced Zone Retained Zone Foundation Zone Angle of Internal Friction 30 degrees 30 degrees 30 degrees Cohesion 100 psf 100 psf 100 psf Wet Unit Density 125 pcf 125 pcf 125 pcf Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 26 - July 28, 2021 6.12.3 The soil parameters presented in Table 6.12.1 are based on our experience and direct shear- strength tests performed during the geotechnical investigation and represent some of the on- site materials. The wet unit density values presented in Table 6.12.1 can be used for design but actual in-place densities may range from approximately 110 to 130 pounds per cubic foot. Geocon has no way of knowing which materials will actually be used as backfill behind the wall during construction. It is up to the wall designers to use their judgment in selection of the design parameters. As such, once backfill materials have been selected and/or stockpiled, sufficient shear tests should be conducted on samples of the proposed backfill materials to check that they conform to actual design values. Results should be provided to the designer to re-evaluate stability of the walls. Dependent upon test results, the designer may require modifications to the original wall design (e.g., longer reinforcement embedment lengths and/or steel reinforcement). 6.12.4 Wall foundations should be designed in accordance with Table 6.12.2 The walls should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. TABLE 6.12.2 SUMMARY OF MSE RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Parameter Value Minimum Retaining Wall Foundation Width 12 inches Minimum Retaining Wall Foundation Depth 12 Inches Bearing Capacity 2,000 psf Bearing Capacity Increase 500 psf per Foot of Depth 300 psf per Foot of Width Maximum Bearing Capacity 4,000 psf Estimated Total Settlement 1 Inch Estimated Differential Settlement ½ Inch in 40 Feet 6.12.5 Backfill materials within the reinforced zone should be compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D 1557. This is applicable to the entire embedment width of the reinforcement. Typically, wall designers specify no heavy compaction equipment within 3 feet of the face of the wall. However, smaller equipment e.g., walk-behind, self-driven compactors or hand whackers) can be used to compact the materials without causing deformation of the wall. If the designer specifies no compactive effort for this zone, the materials are essentially not properly compacted and the reinforcement grid within the uncompacted zone should not be relied upon for Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 27 - July 28, 2021 reinforcement, and overall embedment lengths will have to be increased to account for the difference. 6.12.6 The wall should be provided with a drainage system sufficient to prevent excessive seepage through the wall and the base of the wall, thus preventing hydrostatic pressures behind the wall. 6.12.7 Geosynthetic reinforcement must elongate to develop full tensile resistance. This elongation generally results in movement at the top of the wall. The amount of movement is dependent on the height of the wall (e.g., higher walls rotate more) and the type of reinforcing grid used. In addition, over time the reinforcement grid has been known to exhibit creep sometimes as much as 5 percent) and can undergo additional movement. Given this condition, the owner should be aware that structures and pavement placed within the reinforced and retained zones of the wall may undergo movement. 6.12.8 The MSE wall contractor should provide the estimated deformation of wall and adjacent ground in associated with wall construction. The calculated horizontal and vertical deformations should be determined by the wall designer. Where buildings are located adjacent to the walls, the estimated movements should be provided to the project structural engineer to evaluate if the building foundation can tolerate the expected movements. With respect to improvements adjacent to the wall, cracking and/or movement should be expected. 6.12.9 The MSE wall designer/contractor should review this report, including the slope stability requirements, and incorporate our recommendations as presented herein. We should be provided the plans for the MSE walls to check if they are in conformance with our recommendations prior to issuance of a permit and construction. 6.13 Soil Nail Walls 6.13.1 We understand soil nail walls are planned for the project. Soil nail walls consist of installing closely spaced steel bars (nails) into a slope or excavation in a top-down construction sequence. Following installation of a horizontal row of nails, drains, waterproofing and wall reinforcing steel are placed and shotcrete applied to create a final wall. The wall should be designed by an engineer familiar with the design of soil nail walls. 6.13.2 In general, ground conditions are moderately suited to soil nail wall construction techniques. However, localized gravel, cobble and oversized material could be encountered in the existing materials that could be difficult to drill. Additionally, relatively clean sands may be Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 28 - July 28, 2021 encountered that may result in some raveling of the unsupported excavation. Casing or specialized drilling techniques should be planned where raveling exists (e.g. casing). 6.13.3 Testing of the soil nails should be performed in accordance with the guidelines of the Federal Highway Administration or similar guidelines. At least two verification tests should be performed to confirm design assumptions for each soil/rock type encountered. Verification tests nails should be sacrificial and should not be used to support the proposed wall. The bond length should be adjusted to allow for pullout testing of the verification nails to evaluate the ultimate bond stress. A minimum of 5 percent of the production nails should also be proof tested and a minimum of 4 sacrificial nails should be tested at the discretion of Geocon Incorporated. Consideration should be given to testing sacrificial nails with an adjusted bond length rather than testing production nails. Geocon Incorporated should observe the nail installation and perform the nail testing. 6.13.4 The soil strength parameters listed in Table 6.13 can be used in design of the soil nails. The bond stress is dependent on drilling method, diameter, and construction method. Therefore, the designer should evaluate the bond stress based on soil conditions and the construction method. TABLE 6.13 SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR SOIL NAIL WALLS Description Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle degrees) Estimated Ultimate Bond Stress (psi)* Previously Placed Fill 100 28 10 Alluvium 100 28 10 Very Old Paralic Deposits 200 33 20 San Diego Formation 200 33 20 Assuming gravity fed, open hole drilling techniques. 6.13.5 A wall drain system should be incorporated into the design of the soil nail wall as shown herein. Corrosion protection should be provided for the nails. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 29 - July 28, 2021 Soil Nail Wall Drainage Detail 6.14 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 6.14.1 Preliminary pavement recommendations for the driveways and parking areas are provided below. The final pavement sections should be based on the R-Value of the subgrade soil encountered at final subgrade elevation. For preliminary design, we used a laboratory R-Value of 15. We calculated the preliminary flexible pavement sections for asphalt concrete using varying traffic indices (TIs) in general conformance with the Caltrans Method of Flexible Pavement Design (Highway Design Manual, Section 608.4). The project civil engineer or traffic engineer should determine the appropriate Traffic Index (TI) or traffic loading expected on the project for the various pavement areas that will be constructed. Recommended preliminary asphalt concrete pavement sections are provided on Table 6.14.1. TABLE 16.14.1 PRELIMINARY ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTIONS Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete (inches) Class 2 Base (inches) 4.5 3 6 5 3 8 5.5 3 10 6 3.5 10.5 6.5 3.5 12.5 7 4 13 7.5 4.5 15 8 5 15 i 3'MIN. WHERE REQUIRED PERFORATED COLLECTOR DRAIN SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (O R OTHER) UNIFORMLY SLOPED LEADING TO POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTLET OR CONTROLLED DRAINAGE DEVICE FINI SH SURFACE L ~ Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 30 - July 28, 2021 6.14.2 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 26-1.02B of the Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 6.14.3 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. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to a density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory Hveem density in accordance with ASTM D 2726. 6.14.4 A rigid Portland Cement concrete (PCC) pavement section can also be used. We calculated the rigid pavement section in general conformance with the procedure recommended by the American Concrete Institute report ACI 330R-08 Guide for Design and Construction of Concrete Parking Lots using the parameters presented in Table 6.14.2. TABLE 6.14.2 PRELIMINARY RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS Design Parameter Design Value Modulus of subgrade reaction, k 100 pci Modulus of rupture for concrete, MR 500 psi Concrete Compressive Strength 3,000 psi Traffic Category, TC A and C Average daily truck traffic, ADTT 10 and 300 6.14.5 Based on the criteria presented herein, the PCC pavement sections should have a minimum thickness as presented in Table 6.14.3. TABLE 6.14.3 RIGID VEHICULAR PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Location Portland Cement Concrete (inches) Automobile Parking Stalls (TC=A, ADTT=10) 5.5 Driveways (TC=C, ADTT=100) 7.5 Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 31 - July 28, 2021 6.14.6 The PCC vehicular pavement should be placed over subgrade soil that is compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. 6.14.7 The rigid pavement should also be designed and constructed incorporating the parameters presented in Table 6.14.4. TABLE 6.14.4 ADDITIONAL RIGID PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Subject Value Thickened Edge 1.2 Times Slab Thickness Minimum Increase of 2 Inches 4 Feet Wide Crack Control Joint Spacing 30 Times Slab Thickness Max. Spacing of 12 feet for 5.5-Inch-Thick Max. Spacing of 15 Feet for Slabs 6 Inches and Thicker Crack Control Joint Depth Per ACI 330R-08 1 Inch Using Early-Entry Saws on Slabs Less Than 9 Inches Thick Crack Control Joint Width Inch for Sealed Joints Inch is Common for Sealed Joints 1/10- to 1/8-Inch is Common for Unsealed Joints 6.14.8 Reinforcing steel will not be necessary within the concrete for geotechnical purposes with the possible exception of dowels at construction joints as discussed herein. 6.14.9 To control the location and spread of concrete shrinkage cracks, crack-control joints weakened plane joints) should be included in the design of the concrete pavement slab. Crack-control joints should be sealed with an appropriate sealant to prevent the migration of water through the control joint to the subgrade materials. The depth of the crack-control joints should be determined by the referenced ACI report. 6.14.10 To provide load transfer between adjacent pavement slab sections, a butt-type construction joint should be constructed. The butt-type joint should be thickened by at least 20 percent at the edge and taper back at least 4 feet from the face of the slab. As an alternative to the butt- type construction joint, dowelling can be used between construction joints for pavements of 7 inches or thicker. As discussed in the referenced ACI guide, dowels should consist of Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 32 - July 28, 2021 smooth, 1-inch-diameter reinforcing steel 14 inches long embedded a minimum of 6 inches into the slab on either side of the construction joint. Dowels should be located at the midpoint of the slab, spaced at 12 inches on center and lubricated to allow joint movement while still transferring loads. In addition, tie bars should be installed as recommended in Section 3.8.3 of the referenced ACI guide. The structural engineer should provide other alternative recommendations for load transfer. 6.14.11 Concrete curb/gutter should be placed on soil subgrade compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. Cross-gutters that receives vehicular should be placed on subgrade soil compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. Base materials should not be placed below the curb/gutter, or cross-gutters so water is not able to migrate from the adjacent parkways to the pavement sections. Where flatwork is located directly adjacent to the curb/gutter, the concrete flatwork should be structurally connected to the curbs to help reduce the potential for offsets between the curbs and the flatwork. 6.15 Exterior Concrete Flatwork 6.15.1 Exterior concrete flatwork not subject to vehicular traffic should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Table 6.15. The recommended steel reinforcement would help reduce the potential for cracking. TABLE 6.15 MINIMUM CONCRETE FLATWORK RECOMMENDATIONS Expansion Index, EI Minimum Steel Reinforcement* Options Minimum Thickness EI < 90 6x6-W2.9/W2.9 (6x6-6/6) welded wire mesh 4 Inches No. 3 Bars 18 inches on center, Both Directions EI < 130 4x4-W4.0/W4.0 (4x4-4/4) welded wire mesh No. 4 Bars 12 inches on center, Both Directions In excess of 8 feet square. 6.15.2 Even with the incorporation of the recommendations of this report, the exterior concrete flatwork has a potential to experience some uplift due to expansive soil beneath grade. The steel reinforcement should overlap continuously in flatwork to reduce the potential for vertical offsets within flatwork. Additionally, flatwork should be structurally connected to the curbs, where possible, to reduce the potential for offsets between the curbs and the flatwork. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 33 - July 28, 2021 6.15.3 Concrete flatwork should be provided with crack control joints to reduce and/or control shrinkage cracking. Crack control spacing should be determined by the project structural engineer based upon the slab thickness and intended usage. Criteria of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) should be taken into consideration when establishing crack control spacing. Subgrade soil for exterior slabs not subjected to vehicle loads should be compacted in accordance with criteria presented in the grading section prior to concrete placement. Subgrade soil should be properly compacted, and the moisture content of subgrade soil should be verified prior to placing concrete. Base materials will not be required below concrete improvements. 6.15.4 Where exterior flatwork abuts the structure at entrant or exit points, the exterior slab should be dowelled into the structure’s foundation stemwall. This recommendation is intended to reduce the potential for differential elevations that could result from differential settlement or minor heave of the flatwork. Dowelling details should be designed by the project structural engineer. 6.15.5 The recommendations presented herein are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of exterior slabs as a result of differential movement. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, slabs-on-grade will still crack. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the soil supporting characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, the use of crack control joints and proper concrete placement and curing. Crack control joints should be spaced at intervals no greater than 12 feet. Literature provided by the Portland Concrete Association (PCA) and American Concrete Institute (ACI) present recommendations for proper concrete mix, construction, and curing practices, and should be incorporated into project construction. 6.16 Slope Maintenance 6.16.1 Slopes that are steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) may, under conditions which are both difficult to prevent and predict, be susceptible to near surface (surficial) slope instability. The instability is typically limited to the outer three feet of a portion of the slope and usually does not directly impact the improvements on the pad areas above or below the slope. The occurrence of surficial instability is more prevalent on fill slopes and is generally preceded by a period of heavy rainfall, excessive irrigation, or the migration of subsurface seepage. The disturbance and/or loosening of the surficial soils, as might result from root growth, soil expansion, or excavation for irrigation lines and slope planting, may also be a significant contributing factor to surficial instability. It is, therefore, recommended that, to the maximum extent practical: (a) disturbed/loosened surficial soils be either removed or properly recompacted, (b) irrigation systems be periodically inspected and maintained to Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 34 - July 28, 2021 eliminate leaks and excessive irrigation, and (c) surface drains on and adjacent to slopes be periodically maintained to preclude ponding or erosion. Although the incorporation of the above recommendations should reduce the potential for surficial slope instability, it will not eliminate the possibility, and, therefore, it may be necessary to rebuild or repair a portion of the project's slopes in the future. 6.17 Storm Water Management 6.17.1 If storm water management devices are not properly designed and constructed, there is a risk for distress to improvements and property located hydrologically down gradient or adjacent to these devices. Factors such as the amount of water being detained, its residence time, and soil permeability have an important effect on seepage transmission and the potential adverse impacts that may occur if the storm water management features are not properly designed and constructed. We have not performed a hydrogeological study at the site. If infiltration of storm water runoff into the subsurface occurs, downstream improvements may be subjected to seeps, springs, slope instability, raised groundwater, movement of foundations and slabs, or other undesirable impacts as a result of water infiltration. 6.17.2 We did not perform an infiltration study on the property. However, based on predicted site conditions at the completion of grading, full and partial infiltration is considered infeasible due to the presence of deep fills surrounded by MSE walls at the down-gradient end of the site. Basins or other storm water devices should utilize a liner to prevent infiltration from causing adverse settlement and heave, and migrating to utilities, and foundations. 6.18 Site Drainage and Moisture Protection 6.18.1 Adequate site drainage is critical to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures in accordance with 2019 CBC 1803.3 or other applicable standards. In addition, surface drainage should be directed away from the top of slopes into swales or other controlled drainage devices. Roof and pavement drainage should be directed into conduits that carry runoff away from the proposed structure. 6.18.2 In the case of basement walls or building walls retaining landscaping areas, a water-proofing system should be used on the wall and joints, and a Miradrain drainage panel (or similar) should be placed over the waterproofing. The project architect or civil engineer should provide detailed specifications on the plans for all waterproofing and drainage. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 - 35 - July 28, 2021 6.18.3 Underground utilities should be leak free. Utility and irrigation lines should be checked periodically for leaks, and detected leaks should be repaired promptly. Detrimental soil movement could occur if water is allowed to infiltrate the soil for prolonged periods of time. 6.18.4 Landscaping planters adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. We recommend that subdrains to collect excess irrigation water and transmit it to drainage structures, or impervious above-grade planter boxes be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, we recommend construction of a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 6 inches below the bottom of the base material. 6.19 Grading and Foundation Plan Review 6.19.1 Geocon Incorporated should review the grading plans and foundation plans for the project prior to final design submittal to evaluate whether additional analyses and/or recommendations are required. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2021 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The firm that performed the geotechnical investigation for the project should be retained to provide testing and observation services during construction to provide continuity of geotechnical interpretation and to check that the recommendations presented for geotechnical aspects of site development are incorporated during site grading, construction of improvements, and excavation of foundations. If another geotechnical firm is selected to perform the testing and observation services during construction operations, that firm should prepare a letter indicating their intent to assume the responsibilities of project geotechnical engineer of record. A copy of the letter should be provided to the regulatory agency for their records. In addition, that firm should provide revised recommendations concerning the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development, or a written acknowledgement of their concurrence with the recommendations presented in our report. They should also perform additional analyses deemed necessary to assume the role of Geotechnical Engineer of Record. 2. 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. 3. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or 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. 4. 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. INDUSTRIALBLDG197.5FF296'- 00"63'- 00"635'- 00"··B- 1 TP- 20 TP-3 TP- 2 TP- 19 TP- 4TP-18 TP-5 TP-6TP-1 TP- 7 TP-8 TP- 9TP-12TP-13 TP-14TP- 15TP-16TP- 17 TP- 11 TP- 10 Tsd Tsd Tsd Tsd Tsd TsdTsd Qt QvopQvop Qpf Tsd Qudf/ Qal/ Qal/ Qal/Qal/ Qudf Qudf Qudf LB- 1 LB- 2 A A'5') 3')5') 5')( 5')( 5') 4')(4') 4') 10')( 6') 0')( 0') 5')5') 3') 4') 4') 7')(1')0')0')5')6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 2974 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558- 6159 SHEET OF PROJECT NO.SCALE DATE FIGURE Plotted:07/27/2021 9:20AM | By:ALVIN LADRILLONO | File Location:Y:\PROJECTS\G2762-42-01 (517 Shinohara Lane)\SHEETS\G2762- 42-01 Geo Map. dwg GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS 1" = GEOLOGIC 1AP SHINOHARA INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 517 SHINOHARA LANE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 40' 07 - 28 - 2021 G2762 - 42 - 01 1 1 1 UNDOCUMENTED FILL PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL ALLUVIUM VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS TERRACE DEPOSITS Dotted Where Buried)SAN DIEGO FORMATION Dotted Where Buried) APPROX. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CONTACT Dotted Where Buried, Queried Where Uncertain)APPROX. LOCATION OF BORING APPROX. LOCATION OF LARGE DIAMETER BORING APPROX. LOCATION OF TRENCH APPROX. DEPTH OF REMEDIAL GRADING (In Feet) APPROX. LOCATION OFGEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION TP-20 GEOCON LEGEND Qudf B-1 5') A A' LB- 2 Qpf Qal Qvop Qt Tsd I I I , I I I j i ' ' j I I / I T rn l} J A9:, / I, I' I I ' , I I I 195.1 JW 162. 4FS H=3?.7' i I H=43,5' r£' I I I - il RETAINING WA L I ' I I I I I I I, II I I ' 194, lb. qi I I ' I ' I I I I I I I 154. 0 FS H=40. 6' I I / 149. 12FG r I j,, I' rh ; I / T ~ r/--. i' ff', I \ ' 1 I ', i, I I I I ' I I I I I I ' I I I: 3 I I I / i C/ l D I I , ··,·· -~---___/ I : Ii Ii t~ I I / ,,--- I ' I I j I / . ' i; \k&, ''-~-,"-,,,,-+--+--+---'-+I ~,-+-I \.-:-'-: -,1 -1 +I,.,,,, '-, i ~ I ,~: ~ I /- e-+---+-/ '-- 1 -+-~ I, : . --,'.__ I I / ITT I I ) ' I / / / +-~1" ' I ' I I I I I I 11' !' ' ' i I ' I , , I I / 1' / I . I I . : I / / , I I I i ' ' I / / I I I I / I i' I j__ 1_ / I I ,,I t ii / K 1· I I 1 / ' 1 I, I \..., j I ct'/ I / jI JI 'I I II I 11 11 I 1' 11 1)1, 1 I I I' I/ 1, 11 2 cb j 217- I I I I I cp I,,_ '1 \("-'--::.-"' ~~ rfJ ("~-~~~-~-~~~---~;:~~-~-:~~~--~:f;-,~ I I I -----77 l ---, c -~-I ' I ,_ -- LO'-' / I I\ \ I "-,/ ,/ /___ -: / --- O) J_ ,-L -- I r~ 1 ' ct;_;_ 1'/ i /-,-, I I 1 / L ,/ ~/ 1/ . --r- 0 / i / ' . I / / ', 11 ', ' " / -:\\1,:·-I \ ,/-', ' \ 254.0TW 195. 7 FS H-- 58. 3' I I \ I \ \ I ' 90,,t I I f'I-: -""""'I ,_ GRAPHIC SCALE o· 20· 10· 50• 80' 120' 160' SCALE 1"= 40' ( NORTH0804012016020024028032036048040044052056060064076068072080084088080120160200240A280A'E L E V A T I O N (M S L)E L E V A T I O N (M S APPENDIX A Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2021 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION We performed our field investigation between June 30 and July 7, 2021. Our investigation consisted of a site reconnaissance, logging of 20 exploratory test pits, two large diameter borings and one small diameter boring. The exploratory test pits were excavated to depths between 2- and 16-feet using a rubber-tire Caterpillar 430F backhoe. Exploratory borings were drilled to depths between 20- and 92- feet using truck mounted hollow stem and bucket auger drill rigs. The approximate locations of the exploratory test pits borings tests are shown on Figure 1. The soil conditions encountered in the trenches were visually examined, classified, and logged in general conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure D 2488). Exploratory boring logs are presented in Figures A-1 through A-3, and test pit logs are presented on Figures A-4 through A-23. The logs depict the various soil types encountered and indicate the depths at which samples were obtained. ALLUVIUM (Qal) Medium dense, moist, reddish-brown, Clayey, fine to medium SAND; little silt At 5.5 feet: becomes dense At 10.5 feet: becomes very dense BORING TERMINATED AT 20 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled with drill cuttings on 07-07-2021 SC 120.0 117.7 120.0 8.3 8.1 9.5 B1-1 B1-2 B1-3 B1-4 B1-5 B1-6 37 67 78 91/11.5" 50/6" 78/10" DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Figure A-1, Log of Boring B 1, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)IR A-300 PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)BORING B 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERB. KUNACONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.07- 07-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)153' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42- 01 I] SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown to grayish-brown, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive, powdery texture, micaceous At 7.5 feet: 1-inch thick orangish-brown sand bed; Bedding: N28W/14ºSW Dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown to orangish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; trace gravel (subrounded) up to 4-inch diameter; trace clay,few closed fractures <1/16" thick Dense, damp, grayish-white, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive,highly micaceous Dense, damp, white to blackish-brown, medium to coarse SANDSTONE;laminated, low cohesion, trace fine gravel; Bedding: N25W/9ºSW At 21 feet: band of orangish-brown, coarse sand; cross-bedded with subangular gravel lenses, very low cohesion Dense, dry to damp, orange to dark reddish-brown, medium coarse SANDSTONE; laminated and cross bedded, micaceous, low cohesion, basal contact N30W/ 20ºSW Dense, damp, grayish- white, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE;micaceous SM SM SM SP SP SM 104. 7 97. 8 12. 8 4. 3 LB1- 1 LB1- 2 3 5 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Figure A- 2, Log of Boring LB 1, Page 1 of 4 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) BORING LB 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%)SAMPLE NO.07- 05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. ( MSL.)233' G2762-42-01. GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762-42- 01 t. t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t : :t: J: :~: I : :~: 1: :t: ~~\ t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: lljii 1 · .... I jt ·. · i··. : · t O Dense to very dense, damp, dark reddish-brown to orangish-brown, fine to medium SANDSTONE; massive to weakly laminated, bottom contact N11W/17ºW Dense, damp, whitish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; laminated,highly micaceous with pockets of 100% biotite/muscovite mica At 36 feet: 2-inch thick fine gravel bed; <1/2" subrounded to subangular gravel At 40 feet: becomes weakly cemented with moderate cohesion At 44 feet: trace subrounded gravel At 46 feet: multiple krotovina At 48 to 50 feet: few dark reddish-brown to orangish-brown, fine sandstone interbeds, laminated, soft sediment load structures present; Bedding:N30W/ 7ºSW Dense to very dense, damp, grayish-white, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive, micaceous, small irregular pockets of yellowish white, silt present white some oxidation staining, trace subangular fine gravel SP SM SM 87. 3 5.7 LB1-3 LB1-4 LB1-5 7 8 8 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 Figure A- 2,Log of Boring LB 1, Page 2 of 4 DRY DENSITY( P.C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE ( UNDISTURBED)EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)BORING LB 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO. 07-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.) 233'G2762-42- 01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS Very dense, damp, orange-brown to reddish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; several coarse sand interbeds, massive, micaceous At 71 to 72 feet: 1-foot thick yellowish-orange, siltstone bed; Bedding: N20W/14ºSW Dense, damp, grayish-white, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive,micaceous, low cohesion; Bedding: N10W/21ºW At 84 to 88 feet: few thin subrounded gravel beds SM SM SM LB1- 6 15 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 Figure A- 2,Log of Boring LB 1, Page 3 of 4 DRY DENSITY( P.C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE ( UNDISTURBED)EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)BORING LB 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO. 07-05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.) 233'G2762-42- 01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762- 42-01 t. t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: p\ t--t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1·. ,... -I : :~:.: : t: : ·t. j. :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t t--t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: j' ~ -: · t .. :~: ... . ~ .. ,... -. :~: : · t. ·. · BORING TERMINATED AT 92 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 07-05-2021 SMLB1-7 20 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 90 92 Figure A-2, Log of Boring LB 1, Page 4 of 4 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)BORING LB 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.07- 05-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)233' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, dry to damp, orange-brown to reddish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; laminated, slightly bioturbated with pockets of biotite/muscovite mica; Bedding: N30W/14ºSW Dense, dry to damp, orange-brown, Silty, medium coarse SANDSTONE;some subrounded gravel, laminated, low cohesion Dense to very dense, damp, grayish-white to pale yellowish-white, sitly, fine SANDSTONE; highly micaceous, cross-bedded At 9 feet: becomes orange-brown to reddish-brown At 10 feet: 2-inch thick subrounded/subangular gravel bed Dense, damp, whitish-gray, Sitly, very fine grained SANDSTONE; highly micaceous, powdery texture, moderate cohesion, pocket of biotite/muscovite,mica throughout, trace 1/4"-1/5" subrounded gravel At 22 feet: medium to coarse, reddish-brown sandstone bed; Bedding:N5E/ 11ºW At 24 to 26 feet: some bioturation At 27 feet: becomes massive SM SP SM SM LB2- 1 LB2-2 5 4 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Figure A- 3,Log of Boring LB 2, Page 1 of 3 DRY DENSITY( P.C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE ( UNDISTURBED)EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)BORING LB 2 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO. 07-06-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.) 204'G2762-42- 01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762- 42-01 t. t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: : :t: J: :~: r 1~• .-:~~··t· >--,... -~~~ t ~ -: :t: J: :~: ,... -: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: I : :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: r 1~• >--·.~~·· t· t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: I j :t: l: !~ ! 1: · t. t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: J\ ... . ~ .. . :~: : · t. ,... -·. · i··. : · Dense, damp, bluish-gray, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; some subrounded cobble up to 8-inch diameter, moderately lubricated; Bedding: N10E/15ºW Dense, damp, whitish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive to weakly laminated, minor bioturation Very dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; few coarse grained laminate Dense, dry to damp, orange-brown to gayish-brown, medium to coarse SANDSTONE; cross-bedded, low cohesion, few subrounded and imbricated clay rip clasts 1/2"-3" long; Bedding: NS/10ºW Very dense, damp, orange-brown, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE;massive At 49 feet: contact is offset 4-inch along high angle closed fracture; Fracture:N310E/Vertical, Bedding: N10W/11ºW At 59 to 60 feet: trace subrounded cobble up to 4-inch diameter SM SM SM SM SP SM LB2- 3 10 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 Figure A- 3, Log of Boring LB 2, Page 2 of 3 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) BORING LB 2 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%)SAMPLE NO.07- 06-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. ( MSL.)204' G2762-42-01. GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762-42- 01 t. t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: ~rt ,... -: : t: J: :~: f~.! l· .J.·.· t· ,... -I : : t: J: :~: . :~: 1: · t . J'.! r . -.;~~··t· t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1·. ,... -~l~: 1: ,... -jt t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: ,... -: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: J\ ... . ~ .. t. ·. · i··. : · t .. :~: ... . ~ .. : At 64 feet: becomes bluish-gray to whitish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; Bedding: N10W/12ºW Very dense, damp, grayish-brown to bluish-gray, Silty, fine to meduim SANDSTONE; massive, oxidation mottling in bioturbated areas BORING TERMINATED AT 81 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 07-06-2021 SM SM LB2- 4 LB2- 5 18 20 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 Figure A-3,Log of Boring LB 2, Page 3 of 3 DRY DENSITY(P.C. F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)EZ BORE PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) BORING LB 2 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS) GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%)SAMPLE NO.07-06- 2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENTELEV. ( MSL.)204'G2762- 42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762- 42-01 1 · ·~. ,. ·t. t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t t-- t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: :t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: ALLUVIUM (Qal) Medium dense, dry to damp, reddish-brown, Clayey, fine to medium SAND; abundant caliche, some silt, blocky, slightly porous. At 2 feet: becomes moist At 3 feet: clay films and manganese films on parting surface pockets/lenses of sandy clay present At 6 feet: occasional subrounded gravel At 9 feet: pin-hole porosity and manganese films present with blocky structure and trace subrounded gravel, no caliche Dense, damp, yellowish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND; trace clay, trace subrounded gravel At 11 feet: becomes weakly cemented, cobble up to 6-inch diameter SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown to whitish-brown, Sitly, fine SANDSTONE; massive, weakly bioturbated, trace angular gravel TRENCH TERMINATED AT 16 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SC SM SM TP1-1 TP1-2 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Figure A-4, Log of Test Pit TP 1, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 1 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)152' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42- 01 TOPSOIL Firm, dry, palebrown, fineSandySILT; tracegravelandcobble ALLUVIUM (Qal) Dense, drytodamp, yellowish-brown, Sitly, fineSAND; tracesubroundedto subangulargravel, someporosity SANDIEGOFORMATION (Tsd) Verydense, damp, yellowish-brown, Silty, veryfinegrainedSAND; trace porosity, fewclaylinedburrowsandabundantoxidationmottling TRENCHTERMINATEDAT12FEET Groundwaternotencountered Backfilledon06-30-2021 ML SM SM TP2-1 TP2-2 DISTURBEDORBAGSAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 FigureA-5, LogofTestPitTP2, Page1of1 DRYDENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOECAT 430FPENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TESTPIT TP 2 CHUNK SAMPLEDATE COMPLETED SAMPLINGUNSUCCESSFULSOILCLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO.06- 30-2021SAMPLESYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)153' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGYSTANDARD PENETRATIONTESTWATERTABLEOR ... SEEPAGENOTE:PROJECTNO.THELOGOFSUBSURFACECONDITIONSSHOWNHEREONAPPLIESONLYATTHESPECIFICBORING ORTRENCHLOCATIONANDATTHEDATEINDICATED. ITISNOTWARRANTEDTOBE REPRESENTATIVEOFSUBSURFACE TOPSOIL Firm dry, pale pinkish-brown to grayish brown, fine to medium Sandy SILT; porous ALLUVIUM (Qal) Medium dense, moist, dark brown to reddish-brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND; trace subrounded gravel At 4 feet: subrounded gravel/cobble up to 4-inch in diameter At 4 feet: abundant pin-hole porosity At 6 feet: becomes dense, blocky texture with clay films on parting surfaces SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense to very dense, damp, orangish-brown to pale yellowish-brown, very fine Sandy SILT; some pinhole porosity Dense, damp, whitish-gray, Silty, fine fine grained SANDSTONE; powdery texture when excavated; micaceous TRENCH TERMINATED AT 14 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 ML SC ML SM TP3-1 TP3-2 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Figure A-6, Log of Test Pit TP 3, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 3 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)165' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42- 01 TOPSOIL Loose, dry, pale brown, Silty GRAVEL; rounded to subrounded gravel up to 6-inch diameter TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Dense, dry to damp, pale yellowish-brown, fine to medium Sandy GRAVEL; subrounded gravel and cobble up to 10-inch diameter SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, light gray to pale yellowish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; micaceous, powdery texture, some gravel and cobble up to 6-inch diameter (subrounded) TRENCH TERMINATED AT 10 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 GM GP SM TP4-1 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 Figure A-7, Log of Test Pit TP 4, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 4 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)185' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. TOPSOIL Softtofirm, dry, palepinkish-browntobrown, SandySILT; porous, abundant rootlets ALLUVIUM (Qal) Loosetomediumdense, drytodamp, Clayey, finetomediumSAND; blocky, clay/manganesefilmsonpartingsurfaces At4feet: cobblelayer, subroundedupto12-inchdiameter SANDIEGOFORMATION (Tsd) Dense, drytodamp, orangishbrowntoyellowishgray, Silty, finetomedium SAND; weaklycemented, bioturbatedwithfew1/8-inchopenburrows, trace caliche, oxidation, mottling, nogravelorcobble At7feet: becomesyellowishorange, verydense At10feet: shellfragmentsobserved TRENCHTERMINATEDAT12FEET Groundwaternotencountered Backfilledon06-30-2021 ML SC SM TP5-1 DISTURBEDORBAGSAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 FigureA-8, LogofTestPitTP5, Page1of1 DRYDENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOECAT 430FPENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TESTPIT TP 5 CHUNK SAMPLEDATE COMPLETED SAMPLINGUNSUCCESSFULSOILCLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO.06- 30-2021SAMPLESYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)173' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGYSTANDARD PENETRATIONTESTWATERTABLEOR ... SEEPAGENOTE:PROJECTNO.THELOGOFSUBSURFACECONDITIONSSHOWNHEREONAPPLIESONLYATTHESPECIFICBORING ORTRENCHLOCATIONANDATTHEDATEINDICATED. ITISNOTWARRANTEDTOBE REPRESENTATIVEOFSUBSURFACE TOPSOIL Firmtostiff, dry, browntograyish-brown, SiltySAND; strongblocky structure, goodpeddevelopment SANDIEGOFORMATION (Tsd) Dense, dry, verypaleyellowish-browntowhitish-gray, Sitly, veryfinegrained SAND; powderytextureinplaces, massive, weakly, bioturbated, some oxidationmottling TRENCHTERMINATEDAT5FEET Groundwaternotencountered Backfilledon06-30-2021 SM SM DISTURBEDORBAGSAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 FigureA-9, LogofTestPitTP6, Page1of1 DRYDENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOECAT 430FPENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TESTPIT TP 6 CHUNK SAMPLEDATE COMPLETED SAMPLINGUNSUCCESSFULSOILCLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO.06- 30-2021SAMPLESYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)178' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGYSTANDARD PENETRATIONTESTWATERTABLEOR ... SEEPAGENOTE:PROJECTNO.THELOGOFSUBSURFACECONDITIONSSHOWNHEREONAPPLIESONLYATTHESPECIFICBORING ORTRENCHLOCATIONANDATTHEDATEINDICATED. ITISNOTWARRANTEDTOBE REPRESENTATIVEOFSUBSURFACE TOPSOIL Hard, dry, brown, ClayeySILT; tracegravel ALLUVIUM (Qal) Hard, moist, reddish-brown, finetomediumSandyCLAY; tracegravel, some caliche SANDIEGOFORMATION (Tsd) Mediumdensetodense, damptomoist, orangish-brown, Silty, finetocoarse SAND; somecaliche, weathered, traceclay At4.5feet: becomesyellowish-brown, somecobble Dense, damp, paleyellowish-brown, Sitly, veryfinegrainedSAND; massive, oxidationmottling TRENCHTERMINATEDAT8FEET Groundwaternotencountered Backfilledon06-30-2021 ML CL SM SM DISTURBEDORBAGSAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 FigureA-10, LogofTestPitTP7, Page1of1 DRYDENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOECAT 430FPENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TESTPIT TP 7 CHUNK SAMPLEDATE COMPLETED SAMPLINGUNSUCCESSFULSOILCLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO.06- 30-2021SAMPLESYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)176' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGYSTANDARD PENETRATIONTESTWATERTABLEOR ... SEEPAGENOTE:PROJECTNO.THELOGOFSUBSURFACECONDITIONSSHOWNHEREONAPPLIESONLYATTHESPECIFICBORING ORTRENCHLOCATIONANDATTHEDATEINDICATED. ITISNOTWARRANTEDTOBE REPRESENTATIVEOFSUBSURFACE TOPSOIL Softtostiff, drytomoist, grayish-browntodarkreddishbrown, Sandy CLAY; tracegravel ALLUVIUM (Qal) Mediumdense, damptomoist, reddish-browntoorangish-brown, Clayey, fine tocoarseSANDandSandyCLAY; weathered SANDIEGOFORMATION (Tsd) Densetoverndense, damp, whitish-gray, Silty, veryfinegrainedSAND; powdertexture, micaceous TRENCHTERMINATEDAT9FEET Groundwaternotencountered Backfilledon06-30-2021 CL SC SM TP8-1 DISTURBEDORBAGSAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 FigureA-11, LogofTestPitTP8, Page1of1 DRYDENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOECAT 430FPENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TESTPIT TP 8 CHUNK SAMPLEDATE COMPLETED SAMPLINGUNSUCCESSFULSOILCLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%) SAMPLENO.06- 30-2021SAMPLESYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)204' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGYSTANDARD PENETRATIONTESTWATERTABLEOR ... SEEPAGENOTE:PROJECTNO.THELOGOFSUBSURFACECONDITIONSSHOWNHEREONAPPLIESONLYATTHESPECIFICBORING ORTRENCHLOCATIONANDATTHEDATEINDICATED. ITISNOTWARRANTEDTOBE REPRESENTATIVEOFSUBSURFACE SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Very dense, dry to damp, pale yellowish-brown to gray, Silty, fine fine grained SANDSTONE; massive At 2 feet: subrounded gravel layer, 4-inch thick At 5-7 feet: thin subvertical 1/4-inch, clay filled fractures At 6.5 feet: subrounded pods of caliche TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-12, Log of Test Pit TP 9, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 9 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)223' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762- 42-01 t. t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: UNDOCUMENTED FILL (Qudf) Loose to medium dense, dry to damp, brown to grayish-brown, Clayey, fine to medium SAND; abundant cobble, fill place for perimeter berm SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Very dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown to grayish-brown, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; trace gravel, massive, oxidation mottling throughout TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SC SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 Figure A-13, Log of Test Pit TP 10, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 10 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)205' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT UNDOCUMENTED FILL (Qudf) Loose, dry, pale reddish-brown, fine Sandy SILT; abundant, cobbles and chunks of the brownish black sandy clay topsoil SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Very dense, damp, whitish-gray to yellowish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive At 4.5 feet: 4-inch thick coarse grained, orangish-black sand bed; Bedding: N20W/6ºW TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 ML SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-14,Log of Test Pit TP 11, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P.C. F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE ( UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/ FT.)TEST PIT TP 11 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS) GROUNDWATERR. ADAMS CONTENT (%)SAMPLE NO.06-30- 2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY: EQUIPMENTELEV. ( MSL.)213'G2762- 42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762-42- 01 f-- f--f-- J.·.· t· : ·t. j. :~: 1: : t: : : SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Very dense, dry to damp, pale yellowish-brown, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 2 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 Figure A-15, Log of Test Pit TP 12, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 12 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)227' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762- 42- 01 VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qvop) Dense, dry to damp, brown to grayish-brown, medium coarse SAND with cobble; cobble +/-30%, subrounded up to 10-inch diameter SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp to moist, yellowish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 10 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 GP SM TP13-1 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 Figure A-16, Log of Test Pit TP 13, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 13 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)231' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762-42- 01 o· J. o..\: h o·: o-.-: o_-_-::: o. q-·_. . · .. TOPSOIL Soft, dry, light brown, Clayey SAND; trace cobble Stiff, moist, blackish-brown, Sandy CLAY; some gravel and cobble ALLUVIUM (Qal) Loose to medium dense, moist, brownish-black, Clayey SAND; some gravel and cobble, pin-hole porosity throughout SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Medium dense, moist, pinkish-brown to yellowish brown, Clayey, fine to medium SANDSTONE, mottled, weathered, manganese films on parting surfaces Dense, moist, pale yellowish-brown to yellowish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive, friable TRENCH TERMINATED AT 9 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SC CL SC SC SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 Figure A-17, Log of Test Pit TP 14, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 14 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)212' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER TOPSOIL Loose, dry to damp, brown, Silty, fine SAND; some cobble ALLUVIUM (Qal) Stiff, moist, grayish-brown, Sandy CLAY; trace gravel and cobble; pinhole porosity VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qvop) Dense, damp, reddish-brown to brown, medium to coarse SAND with gravel; trace silt SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, yellow to pale yellowish-gray, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 16 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SM CL GP SM TP15-1 DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Figure A-18, Log of Test Pit TP 15, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 15 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)215' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42-01 f-- f-- f-- f-- f-- f--f-- r- r- r vtt o·.: -·.: j_::-: ... . . . ·.· 6 a.:·_-:_:": TOPSOIL Soft to firm, dry to damp, brown, Sandy CLAY; some gravel and cobble VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qvop) Dense, damp, orange brown, SAND with cobble; cobble subrounded up to 12-inch diameter SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, pale, yellowish-brown to grayish brown, Silty, fine SANDSTONE; massive, micaceous TRENCH TERMINATED AT 9 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 CL SW SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 Figure A-19, Log of Test Pit TP 16, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 16 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)213' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42- 01 f-- f-- f-- f-- TOPSOIL Loose, dry to damp, brown to pale reddish brown, fine to medium Sandy SILT; trace gravel SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, pale yellowish-brown to yellowish-orange, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; massive, mottled, weathered in upper 3 feet, trace gravel, micaceous TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 ML SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 Figure A-20, Log of Test Pit TP 17, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 17 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)198' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS ANDTIMES.G2762- 42-01 f--f-- f--J.·.· t· : ·t. j. :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: TOPSOIL Soft to stiff, dry to moist, light brown to reddish-brown, Silty CLAY; trace sand, manganese coatings on parting surfaces ALLUVIUM (Qal) Medium dense to dense, moist, orange brown, Clayey, medium to coarse SAND; few gravel and cobble SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp to moist, pale yellowish-brown to yellowish-gray, Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; micaceous, mottled TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 CL SC SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 Figure A-21, Log of Test Pit TP 18, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 18 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)190' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. G2762- 42- 01 1// V/ 1// ,... -// V/ V/ --// !/ / V/ V/ ----"'./._ J/:.-·-/ ,... -21; ··~·,· r ,... -·. · i··. : · t .. :~: ... . ~ .. . :~: : · t. --·. · TOPSOIL Soft, dry, pale reddish-brown, Sandy SILT; trace gravel TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) Dense, moist, yellow to yellowish-brown, Clayey, fine to medium SAND with cobble; caliche stringers common, cobble is subrounded up to 10-inch diameter TRENCH TERMINATED AT 12 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 ML SC DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Figure A-22, Log of Test Pit TP 19, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 19 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)173' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT TOPSOIL Loose, dry, olive brown, Silty, very fine grained SAND; trace subrounded gravel SAN DIEGO FORMATION (Tsd) Dense, damp, orangish-brown to whitish-gray, Silty, very fine grained SANDSTONE; highly micaceous TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Groundwater not encountered Backfilled on 06-30-2021 SM SM DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE GEOCON DEPTH IN FEET 0 2 4 6 Figure A-23, Log of Test Pit TP 20, Page 1 of 1 DRY DENSITY(P. C.F.)... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED)BACKHOE CAT 430F PENETRATIONRESISTANCE( BLOWS/FT.) TEST PIT TP 20 CHUNK SAMPLE DATE COMPLETED SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL SOIL CLASS USCS)GROUNDWATERR. ADAMSCONTENT (%) SAMPLE NO.06- 30-2021 SAMPLE SYMBOLS MOISTUREBY:EQUIPMENT ELEV. (MSL.)160' G2762-42-01.GPJ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY STANDARD PENETRATION TEST WATER TABLE OR ... SEEPAGE NOTE:PROJECT NO.THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ATOTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES.G2762-42- 01 r - r-r tTt .-.1-- L-1-. ·~. ,. · t. t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: J: :~: 1: : t: t: APPENDIX B Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2021 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected samples were tested for in-situ dry density and moisture content, maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, expansion potential, consolidation potential, gradation, soluble sulfate content, chloride content, p.H. and resistivity, and shear strength. The results of these tests are summarized on the following tables and figures. The in-place dry density and moisture content of the samples tested are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1557-02 Sample No. Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content dry wt.) T1-1 Brown clayey fine to medium SAND 123.3 12.1 T1-2 Brown silty SAND with gravel 121.3 12.7 T3-2 Dark yellow Silty fine SAND 103.2 16.5 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829-03 Sample No. Moisture Content Dry Density (pcf) Expansion IndexBeforeTest (%) After Test (%) T1-1 10.9 22.0 107.3 46 T1-2 10.8 18.0 107.3 16 T3-1 8.3 13.8 116.8 0 T3-2 14.4 26.7 94.1 0 T8-1 11.7 28.0 103.8 99 Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2021 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 417 Sample No. Water-Soluble Sulfate Sulfate Exposure T1-1 0.020 S0 T3-2 0.001 S0 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE CHLORIDE ION CONTENT TEST RESULTS AASHTO TEST NO. T 291 Sample No. Chloride Ion Content ppm (%) T1-1 380 (0.038) T3-2 71 (0.007) SUMMARY OF LABORATORY POTENTIAL OF HYDROGEN (PH) AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643 Sample No. Geologic Unit pH Minimum Resistivity ohm-centimeters) T1-1 Qal 8.92 700 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4318 Sample No. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index T1-1 42 20 22 T1-2 30 22 8 T3-2 Non Plastic Non Plastic Non Plastic SAMPLE NO. GEOLOGIC UNIT LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SOIL TYPE T1-1 Qal 42 20 22 CL NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0!#NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! ML-OL MH-OH High-Plasticity Silt to High-Plasticity, Organic Silt CL-ML High-Plasticity Clay Low-Plasticity Clay Low-Plasticity Silt TEST RESULTS SOIL TYPE DESCRIPTION CH CL ML Low-Plasticity Clay to Low-Plasticity Silt Low-Plasticity Silt to Low-Plasticity, Organic Silt PLASTICITY INDEX - ASTM D 4318 SHINOHARA PROJECT NO.: G2762-42-01 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110120PLASTICITY INDEXLIQUID LIMIT T1-1 CH MH-OH ML-OL CL ML CL-ML HIGHPLASTICITYLOWPLASTICITY I I I V V GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE -SAN DIEGO , CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558 -6900 · FAX 858 558 -6159 I I I V ti Vvr • • A 0 SAMPLE NO. GEOLOGIC UNIT LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SOIL TYPE T1-2 Qal 30 22 8 CL NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0!#NUM! #NUM! NUM! #DIV/0! #NUM! #NUM! ML-OL MH-OH High-Plasticity Silt to High-Plasticity, Organic Silt CL-ML High-Plasticity Clay Low-Plasticity Clay Low-Plasticity Silt TEST RESULTS SOIL TYPE DESCRIPTION CH CL ML Low-Plasticity Clay to Low-Plasticity Silt Low-Plasticity Silt to Low-Plasticity, Organic Silt PLASTICITY INDEX - ASTM D 4318 SHINOHARA PROJECT NO.: G2762-42-01 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110120PLASTICITY INDEXLIQUID LIMIT T1-2 CH MH-OH ML-OL CL ML CL-ML HIGHPLASTICITYLOWPLASTICITY I I I V ~ V V GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE -SAN DIEGO , CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558 -6900 · FAX 858 558 -6159 I I I V ti Vvr • • A 0 Qal D10 (mm)D30 (mm)D60 (mm) 0.016 0.048 0.105 SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 SHINOHARA PROJECT NO.: U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE G2762-42-01 SAMPLE NO.:T1-1 GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.):2'-4' Cc 1.4 TEST DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION SC - ClayeySAND6.6 Cu6"5" 4" 3" 2" 1- 1/ 2" 1" 3/ 4" 1/ 2"3/8"# 4#8#10# 16#20#30# 40# 50# 60# 100#2000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010. 11101001000PERCENT PASSINGPARTICLE SIZE (mm) SAND SILT OR CLAYCOARSEFINECOARSEMEDIUMFINE GRAVEL I ...... .. .... ... .. - I I I I I I I I II II I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I II II I I II II II I I I I I I I I GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS 6960FLANDERSDRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 I I I l I I I I ---10, ~ I I ,,, \ I I ~ I I I I \ I I I I \ I I I I Qal D10 (mm)D30 (mm)D60 (mm) 0.023 0.068 0.132 SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 SHINOHARA PROJECT NO.: U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE G2762-42-01 SAMPLE NO.:T1-2 GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.):10'-12' Cc 1.5 TEST DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION SM - Silty SAND withgravel5.9 Cu6"5" 4" 3" 2" 1- 1/ 2" 1" 3/ 4" 1/ 2"3/8"# 4#8#10# 16#20#30# 40# 50# 60#100# 2000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010. 11101001000PERCENT PASSINGPARTICLE SIZE (mm) SAND SILT OR CLAYCOARSEFINECOARSEMEDIUMFINE GRAVEL I I ...... I I I I I h I I 1.. I I ..... IL.. -I I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I II II I I II II II I I I I I I I I GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --- I I I -.. ' I I I I I Tsd D10 (mm)D30 (mm)D60 (mm) 0.047 0.089 0.121 SIEVE ANALYSES - ASTM D 135 SHINOHARA PROJECT NO.: U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE G2762-42-01 SAMPLE NO.:T3-2 GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT.):10'-12' Cc 1.4 TEST DATA SOIL DESCRIPTION SM - SiltySAND2.6 Cu6"5" 4" 3" 2" 1- 1/ 2" 1" 3/ 4" 1/ 2"3/8"# 4#8#10# 16#20#30# 40# 50# 60# 100#2000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.010. 11101001000PERCENT PASSINGPARTICLE SIZE (mm) SAND SILT OR CLAYCOARSEFINECOARSEMEDIUMFINE GRAVEL T" .,. I I I I I I I I II II I I I I II II I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I II II I I II II II I I I I I I I I GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 - 297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558-6159 I. I I _. \ I I I I ""-I I ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 13.0 13.2 12.2 12.8 100.7 108.8 104.5 104.7 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 28.7 25.9 26.1 26.9 1125 1599 3046 -- 1004 1602 3046 -- 400 33 280 34 INITIAL CONDITIONS FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) ULTIMATE COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS Tsd N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB1-1 10'-11' GEOLOGIC UNIT: NATURAL/REMOLDED: DRY DENSITY (PCF): 517 SHINOHARA G2762-42-01 DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): RESULTS PEAK COHESION, C (PSF) PROJECT NO.: 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3SHEAR STRESS (PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS ( PSF) NORMAL STRESS ( PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 10002000 3000 4000 5000 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 4.0 4.8 4.1 4.3 95.3 97.4 100.8 97.8 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 23.1 21.5 19.5 21.4 1118 1687 3348 -- 1112 1693 3046 -- 290 37 440 33 DRY DENSITY (PCF): SHINOHARA G2762-42-01 DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): RESULTS PEAK COHESION, C (PSF) PROJECT NO.: Tsd N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB 1-2 20' GEOLOGIC UNIT: NATURAL/REMOLDED: INITIAL CONDITIONS FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) ULTIMATE COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS 500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3SHEAR STRESS (PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS ( PSF) NORMAL STRESS ( PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 10002000 3000 4000 5000 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 5.2 5.4 6.4 5.7 94.5 81.3 86.3 87.3 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 28.3 37.5 35.1 33.6 1086 1586 3338 -- 793 1563 3361 -- 210 37 0 39 DRY DENSITY (PCF): 517 SHINOHARA G2762-42-01 DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): RESULTS PEAK COHESION, C (PSF) PROJECT NO.: Tsd N SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): LB 1-4 40' GEOLOGIC UNIT: NATURAL/REMOLDED: INITIAL CONDITIONS FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) ULTIMATE COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3SHEAR STRESS PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS PSF) NORMAL STRESS PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 10002000 3000 4000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS PSF) NORMAL STRESS PSF) AX AX GEOCON INCORPORATED GEO TECHNICAL CONSULT ANTS A X 6960 FLANDERSDRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 - FAX 858 558- 6159 H,,_; SAMPLE NO.:GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT):NATURAL/REMOLDED: 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 890 2030 4300 -- 13.1 10.7 11.5 11.8 109.6 113.3 112.6 111.8 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 19.0 16.8 18.0 17.9 1141 1904 2866 -- 1103 1904 2866 -- 780 26 750 27 COHESION, C (PSF) DRY DENSITY (PCF): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS T1-1 G2762-42-01 SHINOHARA COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 PROJECT NO.: FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): ULTIMATE RESULTS PEAK Qal 2'-4' NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): INITIAL CONDITIONS R 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300SHEAR STRESS (PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS ( 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 1000 2000 4000 -- 13.6 12.8 13.3 13.2 109.0 109.3 109.2 109.2 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 17.5 16.9 21.6 18.7 1219 2012 3530 -- 1160 2012 3530 -- 460 38 400 38 INITIAL CONDITIONS FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) ULTIMATE COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS Qal R SAMPLE NO.: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): T1-2 10'-12' GEOLOGIC UNIT: NATURAL/REMOLDED: DRY DENSITY (PCF): SHINOHARA G2762-42-01 DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): RESULTS PEAK COHESION, C (PSF) PROJECT NO.: 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3SHEAR STRESS (PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS ( PSF) NORMAL STRESS ( PSF) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 10002000 3000 4000 5000 SAMPLE NO.:GEOLOGIC UNIT: SAMPLE DEPTH (FT):NATURAL/REMOLDED: 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 890 2030 4300 -- 18.5 16.8 18.3 17.9 90.9 92.8 91.2 91.6 1 K 2 K 4 K AVERAGE 32.7 29.7 31.1 31.2 886 1518 2904 -- 886 1461 2866 -- 340 31 330 30 COHESION, C (PSF) DRY DENSITY (PCF): AFTER TEST CONDITIONS T3-2 G2762-42-01 SHINOHARA COHESION, C (PSF) FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) DIRECT SHEAR - ASTM D 3080 PROJECT NO.: FRICTION ANGLE (DEGREES) NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD ACTUAL NORMAL STRESS (PSF): WATER CONTENT (%): ULTIMATE RESULTS PEAK Tsd 10'-12' NORMAL STRESS TEST LOAD WATER CONTENT (%): PEAK SHEAR STRESS (PSF): ULT.-E.O.T. SHEAR STRESS (PSF): INITIAL CONDITIONS R 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300SHEAR STRESS (PSF)HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION (IN)1 K 2 K 4 K 1 K PEAK 2 K PEAK 4 K PEAK 1 K ULTIMATE 2 K ULTIMATE 4 K ULTIMATE 4 K 2 K 1 K 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 30004000 5000 6000SHEAR STRESS ( SAMPLE NO.:Qal SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): B1-3 7.5' GEOLOGIC UNIT: TEST INFORMATION 120.0 PROJECT NO.: G2762-42-01 8.3% INITIAL DRY DENSITY (PCF): INITIAL WATER CONTENT (%): SAMPLE SATURATED AT (KSF): INITIAL SATURATION (%): 4.0 57.4% CONSOLIDATION CURVE - ASTM D 2435 SHINOHARA 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.10 1.00 10.00VERTICAL STRAIN (%)APPLIED PRESSURE ( KSF) GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICALCONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE · SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 · FAX 858 558- SAMPLE NO.:Qal SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): B1-4 10' GEOLOGIC UNIT: TEST INFORMATION 117.7 PROJECT NO.: G2762-42-01 8.1% INITIAL DRY DENSITY (PCF): INITIAL WATER CONTENT (%): SAMPLE SATURATED AT (KSF): INITIAL SATURATION (%): 4.0 52.7% CONSOLIDATION CURVE - ASTM D 2435 SHINOHARA 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.10 1.00 10.00VERTICAL STRAIN (%)APPLIED PRESSURE ( KSF) GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICALCONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE · SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 · FAX 858 558- 6159 SAMPLE NO.:Qal SAMPLE DEPTH (FT): B1-5 15' GEOLOGIC UNIT: TEST INFORMATION 120.0 PROJECT NO.: G2762-42-01 9.5% INITIAL DRY DENSITY (PCF): INITIAL WATER CONTENT (%): SAMPLE SATURATED AT (KSF): INITIAL SATURATION (%): 4.0 65.9% CONSOLIDATION CURVE - ASTM D 2435 SHINOHARA 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.10 1.00 10.00VERTICAL STRAIN (%)APPLIED PRESSURE ( KSF) GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICALCONSULT ANTS 6960 FLANDERS DRIVE · SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121 -297 4 PHONE 858 558-6900 · FAX 858 558- 6159 APPENDIX C APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR 517 SHINOHARA LANE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. G2762-42-01 GI rev. 07/2015 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. GENERAL 1.1 These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon. The recommendations 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. The Consultant should provide adequate testing and observation services so that they may assess whether, in their 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 them 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, and/or adverse weather 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 grading 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. 2.4 Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. GI rev. 07/2015 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 ¾ 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 ¾ inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. 3.2 Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. 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 GI rev. 07/2015 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. 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 Samples of soil materials to be used for fill should 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 1½ 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. 4.2 Asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility or in an acceptable area of the project evaluated by Geocon and the property owner. Concrete fragments that 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. GI rev. 07/2015 4.3 After clearing and grubbing of organic matter and other unsuitable material, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction should 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 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), or where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL Remove All Unsuitable Material As Recommended By Consultant Finish Grade Original Ground Finish Slope Surface Slope To Be Such That Sloughing Or Sliding Does Not Occur Varies B” See Note 1 No Scale See Note 2 1 2 DETAIL NOTES: (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet, 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 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. 4.5 After areas to receive fill have been cleared and scarified, the surface should be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6 of these specifications. 1 I .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... GI rev. 07/2015 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 D 1557. 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. 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 D 1557. 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. GI rev. 07/2015 6.1.6 Where practical, soils having an Expansion Index greater than 50 should be 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. 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. GI rev. 07/2015 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 Rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows should be continuously observed by the Consultant. 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). 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 required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be utilized. The number of passes to be made should 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 D 1196, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the required minimum number of passes of the compaction equipment. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing tests should 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 GI rev. 07/2015 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 should be present during rock fill operations to observe 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. 6.3.5 Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in their 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. 6.3.7 Rock fill placement should be continuously observed during placement by the Consultant. 7. SUBDRAINS 7.1 The geologic units on the site may have permeability characteristics and/or fracture systems that could be susceptible under certain conditions to seepage. The use of canyon subdrains may be necessary to mitigate the potential for adverse impacts associated with seepage conditions. Canyon subdrains with lengths in excess of 500 feet or extensions of existing offsite subdrains should use 8-inch-diameter pipes. Canyon subdrains less than 500 feet in length should use 6-inch-diameter pipes. GI rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL CANYON DRAIN DETAIL 7.2 Slope drains within stability fill keyways should use 4-inch-diameter (or lager) pipes. NATURAi.GROUND ,,,,,,----- NOTES: SEE DETAL BELOW 1 ...... 8-lNCH DIAMETER, SCHEDULE 80 PVC PERFORATED PIPE FOR FILLS IN EXCESS OF 100-FEET IN DEPTH ORA PIPE LENGTH OF LONGER THAN 500 FEET. 2 ...... 6-INCH DIAMETER, SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED PIPE FOR FILLS LESS THAN 100-FEET IN DEPTH OR A PIPE LENGTH SHORTER THAN 500 FEET. BEDROCK NOTE: FINAL 20' OF PIPEAT CUTI.ET SHALL BE NON-PERFORATED. 9 CUBIC FEET / FOOT OF OPEN GRADED GRAVEL SURROUNDED BY MIRAF1140NC (OR EQUIVALENT) FILTER FABRIC NO SCALE GI rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL STABILITY FILL DETAIL 7.3 The actual subdrain locations will be evaluated in the field during the remedial grading operations. Additional drains may be necessary depending on the conditions observed and the requirements of the local regulatory agencies. Appropriate subdrain outlets should be evaluated prior to finalizing 40-scale grading plans. 7.4 Rock fill or soil-rock fill areas may require subdrains along their down-slope perimeters to mitigate the potential for buildup of water from construction or landscape irrigation. The subdrains should be at least 6-inch-diameter pipes encapsulated in gravel and filter fabric. Rock fill drains should be constructed using the same requirements as canyon subdrains. DETAIL NOTES: FORMAnONAL MATERIAL 1 •.... EXCAVATE BACKCUT AT 1:1 INCUNATION (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTl:D~ 2 .... .BASE OF STABILITY FILL TO BE 3 FE ET INTO FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, SI.OP ING A MIN IMUM 5% INTO SLOPE . 3 •.••. STABIUTY FLL TO BE COMF'OSED OF PROPERLY COMPACTED GRANIA..AR SO IL 4 ..... CHIMNEY DRAINS TO BE APPROVED PREFABRICATED CHIMNEY DRAIN PANELS (MIRADRAIN G200N OR EQUIVALENT) SPACED AF'PROXIMATELY 20 FEET CENTER TO CENTER AND 4 FEETWIDE. CLOSER SPACING MAY BE REQUIRED F SEEPAGE IS ENCOUNTERED. 5 ..••. FILTER MATERIAL TO BE 314-tlCH, OPEN-GRADED CRUSI-IED ROCK ENCLOSED IN APPROVED FLTER FABRIC (M IRAFI 1-40NC~ 6 ..... COLLECTOR PIPE TO BE 4-INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER, PERFORATED, THICK-WALLED PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT, AND SLOPED TO DRAIN AT 1 PERCENT lilNMUM TO APPROVED oun.ET. NO SCALE GI rev. 07/2015 7.5 Prior to outletting, the final 20-foot segment of a subdrain that will not be extended during future development should consist of non-perforated drainpipe. At the non-perforated/ perforated interface, a seepage cutoff wall should be constructed on the downslope side of the pipe. TYPICAL CUT OFF WALL DETAIL 7.6 Subdrains that discharge into a natural drainage course or open space area should be provided with a permanent headwall structure. FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW CONCRETE CUT-OFF WAU. CONCRETE CUT-OFFWAU. SOLID SlJBDRAII P1PE 8' MIN. NO SCALE ll" MIN .(TYP) ll" MIN .(TYP) / NO SCALE GI rev. 07/2015 TYPICAL HEADWALL DETAIL 7.7 The final grading plans should show the location of the proposed subdrains. After completion of remedial excavations and subdrain installation, the project civil engineer should survey the drain locations and prepare an “as-built” map showing the drain locations. The final outlet and connection locations should be determined during grading operations. Subdrains that will be extended on adjacent projects after grading can be placed on formational material and a vertical riser should be placed at the end of the subdrain. The grading contractor should consider videoing the subdrains shortly after burial to check proper installation and functionality. The contractor is responsible for the performance of the drains. FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW 8"0R8" SUBDRAIN CONCRETE fEADWALL 8" ORB" SUBDRAIN 24" NOTE: HEADWALL SHOULD ounET AT TOE OF FILL SLOPE OR INTO CONTROLLED SURFACE DRAINAGE NO SCALE 12" NO SCALE GI rev. 07/2015 8. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 8.1 The Consultant shall be the Owner’s 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 should be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test should be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 8.2 The Consultant should perform a sufficient distribution of field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion 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. 8.3 During placement of rock fill, the Consultant should observe that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant should 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. When observations 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. 8.4 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. 8.5 We should observe the placement of subdrains, to check that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 8.6 Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 8.6.1 Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: 8.6.1.1 Field Density Test, ASTM D 1556, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. GI rev. 07/2015 8.6.1.2 Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, ASTM D 6938, Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 8.6.1.3 Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D 1557, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 8.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, ASTM D 4829, Expansion Index Test. 9. PROTECTION OF WORK 9.1 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. 9.2 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. 10. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 10.1 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. 10.2 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 geotechnical 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. Geocon Project No. G2762-42-01 July 28, 2020 LIST OF REFERENCES 1. FEMA (2012), Flood Map Service Center, FEMA website, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home, flood map numbers 06073C2156G and 06073C2157G, effective May 16, 2012, accessed July 16, 2021; 2. Kennedy, M. P., and S. S. Tan, 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’x60’ Quadrangle, California, USGS Regional Map Series Map No. 1, Scale 1:100,000. 3. SEAOC (2019), OSHPD Seismic Design Maps: Structural Engineers Association of California website, http://seismicmaps.org/, accessed July 19, 2021; 4. USGS (2019), Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/faults, accessed July 19, 2021; 5. Unpublished reports and maps on file with Geocon Incorporated.